A Closer Look at Hate Crime Britain
Retrospective summaries of past "hate crime" cases in the wake of the Allison Pearson controversy.
Essex Police have officially closed its investigation into Allison Pearson, who had been accused of “stirring up racial hatred” over a social media post made in November last year.
Pearson, a renowned columnist and award-winning writer, faced allegations under the Public Order Act 1986, a statute that can carry severe penalties, including imprisonment.
The investigation became public when two police officers visited her home at 9:40am on Remembrance Sunday, inviting her to a voluntary interview. They did not disclose the specific post under scrutiny.
During the visit, Pearson questioned officers about the accusations but received little clarity. She later speculated the visit was prompted by an X post in which she called certain pro-Palestine protestors “jew haters” and misidentified members of London's Metropolitan Police standing by them in support.
Curiously, when asked about her accuser’s identity, an officer allegedly corrected her, stating that the individual was referred to as "the victim."
The investigation’s lack of transparency sparked fierce criticism, with many also questioning the proportionality of the police response.
Such concern became more pronounced when police revealed they had set up a ‘Gold Group’—a tactic typically reserved for major incidents like terror attacks—following public backlash and criticism from Elon Musk.
The case also touched on policing priorities. A report by HM Inspectorate of Constabularies highlighted Essex Police’s focus on tackling hate crimes, including deploying dedicated officers and increasing resources.
Additionally, the report flagged significant delays in handling non-emergency calls, warning that such inefficiencies could erode public confidence.
In August, a Home Office source told the Telegraph that Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has issued a directive to reverse the restrictions from her predecessors and bring back mass recordings of non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs).
Although this preceded Starmer's recent comments that responding to X posts should not be the police’s first priority and forces should “concentrate on what matters most to their communities”.
When push came to shove during the summer protests/riots, however, Starmer singled out online speech, issuing stern warnings about its consequences in the same breath as physical violence:
Naturally, critics have queried whether Starmer is simply bowing to political pressure given the level of public criticism and the actions of his cabinet.
In recent months, Starmer’s cabinet has ordered a review into misogyny with the same vigour as far-right and Islamic extremism, including "misogynistic influencers". They’ve halted implementation of the Freedom of Speech Act 2023, designed to ensure students can express their views without fear of censorship. And just days ago, they announced “robust” enforcement of the Online Safety Act—a law Cheshire Police recently cited in the arrest of a woman for knowingly spreading false information without any evidence.
Certain members of the “liberal” commentariat, including ex-BBC journalists Lewis Goodall and Emily Maitlis, dismissed Pearson’s concerns. In response to descriptions of her ordeal as “Kafkaesque,”—meaning, surreal as if like a nightmare—they implied it was a product of a “persecution complex.”
The logic being that police aren’t anti-free speech at all. “Right-wing” commentators and voters are apparently fabricating a fake crisis.
Other more objective commentators rallied behind Pearson, saying such investigations have yet again confirmed Britain’s descent into soft authoritarianism. This is the country of Magna Carta, and the police’s conduct should reflect that, they argued.
In reality, anyone familiar with policing in Britain will know that non-violent speech has been repeatedly and increasingly stifled since the 1980s.
So illustrating this, here follows a summary of “hate” policing in recent years, including cases of NCHIs and hate crime investigations/prosecutions.
Kate Scottow
In December 2018, police arrested 39-year-old Kate Scottow at her home in front of her ten-year-old daughter and 20-month-old son after she misgendered a trans-identified male online.
Scottow sent tweets referring to the accuser as "he", "him", and "a pig in a wig" during what the accuser described as a period of "significant online abuse." Hertfordshire Police reportedly held Scottow in a cell for seven hours, separating her from her children, including her breastfeeding son.
In February 2020, a court convicted Scottow of persistently using a public communications network to cause “annoyance and anxiety”. Later in December, she successfully appealed the conviction.
Darren Grimes
In October 2020, the Metropolitan Police summoned conservative commentator Darren Grimes for questioning after he published a podcast featuring historian Dr David Starkey. During the podcast, Starkey claimed that slavery was not genocide because there are “so many damn blacks.”
Police investigated Grimes on suspicion of “stirring up racial hatred” by releasing the podcast. He apologised for the incident. Starkey also said he did not intend to stir up racial hatred.
The case was one of the few examples where authorities arguably held a citizen liable for comments made by a third party in their presence. Two weeks later, police dropped the case.
Harry Miller
In January 2021, ex-police officer Harry Miller received a call from Humberside Police informing him he was under investigation following an anonymous complaint about 30 “transphobic” posts he had shared on Twitter.
One of his tweets read, “I was assigned mammal at birth, but my orientation is fish. Don’t mis-species me.” Another stated that trans women are not women. Although the police concluded that no crime had been committed, they still recorded the matter as a “non-crime hate incident.” During the call, an officer said they were phoning to “check” Miller’s “thinking.”
Determined to challenge the police’s use of non-crime hate incident guidance, Miller took the matter to court. In December 2021, the court ruled that the police had acted “unlawfully”.
Geraint Jones
In January 2021, authorities charged Sergeant Geraint Jones of the Devon and Cornwall Police with sharing a "grossly offensive" meme about George Floyd in a private WhatsApp group with fellow officers.
Jones allegedly sent the meme five days after Floyd’s death during a police interaction in the United States. Prosecutors charged him with sending messages that are “grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene, or menacing character.”
By April 2021, Plymouth Magistrates' Court acquitted Jones. The judge ruled that the prosecution failed to prove the meme was intended as anything other than a joke. Jones’ suspension lasted 10 months before the ruling. It is unknown if he received wages during this time.
Emily Robinson and Norwich’s Confederate Flag
In May 2021, a 34-year-old teacher reported a house in Norwich to the police after seeing a Confederate flag displayed outside. The couple living in the house regularly flew various world flags on significant dates, often accompanied by a note explaining the flag’s history for public information. It was an educational exercise of sorts.
Police, nonetheless, recorded the display as a “hate-related public order offence” and issued “words of advice” to the homeowner. A Norfolk Constabulary spokeswoman revealed the homeowner explained the flag was not intended to cause offence.
According to a 2022 CNN/ORC poll, 57% of Americans viewed the Confederate flag as a symbol of Southern pride rather than racism. Similarly, a poll conducted in 2000 found 59% of Americans shared this perspective. Norfolk Constabulary took no further action.
Scott McCluskey
In August 2021, Cheshire Police charged a 43-year-old Scott McCluskey for posting a racist message on social media following England’s loss in the Euro 2020 final. His post read: "Well it took three ethnic players to f*** it up. Unlucky England. Sack them three monkeys."
McCluskey later claimed he did not realise his comments would be considered racist and deleted the post after receiving backlash. The following month, District Judge Nicholas sentenced him to 14 weeks in prison, suspended for 18 months after he pleaded guilty to sending an offensive or abusive message. The court also imposed an electronically monitored curfew on Saturdays and Sundays for 40 weeks and issued 30 days of “rehabilitation” work on racism and diversity.
The UK Football Policing Unit reported they arrested 11 other individuals for similar speech targeting the three minority players who missed their penalties during the final shootout.
Darren Brady
In July 2022, Hampshire Police sent five officers to arrest army veteran Darren Brady after he retweeted a meme of a swastika made from Pride flags. Reclaim Party leader Laurence Fox originally posted the meme.
An officer told Brady that he was being arrested because the post had “caused anxiety” to someone who reported it to the authorities. Before the arrest, police had contacted Brady 10 days earlier, offering him the option to attend an £80 racism awareness course to avoid potential prosecution. Such courses allow alleged offenders to avoid criminal charges.
Police eventually released Brady hours later without taking further action and later scrapped the awareness course after local police and crime commissioner, Donna Jones, implied it was not fit for purpose.
Caroline Farrow
In October 2022, Surrey Police arrested Catholic campaigner Caroline Farrow at her home in front of her children. Officers conducted a body search during the arrest because she had allegedly posted “malicious” anonymous messages online. Farrow was reportedly detained while preparing a roast dinner for her priest husband and five children.
The arrest followed her participation in a prolonged online debate about transgender issues. In a statement, Surrey Police described the investigation as involving allegations of “indecent, grossly offensive messages, threats, or information,” as well as harassment. They did not provide any specific details about the alleged messages.
Surrey Police had investigated Farrow in 2019 over claims that she used the wrong pronoun to refer to a transgender woman. She is now suing the police for wrongful arrest and under the Equality Act.
“Lesbian Nana” Row
In August 2023, West Yorkshire Police arrested a 16-year-old autistic girl for allegedly making a "homophobic" remark to a police officer. The incident occurred after officers drove the teenager home from Gay Pride celebrations in Leeds, where she had been with her sister. According to her mother, the remark involved the girl describing an officer as looking like her "lesbian nana."
A video posted on TikTok by the girl’s mother showed seven officers detaining the teenager outside her home in the early hours of August 7. She was subsequently held in custody for 20 hours before being released.
In April 2024, West Yorkshire Police confirmed they would take no further action against the teenager and released her from bail.
Anthony Stevens
Also in August 2023, Northamptonshire Police arrested Conservative councillor Anthony Stevens for an alleged hate crime after he retweeted a video criticising the arrest of a Christian street preacher, Oluwole Ilisanmi, in Southgate, London.
Police informed Cllr Stevens that a member of Britain First posted the original tweet he shared. Stevens stated he was unaware of the connection to Britain First and did not know who they were. He explained he shared the video only as “disturbing evidence of religious discrimination in law enforcement.”
By December 2023, police informed Stevens that they had dropped the case.
John and the Palestine Flags
In November 2023, Metropolitan Police officers arrested a man named John (surname undisclosed) reportedly because he posted a video online criticising the display of Palestinian flags in a London neighbourhood.
In the video, John expressed discontent with the number of Palestinian flags on Bethnal Green Road, stating, "Look at this cr*p here". He added, "You let them into the country and this the s*** they come up with."
Footage shared on X showed officers handcuffing John and escorting him to a police van. Police later said they arrested him on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offence. There have been no public updates regarding the outcome of John's case.
Rachel Maclean
In December 2023, West Mercia Police recorded a non-crime hate incident (NCHI) against Conservative Deputy Chairman Rachel Maclean after she shared a post on X describing Bromsgrove Green Party candidate Melissa Poulton, a trans-identified man, as "a man who wears a wig and calls himself a 'proud lesbian'."
Initially, the police stated they would not launch a criminal investigation but informed Maclean that an NCHI had been logged.
In March 2024, after Maclean appealed the decision, and police removed the NCHI from her record, determining that the comments did not meet the definition of an “incident”.
Ian Austin
In February 2024, West Midlands Police launched an investigation into Labour MP Ian Austin over comments he made on social media about the Hamas atrocities on October 7th.
Austin had ridiculed claims by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) that they were unaware of a Hamas operations centre beneath their offices in Gaza. He wrote: “Everyone, better safe than sorry: before you go to bed, nip down and check you haven’t inadvertently got a death cult of Islamist murderers and rapists running their operations downstairs. It’s easily done.”
A few days later, police contacted Austin to inform him they had investigated the matter but decided not to take further action. He said police took issue with his use of the term “Islamist,” despite it appearing 17 times in the UK Government’s list of proscribed organisations.
A Christian, A Psychologist, and Two Police Officers
In April 2024, two police officers and an NHS psychologist visited a British Orthodox Christian man at home after he posted online, “Christians must stand up,” in response to the stabbing of Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel in Sydney by an Islamist.
In a video, an officer is heard saying they had “a few concerns” about his posts. The NHS psychologist said he was there because of a report about “some beliefs being expressed” and offered to help.
The man’s identity remains unknown. Mainstream media largely ignored the case. No details about legal actions or outcomes have emerged since.
Edward Matthews
In May 2024, TikToker Edward Matthews posted a video mocking a police car decorated with LGBT rainbow colours. Matthews put to his viewers, “Mate, what the f** has happened to the UK?” while filming the car. A police officer nearby responded, “Maybe you should watch your tone in public; there’s nothing wrong with the car.”
The exchange escalated when Matthews shared his opposition to LGBTQ education in schools and criticised the widespread display of LGBTQ symbols across the country. The officer advised him to reserve such opinions for when he was at home, implying they were inappropriate to express publicly.
Matthews ended the video with a joke about how unintimidating it would be to be chased by a rainbow-coloured police car. It’s unknown if police recorded an NCHI against Matthews.
Welsh Police and Reform UK Supporter
In June 2024, a security camera video showed Welsh police visiting a man’s home after he displayed a Reform UK political sign on his wall. The sign, a common sight during election season, drew police attention after someone raised “concerns”.
An officer explained he needed to photograph the sign. The officer also took a photo of a "Lest We Forget" flag displayed at the home. According to Voice of Wales, the complaint reportedly came from a charity that owns the neighbouring property, which was set to be converted into accommodation for asylum seekers.
It remains unclear what actions the police took afterwards and whether they logged an NCHI against the homeowner.
Playground Hate Crimes
In November 2024, The Times revealed children have been among thousands investigated for non-crime hate incidents. Police recorded a case involving a nine-year-old who called a classmate a “retard” and another involving two secondary school girls who said a pupil smelt “like fish.”
Freedom of information requests revealed that over 13,200 hate incidents were recorded in the 12 months to June this year by 45 of Britain’s 48 police forces.
West Yorkshire Police, which also logged complaints against children, stated that its crime recording had been judged as “outstanding” by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services. The force said this might explain its higher levels of recorded hate incidents.
Julie Bindel
In the wake of the Allison Pearson investigation, feminist Julie Bindel unearthed that two Scotland Yard officers visited her home to warn her they were conducting "hate crime" investigation. The officers did not specify which of her tweets was under investigation, the category of hate crime involved, or the identity of the complainant.
Bindel later found out a “transgender man” in the Netherlands filed the complaint, relating to her social media activity in 2019. A longstanding critic of gender ideology and campaigner against violence toward women, Bindel refused the officers' request to voluntarily attend her local police station to make a statement.
Speaking about the visit, Bindel criticised the police for prioritising her tweets over serious crime. She said, “Police have limited time to investigate actual crime but are instead being tasked with ticking off the likes of me for daring to tweet that ‘trans women are not women’ or whatever the person in Holland had objected to.”
How Does the Ruling Class Get Away With It?
Britain has some of the most extensive and subjective speech laws in the democratic world, and these allow police forces to regulate speech arbitrarily. There are five specific laws they seem to rely on:
Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 criminalises the publication or distribution of written material that is “likely to incite racial hatred.” The threshold of "likely" is notoriously vague, leaving significant discretion to police and judges to determine whether speech crosses the line. The Act has also been a key tool for prosecuting individuals involved in public disorder, including non-violent protestors.
Originally aimed at regulating printed materials, the Malicious Communications Act 1988 now covers online communications. It allows for charges against individuals posting comments deemed “grossly offensive” and “racially” or “religiously motivated” with an intent to cause “distress or anxiety”.
Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 prohibits sending a message via electronic communication networks that is “grossly offensive, indecent, obscene, or menacing.” The law was intended to regulate telecommunications, replacing the older Telecommunications Act 1984.
Note the courts proceed with cases under Section 127 without a jury. So individuals accused of sending messages that others might find “offensive or threatening” face a court trial without conventional safeguards. The provision has even been used to prosecute private messages shared between colleagues and friends, and has resulted jail time.
The Equality Act 2010 added yet more complex and overlapping regulation. Under its clause for “harassment”, a person is guilty if their actions create an environment that is “intimidating, hostile, humiliating, or offensive” based on protected characteristics such as age, sex, race, religion, or sexual orientation.
The Online Safety Act 2023 introduced two new offences targeting harmful communications. “Knowingly spreading false information intended to cause non-trivial harm,” which is criminalised under ‘False Communications’, could lead to a 12-month prison sentence. The second, ‘Threatening Communications’, penalises threats of death or serious harm, even if the threat is not credible, as long as the recipient perceives it as so. The offence carries an even harsher penalty, with longer jail sentences.
Even when speech does not meet the threshold for criminality, authorities can still implicate individuals in non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs). Introduced in 2014 under the College of Policing’s Hate Crime Operational Guidance (HCOG), NCHIs are recorded when speech is “perceived” to be motivated by hostility or prejudice against a protected characteristic, such as race or religion.
Complainants are not required to provide evidence or justify their perception; the mere belief that hostility exists is enough. NCHIs are logged without any court evaluation and can leave a lasting mark on a person’s record, potentially affecting employment prospects. Some have successfully repealed NCHI logs by appealing to police forces directly.
Note parliament never mandated NCHIs, meaning they lack democratic approval. Nevertheless, in June 2023, the political establishment quietly formalised them under sections 60 and 61 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022.
Us Brits do have speech rights enshrined in law under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998. These supposedly protect the right to hold opinions, share ideas, communicate freely in any medium, and engage in political, artistic, and commercial expression. But enforcement of the former speech laws often diminishes and obscures these rights.
Put simply, we live in an unworkably vague legal system, and until it is addressed, this kind of authoritarianism will continue to flourish…
Do you think if things stay the way they are our best days are ahead of us?
Are you going to sit down and watch as our media parrot narratives that lead to yet more invasive, authoritarian, censorious policy?
If you want to do something today to help change it, you can opt for a paid subscription and help citizen journalists like me attempting to stop it… for about the same price per month as a coffee.