Click here to read the article
Conservative peer and founder of the Free Speech Union, Lord Young of Acton, commented: “The number of people who’ve been charged with this offence is deeply concerning. The problem with trying to criminalise ‘disinformation’ is that it empowers the state to decide what is and isn’t true.”
Kurt Zindulka, Breitbart, 16th February 2025.
Click here to read the article
Lord Toby Young, the Conservative peer and founder of the Free Speech Union, said: “The number of people who’ve been charged with this offence is deeply concerning. The problem with trying to criminalise ‘disinformation’ is that it empowers the state to decide what is and isn’t true.”
Lord Young added that the false communications offence was the latest in a number of “speech crimes” created by successive governments. He said: “Causing someone psychological distress should not be a criminal offence.”
Matthew Field, The Telegraph, 15th February 2025.
Click here to read the article
David McKelvey, a former detective chief inspector in the Met Police, has called for the prosecution of Andrew Gwynne, the Labour MP forced to resign as a health minister last weekend for posting racist and sexist comments in a private WhatsApp group. ‘One rule for MPs, another for police officers?’ he asked on LinkedIn, pointing out that other officers have been prosecuted for sending less offensive messages. ‘The law must be applied fairly to all – no exceptions.’
Toby Young, The Spectator, 15th February 2025.
Click here to read the article
Free Speech Union leader Toby Young also slammed the move to put a trigger warning on the episode. He said: “The language and behaviour was ‘offensive’ in 1998 – that was the point. This episode was mocking the hyper-sensitivity of our age, something that was already apparent 27 years ago. For Channel 4 to attach a trigger warning shows that nothing has changed. The scolds and finger-waggers are as humourless as ever.”
Laura Fox, MailOnline, 12th February 2025.
Click here to read the article
The founder of Britain’s Free Speech Union (FSU), Lord Young of Acton, relayed similar concerns, saying: “If Ofcom tries to fine X or Facebook 10 per cent of their global turnover for not removing content that isn’t unlawful, I predict a showdown between Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and the UK Government. If that happens, Trump will side with his tech bros and tell Sir Keir that if he wants a trade deal, he’ll call off his dogs.”
Kurt Zindulka, Breitbart, 10th February 2025.
Click here to read the article
Lord Young, founder of the Free Speech Union, criticised the recommendation.
He said: “What’s next? ‘Non-blind’ instead of ‘20:20 vision’? ‘Non-deaf’ instead of ‘perfect hearing’? Will we have to describe Marilyn Monroe in future as ‘non-ginger’ instead of ‘blonde’?”
Tim Sigsworth, The Telegraph, 8th February 2025.
Click here to read the article
On Feb 4, a jury at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court was told that Mr Michael had been “unrelentingly negative” towards migrants in a clip he had distributed to stir up racial hatred.
However, his barrister, paid for by the Free Speech Union (FSU), which campaigns to protect freedom of speech, insisted it was “beyond obvious” he was not referring to all migrants, explaining how his main cut and thrust had been for more security in schools to protect children.
When the jury retired the next day to consider its verdict, Mr Michael bought a cup of tea, anticipating a long wait. The drink was still piping hot when he was summoned to hear their not guilty verdict.
Steve Bird, The Telegraph, 7th February 2025.
Click here to read the article
The Free Speech Union warned that the formalisation of such a definition by the government would result in more people being criminalised for their speech in the UK, saying that “if Labour gets its way, even more voices will be silenced.”
“Once adopted as official guidance for public bodies, individuals could face accusations of Islamophobia simply for criticising aspects of Islam or Islamic practices,” the FSU wrote on X.
“In the worst case, such remarks could even be treated as ‘stirring up religious hatred’ under Part 3A of the Public Order Act 1986, risking criminal charges and jail time.”
Kurt Zindulka, Breitbart, 5th February 2025.
Click here to read the article
Earlier today, following a two-day trial at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court, Jamie was acquitted by a jury. They took just 17 minutes to find him not guilty.
I was Jamie’s defence solicitor. Adam King was Jamie’s superb barrister. We were supported by the Free Speech Union. In the lead-up to the trial, we tried repeatedly to get the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to drop the case. We argued that Jamie’s Facebook post ought to be protected by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. We argued that what he said did not come close to meeting the standard for a criminal prosecution.
Luke Gittos, Spiked, 5th February 2025.
Click here to read the article
In a letter to the force, Lord Young, general secretary of the Free Speech Union raised concerns about the defendant’s safety as a consequence. He claimed that the case ‘should never have been a police matter, adding the decision to name Frost ‘may well have placed him in great jeopardy’.
Richard Marsden and Olivia Christie, Daily Mail, 5th February 2025.
© Limited
