Elon Musk and senior British politicians are leading a growing backlash against police for investigating a post on X, formerly Twitter, by a Telegraph writer (Telegraph).
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp, former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, and Reform UK leader Nigel Farage have raised serious concerns about officers visiting the home of Free Speech Union (FSU) member and award-winning journalist Allison Pearson. After watching an interview with her about the visit, Mr Musk posted on X, a platform he now owns: “This is insane. Make Orwell Fiction Again!”
Allison is facing the investigation over a post from last year which the police initially logged as a non-crime hate incident (NCHI) after a member of the public complained.
In a Telegraph article this week, she describes how two officers called at her home at 9.40am on Remembrance Sunday. One of them told her that, “I was accused of a non-crime hate incident. It was to do with something I had posted on X a year ago. A YEAR ago? Yes. Stirring up racial hatred apparently.”
When she asked what she’d allegedly said in the post, the officer replied that he was not allowed to disclose it. However, this time last year, Allison was frequently tweeting about the October 7th attacks on Israel and the subsequent pro-Palestinian protests in London.
The accuser’s name was also withheld from her – although she did learn that whoever it was should not be accused of accusing: “‘It’s not the accuser,’ the PC said, looking down at his notes. ‘They’re called the victim.’”
Mr Musk, the world’s richest man, who has been outspoken about Labour’s attacks on free speech since coming to power, was recently nominated for the European Parliament’s 2024 Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought. His comments on the Pearson case have added to the growing sense of outrage.
Meanwhile, Mr Philp said: “The police should not be wasting time and resources targeting journalists or the public for simply expressing opinions. Only where the criminal threshold is met should police become involved. I do not think officers should be policing thought – only actual crimes that meet the criminal threshold.
He added: “Freedom of expression must be protected, even where we disagree with the views being expressed.”
Sir Iain was equally horrified. “What we are seeing is the police force turning into the thought police,” he said. “This is definitely George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four; very Big Brotherish. I feel sorry for the police who seem to be so badly led that officers are forced into this nonsense.”
Mr Farage also commented on the incident, saying: “On Remembrance Sunday of all days, when we remember those who fell for democracy and freedom of speech, it is outrageous that Allison Pearson had to face police officers on her doorstep as the result of a freely expressed opinion.
“I’m absolutely appalled that Allison and others like her have to live in fear for months without ever being told what has been said against them. We are very much in the territory of thoughtcrime here.”
For the avoidance of doubt, NCHIs really are as Orwellian as they sound: they can show up on an enhanced criminal records check and prevent you from getting a job. Nor do most people realise just how many have been recorded. Since the publication of the College of Policing’s NCHI guidance in 2014, we estimate that more than 250,000 have been logged by forces in England and Wales – an average of around 66 a day.
Little wonder, then, that the police don’t have time to send an officer round to your house if you report a burglary. (Between 2015 and 2021, 964,197 domestic burglary investigations ended without a suspect even being identified).
It should be stressed that we’re not talking about attempts to stir up hatred on the grounds of race, religion or sexual orientation – or people hurling racial abuse at football players on social media. Those are actual hate crimes, prohibited by law. NCHIs refer specifically to “non-crimes”, i.e., comparatively trivial episodes that, for the most part, the police should not be wasting their time on.
In June 2023, following a court ruling that the logging of NCHIs on the scale it was taking place constituted an unlawful interference in freedom of speech, the then Home Secretary Suella Braverman raised the threshold for recording them. Under this guidance, officers are now supposed to record an NCHI only if the incident is “clearly motivated by intentional hostility”. Unfortunately, the new Code of Practice appears not to have been shared with officers on the ground.
The FSU recently submitted FOI requests to all 43 police forces in England and Wales to find out if the number of NCHIs they were recording had gone down since the new Code was introduced. According to our analysis of the data we got back, the number has actually gone up: overall by 1.6 per cent, but in certain regions by far more. The full briefing is available below.
And if you’re wondering why, in Allison’s case, an incident initially recorded as an NCHI is apparently now being investigated by Essex Police “under section 17 of the Public Order Act”, it’s worth noting that a damning report from the UK’s police watchdog recently identified a lack of knowledge across forces in England and Wales regarding “the difference between a crime, an NCHI and an incident that is neither”.
It’s a finding perfectly encapsulated by this Keystone-Cops-style incident detailed by the report from His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS):
A man reported that when he had tried to deposit a large amount of cash at a bank, staff, following anti-money laundering protocols that apply to all customers, questioned the origin of the money. The complainant took exception and became angry as he believed this was due to his ethnicity. Although the matter related to banking processes, the force initially recorded it as an NCHI. Following investigation, the officer dealing with the case concluded that it shouldn’t have been recorded and that the force should close the matter. However, a crime reviewer later incorrectly reclassified it as a racially aggravated public order offence, committed by bank staff. Eventually, after a further review, the incident was declassified as a crime.
