Tag: united kingdom

Mother Arrested, Held In Police Cell In UK, For Confiscating Her Own Daughters’ iPads

A mother was arrested and jailed for seven hours after she confiscated iPads from her own children because she wanted them to concentrate on their homework.

It’s the latest insane story of police overreach from the backwards UK, where stabbings are just an everyday occurrence and robberies are not even investigated, but people saying mean words about the ‘wrong’ things are thrown in prison.

Now responsible parenting is the target.

The LBC report notes:

History teacher Vanessa Brown, 50, spent seven-and-a-half hours in a custody cell on March 26 this year, following a claim she had stolen two iPads which were traced to her mother’s house in Cobham, Surrey.

Yet it transpired that the two devices belonged to her daughters, and Ms Brown had merely confiscated them to encourage them to focus on their schoolwork, a fact Surrey Police has now acknowledged.

“I find it quite traumatic even talking about this now,” Ms Brown recalled.

“At no point did they [the officers] think to themselves, ‘Oh, this is a little bit of an overreaction for a moment, confiscating temporarily her iPads and popping over to her mum’s to have a coffee’. It was just a complete overreaction.

It isn’t made exactly clear who reported the iPads stolen, but it seems to have been the ex-partner of the woman.

Keep reading

BitChute Discontinues Video-Sharing Service for UK Residents Over Online Censorship Laws

BitChute, a platform widely recognized for its commitment to free expression and open discourse, has officially withdrawn its services from the United Kingdom, citing untenable regulatory conditions under the UK’s recently enacted censorship law, the Online Safety Act. The move comes in direct response to regulator Ofcom’s newly enhanced authority, which enables the communications regulator to levy fines as high as 10% of a company’s global revenue if deemed non-compliant with the Act’s sweeping censorship demands.

This shift in regulatory climate marks what some view as a profound erosion of digital freedoms in the UK. BitChute’s decision could serve as the first signal of a broader exodus, with other international platforms potentially following suit to avoid the heavy-handed oversight now codified in British law.

In a detailed public statement posted to its website, BitChute explained the rationale behind the drastic step:

“After careful review and ongoing evaluation of the regulatory landscape in the United Kingdom, we regret to inform you that BitChute will be discontinuing its video-sharing service for UK residents.”

The platform highlighted the unpredictable and burdensome nature of the new legal framework, emphasizing the Act’s expansive mandates on content moderation and the discretionary powers it grants Ofcom to enforce them. BitChute warned that these provisions create an environment of legal ambiguity, placing platforms at the mercy of vague standards and severe penalties.

“The BitChute platform has always operated on principles of freedom of speech, expression and association…However, the evolving regulatory pressures—including strict enforcement mechanisms and potential liabilities—have created an operational landscape in which continuing to serve the UK market exposes our company to unacceptable legal and compliance risks.”

The company has implemented immediate restrictions: UK residents can still upload content to the platform, but none of their videos will be accessible to other UK-based users. Their content will remain viewable to users in other countries, who can interact with it as usual.

“The significant change will be that this UK user-posted content will not be viewable by any other UK user, but will be visible to other users outside of the UK.”

This effectively means that while UK-based creators are not entirely barred from participation, their voices are now digitally cordoned off from fellow citizens, a result of legal constraints rather than technical ones.

Keep reading

Points For Honesty: UK Tech Firm Says “Only Immigrants From India Will Be Considered” In DevOps Want Ad

UK tech firm Avantao Technologies has apologized after posting a job ad stating “only candidates who are immigrants from India will be considered”, according to the Daily Mail.

The listing, for a DevOps engineer role in Ilford, also asked visa-related questions like “What is your native country?” and “Are you seeking sponsorship for employment in the UK?”

The Daily Mail report says that the company claims the ad was a staff training “test” that was mistakenly published. Sure.

“Unfortunately, that has been published, and we are unable to retract it because it was a mistake made by the employee who posted it live and then departed on holiday,” a spokesperson told MailOnline.

“We are very sorry to hear that this has occurred… a mistake is a mistake, and we have taken action against the individual… we genuinely apologise.”

Keep reading

Columnist Suggests Big Business Could ‘Put a Hit Out on Trump’

A prominent British newspaper columnist suggested that big business could ‘put a hit out on Trump’ in response to his tariffs.

Writing for the Telegraph, Tim Stanley made clear that he supported Trump’s tariff regime, asserting that the U.S. president is “trying to change history, rather than just caretake it.”

“In fact, Trump is correcting a 50-year misdirection in US life, and one that the hero of many Trumpers, Richard Nixon, also attempted to fix,” he wrote.

However, Stanley made clear that the backlash to Trump’s efforts to upturn the global order could be brutal.

“Were I a foreign manufacturer, I’d wager this policy will be reversed at least by 2028 when a new president is elected – or big business puts out a hit on Trump, because they’ll tolerate anything but the devaluing of their stock price. The next gun that fires at the president will probably be made in America,” he wrote.

It’s not clear whether the columnist was actually saying Trump could be physically taken out by monied interests, although his choice of words certainly seems to suggest this is the case.

As we reported yesterday, despite Trump surviving two assassination plots last year, vile leftists would be happy to see him killed.

A poll conducted by the Network Contagion Research Institute found that over 55 per cent of respondents said it would be “justified” to murder President Trump, with just under 50 per cent believing the same about Elon Musk.

As we highlight in the video below, Stephen Colbert also ‘joked’ that if the deep state existed, it should step in to do something about Trump’s tariffs, referencing the word “Fidelio” from the movie Eyes Wide Shut, which is about a secret society that kills people who expose it.

Keep reading

Mum jailed for ‘racist’ migrant hotel tweet ‘not allowed to visit ailing husband’

A woman who was jailed for over two years after tweeting about mass deportation and setting fire to migrant hotels has been refused temporary leave to visit her sick husband. Lucy Connolly, 42, was sentenced to 31 months behind bars after an inflammatory post on social media during the Southport riots last summer.

Demonstrations broke out across the country following the vicious killing of three children at a dance class on July 29, fuelled by false claims that the attacker was an illegal immigrant. Connolly’s post, which was later deleted, read: “Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f***ing hotels full of the b******s for all I care … If that makes me racist, so be it.” The 42-year-old has reportedly been denied temporary leave to visit her husband Ray, who is suffering from bone marrow failure, and has also had her pleas to be with her 12-year-old daughter, whose behaviour at school has been “out of character”, rejected by authorities.

Documents suggest that Connolly has been denied leave for reasons linked to concerns over public and media interest in her case, rather than issues meeting the necessary criteria, The Telegraph reported.

Prison service sources denied her application for temporary release was blocked, insisting it was being considered by the governor at HMP Drake Hall in Staffordshire, to which she has recently been transferred

A spokesperson said: “Decisions on release on temporary licence and home detention curfew are made following uncompromising risk assessments to prioritise public safety.

“These are discretionary schemes, and each case is rigorously scrutinised, considering the severity of the offence, the prisoner’s conduct and the potential impact on victims and the community.”

However, internal notes at her previous prison, HMP Peterborough, suggested that the temporary release was “not necessarily going to happen due to the public interest” and that “the media interest has been raised as an issue in terms of any future Release on Temporary Licence (ROTL) applications”.

Keep reading

UK creating ‘murder prediction’ tool to identify people most likely to kill

The UK government is developing a “murder prediction” programme which it hopes can use personal data of those known to the authorities to identify the people most likely to become killers.

Researchers are alleged to be using algorithms to analyse the information of thousands of people, including victims of crime, as they try to identify those at greatest risk of committing serious violent offences.

The scheme was originally called the “homicide prediction project”, but its name has been changed to “sharing data to improve risk assessment”. The Ministry of Justice hopes the project will help boost public safety but campaigners have called it “chilling and dystopian”.

The existence of the project was discovered by the pressure group Statewatch, and some of its workings uncovered through documents obtained by Freedom of Information requests.

Statewatch says data from people not convicted of any criminal offence will be used as part of the project, including personal information about self-harm and details relating to domestic abuse. Officials strongly deny this, insisting only data about people with at least one criminal conviction has been used.

The government says the project is at this stage for research only, but campaigners claim the data used would build bias into the predictions against minority-ethnic and poor people.

The MoJ says the scheme will “review offender characteristics that increase the risk of committing homicide” and “explore alternative and innovative data science techniques to risk assessment of homicide”.

The project would “provide evidence towards improving risk assessment of serious crime, and ultimately contribute to protecting the public via better analysis”, a spokesperson added.

The project, which was commissioned by the prime minister’s office when Rishi Sunak was in power, is using data about crime from various official sources including the Probation Service and data from Greater Manchester police before 2015.

The types of information processed includes names, dates of birth, gender and ethnicity, and a number that identifies people on the police national computer.

Statewatch’s claim that data from innocent people and those who have gone to the police for help will be used is based on a part of the data-sharing agreement between the MoJ and GMP.

A section marked: “type of personal data to be shared” by police with the government includes various types of criminal convictions, but also listed is the age a person first appeared as a victim, including for domestic violence, and the age a person was when they first had contact with police.

Also to be shared – and listed under “special categories of personal data” – are “health markers which are expected to have significant predictive power”, such as data relating to mental health, addiction, suicide and vulnerability, and self-harm, as well as disability.

Sofia Lyall, a researcher for Statewatch, said: “The Ministry of Justice’s attempt to build this murder prediction system is the latest chilling and dystopian example of the government’s intent to develop so-called crime ‘prediction’ systems.

“Time and again, research shows that algorithmic systems for ‘predicting’ crime are inherently flawed.

Keep reading

UK MP’s call for digital identity to “tackle illegal immigration”

It turns out that the solution to illegal immigration is instituting a nationwide system of digital identity, issued to every baby at birth and containing all your social, education, financial, medical, and employment information.

At least, according to the 40 or so Labour MPs who co-signed an open letter calling for such a system.

Of course, that digital ID could solve the immigration “problem” should come as no surprise. After all, it can solve every “problem”.

It can make sure our elections aren’t rigged. It can protect our children on the internet. It can prevent the spread of disease. It can lower crime. It can tackle truancy and benefit fraud. It can government eliminate inefficiency.

Oh, it’s good for the economy too!

Yay!

Keep reading

UK Tribunal Blocks Government’s Attempt to Keep Apple Surveillance Case Secret

With a necessary reality check, a UK tribunal has told the government that, no, it cannot hold a secret legal battle against Apple over encryption. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), the body meant to oversee the country’s surveillance powers, has dismissed efforts by the Home Office to keep the entire case hidden from public view. And in doing so, it has delivered a quietly important win for press freedom and digital rights. Although, things are far from over.

The case revolves around Apple’s Advanced Data Protection system, or ADP. It’s a security feature that gives users the option to encrypt their iCloud data in a way that even Apple itself cannot access. Not through a backdoor, not with a master key, not at all. It’s the kind of robust end-to-end encryption that governments around the world have grown increasingly nervous about.

The UK, it turns out, is no exception.

Keep reading

UK Halts “Legal but Harmful” Censorship Rule Amid US Trade Pressure, But Online Safety Act Still Fuels Free Speech and Privacy Fears

Plans to implement sweeping content moderation powers for tech companies have been put on hold by the UK government, as concerns grow that reintroducing speech controls could disrupt sensitive trade discussions with President Donald Trump’s allies.

The British Government had been exploring a return to the abandoned “legal but harmful” proposal, a measure that would have forced online platforms to purge content deemed “harmful” yet not unlawful. But after internal pushback and a wary eye on Washington’s stance, the idea has been quietly dropped.

The original measure, introduced under Conservative leadership in 2022, triggered significant dissent, including from within the party itself. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, then serving as business secretary, dismissed the idea, warning it could mean “legislating for hurt feelings.” The proposal was ultimately replaced with tools that give individuals more choice over the material they encounter online rather than imposing top-down restrictions.

According to reports, the recent move to distance the government from any revival of the censorship clause comes amid Labour’s review of the Online Safety Act, launched after riots last summer linked to false claims about a Southport attacker. While that review sparked fresh debate over “misinformation,” officials have opted not to revisit the “legal but harmful” language, choosing instead to emphasize online protections for children.

Labour appears focused on building upon new safety measures coming into force this summer, including mandatory age checks for adult content. Technology Secretary Peter Kyle is working on a package aimed at strengthening youth safeguards, though these proposals stop well short of any return to compelled content takedowns.

“We are really committed to keeping children safe,” a government insider said. “Finally, the Online Safety Act is starting to have an impact, and we will see some enforcement action shortly. Age assurance will also be a massive step forward when it comes in the summer, but we’re actively exploring other ways of protecting children.”

​While the UK government’s removal of the “legal but harmful” provision from the Online Safety Act was intended to address concerns over free speech and censorship, significant issues remain. The Act still imposes broad duties on online platforms to assess and mitigate risks associated with user-generated content.

Keep reading

Ten Britons accused of committing war crimes while fighting for Israel in Gaza

A war crimes complaint against 10 Britons who served with the Israeli military in Gaza is to be submitted to the Met police by one of the UK’s leading human rights lawyers.

Michael Mansfield KC is one of a group of lawyers who will on Monday hand in a 240-page dossier to Scotland Yard’s war crimes unit alleging targeted killing of civilians and aid workers, including by sniper fire, and indiscriminate attacks on civilian areas, including hospitals.

The report, which has been prepared by a team of UK lawyers and researchers in The Hague, also accuses suspects of coordinated attacks on protected sites including historic monuments and religious sites, and forced transfer and displacement of civilians.

For legal reasons, neither the names of suspects, who include officer-level individuals, nor the full report are being made public.

Israel has persistently denied that its political leaders or military have committed war crimes during its assault on Gaza, in which it has killed more than 50,000 people, most of them civilians. The military campaign was in response to Hamas’s 7 October 2023 attack on southern Israel, in which more than 1,200 people, also mostly civilian, were killed and a further 250 taken hostage.

Mansfield, who is known for his work on landmark cases such as the Grenfell Tower fire, Stephen Lawrence and the Birmingham Six, said: “​If one of our nationals is committing ​an offence, we ought to be doing something about it​. Even if we can’t stop the government of foreign countries behaving badly, we can at least stop our nationals from behaving badly.

“British nationals are under a legal obligation not to collude with crimes committed in Palestine. No one is above the law.”

The report, which has been submitted on behalf of the Gaza-based Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) and the British-based Public Interest Law Centre (PILC), covers alleged offences committed in the territory from October 2023 to May 2024 and took six months to compile.

Each of the crimes attributed to the 10 suspects, some of whom are dual nationals, amounts to a war crime or crime against humanity, according to the report.

One witness, who was at a medical facility, saw corpses “scattered on the ground, especially in the middle of the hospital courtyard, where many dead bodies were buried in a mass grave”. A bulldozer “ran over a dead body in a horrific and heart-wrenching scene desecrating the dead”, the witness said. They also said a bulldozer demolished part of the hospital.

Keep reading