Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Neil Cummings / Flickr (Edited)


UK Police Instructed to Ignore ‘Trivial or Irrational’ Online Incidents, Protect Free Speech

A rare victory for freedom of speech in the United Kingdom

British police have been instructed to no longer record or investigate “trivial or irrational” online disputes reported as non-crime hate incidents.

Non-crime hate incidents could be reported by a “victim” or any witness who felt offended by something that did not break laws on hate speech or online posting, and they were recorded irrespective of whether there was any objective evidence of hate to begin with. The incidents could range from an offhand remark, to an argument about sensitive political topics on Twitter.

Such incidents do not show up on the normal criminal record, but would do on an enhanced background check. Police forces have not been required to tell somebody when a non-crime hate incident has been placed on their record, meaning tens of thousands of people in the UK likely have no idea they have one.

In December last year, the Court of Appeal ruled in favour of Harry Miller, a former police officer who had a non-crime hate incident recorded against him for retweeting an allegedly “transphobic” limerick. The Court determined that it was “plainly an interference with free speech” to have the incident placed on Miller’s record, and the records of others.

As a result of the ruling, new interim guidance from the College of Policing severely restricts British police from cracking down on legitimate debate online. The guidance, which will be in place until the Home Office publishes a new code of policing later this year, says that officers should respect free speech, and focus on catching real criminals.

“The public rightly expect the police to focus on cutting crime and bringing criminals to justice,” said Andy Marsh, chief executive of the College of Policing.”

Related  UK Prime Minister Issued £100 Fine for Not Wearing Seatbelt in Back of Moving Car

“While we work to protect the most vulnerable in society, we also have a responsibility to protect freedom of speech,” Marsh added. “This updated guidance puts in place new safeguards to ensure people are able to engage in lawful debate without police interference.”

Police will continue to act when there is evidence of criminality, but the code now dictates that any “trivial or irrational” hate incidents must not be recorded, or if there was “no basis to conclude it was motivated by hostility.”

The code further notes that “individuals who are commenting in legitimate debate, for example, on social or political issues, should not be stigmatised simply because someone is offended.” If officers think it is necessary, they should try and avoid recording names or locations of the incident, the code concludes.

“The police regularly deal with complex incidents on social media,” Marsh said. “Our guidance is there to support officers responding to these incidents in accordance with the law, and not get involved in debates on Twitter.”

Deputy Chief Constable Mark Hamilton, the National Police Chiefs’ Council lead for hate crime, maintained that it was still important to record and respond to non-crime hate incidents, “given the impacy they can have on individuals, communities and families.” Hamilton did not detail what the supposed impacts of non-crime were.

Related  UK: Future Conservative MPs Must Undergo Diversity Training on 'White Resentment', 'Microaggressions'

“It is essential that the harm caused by such incidents, and the motivation they can have on others, are recognised,” he continued. “At the same time, we must make sure that our responses are proportionate, so that human rights freedoms are protected, while also safeguarding members of the public.”

The Free Speech Union, run by conservative commentator Toby Young, which supported Miller in his case, has included on their website a way to find out if you have a non-crime hate incident attached to your record, along with a method of removing it.

Valiant News reported in April that guidance from the National Police Chief’s Council said that transgender officers born as male must be allowed to strip-search women, with the potential for non-crime hate incident being recorded if the women object. It is unclear how the most recent guidance will affect this.

Jack Hadfield
Written By

Jack Hadfield is the Associate Editor at Valiant News. An investigative reporter from the UK, and the director and presenter of "Destination Dover: Migrants in the Channel, his work has appeared in such sites as Breitbart and The Political Insider. You can follow him on Gab @JH, on Telegram @JackHadders, or see his other social media by visiting

1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Avatar

    Stevan Baker

    July 23, 2022 at 9:42 am

    About freakin time. The Po-Po has no business getting involved in crybaby arguments of wussies who just need to toughen up if they are going to participate in the “rough and tumble” of on line debate. [For those of you in the UK that may not be familiar with colloquialism “Po-Po” it means the police.]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Trending on Valiant News:


"This is really someone with so much money... going after someone who is really the little guy."


The inflation rate was 1.4% when Biden took office. Two years later, that number has tripled.


"Mask-wearing can shift from being a self-protection measure... to a self-presentation tactic."

Foreign Policy

The popular Fox News host called the former British Prime Minister a "coward" and a "liar" in response.