Anyone seen woman arrested for saying f****t in a private text message?

So an abuse victim receiving online threats and texts from their abuser would be wasting the police’s time by expecting it to be dealt with.

The majority of these cases don’t warrant investigation based on one incident. Although they can if the nature and credibility of a threat is high. They are investigated when someone is on the receiving end of numerous unsolicited and unwanted malicious communications. Because that is someone harassing and abusing you.

In this case the abuser accepted guilt and the poor reporting even notes it was a barrage of messages.

It is right that people who harass and abuse others online and via texts or by phone or poison pen letters are prosecuted and stopped. It is not acceptable behaviour. Even if your feelings have been hurt or you have been a victim yourself. A lot of abusers will have been victims. It doesn’t mean that cannot be held accountable and it doesn’t give them some privileged status in society.

What a waste of police time.

I don't agree. There seems to be plenty of people who are claiming that causing offence should be illegal. There have been a significant number of cases where someone wrote something fairly inoffensive on the Internet and the police turn up at their door. For example Alison Pearson. Or Graham Lineham, who was arrested months later by armed police. This is wrong and chilling.

The other issue is not being able to predict what will cause offence and to whom. No one wants the police at their door on Sunday morning like Alison Pearson and to have their books checked for wrong-think.

I think people who defend this or don't think there's much of a problem with the law as it is perhaps haven't done much reading in life to know it's worrying as to where this sort of thing might go. (That's just my personal opinion of course and I'm sure it doesn't apply to all).

No one said offence should be illegal, that’s a straw man. The UK has always had legal limits on speech. Pointing that out isn’t smug; refusing to accept it while lecturing others on free expression however...

None of this is new. The laws have been in place for ages, all that’s changed is the number of people skirting/crossing those long-established lines and the number of people reporting them for it. Calling that ‘criminalising offence’ just ignores how the law works.

Well maybe they should go and arrest the Pogues while they're at it.

Blimey, that's awful!

That some people are so desperate to justify this appalling overreaction is frankly terrifying. At what stage do you admit to yourself that you welcomed the police state?

• Over 12,000 arrests/year: Reports from early 2025, based on data up to 2023, indicate police are making over 12,000 arrests annually under laws covering offensive online communications (like S127 Communications Act 2003).
• Significant Increase: This represents a nearly 58% rise compared to 2019, when around 7,700 arrests were recorded.

How was she inflaming him? By texting a separate person to rant about them? Where presumably she didn't think the person would report her text to the police?

It's not unprecedented, is it? Look at the number of arrests for speech in this country over the last few years. There are about 30 a day. Literally arresting people for things they say online or in private conversations. There have been quite a few high profile cases where the police have overreached and been forced to apologise. So yeah, I don't doubt that it's true - and if it isn't, well, the facts will be on record, won't they, so I'm sure we'll find out soon enough.

Where have you seen that she reported the assault to the police.

And the 10 police is only based on her claim on piers Morgan so I'll take it with a pinch of salt

Fucking hell, that is terrifying. So the man who beat her up doesn't get arrested, but they sent ten!!! officers to a woman's house to arrest her for ranting to her mate.

The police in this country are an absolute joke. Rape, assault, robbery - no chance the police will do a thing. Call someone a nasty name and you'll have ten officers kicking your door down.

Nothing can justify this. Utterly terrifying for the woman. She looks small and slight and certainly not such a threat that it needs ten officers to arrest her.

It's honestly sickening.

I've always thought people being smug on MN and suggesting they are cleverer than everyone else does people no credit.

There's no law against offending people. Or there shouldn't be. Which is what the OPs story regarding the texts seems to be about.

The whole issue at the moment in this country is speech being criminalised. Or the attempt to criminalise speech (luckily often rejected by juries).

Working with women who have been murdered, almost murdered, had their dogs stabbed, their children removed, put in prison, forced into prostitution because of the very real THREAT of male violence.

Nah, you’re right. I don’t give a shit about rude words.

I know you’re not going to back down or stop using these women as a means to make your own, very separate point (ironically against a woman who was actually ASSAULTED by the person she called a bad word) so I’m going to bow out of this.

I hope you get the validation you need out of your whatabouting on this thread.

After a quick google:

"A report by the Times in April 2025, based on data from freedom of information requests and Ministry of Justice records, indicated that the number of convictions for offences under Section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 and Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 had decreased over the past decade, despite a significant increase in arrests. The report noted that arrests under these sections had risen by nearly 58% since before the pandemic, with over 12,000 arrests annually, equating to more than 30 per day. While specific conviction numbers are not available, the data suggests a growing number of arrests but a declining trend in convictions."

Funny how none of these Patriots seemed outraged about ""what was happening to the country" 10 years ago when more people were actually being convicted when the Tories were in charge.

The law in question was brought in by Thatcher.

No it doesn't, and it never has. Not sure why the simple fact that freedom of expression has always been limited by law in the UK is so hard for some people to grasp.

Personally I’d differentiate between a case like this, where the messages have remained private and I suspect there is quite the backstory and other cases where something is posted publicly and we can all see what was said. I think there’s been some overreach in the latter.

But not appalled at people trying to justify sending abuse to other people hey? Many women are subjected to abusive messages. The law currently allows room for them to report them as malicious communications if they feel, among other things, distress I’m not sure why you want to take that protection away from women.

For the record, the example of 90s policing was from my personal experience as was the ‘has he actually threatened you’ comment. So save the implication that you’re the only person who either knows or cares about DV

So have the details been verified to be true away from the daily mail that is

Well thank goodness it’s not classed as free speech then.

https://library.college.police.uk/docs/college-of-policing/Risk-led-policing-2-2016.pdf

Have you heard of a DASH risk assessment checklist?

To be honest, I’m pretty appalled at you comparing the domestic abuse of women to mean tweets. Two women a week are killed by men in the UK.

”but has he actually threatened you?”