Graham Linehan arrested on arrival at Heathrow Part 4

[IDareSay]

These threads have mostly been used to follow the case that has taken place at Westminster Magistrate's Court over the 4th and 5th September, (and will continue on the 29th October), but were created to follow the fallout of Graham's arrest at Heathrow on his return to the UK for this court case last week, and what is allegedly a conspiracy of TRAs to intimidate and harass a number of people, including Graham, with the alleged support of various police services.

He is currently on trial for alleged harassment of a trans identified male and criminal damage to the man's phone. The charges stem from a series of events in October 2024 at Battle of Ideas.

Part 1 here
Part 2 here
Part 3 here
Graham's account of the arrest here
You can support his Substack here
Or buy him a coffee here

Free Speech Union are running a fundraiser to support a claim against the Met in reference to the Heathrow arrest. Just search FSU and Graham Linehan fundraiser and it should be easy to find. At the time of posting it has reached 64% of its stretch target.
The FSU have managed to get the bail condition that @Glinner must not post on X removed, so he is now freely posting on there again.

Most of the mainstream media have reported on the case, but none have covered it as well as Nick Wallis. Follow him on X for live posting from the court again on 29th October.
You can support Nick here (posted Friday 5th September):
"I am deeply grateful to everyone who has seen fit to bung me the cost of a coffee, a pint or even a bloody London pint since I found out I was able to come back today. If you think you can afford to make a small donation, there’s more info here:"
https://store29806256.company.site

I'm not sure where the boundaries lie for this sort of offence (or perceived offence) any more.

On the basis that telling a crowd 'We need to cut all their throats ..' is not an offence then I'm not sure Glinner's 'ball punching' gets close.

Suspended Labour councillor found not guilty of encouraging violent disorder | Labour | The Guardian

From another post this is the author of that post. She has 'transed' her child so is one of Helen Joyce's last Japanese soldiers still fighting.

Some background
My name is Helen, some of you will know me from Twitter as @mimmymum — a cis feminist, the mum of a trans son, and a fierce trans ally.

Isn't she the one who tried to take Miranda something, a transwoman, to court for transphobia?

It appears that indeed it was the Helen Islan who accused Miranda Yardley of transphobia & persuaded West Yorkshire Police to act.

www.spectator.co.uk/article/a-collapsed-case-shows-the-perils-of-policing-transphobia/

She used to be the marketing manager for Mermaids I think.

To quote Ben Cooper- Would it be unkind of me to ask how that is going?

Breaking:

"The police have informed my lawyers that I face no further action in respect of the arrest at Heathrow in September. After a successful hearing to get my bail conditions lifted (one which the police officer in charge of the case didn't even bother to attend) the Crown Prosecution Service has dropped the case. With the aid of the Free Speech Union, I still aim to hold the police accountable for what is only the latest attempt to silence and suppress gender critical voices on behalf of dangerous and disturbed men."

https://x.com/Glinner/status/1980288054016590157

Graham's trial for alleged harassment of a trans identified male and criminal damage to the man's phone continues on October 29th (next week).
The charges stem from a series of events in October 2024 at Battle of Ideas.

See first post for more details.

Be nice to think that would be dropped too.

Great news, hope he gets compensation.

I am hoping for the same outcome once prosecutors review my case. I invite them to take a long, hard look at the evidence and draw the appropriate conclusions of no further action.

No further action, case dropped. As of today. Yay!

He may find the Sophia Brooks case a bit more problematic, after all, he did knock the young man's phone out of his hand. Hopefully, the defence will be allowed to show some of the numerous clips of him buttonholing women and harassing them by shoving his phone in their faces.

I think it's the case that he'd done it to Linehan a number of times that day and he may be able to argue that he was simply at the end of his tether.

The prosecution has to.show that the phone was damaged by Linehan. The phone may have been damaged but there is no evidence that Linehan's actions caused the damage. As it was a four year old iPhone and the bill was three figures, that may be difficult to demonstrate.

They also have to prove that Linehan intended to damage the phone or was reckless in his actions (I.e. didn't care that his actions might cause damage). He is clearly swiping the phone away from his face because Sophia was harassing him with it, and he skimmed the phone across the ground rather than threw it with any force. This is hardly the action of someone determined to damage the phone.

The damage looked like it had been caused by a hammer or stamping, not the skimming. Given that Sophia had another camera, he could have filmed the damage done in real time. The question we ask is why didn't he?

Exactly

Maybe not dropped but found to be without any basis in fact and therefore malicious - so he can sue in the civil courts. And they might face criminal charges of wasting police time. Plus a complaint about police conduct. Throw the book at these ghastly people

He is going to sue the Met, right?

BBC news report just now said glinner would be suing the police for false arrest

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyp1gk0n23o

The Metropolitan Police says it will no longer investigate non-crime hate incidents to allow officers to "focus on matters that meet the threshold for criminal investigations".

And

"This decision means that no charges will be brought against Graham Linehan in relation to this allegation," a detective wrote in an email to the comic on Monday.

The BBC news article doesn't say it, but BBC news has said that they will still record 'non crime hate incidents' though.

Ooo yes, much better. Bring it!

It was suggested in an earlier thread that the claimant in the other case had previously claimed the cost of a damaged phone from someone else. There was some speculation about how many phones the claimant had in their possession. So there may be some interesting questions to answer in that case.

Having read the testimony of the alleged victim in that case, it felt like it was the wrong person being prosecuted tbh...

Is the damaged phone case being heard before a jury? He may technically have committed the offence but it's hardly a criminal matter. If you stick your phone in someone's face and they swat it away, you deserve all the damage to your phone I reckon.

Magistrates' court before a judge, I believe.

Has this case been stopped? I’m confused on what’s happening, just heard Glinner sounding happy on radio.