Facebook, Riots and the Law: How the UK Is Prosecuting Recent Unrest

A car burns after being overturned during an anti-immigration protest in Middlesbrough, England, on Aug. 4, 2024. Owen Humphreys/PA

Analysis

In the aftermath of the violent UK riots, authorities have been charging individuals for crimes both online and offline, ranging from violent disorder to incitement of racial hatred.

After Elon Musk publicly clashed with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer on social media platform X, the policing of social media quickly became a global focus of the UK riots—along with cases of people sent to prison over social media posts.

While some of the swiftly-meted-out convictions have been solely based on social media posts, the majority of the arrests, charges and convictions have been for violent crime and disorder.

Nearly all prosecutions over social media posts so far have not been under the new controversial law designed to bring the online world to heel—but via 38 year old legislation.

So, what laws are being broken by those involved in the riots, and by those who have done nothing more than post on social media?

The Crown Prosecution Service told The Epoch Times they do not have a definitive breakdown of data with every single conviction and arrest by type, and arrests are still being made and charges brought. But the details of charges and convictions so far do provide a snapshot.

Police officers with protesters during an anti-immigration demonstration outside the Holiday Inn Express in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, on Aug. 4, 2024. Danny Lawson/PA

Violent Crimes

The violence was widespread as people took to the streets.

Mosques in at least four English cities were targeted. Hundreds also gathered near a Holiday Inn Express hotel used to house asylum seekers near the northern town of Rotherham, with some attempting to set it on fire.

In Middlesbrough, rioters shouted, “Are you English? Are you white?” at a car trying to cross the intersection.

This was on top of countless attacks where bricks and fireworks were launched towards police officers.

Street violence also increased as footage of Muslim gangs attacking white people went viral.

Independent journalist Andy Ngo reported that a “Muslim patrol” carrying melee weapons had attacked white people in the streets, accusing them of being linked to the earlier anti-mass migration protest.

Ngo also shared footage of a pub in Birmingham where a “Muslim patrol” group yell at a white man smoking outside before going over and beating him.

Public Order Act

A drone's eye view of the aftermath of a riot at a Holiday Inn Express hotel in Tamworth, England on Aug. 5, 2024. Jacob King/PA Wire

In response, British authorities, including the police, Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), and the Home Office, took rapid action across the justice system to arrest, charge and jail those involved.

Many of the actions taken have stemmed from offenses outlined in the Public Order Act 1986, a British law designed to prevent and address behaviors that threaten public peace.

In that law, incitement, provoking violence and harassment offenses, which predate social media companies such as Facebook, Telegram and X by almost 20 years, apply both on and offline.

According to the National Police Chiefs’ Council, to date, 927 arrests and 546 charges have been made across the UK in connection with the ongoing disorder since July 29.

The CPS said that as of Tuesday, 354 defendants have been charged for disorder following the riots.

For example, John Honey, 25,  in Hull, pleaded guilty to violent disorder, burglary, and racially aggravated criminal damage. He also pleaded guilty to the racially aggravated criminal damage of a BMW and damaging nine other cars.

A 13-year-old girl, pleaded guilty to violent disorder at Basingstoke Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday following a protest outside Potters International Hotel in Aldershot on July 31.

The girl, who cannot be named for legal reasons, admitted threatening unlawful violence that would cause a person to fear for his or her personal safety.

Jason Barry Francis, 38, was jailed for two years after pleading guilty to violent disorder and assault of an emergency worker at Bournemouth Crown Court on Monday, Dorset Police said.

Francis was seen in local council CCTV footage and on social media moving towards a police line, pushing and kicking out at police before punching an officer in the face and backing away into the crowd.

Sameer Ali, 21, was jailed for 20 months for affray while Adnan Ghafoor, 31, was jailed for 18 months for the same offence committed in Leeds City Centre. They had attended an anti-racism demonstration while an anti-immigration protest was happening at the same time.

The judge, the Recorder of Leeds, Guy Kearl, KC, told them: “The law applies to everyone, no matter what color, race, religion, or political persuasion they are. There is no distinction.”

“It is against that background that both of you involved yourselves in violence in the street, in Leeds. The violence used by you and others was unlawful. Not only did you violently attack others in the street, but this was witnessed by people in a nearby bar, on the pavement and in cars. They will have been shocked, fearful, upset and distressed by your actions,” he said.

The number of people jailed is expected to rise significantly as police continue to arrest and charge more individuals as their investigations progress.

Stirring up Hatred

The act, which is just less than forty years old, also includes provisions against publishing or distributing written material intended to stir up racial hatred, This is being used to charge online material.

The initial focus of the role of social media was because the riots were partly fuelled by inaccurate claims that a triple-child murder stabbing suspect was a Muslim illegal immigrant on a terror watch list, which spread online.

But the convictions so far have not been for repeating the posts that sparked the unrest, but for other specific incitements.

For example, Jordan Parlour, 28, pleaded guilty last week to using threatening, abusive, or insulting words or behavior intending to stir up racial hatred and was sentenced to 20 months’ imprisonment.

Tyler Kay, 26, wrote an offensive anti-immigration post on X calling for hotels housing asylum seekers to be set alight. He also reposted a screenshot of another message inciting action against a named immigration solicitor in Northampton. He pleaded guilty to publishing material intending to stir up racial hatred under the same act and was sentenced to 38 months’ imprisonment.

Others have been convicted or are awaiting trial under communication offenses specified in the Communications Act 2003.

For instance, Richard David Williams, who the CPS said “enthusiastically” posted about participating in a riot and shared derogatory memes about migrants, became the first person in Wales to be convicted and sentenced for offenses related to the recent disorder.

He pleaded guilty to sending menacing messages via a public communication network and was sentenced to 12 weeks’ imprisonment.

Jailed For Comments on Social Media

Dimitrie Stoica, 25, who falsely claimed on a live-streamed TikTok video that he was “running for his life” from rioters in Derby was jailed under the Online Safety Act—a new and controversial set of online laws designed to protect users and combat harmful content online.

Stoica’s stream had come to the attention of officers monitoring social media from the area. However, he confirmed to police that he was not being chased and was not afraid for his safety.

Stoica had been livestreaming to 700 followers as he walked around Derby on Wednesday 7 August – the same evening that potential protests and disorder had been feared might take place in the city and admitted that his comments had been a “joke.”

He was charged the following day with one count of sending a false communication with intent to cause harm contrary to Section 179 of the Online Safety Act 2023. He was jailed for three months and ordered to pay £154 in compensation.

Punishment and Deterrence

The sentences are intended to provide “both punishment and deterrence,” said a judge.

When sentencing John O’Malley and William Nelson-Morgan to 32 months’ imprisonment on Thursday for separate offenses of violent disorder in Southport and Walton, Judge Menary, KC, sitting in Liverpool, said: “It has long been recognized that there is an obligation on sentencing courts to do what they can to ensure the protection of the public, whether in their homes, in their businesses, or on the streets, and to protect the places where they live and work. In seeking to achieve this aim, the courts will typically impose severe sentences for offenses involving or connected to large-scale and violent public disorder, intended to provide both punishment and deterrence.”

“Quite simply, those who deliberately participate in such disorder, causing injury, damage, and fear to communities, will inevitably be punished with sentences designed to deter others from similar activity. Other offenses, such as criminal damage, arson, threatening behavior, or assault committed in the context of widespread disorder, will be regarded as aggravated forms of that offending,” he added.

Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Parkinson said that one case of alleged terrorism is “actively under consideration,” though no terrorism charges had yet been brought in yet.

Parkinson told PA Media what may be considered a terrorism offense could be about named individuals or immigration law firms, for instance, and encouraging activity affecting those individuals.

2011 Riots

The recent riots have drawn comparisons to the 2011 unrest, when almost 4,000 people were arrested for being involved in the disorder from Aug. 6 to 9, 2011.

These riots and looting, which spread across the country, were triggered by the police shooting of Mark Duggan, a 29-year-old black gang member, in Tottenham.

Along with the five deaths, at least 16 others were injured as a direct result of related violent acts. Authorities said that with this event, most forces perceived that where gang members were involved, though they generally did not play a pivotal role.

Ministry of Justice figures said that 1,984 defendants had appeared at magistrates’ courts for initial hearings related to riot offenses. Of these, 686 were found guilty, and 551 of the guilty defendants had been sentenced.

Overall 13 percent of arrestees (417) were reported to be affiliated with a gang, 46 percent were black (including mixed black background), 42 percent were white, 7 percent were Asian, and 5 percent were from some ‘other’ ethnic group.

The most common offenses for which people were brought before the courts included burglary (50 percent), violent disorder (22 percent), and theft (15 percent).

Just over three-quarters (76 percent) had a previous caution or conviction, including a significant proportion (26 percent) with more than ten previous offenses.

PA Media contributed to this report.