Stephen Gray, 65, to appeal conviction for resharing posts that were critical of Islam

When Stephen Gray, a retired police officer, was told he would be charged with a criminal offence for sharing posts online that were critical of Islam, his first concern was not for himself.

It was for the young Irish girl he and his wife had been fostering for the past six years.

He told The Telegraph: “I was initially quite worried because obviously we have to have enhanced DBS checks to foster children.

“These kids have enough to put up with without the fear they may be moving again hanging over their heads.”

Gray, 65, who worked for Cleveland Police for nearly three decades, went on trial at Newton Aycliffe magistrates’ court in April 2026.

Despite pointing out he had only reshared the posts, as hundreds of other people had, and explaining he viewed them as political satire, he was found guilty of making a grossly offensive post on Facebook contrary to Section 127(1)(a) of the Communications Act 2003.

Speaking from his home in Darlington, County Durham, Gray still cannot get his head around the fact he has a criminal conviction for a post on social media.

He said: “I guess some of the posts may have been in bad taste. Some of them may upset one or two people, but I didn’t think for one second it would be cast as grossly offensive by the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and by the courts. Not for one second.”

Gray was charged over the reposting of two allegedly offensive images.

The first had the words “time for mass deportation” alongside an image of a Middle Eastern man, who was in his late 20s or 30s, and the words “Children in Need”.

The image had the caption “12-year-old Mohammed recently arrived at Dover. Please donate to help him move from a three-star to a five-star hotel which has a better halal menu, free wifi and Sky and is nearer to a girls’ school”.

The second image was a picture of a rasher of bacon and a man in a turban alongside the caption “Fun facts about Bacon!” People who eat bacon have a lower chance of marrying a 9-year-old!”

Ultimately, the district judge who tried his case ruled the first post was not grossly offensive and it related to a political issue that had been debated in Parliament.

The second image, however, resulted in a conviction. The judge ruled the post was not political; it was about religion, and it was grossly offensive.
‘I made a joke’

Giving evidence during the trial, Gray pointed out that he had not made the images himself but had simply reposted the images along with thousands of other people.

The posts had not been directed at any individual and the person who complained about it to police in the first place, was a non-Muslim neighbour of Gray’s, with whom he had previously had an unrelated disagreement.

Gray said: “I made a joke, an ironic joke, about Islam. That is all it was at the end of the day. A joke. I certainly never, not for one second, thought it would be deemed abusive.”

After being found guilty, Gray, who is appealing against the decision with the support of the Free Speech Union (FSU), was also ordered to pay more than £1,000 in fines and costs.

Gray and his wife Alex, 62, have fostered three children over the past seven years. He informed social services about the prosecution after he was charged.

“Even they looked at it and said, ‘This is utter rubbish’. They reassured me nothing would happen as a result of it,” he said. “So that was a bit of pressure off. We were very worried about losing her.”

After investigating the posts, Durham Constabulary passed a file of evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), who initially declined to charge Gray, saying there was no realistic prospect of conviction.

But the person who made the original complaint appealed the decision using the Victims’ Right to Review scheme, and the CPS then decided to proceed with the case.

‘Absolutely gobsmacked’

When they initially presented the case in court, prosecutors highlighted posts Gray had published as criticism of the Labour Party and Sir Keir Starmer “for context”.

Gray said that he had told his former boss at Cleveland Police about the case and he was “absolutely gobsmacked”.

He said: “He couldn’t believe it. Back when I was serving, if I had taken this case to my sergeant or inspector, I would have been on foot beat night shift for the next five years for wasting everybody’s time. It wouldn’t have got past the front door of the police station.”

Gray said he was “humbled” by all the help he had been given to fight his case. His appeal is scheduled to be heard in November.

He said he believed prosecutions such as his were an attempt to revive blasphemy laws in the UK.

“I just think it’s a dangerous road that the Government is going down trying to use the justice system to get us to stop criticising a religion that promotes a lot of things people might not agree with,” he added.

Lord Young of Acton, general secretary of the FSU, said: “Prosecuting people for making jokes about Islam, particularly if they contain a kernel of truth, is a new low.

“No one making a similar joke about Jesus would face prosecution. Blasphemy laws were abolished in England 18 years ago and should not be resurrected by the courts and applied to just one religion.

“If Labour wants to make it a criminal offence to offend Muslims, but not Christians, Hindus, Sikhs or Buddhists, Andy Burnham should include that in the next King’s Speech. Good luck getting it through parliament.”

Gray’s ordeal follows that of Hamit Coskun, who won a landmark blasphemy case at the High Court earlier this year.

Mr Coskun was convicted of a religiously aggravated public order offence after holding up a flaming copy of the holy book and shouting “f—- Islam”, in what he insisted was a political protest.

He successfully appealed the decision against the CPS, who had claimed his actions were criminal and amounted to disorderly conduct.

Mr Coskun said at the time that if the High Court had not ruled in his favour, “the Islamic blasphemy code would now be, in essence, embedded into English law”.

The CPS declined to comment while Gray’s appeal was ongoing. Durham Constabulary has been approached for comment.

Daily Telegraph

He received a lengthy prison sentence for his behaviour

A TikTok conspiracy theorist with a ‘God complex’ left his ex-girlfriend suicidal and caused her to suffer meltdowns and hospitalisations during an abusive and controlling relationship, a court has heard.

Karl Farr, 31, was sentenced to 39 months in prison for controlling and coercive behaviour and breaching a non-molestation order against former partner Katie Saunders during a hearing at Bristol Crown Court on Friday (August 14).

Farr, from North Common in South Gloucestershire, filmed his ex while she was having autistic meltdowns triggered by his behaviour and then told her he would use the footage to show she wasn’t fit to look after her children if she reported him to the police, the court heard.

Ms Saunders told the court that Farr had taken total control of her life, with his behaviour causing her to end up in hospital. The relationship began in May 2023 but by the end of that year he had become so jealous and controlling that she became isolated from her friends and family. Farr’s threats made Ms Saunders feel like she could not break up with him.

“During my relationship with the defendant, he caused me to suffer a huge amount of stress,” Ms Saunders said. “This stress resulted in many autistic meltdowns and shutdowns. I experienced hospitalisations due to burn out and illness and became a shell of my former self.

“This (behaviour) was so that I would be submissive to the defendant…It was relentless and a constant battle. I would beg him to stop.

“He would taunt me until I broke down completely, yet he would always carry on. That, in itself, was terrifying.”

Under the account name ‘Karl, of the Code’, Farr peddled fringe opinions to over 40,000 followers on social media and regularly used his TikTok account to dismiss the validity of the judicial process. He also subscribed to ‘Hustlers University’, a paid online course run by manosphere influencer and alleged rapist Andrew Tate.

Talking through tears, her voice sometimes quivering with rage, Ms Saunders told the court about the direct impact Farr’s extremist views had on her life. She said he convinced her that her children would find her dead because she had taken the covid vaccine.

“He (also) persuaded me to stop taking all my medication, fed me chlorine dioxide in every drink, and insisted on extreme detoxes,” she said.

“I was made to believe this was healthy. It stripped me of my freedom and left me significantly worse.”

“For the past two years, life for both myself and my children has been significantly affected by his behaviour, carried out with a God complex mentality, an attitude of being above the law, and a complete lack of accountability or remorse for those harmed by his actions.”

As she spoke, Ms Saunders occasionally glanced at Farr who sat impassively in the dock, sometimes staring at his phone.

After Ms Saunders eventually ended the relationship in March 2024, Farr continued to harass and stalk her, including by making new social media profiles when she blocked him and sitting near her house in an unregistered car.

On one occasion in December 2024, he let himself into her home while she was ill in bed and subjected her to a torrent of abuse. The relentless attempts to contact and intimidate Ms Saunders continued even after Farr was issued with a legal non-molestation order.

“The message was clear, nothing would get rid of you,” presiding judge Recorder Brian Fitzherbert said.

“Ms Saunders was powerless to stop you, or so you wanted her to believe.”

Ms Saunders said the effects of Farr’s behaviour continued to linger, over two years since the end of their relationship.

“It is difficult to convey the full complexity of what I have endured,” she told the court.

“I obsessively check windows, doors, cameras, emails, and alarms. I lose sleep, experience flashbacks, and relive the fear.

“I jump at every phone call or message, terrified it may bring news that something has happened to my children. I fear the arrival of (the) post and constantly look over my shoulder, hyper aware of my surroundings.”

Prosecuting barrister Georgia Luscombe pushed for Mr Fitzherbert to give Farr a lengthy prison term because of the seriousness of the harm he had caused his ex-girlfriend. The judge agreed, citing Ms Saunders’ autism and Farr’s disregard for court orders as aggravating factors as he handed him one of the longest permitted sentences for his crime.

“You knew that she would take your threats very literally and was likely to panic,” Mr Fitzherbert said.

“Your deliberate manipulation of Ms Saunders left her feeling suicidal…your view was simply that court orders did not apply to you….The simple fact is that you like to be in control and being subject to court orders which control you is intolerable to you, as is the idea that Ms Saunders could free herself from your control.”

Defending himself, Farr said Ms Saunders had also behaved in a controlling manner during their relationship. He claimed he stopped contacting her as soon as he was made aware of the non-molestation order.

The judge dismissed both claims based on evidence heard throughout the trial.

Farr also produced a bizarre statement signed by multiple people defending his character that he said ‘had come from Ireland’, which claimed he showed remorse and helped people by educating them about cryptocurrency and how to guard against online scams.

“It asked me to take into account that you have shown remorse and a willingness to learn from this experience, that’s completely the opposite of what I’ve seen in this case,” Mr Fitzherbert said.

Farr tried to frustrate the sentencing hearing by claiming the police and prosecutors made a series of procedural errors during his trial and withheld evidence from the jury.

“The jury have returned their verdicts, the trial is now over, I can do nothing about that,” Mr Fitzherbert.

Farr said he intended to appeal against his conviction and issued a half-hearted apology to Ms Saunders as it began to dawn on him that he faced a long time behind bars. However, he could not resist the urge to indulge in a final bout of pseudo-legalistic babble as he was led out of the dock to begin his sentence.

“Who’s the trustee today, clerk are you the trustee,” he shouted. “I’m not the trustee and I’m not the surety for Mr Farr.”

Farr will serve at least 50 per cent of his sentence before being released on licence. He was also given a restraining order prohibiting him from contacting Ms Saunders for five years.

Bristol Post

A man has been convicted of three offences after writing an abusive message to an MP on a St George’s flag in York.

Lee Moran daubed the words “This one’s for you Maskill (sic)” on the flag, in reference to York Central MP Rachael Maskell, before hanging it over the city walls near Walmgate Bar.

The 54-year-old said the misspelling of Maskell’s name had been a deliberate “play on words” but denied it had been threatening or abusive.

His trial at York Magistrates’ Court heard that when erecting the flag on 16 September last year, Moran had also shouted obscenities at a young woman who had tripped over and dislodged the flag poles.

The woman, a University of York student, told the court she had spotted Moran, of Brunswick Street, on the walls and he had been holding two flag poles that jutted into the walkway.

When getting past, she said she had tripped and heard the poles topple over, followed by the defendant following and shouting at her.

The young woman told the court Moran had sworn at her and “got in her face”, making her fear she would be grabbed and thrown off the walls.

She said he had also repeatedly asked if she was racist.

He only stopped when a man distracted him by letting him know he had made a spelling mistake on the flag, which allowed her to leave and call the police, the court heard.

Moran argued the student had deliberately kicked his flag poles over and claimed he had not followed her nor sworn at her.

He admitted he had asked what her problem was and was she racist.

Judge Tan Ikram found the student to be consistent in her account and found Moran guilty of being abusive towards her, intending to cause fear of violence.The defendant told the court the flag and its message had been a “protest” against the MP’s call to remove flags put up on street furniture and lampposts in the city.

“It wasn’t threatening or abusive, it was meant to wind up the left wing bubble in York who don’t like the English flag,” he said.

Moran claimed the use of “kill” in the flag had referred to Maskell being a “buzzkill” or a “killjoy” but others had “started a different narrative”.

However, prosecutor Verity Barnes said the defendant had made this up in his police interview and he had used the language to provoke people in a busy public space.

After the flag was posted on Facebook, people asked Moran in the comments what he had meant by the misspelling and asked if it had it been a mistake.

He wrote: “Why would I tell you?”

The court heard he had proceeded to call Maskell an “English race hating b****” and say she “needs to f*** off back to where she came” or to “p*** off to one of the foreign countries she keeps trying to turn York into”.

He denied this was grossly offensive, telling the court: “I intended to swear, I could be more offensive.”

In a statement to the court, the MP said the flag “caused me to feel distressed with the threat of being a target in political violence”.

She added: “It may not have had that intention but it could embolden others to think that way.”

Judge Ikram told the court he was not passing judgement on people’s right to fly flags.

However, he said the message on the flag had been “threatening and abusive and right-minded people would have seen it that way”.

The judge found Moran guilty of displaying a threatening or abusive sign likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

He also found him guilty of writing grossly offensive comments on Facebook.

Moran will be sentenced at York Magistrates’ Court on 14 September.

BBC News

A Talk TV presenter has been found guilty of assaulting a fossil fuel protester who disrupted a dinner marking President Trump’s state visit to the UK.

Andre Walker carried Dr Kush Naker out of the event at Windsor Guildhall in September 2025 and then subjected him to a “prolonged assault in a side room”, a judge at Reading Magistrates’ Court was told.

The 47-year-old presenter, who later claimed he was trying to protect artwork in the building, was convicted of assault by beating.

He was given an 18-month conditional discharge and was ordered to pay £650 in court costs and £550 to his 36-year-old victim.

Passing sentence, Judge Sundeep Pankhania told Walker: “You should certainly be ashamed of the way you behaved.”

At the end of the hearing, Walker slammed his palm on the desk, stood up and asked: “Can I go now?”

When the judge said yes, he walked quickly out of the courtroom, uttering a swearword.

Naker previously said he escaped with minor injuries after Walker attempted to punch, strangle and knee him in the groin.

In a victim impact statement read out in court, he said Walker’s “level of anger and violence… took me by surprise”.

The statement said: “Something that was on my mind for a while was what could have happened and how much worse this could have been had he been stronger, or had targeted a weaker person.

“I found it so frightening that Walker could react the way he did just because he did not share my views.”

Four protesters unfurled a banner at the Republicans Overseas event on 16 September, which President Trump did not attend.

Dr Naker was chanting an anti-oil slogan when Walker approached “at pace” and pulled his arm, the judge was told.

The campaigner fell over and was carried by the defendant and another man into the side room.

Describing the subsequent incident on his YouTube channel, Walker said: “Obviously there was no cameras at one point” and held two thumbs up.

The presenter, of Clarence Road, Windsor, told the judge he feared the protesters would attack paintings in the building.

He said: “I don’t know what would have happened if I had not stopped the protest.”

Following the verdict, Fossil Free London, whose members took part in the protest, said: “People should not face violence simply because they have chosen to challenge those in power.”

Dr Naker added: “Using violence to silence free speech is a hallmark of fascism.

“It’s frightening that this violent man is given a platform to further spread such toxic views by News UK, YouTube and X.”

The BBC has approached the three organisations for comment.

BBC News

A drunk passenger who launched a “vile” racist rant on a plane, including giving a Nazi salute and proclaiming England would “rise again”, has been jailed for 10 months.

David Kelly, 56, shouted threats and racist and homophobic abuse at staff and passengers during his tirade on a Jet2 flight from Antalya in Turkey to Newcastle in December, Newcastle Crown Court heard.

A number of passengers, including a family with young children, were moved away from him, and he refused instructions to sit down so the plane could land, the court heard.

Kelly, from Durham, whose previous criminality included drug offences and arson, admitted being drunk on an aircraft and racially aggravated public disorder.

Kelly was noted to have been “loud and boisterous” with “lots of laughter” during the first couple of hours of the flight on 19 December, prosecutor Saba Shan said.

But his behaviour deteriorated as he became more drunk, the court heard.

He became “angry and animated as he started ranting”, Shan said, as passengers and staff had to “endure” his behaviour in the tight confines of the plane.

‘Genuine fear’

On the flight, Kelly asked what had “happened to our country”, the court heard, before he said: “We owned one-third of the world for hundreds of years. Look at us now, I’m ashamed.”

He also chanted “hey Tommy Tommy” and said “Hitler knew” while giving a Nazi salute, the court heard.

He called a Turkish passenger a “terrorist” and repeatedly swore at staff while using racist and homophobic slurs when they asked him to calm down.

He then stood on his seat and initially refused to sit back down as the plane prepared to land, Shan said.

The court heard he had four offences on his record including “serious drug offences” and an arson in 2013 for which he was jailed for five years and four months.

In mitigation, the court heard Kelly’s “deeply reprehensible and unpleasant” behaviour began after he had a “fundamental disagreement” with his neighbouring passenger about politics.

Recorder David Gordon said Kelly’s language was “vile” and he “created genuine fear” for passengers and crew as well as an “inherent safety concern” in the “uniquely confined environment of an aircraft in flight”.

BBC News

A man has admitted posting material online to stir up racial hatred following an investigation by counter terrorism officers.

Thomas Webster, from Lapworth, in Warwickshire, appeared at Coventry Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday.

He pleaded guilty to 10 counts of posting material online using threatening words or behaviour intended to stir up racial hatred.

The 29-year-old also admitted posting material online using threatening words which were intended to stir up hatred on the grounds of religion and on the grounds of sexual orientation.

He is due to be sentenced at Warwick Crown Court on 2 September.

BBC News