Bartholomew's Notes

From The Spectator, back in December:

You’ve probably seen the videos. Kemi Badenoch delivering her Budget response in the form of a rap to a sobbing Rachel Reeves. Keir Starmer as a McDonald’s drive-thru worker. David Lammy as a Spice Girl in a tight dress. Reeves (again) as the Grand High Witch from The Witches. Behind the videos is one man. He runs the Crewkerne Gazette, an online publisher of viral political videos made with artificial intelligence.

The ‘Crewkerne Man’ would not give me his name when we met for lunch in Somerset last week… He wishes to remain anonymous.

We found out why that anonymity was so important two months later, when Channel 4 News revealed him to be none other than Joshua Bonehill-Paine, a one-time neo-Nazi with a string of convictions, including “malicious communications over an anti-Islam hoax that led to death threats against the owners of a Leicester pub”; “inciting racial hatred for promoting an antisemitic demonstration in Golders Green”; and “racially aggravated harassment of Luciana Berger, then a Labour MP”.

Some Crewkerne Gazette material had been promoted by the Conservative Party, and one might have thought the discovery of such a toxic provenance would have been the end of that. Instead, however, the party has decided to expend an extraordinary amount of political capital in attempting to rehabilitate Bonehill-Paine’s reputation: he was recently chosen as a Conservative candidate in a local election (candidacy since withdrawn), and party leader Kemi Badenoch wrote an op-ed on the importance of second chances and the value of a former extremist who have since seen the error of his ways and who now works “to explain the evils of antisemitism, training organisations on extremism, the dangers of radicalisation and how both take root.” The fact that he also has a useful flair for satirical videos that target her political opponents was not mentioned.

Obviously it is good that Bonehill-Paine is speaking against anti-semitism, but when remorse is rewarded with high-profile endorsements and the chance of public office it is reasonable to suspect a self-interested motive. And his crimes are not some hazy memory from decades ago: his most recent conviction was in 2016.

There are also other reasons for scepticism. As far as I have seen, his remorse appears to be focused exclusively on his past anti-semitism (1), despite other matters that ought to be addressed. For example, as reported in the Independent in 2015:

A man has been arrested for abusing gay poverty campaigner Jack Monroe on Twitter… One account in particular claimed to be that of former Ukip election candidate Alex Wood, but has since been found to be a fake.

“Your sick form of Lesbianism and militant queerism is destroying this country. Get out and give us Britain back! #VoteUKIP” the mock profile tweeted at Monroe.

The [arrested] man has since named himself as Joshua Bonehill. Speaking about his arrest… he wrote:

“Earlier today I was arrested in connection with some funny tweets sent to a prolific lesbian and feminist… I will not comment on my guilt or innocence at this time being but I am confident the police investigation will reveal the truth. This momentous occasion marks my 15th arrest for Free Speech.”

It appears that the matter was eventually dropped, but as far as I am aware he never did comment on his guilt or innocence. If it wasn’t him, why did he refer to an arrest “for Free Speech” rather because of mistaken identity? This is not something that should just be shrugged off, especially if there was a deliberate attempt to misdirect the police towards Alex Wood – that would be perversion of justice, a crime for which there is no statute of limitations in the UK.

Note

1. On his website, Bonehill-Paine explains that he had a “great epiphany” while reading the Bible in prison, coming to understand “why so many Christians see the restoration of Israel as bound up with the faithfulness of God to His promises and with the long, battered continuity of the Jewish people through history”. So is he sorry about what he did to Berger because that’s not how anyone should be treated, or because he understands the Bible to say that’s not how Jews should be treated?

Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »

Media criticism from Reform UK’s Nigel Farage:

The details of Ann Widdecombe’s murder revealed in court are horrific.

Why will no one report on Joshua Kerry’s political views?

The faux-bewilderment is meant to imply a conspiracy to suppress the truth, apparently including media outlets that already pushed the boundaries during the early stages of a live police investigation: in particular, the Daily Mail published (anonymised) claims that the suspect had “communist” literature in his home, while The Sun followed up a few days later with claims that he had “news clippings of Farage pinned to the walls”.

The notion of some ideological agenda overriding journalistic instincts here is implausible – we can be sure that media would be very happy to feed a public appetite for in-depth background pieces on Kerry should he suddenly drop dead, but while he is a suspect journalists must remain mindful of well-known laws about contempt of court and due process. If Farage is of the view that the law should be changed to allow “open season” on suspects ahead of trial, then he ought to say so clearly – although it seems more likely that he simply wants to rile up some resentment. I looked at previous complaints by Farage and others last week.

Meanwhile, Farage’s deputy Richard Tice has followed up with a related complaint:

Was Joshua Kerry a member of the Labour Party? Or the Green Party?

They should both be transparent and confirm or deny.

How many pictures are there of him at different protests?

Who else if anyone was he pictured with frequently?

We deserve to know the answers, immediately… These answers in no way prejudice a trail. It is simply a matter of our safety.

The Sun published pixelated doorcam footage of Kerry shortly after his arrest, and a clear photo of him – taken a few years ago – afterwards appeared in the Daily Mail. As with the information noted above, we don’t know how exactly these items came into their possession, although tabloid journalists have formidable information-gathering resources at their disposal. If Mail or Sun journalists had found pictures of him at protests it is very likely they would have published them, or at least alluded to them. And if such pictures exist and are with the police, then Tice should ask them directly about it if he is serious rather than just striking a pose.

However, Tice’s conspiracism goes further: he also now suggests that the photo published by the Daily Mail is “classic Establishment misinformation”, because it makes him look like an “innocent sweetie chap” rather than a “thug”. He cites someone who seems to think that the picture is actually of someone else, based on comparison with a botched AI upscale of the pixelated doorcam footage (this has confused a lot of people) and a court sketch. Tice’s allegation here makes no sense – what purpose would be served?

Reform also has other complaints: Zia Yusuf claims that Devon & Cornwall Police ignored “hallmarks of a politically motivated attack” that “were visible from the first hours” (1), and that terror-related arrests arising from rar-right interest in a Muslim event in Suffolk were contrived to “shut down discussion” of the Widdecombe killing (2). Pro-Reform hack Allison Pearson believes that the trial being scheduled for next June is “disturbing evidence that the alleged murder of a right-wing politician is treated differently”. Again, though, it is not clear what purpose a delay would serve.

Note

1. The case against Kerry as related in court is that

A doorbell camera captured the suspect’s red Vauxhall Corsa pulling up outside the property… A camera positioned in the hallway showed the 78-year-old politician sitting down eating lunch in the kitchen before the defendant allegedly entered via the front door and asked her: “Don’t suppose you have bank cards and ID?”

He is then alleged to have struck her 21 times on the head with the hammer before tipping her out of her chair and on to the floor.

It is not clear how these details are “hallmarks of a politically motivated attack”.

2. The Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, said that the arrests “undoubtedly saved lives”, although most of the suspects have since been released without charge. Searchlight, discussing the individuals involved, took the view that it “was always unlikely that this group of performative numpties with a penchant for conspiracy theories and dressing up in military gear would ever represent an actual terrorist threat”. However, there is no evidence that the Widdecombe murder influenced police decision making.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »

From the Daily Mail, 13 July:

The brutal murder of Ann Widdecombe was last night being treated as a suspected politically motivated terrorist attack.

In a dramatic escalation, counter terrorism officers yesterday took over the investigation into the killing of the former Tory minister. It came after the discovery of Russian communist literature and other items of political ideology at the home of the suspected killer.

…The Mail has learnt that items of varying political ideology, including Russian material, have been found at the suspect’s home and on electronic devices.

Asking the public not to speculate after such details have been leaked is futile, and the presence of the material is being widely interpreted as indicative that Widdecombe was killed by a left-wing terrorist. This is despite the fact that “varying political ideology” could mean anything, and there’s no way to assess the signifance of “Russian communist literature” among whatever other materials the suspect may have had in his home. Has the supposed “Russian communist literature” even been correctly identified as such? There’s also of course the minor detail that the suspect has not so far even been charged, let alone found guilty.

Devon and Cornwall Police Assistant Chief Constable Matt Longman had been quoted the day before as saying that there was “nothing to suggest” that the murder “was politically motivated”, but that officers remained “open-minded”. The phrase “nothing to suggest” could be disputed on the grounds that the murder of a politician is inherently suggestive of a political motive, but in context it was obviously intended to mean that no evidence had at that point come to light. (1)

Criticism has inevitably followed the new developments; here’s Jonathan Hall KC, the British government’s Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, in convervation  with John Pienaar on Times Radio:

I don’t understand why Devon and Cornwall police were steering the public away from the idea that this was a terrorist case and I don’t know why they didn’t simply say they had an open mind as to the motivation. I think they probably broke one of the golden rules of investigations, which is not to comment on live investigations in case new facts emerge. So that aspect is slightly regrettable.

Hall previously criticised Merseyside Police for saying too little about the Southport killer while Rudakubana was an arrested suspect, yet now he complains that Devon & Cornwall Police said too much (2). It’s not clear how closely he was following police statements, given he does not appear to be aware that Longman had specifcally referred to being “open-minded”; and in the age of conspiracism, the phrase “steering the public” is inflammatory. Thus we now have right-wing commentator Alex Phillips telling Megyn Kelly that “the police lied”, and that the killing was not just “left-wing terrorism” but also “state-sanctioned terrorism” (3).

Inevitably, the development is also being exploited by Nigel Farage. Farage has never been cautious when it comes to forming strong conclusions from initial impressions, and he provided a quote to the media prior to the arrest:

One theory doing the rounds is that it was a burglary gone wrong. But a car went onto the drive at approximately 12.25-12.30 on Wednesday… From what I can see of it, from what I make out, this was premeditated murder. Whether it was politically motivated, whether it was someone with a grudge. I don’t think it pays at this time to speculate.

This may be a reasonable enough theory – but it was obviously speculative, despite his advice not to speculate ludicrously tagged onto the end of it. Now, Farage’s supporters crow that he has been proven right, and that criticism of his statement was ill-considered.

One person who criticised Farage for speculating was Harvey Proctor, who suggested Widdecombe’s death was being “exploited as political propaganda”. Proctor had paid tribute to Widdecombe in The Times for the support she had given him during the Operation Midland fiasco, and his concern in speaking out was not just for his friend’s memory but for the principles of due process that had been cast aside by the elements of the media and some politicians when he was being falsely accused by Carl Beech.

Farage replied that “Harvey was very close to Ann, I know he is upset, but I was really careful not to be political”. This seemed measured enough, but Zia Yusuf and other Reform figures then waded in on social media with gratutious references to Proctor’s 1987 conviction.

Meanwhile, whatever Farage’s intentions with his statement, the involvement of counter-terrorism police and details about the materials found at the suspect’s home are obviously being exploited for political purposes, with claims from supporters that hostility is incitement (Allison Pearson), scrutiny is dangerous personal intrusion (Farage and Yusuf) and criticism of Farage’s undeclared financial gifts are intended to deny him the personal security that he needs (Aaron Banks).

Further, claims of exploitation are themselves incitement, apparently: Isabel Oakeshott amplified a claim (since deleted) by one “Stand Up To Marxism” to have reported the journalist Dan Hodges to police for harassment of Farage:

Hodges has posted about Nigel Farage and Reform 52 times across approximately 43 posts and replies on X in just eight days. Many are direct quote-tweets and aggressive replies clearly targeting Farage personally.

A significant number of these posts accuse Farage and Reform MP’s of politicising the murder of Ann Widdecombe, and repeated attacks on Nigel Farage’s security procedures and finances with personal derogatory comments, and appear to incite others against him and the party.

Hodges appears to be a particular hate figure for Reform supporters at the moment, with Oakeshott’s partner Richard Tice demanding he apologise for various unspecified statements.

Notes

1. The detail of “Russian communist literature” was mentioned online by Dan Wootton a couple of hours before the Mail item appeared. It is doubtful that the Mail relied on him; but did the paper wait for him to “break ranks” before they published?

2. Hall goes on to refer to Southport, where police countered false claims that the suspect was an asylum seeker by confirming he was someone born in Cardiff. This deviated from usual practice relating to an arrested suspect who had not yet been charged, and there was the added problem that the suspect was minor and so reporting restrictions applied. Hall thinks police ought to have gone further, although it is not clear what exactly he thinks would have been legal and he shows no concern as regards potential downsides. Inevitably, populists allege that “born in Cardiff” was an attempt to mislead on ethnicity, and when a local newspaper found the detail that he sang in a church choir this was became characterised as an attempt by “the authorities” to present him as a “Welsh choirboy” and by implication as white rather than of Rwandan heritage.

3. A potential communist killer could be helpful to recent MAGA narratives about a supposed communist threat in the USA.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 3 Comments »

From BBC News:

Police say a 28-year-old man has been arrested in South Yorkshire on suspicion of the murder of Ann Widdecombe.

“The suspect, who is a white British national, is now in police custody,” a statement from Devon and Cornwall Police said.

Police had announced as part of their appeal for information on Friday that they were looking for a white individual, and so the statement confirms that the suspect fits the description. And having gone that far, then why not add that the suspect is British as well?

The police statement is the latest example of the trend I noted last month in which police increasingly choose to disclose an arrested suspect’s ethnicity and nationality, rather than just age and sex. The purpose, of course, is to pre-empt or counter racist disinformation and incitement; but as I noted then, it comes with downsides. Online populists now routinely say that when ethnic information is not released then we can infer that an arrested suspect must be either from an ethnic minority or foreign, and that the identification of white suspects is unfair.

In this instance, the police statement can also be interpreted as an example of a slippery slope. Hitherto, the disclosure of the ethnicity and nationity of an arrested suspect has been associated with cases where there was overwhelming direct evidence that the police had arrested the right person. When Paul Doyle ran his car into a crowd in Liverpool in May 2025, it was immediately obvious that he had done it, whatever explanation he might put forward for his actions. And without prejudicing the Old Hurst Zoo incident, most people will be very surprised if it turns out that the boy was not in fact thrown into the crocodile enclosure, or that the wrong person has been identified as having done it. The suspects were apprehended at the scene, and there were multiple witnesses to what had happened.

However, the police could never state explicitly that this is why they judged it reasonable to disclose extra information about suspects. In real life, a suspect in one set of circumstances may be more obviously guilty than some other suspect in different set of circumstances, but it would be a “two-tier” and prejudicial approach for that to guide police policy about disclosures before an arrested suspect has even been charged, let alone tried in court. And a policy that is merely implicit is more likely to “creep” beyond its initial boundaries. The upshot is that we are now being told the ethnicity and nationality of a suspect who has been arrested only as the result of an investigative process, relating to an alleged murder which (as far as we know) was not witnessed by anyone.

That this is undesirable is illustrated by the fact that the 28-year-old suspect mentioned above is the second arrest relating to Ann Widdecombe’s death, after a 26-year-old man was arrested on Friday but released the following morning and discounted from the investigation. This first suspect was also described by police as a “white British man”, and the arrest excited demands for further disclosure by Reform ideologue Matt Goodwin:

It is absolutely critical — given the climate the mainstream media have whipped up in this country in recent months — that we are told EVERYTHING about the Ann Widdecombe murder suspect, the case, the context, all of it. (2)

Clearly, it was not “absolutely criticial” for the police to provide more information about someone who turned out to have nothing to do with the case (1). The cases of Chris Jefferies and the wrongly identified “Gatwick drone” suspects come to mind. In both instances, arrests were seen as highly indicative of guilt.

Meanwhile, Tommy Robinson responded to news that the 26-year-old had been released by expressing the view that “Looks like they just grabbed the first white person they seen so they could say ‘white British male arrested'”.

Notes

1. Complaints about “the mainstream media” from someone involved in Reform UK are grotesque given Nigel Farage’s role in validating disinformation following the Southport killing.

2. It appears that Matt Goodwin was so unconcerned about having demanded information about an arrested suspect who turned out to have nothing to do with the case that he blithely reposted it after news of the second arrest.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »

As is being widely reported:

The Duke of Sussex and six others have lost their High Court privacy case against the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday.

Judge Mr Justice Nicklin said the claimants had failed to prove the allegations of unlawful information gathering.

…Mr Justice Nicklin refused to make a finding as to whether what became known as unlawful information gathering had become “widespread and habitual” at Associated Newspapers and instead decided the merits of each individual claim.

He said he accepted the denials of Associated Newspaper journalists “who gave lawful explanations for the sourcing of the disputed articles and incidents”.

Mr Justice Nicklin’s judgment can be seen here. He took account of “propensity evidence”, but a strong theme of his reasoning was that propensity is not proof when it comes to specific instances of unlawful information gathering (UIG) alleged by the claimants. And whereas the 2023 case brought by Prince Harry and others against the publishers of the Mirror and Sunday Mirror included a “generic claim” about “the extent of phone hacking and other unlawful activity by MGN”, Mr Justice Nicklin guarded against the Associated Newspapers case becoming what he regarded to be “a public inquiry into the conduct of Associated generally”.

Mr Justice Nicklin does, though, refer back to activities at MGN. Thus we read in relation to one of the Associated journalists:

On the evidence, I am satisfied that Mr Buckwell has a demonstrated propensity, during his period at the Sunday Mirror, to use (and to have commissioned) certain forms of UIG, including the obtaining of private medical information and the procurement of telephone-related information of a kind not readily explicable as lawful “contact finding”. The documentary material put to him in cross-examination included a Christine Hart invoice recording, against his name, “Full M” enquiries in relation to Timothy Taylor and Des Lynam, and surviving Jonathan Stafford schedules containing entries such as “Tele item”, “Meter + telephone itemisation” and “airline checks”. Although Mr Buckwell sought to distance himself from the more obviously intrusive character of that material – saying he did not recall instructing such tasks, that his name might appear because he was bylined on an article, and that he believed that he was using legitimate “tools” available in the newsroom – his evidence did not provide a convincing lawful account for why such enquiries were being commissioned repeatedly in his name, still less why items such as itemised billing data and airline checks were being sought. I find that the contemporary documentary material provides a more reliable insight into Mr Buckwell’s activities.

However, the judge also writes in an earlier paragraph:

Although I have found that Mr Buckwell had a demonstrated propensity, during his period at the Sunday Mirror, to use certain forms of UIG, that cannot of itself prove wrongdoing on another occasion. At most, such evidence may provide some support for an inference where other evidence, relating to the particular Article, points in the same direction. It does not supply missing proof and cannot justify inference-upon-inference reasoning.

The 2023 MGN judgment notes other MGN journalists linked to invoices for “Full Med” and “Full M” medical intrusion who later went on to work for Associated – although the MGN judge, Mr Justice Fancourt, gave the point only passing attention and made no finding in relation to it, and the journalists concerned were not part of the more narrowly defined Associated case.

The media are currently focused on other aspects of the case, but it seems to me that if a newpaper employs a journalist who apparently met the benchmark for demonstrating a “propensity” for unlawful information gathering at a previous paper then the person in charge can’t complain too much if people take that into account when trying to work out how intrusive stories about the private lives of celebrities were sourced – or if people draw broader inferences than would be appropriate for a High Court judge. These are points on which Paul Dacre ought perhaps to be pressed.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »

From BBC News:

A three-year-old boy critically injured in a zoo enclosure was attacked by a crocodile, the BBC understands.

Cambridgeshire Police said a 30-year-old man arrested on suspicion of attempted murder had been bailed and was “unfit for interview”. He reportedly has learning disabilities and had been on a trip to Johnsons of Old Hurst, near Huntingdon, with carers.

…Cambridgeshire Police confirmed the suspect was white British after misinformation shared on social media.

It is thought that the boy was thrown into the enclosure – a shocking and dramatic incident that naturally has provoked not just public interest but also concern and anger. There is no law against the media naming the suspect, if they have it, but they are unlikely to do so unless he is charged – and his being “unfit for interview” means that the matter could be left hanging indefinitely.

The police decision to confirm the suspect’s “white British” background shows that the practice is becoming, or has become, normalised. The break with long-established police practice of providing only gender and age of those under arrest but not charged began after Southport, when police confirmed that the suspect – not yet named as Axel Rudakubana – had been born in Cardiff. This decision countered disinformation about the suspect being an asylum seeker, but has subsequently been portrayed unfairly as an attempt to mislead as regards ethnicity (1).

I noted another case last year, after a man named in due course after charging as Paul Doyle ran his car into a crowd in Liverpool. It turned out that Doyle was in the grip of some sort of “road rage”, although at the time it was reasonable to suspect terrorism, and Merseyside Police’s decision to confirm his “white British” ethnicity before charging was a practical concession to public disquiet. The bar was lowered from potential terrorist contexts in March this year, when police referred to a “white British 15-year-old boy” in relation to the stabbing of a schoolgirl at a school in Norwich.

The Johnsons of Old Hurst zoo incident presents as an act of random violence inflicted by a stranger. There have been cases where a mentally ill migrant has killed – most notoriously in recent years, Eltiona Skana and Valdo Calocane – but the context of a man with “learning disabilities” who was “with carers” were strong indicators against speculation that the suspect in this instance is someone who has arrived in the UK from abroad. Ethnicity here is not a relevant detail – but police know that false claims about a Black or Asian-heritage suspect may lead to disorder and to misidentifications. The strategy has diminishing returns, though, with populists now asserting that when ethnicity information is not provided this means we can infer that a suspect is not white (for example, Ian Miles Cheong made this argument in March in relation to an arrest following an alleged rape of a boy in Sheffield). And it tends towards giving an impression that we should draw conclusions about criminal profiles from arrests rather than from convictions.

As regards the misinformation that Cambridgeshire Police is reacting against, one prominent example, predictably, was provided by Tommy Robinson’s US ally Valentina Gomez, whose crudely peformative anti-Muslim monomania would be comical if it weren’t so ghoulish: just as she recently falsely asserted that three sisters who had been drowned in a tragic accident in Brighton “were raped & thrown overboard by rapists muslims”, she now claims to millions that “a muslim threw a 3 year-old boy to be eaten alive by crocodiles”. Ant Middleton, who agreed with Gomez about Brighton, similarily asserted that “our children are being fed to crocodiles by immigrants” – yet more evidence that Reform UK’s embrace of Middleton at the recent Makerfield by-election ought to be a source of shame and disgust.

Note

1. This portrayal owes a great deal to a detail that appeared in the  Liverpool Echo two days after the Southport attack, in which a neighbour described Rudakubana as a “quiet choir boy”. Although this had nothing to with the police statement, populists assert that “the authorities” sought to present the killer as a “Welsh choirboy”.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

The i Paper has a useful overview by Lizzie Dearden of how the Keir Starmer “rent boy” conspiracy theory spread on social media following acts of arson at properties linked to the prime minister:

Less than 15 minutes after [Roman] Lavrynovych was arrested, and before the arrest was made public by the police, an account on X describing itself as a British “patriot” claimed to have the answer. “Angry unpaid rent boy,” it wrote in reply to a British news aggregator with more than 400,000 followers, which had reported the latest blaze.

No source for the false claim was provided, but after the police announced the arrest five hours later, the same account repeated the allegation in response to a prominent British far-right influencer. That influencer, who has around 340,000 followers, including Elon Musk, went on to post the “rent boy” narrative himself.

The news aggregator concerned, @PoliticsUK, posted at 4.06 pm on 12 May, and the “patriot” reply appeared at 2.02 am on 13 May. The reply looks like it was just a trolling off-the-cuff quip, but the timing is suggestive. The later “influencer” referenced but not named by Dearden is Dave Atherton, who cited “the rent boy saga” two weeks later to counter claims of likely Russian involvement in the arson. By this time, as noted by Dearden, the conspiracy theory was being spread openly by Russian media and officials. One detail that helped to boost the story was that Lavrynovych’s co-accused Stanislav Carpiuc had at one time attempted to find work as a model, and there are photoshoot images in which he looks particularly well groomed.

As I noted in April, the whole edifice collapsed as soon as the trial got underway: the case hinged on undisputed messages between Lavrynovych, his co-accused, and the person who hired them for the arson jobs, and these messages made clear that they didn’t know why they were being asked to target particular addresses. However, as Dearden notes on Twitter/X:

It is not in the interest of anyone who has been promoting this theory to admit it is false in the face of evidence from the trial, which they will present as a cover-up

A search of X just now shows people continuing to share the false “rent boy” claims roughly every two minutes.

During the trial, I noted how the reporting of details was being distorted and misinterpreted.

One commentator who continues to fan the flames is TalkTV’s Jeremy Kyle. Here’s how he framed the story two days ago in conversation with Reform UK’s Sarah Pochin MP, sneering incredulously and citing his own ignorance as evidence that something is amiss:

On a serious note, Sarah, straight face, our prime minister, we are told, was attacked by a foreign state. His front door was bombed. His car was firebombed. And then the Russians started a conspiracy about two Ukrainian rent boys, keep your face straight. Why have we heard nothing about it?

In reply, Pochin smirked that Russia would have no reason to “bother” with Starmer, adding that “there’s some information missing on this story” and that “they’re trying to brush something under the carpet”. Their exchange is on YouTube under the title “Pochin Challenges Claims Of Russia Behind PM Arson Attack”.

Kyle also spoke with the Conservative Party’s Matt Vickers, asking

But why would Russia start a conspiracy theory that two rent boys allegedly from Ukraine or was it somewhere else off Grinder?… Um, it’s just an extraordinary story, isn’t it?

Vickers’ response was “Extraordinary story. Smoke, fire” and to joke that Starmer is doing “a pretty canny job of blowing himself up” – remarks that have been criticised by Labour. That video is on YouTube as “Two Ukrainian Rent Boys Behind Arson Attack Targeting Keir Starmer?”.

Kyle’s worthless segments exploit the fact that we don’t know exactly what the person who commissioned the arson was attempting to achieve by it. It seems unlikely that this person’s primary aim was to spread the “rent boy” smear, although Russia made use of it opportunistically following Lavrynovych’s arrest. The case for a Russian paymaster is laid out convincingly by the BBC and the Financial Times, with the BBC identifying specifically one Evgeny Lyukshin, who is “23 and the son of a senior official”.

Perhaps, had the arsonists not been arrested, subsequent acts would have been falsely attributed to some ideological group – Islamist, far right, whatever. But Russian involvement need not imply some carefully considered grand strategy emanating from the Kremlin; a well-connected Russian young man wanting to impress more powerful figures or just enjoying the thrill of being part of “the struggle” (likely well away from the front line in Ukraine) may well have decided to use their own initiative on schemes intended primarily to show off their capabilities and potential. He wouldn’t be the first.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »

Amended – see comments

From BBC News:

A man has been found guilty of making sexual remarks to a group of girls aged between 12 and 14 in Dundee before grabbing and pushing one of them to the ground.

Ilia Belov, 22, claimed he confronted the girls after receiving abusive remarks and said he saw one of the girls with a knife in her waistband before the assault.

His sister Nadjedzha Belova, 20, previously admitted assaulting a 13-year-old girl by seizing and pulling her hair, dragging her to the ground, and striking her on the head to her injury during the incident.

A clip of the girl brandishing a knife and an axe went viral last year, widely interpreted as either a brave young girl defending her sister from a predator or a feral racist child threatening an innocent migrant couple going about their business.

The latter version was promoted, perhaps unexpectedly, by the Daily Mail, which ran an “EXCLUSIVE” by Douglas Walker. As introduced by Walker:

The ugly video clip from a Dundee housing estate in which a schoolgirl brandished a knife and an axe soon went viral… Now we can reveal the man being threatened is a family man who has been living in the UK for four years – and who was accompanied by his wife on the way to the shops when the incident occurred.

Far from being fresh off a cross-channel small inflatable, as implied by [Tommy] Robinson and [Elon] Musk, Fatos Ali Dumana, 21, says he came to Britain legally from Bulgaria and he and his wife have an eight-month-old baby.

…In the video the girl – wearing torn jogging bottoms and a navy t-shirt – is being kept away from Mr Dumana by another young female claiming to be her sister.

…Another female out of shot – believed to be his wife Yulianova – then utters something in Bulgarian before he responds in the same dialect.

So how come Fatos Ali Dumana in the Daily Mail is now Ilia Belov? And why does Daily Mail version suggest that his wife, rather than his sister, was involved? And why is the voice “believed to be his wife”, when surely “Dumana” must know for sure either way? Although the “exclusive” was billed as “the truth”, Walker appears to hedge his bets by stating that

Police have officially refused to divulge the nationality or identity of Mr Dumana or what prompted the disagreement.

My first impression was that some completely different person had put themselves forward to the Daily Mail, especially given that the man looks somewhat different in photos accompanying the story than in the BBC report. However, it is the same person: other photos from outside the court (where, unlike many defendants, it appears he chose to pose for the cameras rather than rush furtively past) show that he has a distinctive tattoo on the left side of his neck which is not visible on the BBC report and which has been transposed onto his right side in an image published by the Daily Mail. Questions, however, remain.

Left: As “Fatos Ali Dumana” in the Daily Mail; right: as Ilia Belov on BBC News.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

Although it hasn’t so far made the mainstream news, Ant Middleton has been welcomed by Reform UK at the Makerfield by-election campaign: images on social media show the former soldier and SAS: Who Dares Wins TV presenter posing with local canvassers and with the candidate, Rob Kenyon, as well as with the party’s failed Gorton & Denton candidate, Matt Goodwin. Goodwin, as usual channelling his inner Partridge, has expressed his excitement at the development with the comment “LFG Makerfield” (1). It is not explicit that Middleton has come to support Reform over Rupert Lowe’s Restore, which threatens Kenyon’s prospects from the right, but it is a reasonable assumption [UPDATE: and has now been confirmed].

However, when an endorsement is gratefully received it works both ways – Reform previously passed Middleton over as its prospective candidate for mayor of London, yet now embraces a man who is an ally of Tommy Robinson and who has articulated an openly racist position on ethnic minority participation in politics:

1st, 2nd & 3rd generation immigrants SHOULD NOT hold top tier government positions! Our great nation, our culture and our great people are not naturally at the forefront of their hearts & minds! It’s just not in their nature or DNA! […] Our Capital City of our Christian country needs to be run by a native Brit with generational Christian values, principles and morals coursing through their veins from which our very society was built, thrived and was forged upon.

Prior to that, Middleton promoted at least one post that contrasted him with “Pakistan-origin Mayor Sadiq Khan”. It’s not clear whether he is simply exhorting people to reject candidates based on their ethnicity or if he wants them banned from standing for office.

Back on 24 March 2025 Middleton promised to “release my side of the story tomorrow here on X” regarding the circumstances that saw him made a disqualified company director over £1 million in unpaid tax. He has not been pressed to fulfil this promise.

UPDATE (12 June): One thing I didn’t mention in the above was Middleton’s 2013 conviction for assulting a female police officer while drunk. I knew about it, of course, but decided that Reform could very reasonably say that he has paid his debt to society and sobered up, and that an unhappy incident from so long ago unrelated to political activism ought not to be held against him forever. However, Labour has had no such qualms; and Middleton’s response, bizarrely, has been to deny that the incident ever happened, and to mock someone for citing a report about it from the Daily Mirror.

Note

1. “LFG” apparently stands for “Let’s Fucking Go”. Performative profanity seems to be part of populist right identity, presumably to signal contempt for old-fashioned “taste and decency” conservatism. This extends to Christian nationalism, with Middleton riling up the crowd at a Tommy Robinson rally last year with the assertion that “we can’t even fucking celebrate Christmas these days without offending someone”. At the most recent Robinson rally, attendees held placards stating “Fuck Islam Christ is King”.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 9 Comments »

From the International Business Times:

Protesters across parts of the United Kingdom have begun reviving the ‘take the knee’ gesture following the murder of Southampton student Henry Nowak and the release of police body-worn camera footage showing officers handcuffing him as he lay fatally injured.

…Images and videos shared on social media have shown people kneeling outside police stations and public buildings in what organisers describe as a response to the handling of the case.

Commentary on Nowak’s death has been extensive, with many writers saying much the same thing. We know that Nowak’s killer, Vickrum Digwa, gave a false account to police, as a result of which police handcuffed Nowak and intially disbelieved his claim to have been stabbed. The pathologist found that nothing could have been done to save his life (although, inevitably, a fringe theory that police likely dislodged a blood clot is doing the rounds), but Nowak died without dignity, thinking that the police believed him to be a racist attacker. Much of the debate focuses on to what extent the police attitude and incompetence are attributable to Digwa being able to leverage a false allegation of racism.

Nowak’s last words were “I can’t breathe”, which was evocative of George Floyd’s final moments in Minneapolis six years ago. The circumstances of Floyd’s death appeared to vindicate Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand for the national anthem at sport events as a protest against police brutality against African Americans, and after Floyd’s death Kaepernick’s gesture was copied in solidarity in the UK first by football teams and then by some politicians – including Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner. Some police officers also joined in, signalling their solidarity with “Black Lives Matter” protestors.

Not everyone approved, and divorced from the context of refusing to stand it was derided by some as a kneeling gesture of submission – and even specifically as a gesture of white submission to ethnic minories. Last year, for instance, Richard Holden MP referred to the NHS as “taking the knee to damaging and oppressive cultural practices” because of a document on a website that argued against a ban on cousin marriage.

The populist right adopting a gesture that it has previously repudiated and tried to stigmatise is an odd way to protest on behalf of a cause. As such, its appearance can hardly be called a “revival” so much as an ironic appropriation meant as a rebuke against the 2020 protestors and the “Black Lives Matter” slogan. As expressed by Tommy Robinson:

As Southampton police refuse to “take a knee” for Henry Nowak.

Reminder of them doing it outside UK Parliament for George Floyd’s fentanyl overdose!

This also points toward another use of Nowak’s death, as a somewhat perverse way to downplay what happened in Minneapolis. As Elon Musk puts it:

In both cases, police were uncaring, but only in one case does Starmer bend the knee

Musk here was commenting on a social media post by Kevin Sorbo, who referred to Starmer (misspelt as “kier Starmer”) as “kneeling for fentanyl addict George Floyd, who died of an overdose”.

No-one is arguing that Southampton police murdered Nowak, who was stabbed during an altercation, but the police officer who restrained Floyd is currently in prison for murder. The cases become more comparable, however, if Floyd wasn’t killed by police after all. The claim that Floyd died of an overdose has become “common knowledge” on the populist right through repetition, having been spread by Kanye West and Candace Owens in 2022 and repeated by Marjorie Taylor Greene last year.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »