Bartholomew's Notes

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 on 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 Widdicombe 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 | 5 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 »