The pro-lifer whose protest in Bournemouth triggered free speech row with Trump
Livia Tossici-Bolt, a retired medical scientist, was charged with a public order offence for allegedly breaching a protected buffer zone outside the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) facility on two consecutive days in March 2023.
Now, days before she is expected to receive a verdict on Friday, she has found herself the subject of an extraordinary intervention by US government officials after a state department bureau announced on Sunday that it was 'monitoring' her case.
In a statement issued on X, the US bureau of democracy, human rights and labour said: 'We are concerned about freedom of expression in the United Kingdom… We are monitoring [Ms Tossici-Bolt's] case.'
The move marks an escalation between Donald Trump 's administration and British politicians over the UK's commitment to free expression.
In recent months, the row has increasingly focused on the right to protest outside abortion clinics.
'Buffer zone' legislation in the UK that bans protest outside clinics has been backed by all major political parties.
But in America, where 12 states now prohibit abortion in almost all circumstances, the issue is much more divisive.
In February, JD Vance, the US vice-president, used his speech at the Munich Security Conference to criticise British authorities' prosecution of another activist, Adam Smith-Connor, 51, for a similar protest outside the same Bournemouth clinic in 2022.
Mr Vance said the case of the British Army Reserves veteran showed that the 'basic liberties of religious Britons, in particular' were under threat.
Mr Smith-Connor denied committing an offence, but in October last year a judge found his actions had been 'deliberate'.
He had claimed that he had the right to silently pray for an unborn son whom he now regrets aborting and that prosecuting him amounted to 'criminalising someone's beliefs'.
He was handed a two-year conditional discharge and ordered to pay more than £9,000 costs.
Like Mr Smith-Connor, Ms Tossici-Bolt is also being prosecuted under a public spaces protection order (PSPO), legislation that restricts anti-social behaviour in a specific area.
Last October, Sir Keir Starmer's government replaced these local powers with national restrictions making it a criminal offence to attempt to 'influence a person's decision to access or provide abortion services within 150 metres of a clinic' in England and Wales.
The new 'safe access zones' law does not automatically ban silent prayer outside abortion clinics, but Crown Prosecution Service guidance states there is no defence on religious grounds under the statute, meaning that holding a vigil or praying, including silent prayer, could be considered a violation.
Ms Tossici-Bolt, leader of the Bournemouth branch of the anti-abortion charity 40 Days of Life, has always denied the charges against her and claimed she was 'just there to offer support' to women seeking an abortion.
In March, Poole magistrates' court heard that she stood outside the BPAS clinic in Bournemouth for around two hours on two consecutive days in March 2023, holding up her sign.
She was approached by police and a local council official who told her that one person had felt harassed by Ms Tossici-Bolt's protest.
The court heard that Ms Tossici-Bolt refused to vacate the area, despite being repeatedly asked to leave.
She claims she was given no legitimate reason to leave and told magistrates that she did not 'see how someone standing there can be seen as harassment and intimidation'.
'My signs are solidarity signs. I am just there to offer support. I rejoice when a life is saved. People can say yes or no when they see me,' she said.
'I always made sure I did not come across as aggressive. I always try and do it in a loving way. I never tell people to terminate. If they decide to go ahead with the abortion then we can offer support afterwards,' she added.
Ms Tossici-Bolt said she had been standing diagonally opposite the Bournemouth clinic, about 50 metres away, for just under two hours on March 2 when a police officer approached her to report that someone had complained about her presence.
She said: 'I asked him how this could possibly happen. I don't see how someone standing there can be seen as harassment and intimidation.
'I don't see the problem with people seeing me. It would have been lovely if the officer had gone to the person and asked me why I was harassing them. I was being completely passive.'
She added that she 'would have left if they had given me a reason but they could not provide one'.
'I was sure that I was not in breach,' she said. 'I still maintain that.'
After hearing all the evidence, District Judge Orla Austin adjourned the case and will deliver her verdict on April 4.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Hackers capture personal data of former Tory ministers, British troops and thousands of Afghans allies in latest Ministry of Defence blunder
Personal data of former Tory ministers, British troops and thousands of Afghans has been lost in another embarrassing blunder for the Ministry of Defence. Defence officials sent a warning on Friday to 3,700 affected individuals warning their personal details, including their name, date of birth and passport number, had been hacked. It comes exactly a month after it was revealed the MoD had been running secrets flights to Britain, bringing in thousands of Afghans after a data blunder put 100,000 of them 'at risk of death' from the Taliban. The latest leak concerns many of the same people and is the third involving the personal data of former frontline Afghans since 2021. Former special forces interpreter Rafi Hottak, who was seriously injured in Afghanistan, said: 'How can it be that we've now had three separate data leaks involving one of the most vulnerable groups of people. 'I am truly worried about how badly the UK MOD has mishandled the personal data of Afghan allies. 'Once again, they have failed to protect those who stood shoulder to shoulder with them.' The personal details of former Conservative government ministers are also understood to have been compromised. Former special forces interpreter Rafi Hottak, who was seriously injured in Afghanistan , said: 'How can it be that we've now had three separate data leaks involving one of the most vulnerable groups of people' Such is the sensitivity of the leak that both the National Crime Agency and the National Cyber Security Centre are involved in the investigation. It follows a cyber attack on a third-party sub-contractor used by the MoD for flights into Stansted – the airport that brings Afghans to the UK. They have been flown over in a secret operation following a major data leak, which was uncovered in 2023 and then remained secret for almost two years after an unprecedented government super-injunction. It is believed that some of the Afghans whose data was leaked in that first blunder have now been impacted a second time. A subcontractor called Inflite The Jet Centre which provides ground handling services for flights to the airport was compromised. It also handles flights for the Cabinet Office. The data covered the period from January to March last year, when hundreds of Afghans, relocated after risking their lives to help British troops, were flown to the UK. The hack, which happened recently, related only to those flying into Stansted Airport. Investigations are underway into the cyber attack and ransomware demands, said the MoD. The flights were used for bringing Afghans to the UK, as well as travel to routine military exercises and official engagements. The database at the heart of the super-injunction scandal, seen by the Daily Mail, contains details of more than 100 Britons including senior military officers and government officials The MoD alert warned: 'Please remain vigilant and be alert to unexpected communication or unusual activity.' The email has been sent to those who travelled during the period. It explained that certain information was required by the contractor to enable flights to depart and arrive. It is understood the hack primarily concerned Afghans being brought here, although 100 UK personnel were also affected. MoD sources said there was currently no evidence to suggest that any data has been released publicly or on the dark web. Investigations are underway into the cyber attack and any possible ransomware demands. Tens of thousands of Afghans who served alongside UK forces during the war have been rescued and brought to the UK. Professor Sara de Jong of the Sula Alliance, which campaigns for Afghans who worked beside UK forces during the 20 years of conflict, said: 'It's extraordinary that Afghans at risk are affected by yet another data security incident involving the Ministry of Defence. 'This will even further erode the trust of Afghans, who supported British military goals and who thought they could rely on protection in return, in UK institutions. 'Afghans who are now affected by several data leaks will also be left wondering why the Ministry of Defence's communication and advice is different each time, with the limited security advice and guidance, given very little reassurance.' In a statement, Inflite The Jet Centre Limited said it 'recently experienced a data security incident involving unauthorised access to a limited number of company emails. 'We have reported the incident to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) and have been actively working with the relevant UK cyber authorities to support our investigation and response. 'We believe the scope of the incident was limited to email accounts only, however, as a precautionary measure, we have contacted our key stakeholders whose data may have been affected during the period of January to March 2024.' A government spokesman said: 'The incident has not posed any threat to individuals' safety, nor compromised any government systems.' 'We were recently notified that a third party sub-contractor to a supplier experienced a cyber security incident involving unauthorised access to a small number of its emails that contained basic personal information. 'We take data security extremely seriously and are going above and beyond our legal duties in informing all potentially affected individuals.' The government super-injunction was imposed after a list of those looking to relocate to Britain from Afghanistan after the Taliban took back control was accidentally emailed out by a soldier. When the Daily Mail uncovered the leak, it, followed by other media, was gagged.
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
US and UK must turn up heat on China over Jimmy Lai trial
Jimmy Lai has been charged under the same national security laws that he once dubbed 'a death knell for Hong Kong' and against which his tabloid newspaper, Apple Daily, had campaigned VINCENT YU/AP If courage has a representative, his name is Jimmy Lai. The 77-year-old media magnate and British citizen has been imprisoned for more than 1,600 days, a prolonged ordeal which began with his arrest in 2020 over his role in pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong. He appeared in court on Friday to hear the closing arguments in the case brought against him by the authorities. Within a short time, however, the court was adjourned over Mr Lai's ill health. It will resume on Monday. The newspaper proprietor has been charged under the same national security laws that he once dubbed 'a death knell for Hong Kong' and against which his tabloid newspaper, Apple Daily, had campaigned. The prosecutors allege collusion with foreign powers — potentially carrying a life sentence — and that he published seditious articles intended to incite hatred or contempt towards the Beijing or Hong Kong governments. Mr Lai vigorously denies the charges, contending that he was peacefully exercising and supporting freedom of speech, as protected under the Basic Law agreed when the territory passed from British to Chinese rule in 1997. After years of delay Mr Lai's national security trial began in December 2023. From November last year he gave evidence in his own defence for a gruelling 50 days. Onlookers might reasonably conclude that the dragged-out process has become part of the intended punishment for public dissent. And although Mr Lai's spirit clearly remains undiminished, his body is increasingly weak: he suffers from diabetes and a heart condition and his family fear that under continuing detention, which has been spent in solitary confinement, his health is rapidly deteriorating. • Refugee to riches: the brash billionaire who took on Beijing (and is now in jail) In earlier days Mr Lai could have chosen to leave Hong Kong to protect himself from vengeful persecution. That he didn't is testament to his strength of character and the depth of his belief in democracy. It is a source of regret that some British judges, who still sit in Hong Kong's court of final appeal, have not displayed the same intellectual and moral clarity. One of them, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, a former president of the UK's Supreme Court, served on a judicial panel which last year upheld the conviction of Mr Lai and other pro-democracy activists on a previous charge related to a peaceful protest in 2019. The argument that British judges could help to prop up an embattled legal system in Hong Kong has gradually crumbled in the face of Beijing's growing authoritarianism. Now their presence more resembles a gilded façade on a process riddled with rot. Lord Sumption, who resigned from the court last year, concluded that the rule of law in the territory was 'profoundly compromised' and that it was 'slowly becoming a totalitarian state'. Mr Lai's supporters, however, must not give up hope. He has recently referred to himself as a 'political prisoner' and it is through political pressure that he has the greatest hope of release. President Trump's recent promise to do 'everything I can' to help Mr Lai is a welcome one, which may carry particular weight at a time when increased US tariffs on Chinese goods hang in the balance. Sir Keir Starmer, too, raised the case in his first meeting with President Xi last year. The US and UK should intensify this pressure by every means possible. Mr Lai has taken great personal risks to defend the principles of democracy. Democrats must now stand up for him.
Metro
2 hours ago
- Metro
Cancel your weekend plans to binge Sheridan Smith's 'outstanding' Netflix drama
It looks like Netflix subscribers are discovering a Sheridan Smith crime drama that first aired on ITV in 2012. Mrs Biggs is climbing up the streamer's ranking of the platform's top 10 TV shows – making a convincing argument for a mid-August weekend watch. Smith – who has so many British dramas to her name it can be easy to let one slip – stars in this five-part drama, which is based on the true story of the Great Train Robbery. The drama focuses on the relationship between Charmian, played by Smith, and Ronnie Biggs, played by Daniel Mays. It follows everything from their first lovestruck meeting and the fateful 1963 train heist, to its aftermath and their eventual divorce in 1976, after Biggs fathered a child in Brazil. We see the petty crook meet his soon-to-be wife on, of all places, a train. 'The future is full of possibilities,' he tells her. 'The past will only drag you down.' With that, the Biggs couple set off on a crime spree before they eventually decide to settle down for a quiet married life. That is, until the 'one last job' pops up in the chance to join the train robbers. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Some labelled the drama a sanitised version of events, but it was inspired by a letter Biggs sent to his wife following the death of their son Nicholas. Biggs's former wife Charmian was also a consultant on the show. The show's writer and executive producer Jeff Pope said he wanted to set out a romantic tale, rather than a romanticised one. 'We show Ron as perhaps a little too wilfully optimistic and Charmian is the cold voice of reason throughout. It absolutely would be a danger of a piece like this to romanticise it,' he told The Guardian. 'It will get laughed out of court if it's a slushfest. In the first episode, they steal, he strikes her, we acknowledge the fact he had a criminal record; further down the line, Charmian has an abortion by another man. We don't pull back, we don't flinch.' Praised at the time of its release for the quality of the acting and the excitement of the episodes, TV viewers have shared their positive reception over the years, as Mrs Biggs has been available on ITVX as well as Netflix. Taking to X, @AshWoody90 praised: 'Mrs Biggs on Netflix, possibly one the best things I have ever watched.' More Trending @elliot_gonzalez commended the creative partnership between the show's writer and star, writing: 'Jeff Pope and Sheridan Smith should always work together. Mrs Biggs, The Widower, Cilla and now The Moorside. All outstanding work.' @TVChatty wrote: 'All week I've been watching Mrs Biggs on ITV3. Why did I not watch it first time? Fantastic story and great acting. Really enjoyed it.' @lizcurran echoed: 'Sheridan Smith is wonderful in Mrs Biggs – she is one of my favourite actors. Utterly mesmerising – always.' View More » Mrs Biggs is available on Netflix and ITVX. Got a story? If you've got a celebrity story, video or pictures get in touch with the entertainment team by emailing us celebtips@ calling 020 3615 2145 or by visiting our Submit Stuff page – we'd love to hear from you.
