
Black student accuses Met and CPS of misusing laws over use of N-word
A 22-year-old black student has accused police and prosecutors of misusing hate speech laws intended to protect minorities after she was charged for using the N-word in a tweet.
Jamila A, who lives in London, was charged under the Communications Act 2003 in July 2023 after referring to the black Newcastle United footballer Alexander Isak as a 'nigga' in a tweet.
Her legal team argued the term was widely used in African American vernacular English and black British English and differed significantly from the racial slur ending in '-er'.
The tweet was flagged by a data monitoring organisation and passed to the Metropolitan police, whose referral to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) led to charges, prompting a legal battle that lasted one and a half years.
The CPS ultimately dropped the case, citing insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction.
Jamila told the Guardian she had been prosecuted for speaking in a way 'that came naturally to me as a black woman'.
'Everyone was so angry on my behalf: my mum, my siblings, my friends … They just thought it was outrageous because, of all the people they could prosecute for saying the N-word, they chose another black person.'
She added: 'I can go outside right now … and there'd be a million people who listen to rap songs that have the N-word in there and they sing along to it but nothing will ever happen to them, but they will get you, a black person, for saying the N-word in your language.'
Jamila said she realised she was in trouble when police turned up at her house last summer. She was not home, but her mother called her, and she was suddenly filled with dread. A text message from the investigating officer told her she was wanted for questioning over a 'racial' tweet.
'I was trying to rack my brain to think of what could I possibly have said that anybody could have considered as racist … Then I went to the station, saw the tweet, and thought: are they being for real?'
Her defence team, led by the barrister Ife Thompson of Nexus Chambers and the solicitor Ghislaine Sandoval of Hodge Jones & Allen, argued that the CPS failed to consider the cultural and linguistic context of the term. They said the N-word, when spelled with an '-a', was commonly used within black communities worldwide as a form of reclamation and solidarity.
They also pointed out that no evidence was provided to show that the tweet was found offensive, indecent or menacing, even by the recipient.
A CPS spokesperson said: 'After careful consideration, and in line with our duty to keep all charged cases under review, we have concluded there is no longer sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction, and the case has been discontinued.'
When contacted about the case by the Independent newspaper in July last year, the CPS had said: 'Hate crime has a profound impact on victims and communities. Being from an ethnic minority background does not provide a defence to racially abusing someone. Our commitment to tackling these abhorrent crimes through fair and impartial prosecution is unwavering.'
Jamila said: 'The hard 'r' is a slur that was used in the mid-19th century against African Americans … Around the mid-20th century, African Americans, reclaimed that word with an 'a' as a way to refer to each other … And it was very different in pronunciation, especially with the American accent, between the hard 'r' and with the 'a'.'
She said black Britons, too, had been dehumanised and called the N-word, and that through cultural exchange with African Americans, a similar process of reclamation had taken place in the UK.
Jamila claimed the police understood this. 'Before I had the interview, he [the police officer] told me: 'I know that in some languages, in some communities, you have words and phrases that you use that aren't offensive amongst yourselves, but it's been brought to us, so we have to deal with it.''
Thompson, who led the defence, said the 'case raises serious concerns about how the CPS and police are unfairly and inappropriately criminalising Black language speakers'.
Jamila, when asked what she would say to those who believed no one should use the N-word, responded: 'I can respect your opinion, but I have my own. And just because you think nobody should be saying it, doesn't mean I should now be in court getting prosecuted for it.'
She added: 'Black people can say it because it's their language. If you're going to prosecute people for saying the N-word, surely it should be an actual racist thing.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


North Wales Chronicle
5 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Corbyn says police ‘picked on him to silence democratic rights' as case dropped
The former Labour leader and John McDonnell were called for interview after a pro-Palestine protest in London earlier this year. Mr McDonnell revealed in the Commons that police had dropped their investigation into the pair, but said the Metropolitan Police had originally tried to charge them because MPs were held to have 'a greater culpability'. Nine people face no further action after a demonstration on January 18, according to the Met, which has told the PA news agency it will not confirm whether either politician was involved. Raising a point of order, Mr McDonnell told the Commons: 'You may be aware that (Mr Corbyn) and I were called for interview by the Metropolitan Police following our participation in a demonstration in January calling for peace and justice for the Palestinian people and an end to the genocide in Gaza. 'It was alleged that we failed to follow police restrictions on the protest. This is untrue, and at all times we followed police instructions. 'We can now report that the police have dropped the case against us and there will be no charges.' Mr McDonnell alleged that 'the Metropolitan Police informed us that our case was referred to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) because as MPs we were to be held to have, and I quote, 'a greater culpability'.' The independent MP for Hayes and Harlington, who was once Mr Corbyn's shadow chancellor, added: 'This is an unacceptable practice which flies in the face of the principle that we are all equal before the law.' Mr Corbyn, now the independent MP for Islington North, said: 'I don't intend to let it rest just there.' He told MPs: 'If there are elements in the police and possibly in the Crown Prosecution Service who want Members of Parliament to be held to a different standard of account than the general public, that removes us from the normality of law in this country. 'And I think that would be a very, very bad step indeed.' He later added: 'We have to all – all of us – have the right to take part in public protest about human rights abuse, about war, about peace, about anything else. That is what democracy is about. 'And I saw this whole effort as being a means to try and silence the democratic rights of everybody in our society by picking on us two as Members of Parliament, and I'm grateful for the decision that's been made today.' Father of the House Sir Edward Leigh said he had 'not often taken part in demos in central London' but spoke to 'show that opinion in this House of Commons is absolutely united'. 'We've always proclaimed what is very much the British way that Members of Parliament are no different from any other member of the public,' the Conservative MP for Gainsborough said. 'If they do wrong, they will be held to account, but they should not be subject to some greater test of culpability just because they're Members of Parliament.' A Met Police spokesperson said: 'No further action will be taken against nine people who were interviewed as part of an investigation into alleged breaches of Public Order Act conditions during a protest on Saturday January 18. 'The decision in two cases was taken following a review of the evidence by the Crown Prosecution Service, while the remaining seven cases were decided on by police officers. 'While we are aware of names being attributed to those who were the subject of our investigation, we will not be confirming their identities given that matters did not result in any charges.' Two individuals have been charged with breaching the same conditions as well as inciting others to do so, according to the force, with a further two individuals still under investigation.

Leader Live
5 hours ago
- Leader Live
Corbyn says police ‘picked on him to silence democratic rights' as case dropped
The former Labour leader and John McDonnell were called for interview after a pro-Palestine protest in London earlier this year. Mr McDonnell revealed in the Commons that police had dropped their investigation into the pair, but said the Metropolitan Police had originally tried to charge them because MPs were held to have 'a greater culpability'. Nine people face no further action after a demonstration on January 18, according to the Met, which has told the PA news agency it will not confirm whether either politician was involved. Raising a point of order, Mr McDonnell told the Commons: 'You may be aware that (Mr Corbyn) and I were called for interview by the Metropolitan Police following our participation in a demonstration in January calling for peace and justice for the Palestinian people and an end to the genocide in Gaza. 'It was alleged that we failed to follow police restrictions on the protest. This is untrue, and at all times we followed police instructions. 'We can now report that the police have dropped the case against us and there will be no charges.' Mr McDonnell alleged that 'the Metropolitan Police informed us that our case was referred to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) because as MPs we were to be held to have, and I quote, 'a greater culpability'.' The independent MP for Hayes and Harlington, who was once Mr Corbyn's shadow chancellor, added: 'This is an unacceptable practice which flies in the face of the principle that we are all equal before the law.' Mr Corbyn, now the independent MP for Islington North, said: 'I don't intend to let it rest just there.' He told MPs: 'If there are elements in the police and possibly in the Crown Prosecution Service who want Members of Parliament to be held to a different standard of account than the general public, that removes us from the normality of law in this country. 'And I think that would be a very, very bad step indeed.' He later added: 'We have to all – all of us – have the right to take part in public protest about human rights abuse, about war, about peace, about anything else. That is what democracy is about. 'And I saw this whole effort as being a means to try and silence the democratic rights of everybody in our society by picking on us two as Members of Parliament, and I'm grateful for the decision that's been made today.' Father of the House Sir Edward Leigh said he had 'not often taken part in demos in central London' but spoke to 'show that opinion in this House of Commons is absolutely united'. 'We've always proclaimed what is very much the British way that Members of Parliament are no different from any other member of the public,' the Conservative MP for Gainsborough said. 'If they do wrong, they will be held to account, but they should not be subject to some greater test of culpability just because they're Members of Parliament.' A Met Police spokesperson said: 'No further action will be taken against nine people who were interviewed as part of an investigation into alleged breaches of Public Order Act conditions during a protest on Saturday January 18. 'The decision in two cases was taken following a review of the evidence by the Crown Prosecution Service, while the remaining seven cases were decided on by police officers. 'While we are aware of names being attributed to those who were the subject of our investigation, we will not be confirming their identities given that matters did not result in any charges.' Two individuals have been charged with breaching the same conditions as well as inciting others to do so, according to the force, with a further two individuals still under investigation.

Rhyl Journal
5 hours ago
- Rhyl Journal
Corbyn says police ‘picked on him to silence democratic rights' as case dropped
The former Labour leader and John McDonnell were called for interview after a pro-Palestine protest in London earlier this year. Mr McDonnell revealed in the Commons that police had dropped their investigation into the pair, but said the Metropolitan Police had originally tried to charge them because MPs were held to have 'a greater culpability'. Nine people face no further action after a demonstration on January 18, according to the Met, which has told the PA news agency it will not confirm whether either politician was involved. Raising a point of order, Mr McDonnell told the Commons: 'You may be aware that (Mr Corbyn) and I were called for interview by the Metropolitan Police following our participation in a demonstration in January calling for peace and justice for the Palestinian people and an end to the genocide in Gaza. 'It was alleged that we failed to follow police restrictions on the protest. This is untrue, and at all times we followed police instructions. 'We can now report that the police have dropped the case against us and there will be no charges.' Mr McDonnell alleged that 'the Metropolitan Police informed us that our case was referred to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) because as MPs we were to be held to have, and I quote, 'a greater culpability'.' The independent MP for Hayes and Harlington, who was once Mr Corbyn's shadow chancellor, added: 'This is an unacceptable practice which flies in the face of the principle that we are all equal before the law.' Mr Corbyn, now the independent MP for Islington North, said: 'I don't intend to let it rest just there.' He told MPs: 'If there are elements in the police and possibly in the Crown Prosecution Service who want Members of Parliament to be held to a different standard of account than the general public, that removes us from the normality of law in this country. 'And I think that would be a very, very bad step indeed.' He later added: 'We have to all – all of us – have the right to take part in public protest about human rights abuse, about war, about peace, about anything else. That is what democracy is about. 'And I saw this whole effort as being a means to try and silence the democratic rights of everybody in our society by picking on us two as Members of Parliament, and I'm grateful for the decision that's been made today.' Father of the House Sir Edward Leigh said he had 'not often taken part in demos in central London' but spoke to 'show that opinion in this House of Commons is absolutely united'. 'We've always proclaimed what is very much the British way that Members of Parliament are no different from any other member of the public,' the Conservative MP for Gainsborough said. 'If they do wrong, they will be held to account, but they should not be subject to some greater test of culpability just because they're Members of Parliament.' A Met Police spokesperson said: 'No further action will be taken against nine people who were interviewed as part of an investigation into alleged breaches of Public Order Act conditions during a protest on Saturday January 18. 'The decision in two cases was taken following a review of the evidence by the Crown Prosecution Service, while the remaining seven cases were decided on by police officers. 'While we are aware of names being attributed to those who were the subject of our investigation, we will not be confirming their identities given that matters did not result in any charges.' Two individuals have been charged with breaching the same conditions as well as inciting others to do so, according to the force, with a further two individuals still under investigation.