This is Jamie Michael.
He is former Royal Marine, who has now found himself fighting against the British state.
This is bc he posted video—genuinely non-violent or "racist"—following second generation immigrant Rudakubana's sick child murder spree.
A review of his case. Thread 🧵
He is former Royal Marine, who has now found himself fighting against the British state.
This is bc he posted video—genuinely non-violent or "racist"—following second generation immigrant Rudakubana's sick child murder spree.
A review of his case. Thread 🧵
Last August, dozens of non-violent Southport protesters pleaded guilty to various charges, raising eyebrows as their sentences didn’t seem to reflect the severity of their “crimes”.
Many suspected Sir Keir Starmer’s push for fast-tracking cases, offering reduced sentences for guilty pleas, while remanding those who pleaded not guilty in custody for months on end played a role.
But not everyone submitted to the system. Some fought back. One of those was Jamie Michael, a 45-year-old former Royal Marine Commando. His alleged crime? Posting a Facebook video.
The video came after the brutal murder of Alice da Silva Aguiar (9), Bebe King (6), and Elsie Dot Stancombe (7)—by Axel Rudakubana. For that post, police arrested Jamie for “publishing threatening material… intending to stir up religious hatred,” under the Public Order Act 1986.
Given the charge, one would expect the video to be damning. But by any objective measure, it wasn’t.
He talked about the ‘Roma Riots’ in Leeds, the Rochdale police station attack post Manchester Airport incident, the stabbing of army officer Mark Teeton on his doorstep, the Southport murders and the machete fight in Southend On Sea—all which occurred within weeks of each other.
He questioned details of the Southport murder, speculating that the then-unnamed suspect came with a migrant family that had been radicalised. He urged viewers to act, but not with violence.
“Go to the councillors, go to the police, go to the politicians… You need to start standing up and organising, okay, which doesn’t mean getting bats and knives and stuff and going and doing what they do. That’s not what I’m talking about.”
He called for increased security at schools and parks, warning, “These f*cking psychopaths are going to start targeting our kids.”
No racial focus. One mention of a mosque. An explicit call for peaceful organisation.
No racial focus. One mention of a mosque. An explicit call for peaceful organisation.
The only apparent error? He thought the suspect was a first-generation immigrant, not second—a mistake that, under the Online Safety Act, could ironically justify his arrest if police decided he made the statement knowingly. But they haven’t.
Days later, South Wales Police arrested him at home.
Listeners reporting on his trial this week revealed officers first downplayed it, telling him there was “nothing to worry about.” Then, they took him into custody.
He remained in custody for 3 weeks—for a social media post.
Listeners reporting on his trial this week revealed officers first downplayed it, telling him there was “nothing to worry about.” Then, they took him into custody.
He remained in custody for 3 weeks—for a social media post.
Jamie wasn’t the only one arrested under this charge. South Wales Police arrested five others, granting bail to three—a 27-year-old from Penarth, and a 33-year-old woman and 39-year-old man from Blaengwynfi, Neath Port Talbot—but not Jamie.
His trial began yesterday. Reporter and activist Dan Morgan, also known @VoWalesOfficial witnessed proceedings and narrated events.
(Check his profile out if you want to see the latest updates)
(Check his profile out if you want to see the latest updates)
Prosecutors first accused Jamie of “inciting racial hatred,” arguing that his words could provoke racial tensions. His lawyers countered that he was exercising free speech, raising concerns over unvetted migration and rising violence.
They then played the video and showed bodycam footage from his arrest.
Next up was his police interview, revealing that he repeatedly called for peace, denied racism, and defended his right to criticise media bias and government failures.
Next up was his police interview, revealing that he repeatedly called for peace, denied racism, and defended his right to criticise media bias and government failures.
This is when he also specified that he was talking about "illegal immigrants" in the original video.
Then, came the revelation of the day...
Then, came the revelation of the day...
Reports revealed that Buffy Williams, a Welsh Labour Senedd Member for Rhondda, instructed her communications officer, Ryan Evans, to file a complaint to police about Jamie’s video. That complaint ultimately led to his arrest.
A politician reported a citizen for political speech. The police acted swiftly. And the legal system accommodated it.
This naturally raised questions among sceptics over whether the arrest might be political, which our tragically vague speech laws naturally accommodate.
Perhaps it provides more insight in the minds of modern Labour politicians: expressions of the "wrong" politics, although clearly not incendiary or “racist”, must be reported, punished, and stopped.
For reference, in 2020, CCTV captured two Black Lives Matter protesters committing overt acts of violence. Jonathan Daley kicked a police officer—he avoided jail. Shayden Spencer threw a metal fence at fleeing officers—he avoided jail.
Reports don’t clarify whether either was remanded in custody until their guilty pleas and sentencing.
Now, if Jamie is found guilty by the jury on Thursday and subsequently jailed, it would mean words—peaceful words—have been punished more harshly than physical violence, once again.
Sentencing Council guidelines suggest that if his crime is deemed ‘high culpability’ and ‘high harm’, he faces between three and seven years in prison.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
