Thread by @Rob_ADFIntl

🧵This morning, a woman was convicted in Britain for holding a sign saying:
“Here to talk, if you want.”
Let that sink in. Here's how it happened: 👇

1/
Livia stood silently in public, in an area covered by a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO).
That PSPO bans “engaging in an act of...disapproval...[of] abortion… by any means”, including “prayer” and “counselling”.
Yes, really.

2/
In March 2023, Livia stood quietly with her sign.
She didn’t mention abortion.
Didn’t mention religion.
Didn’t say a word unless someone wanted to chat.
Still, she was prosecuted.

3/
The court noted:
“There are no religious buildings… the area is purely residential.”
What does that prove?
That Christians should stay in church?

4/
Even the officer admitted:
He “only able to read the wording ... as he came closer.”
His objection?
It “might be distressing to some individuals.”

5/
Next day, another officer was called by the abortion facility.
She saw Livia talking to a passer-by.
The passer-by confirmed:
“No mention of the clinic or religious material.”
Still, she was told to leave. She refused—because she believed she was acting lawfully.

6/
To convict, the court had to find the officers had a “reasonable belief”she breached the PSPO.
So what was that based on?

7/
– That she has “pro-life views.”
– That he’d interacted with her previously (days not part of the charges)
– That she wasn’t harassing anyone.
Yes, really.

8/
Another gem:
Officer 2 justified action based on:
– Her activity on other days
– An older version of her sign
– The fact it was Lent.
Yes, Lent.

9/
The judge ruled there was no need to separately consider her free speech rights.
But still said—if required—the interference was “necessary to protect the rights of those using and/or visiting the clinic” (remembering none of them had complained).

10/
Livia testified: if someone was distressed, officers could say:
“There’s no right not to see things you don’t like.”
The judge said she “lacks insight”—because she used the word “lovely”in her reply.

11/
The council wanted £64,000 in costs.
The court 'only' made her pay £20k.
That’s the cost of offering someone a chat in 2025 Britain.

12/
64-year-old grandmother.
No shouting.
No placard.
No slogans.
Just:
“Here to talk, if you want.”
Convicted.
Support her legal defence and other cases advancing the right to live and speak the truth 👉 adf.uk/support-livia

And please consider helping her meet the prosecution costs she has been ordered to pay. She has a GiveSendGo set up for that here: givesendgo.com/help-livia/don…