Two anti-immigration tweets viewed 33 times lead to 18-month jail sentence
A Twitter user who posted two anti-immigration tweets that were viewed just 33 times has been jailed for stirring up racial hatred. Luke Yarwood, 36, received an 18-month sentence after tweeting in the wake of the Christmas market car attack in Magdeburg, Germany, in December 2024. His posts were reported to the police by Yarwood's own brother-in-law with whom he did not get on.
In This Article:
From December 21 2024 to January 29 2025 a string of anti-immigrant posts escalated
Bournemouth Crown Court heard Yarwood, from Burton near Christchurch, Dorset, made a series of anti-Muslim and anti-immigration posts from December 21, 2024 to January 29, 2025. It started the day after the car attack in Germany in which six people were killed. At the time misinformation on social media suggested the person responsible was an Islamic extremist. Yarwood responded to a post that stated thousands of Germans were taking to the streets and they wanted their country back. Yarwood replied: 'Head for the hotels housing them and burn them to the ground.' While further posts by him displayed a 'rabid dislike' for foreigners, particularly Islam, these did not stir up racial hatred or incite violence. For example, Yarwood wrote about the amount of foreign people in Bournemouth, stating: 'Walking for ages and not hearing a word of English.' He also wrote of his disgust at seeing 'asylum seekers outside the hotel staring at young college girls'. The second illegal tweet was made in response to a post by GB News. Should people be jailed for hate speech online? Yarwood had a 'preoccupation with immigrants and particular obsession with Islam and some extreme Right-wing views', Bournemouth Crown Court heard. He wrote: 'I think it's time for the British to gang together, hit the streets and start the slaughter. Violence and murder is the only way now. Start off burning every migrant hotel then head off to MPs' houses and Parliament, we need to take over by FORCE.' Ms Linsley said that while the two posts in question had minimal views, other posts Yarwood made in the same period had been viewed over 800 times. Is jail an appropriate response for online hate posts? She said: 'So there would have been some awareness that he was not merely shouting into the void. He was also replying to bigger accounts that have more followers, such as GB News.' She said one of GB News's posts that he replied to had one million views. She said: 'In posts over this one-month period the defendant plainly demonstrates a rabid dislike of those he regards as 'non-British' - immigrants, Muslims, as well as other minority groups within society. The two specific posts were aimed at immigrants or asylum seekers, housed in government hotels. This wasn't reckless behaviour, this was a pattern that happened over a month. It was rooted in his belief. He was angry about the presence of Muslims and foreigners in Britain. These two posts bookended a series of extremely unpleasant posts between December and January.'
The prosecution paints Yarwood as preoccupied with immigration and Islam
Ms Linsley said: 'Yarwood had a 'preoccupation with immigrants and particular obsession with Islam and some extreme Right-wing views', Bournemouth Crown Court heard. She said the two posts were aimed at immigrants or asylum seekers, housed in government hotels. This wasn't reckless behaviour, this was a pattern that happened over a month. It was rooted in his belief. He was angry about the presence of Muslims and foreigners in Britain. 'The tweets speak for themselves, they are odious in the extreme. There could be few clearer examples of words specifically designed to stir up racial hatred and incite violence.'
The judge orders immediate custody and lays out the legal boundaries
Judge Jonathan Fuller said the matter was so serious only immediate custody was appropriate. He said Yarwood had a 'preoccupation with immigrants and particular obsession with Islam and some extreme Right-wing views'. 'This is not a court of politics but law. You are entitled to express your views, but freedom of speech is not an absolute right, it's a qualified one. What the law prohibits is the stirring up of racial hatred. The continuing safety and stability of our communities are undermined by actions such as yours. The tweets speak for themselves, they are odious in the extreme. There could be few clearer examples of words specifically designed to stir up racial hatred and incite violence. They are serious offences that could have had serious consequences and can only be marked by a sentence of immediate imprisonment.'
