A trans activist who served 30 years in jail for kidnap and attempted murder has been cleared of breaking the law by telling a crowd at a rally to “punch a Terf” – as he is recalled to prison anyway for breaching his licence conditions. The Mail has the story.
Sarah Jane Baker, 54, of Richmond-upon-Thames, southwest London, will now be held at men’s prison HMP Wandsworth until a parole hearing, which may not take place until March.
It comes after [he] was yesterday cleared of encouraging assault while at the London Trans+ Pride march from Trafalgar Square to Wellington Arch in London on July 8th.
A recording played of the march shows the activist shouting into microphone: “I was gonna come here and be really fluffy and be really nice and say be really lovely and queer and gay, nah if you see a Terf, punch them in the f**king face.”
Trans campaigners use the acronym Terf as a derogatory term for people who do not align with their own views. It stands for ‘trans-exclusionary radical feminist’.
Baker was first jailed in 1989, aged 19, for kidnapping and torturing [his] stepmother’s 19-year-old brother.
[He] was later given a life sentence for the attempted murder of a fellow inmate while in prison – of which [he] served 30 years before [his] release in 2019, making [him] the U.K.’s longest-serving trans prisoner.After appearing at the central London rally last month, Baker was reported to police and arrested at [his] home and taken to Charing Cross Police Station on July 12th.
The defendant denied intentionally encouraging the commission of an offence, namely assault by beating. Baker accepted [he] said the words but denied intent.
[He] appeared at City of London Magistrates Court for trial on Thursday wearing a green top and red beret. [He] told the court [he] believed [his] job at the protest was “to get on the front page of the papers”. [He] added: “I believe my job was to get on the front page of the papers, my job is to get the public to know that transgender people exist.”Baker insisted [he] was exercising [his] “freedom of expression” when [he] gave the speech on behalf of the ‘Trans Prisoners Alliance’.
Prosecutor Kabir Sondhi told the court [his] speech on behalf of the group had been made to a crowd at Wellington Arch.
He said: “The words were clearly capable of encouraging members of the assembled crowd to go out and commit offences of battery against people, [Mr.] Baker referred to as “Terfs”, by punching them or otherwise assaulting them.
“The prosecution say not only is [Mr.] Baker’s intention gleaned by [his] particular use of words in [his] speech but also [his] admissions and comments during [his] arrest later. The issue of the case seems to be one solely of intent.”
A convicted criminal tells a crowd of activists from a movement known to inflict violence on women who oppose it to “punch a Terf” and gets off? Looks like we need to add ‘hate speech’ to the long list of woke crimes that only go one way.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I mean, you would think a person would be on their best behaviour if they’ve already done 30 years inside. What were we saying just earlier about deterrents…?
Perhaps he was looking for free accommodation. After 30 years inside, it could be a bit awkward to find anywhere to reside in outside.
I’m sure he’s making lots of new friends in HMP Wandsworth looking like that.
FFS…”…my job is to get the public to know that transgender people exist…”
Well we knew before…we definitely know now..so can you now all shut up and chuff off and let people get on with their lives…..!!??
Sorry, owd lad, I have inadvertently pinched your point (hope that wasn’t too painful).
…LOL! On the same page..the more the merrier…!
Gleaned not gleamed?
Reminds me of a very dubious old joke about using Brillo pads for feminine hygiene, and if you know the joke you know what that makes Baker.
“Deputy Chief Magistrate Tan Ikram found Baker, of Richmond, not guilty and the public gallery applauded.
He said he was not sure that when she said those words she intended for them to be carried out.
He added: ‘I think it’s also possible you’re just, as you say, an idiot who was trying to get attention to your cause, that you didn’t intend for people to do it, but you said it because you wanted the publicity.'”
Hmm, not sure. Double standards probably apply here in so far as someone saying that about trannies or brown people or whatever would have been convicted. But I tend to think that in general this kind of silly rhetoric should not be criminalised.
“Deputy Chief Magistrate Tan Ikram found Baker, of Richmond, not guilty…”
Clearly this spineless import of a magistrate is hoping to ingratiate himself with TPTB and is expecting some form of promotion for his sterling works in defending thuggery.
I wonder what the outcome might have been if this self gelded scrote had inserted the word nigger or paki or even illegal immigrant?
“I wonder what the outcome might have been if this self gelded scrote had inserted the word nigger or paki or even illegal immigrant?”
Indeed. “Self gelded scrote” – love that. We should buy the bloke a t-shirt with that printed on it.
Thanks tof.
I wonder if a woman at a rally for the protection of biological women’s rights had said if you see a trans punch them in the f. face. Would she have received the same free pass?
I think we all know the answer to that one don’t we? The elites despise the biological female. They want them kept in their place. supplicant, breeders
I am surprised that the NHS and the civil service hasn’t already changed the word for biological female to that of Breeder
[He] added: “I believe ………. my job is to get the public to know that transgender people exist.”
It is difficult not to know they exist – they are by far the noisiest of protest groups -even more vociferous than vegans and stop-oilers.
I for one am sick of these self-publicists.
It seems Sarah Jane believes there is no such thing as bad publicity!
I’m not surprised this case made it to court, but I think free speech requires that the bar for ‘incitement’ (or whatever it is called) should be set pretty high, so the judge’s summing up seems reasonable.
What was that word beginning with ‘w’ that we’re not allowed to call transpeople…?
Well he is one.
He’s certainly not a word beginning with “w” which refers to biological females.
The frock, lippy, heels, wig and surgery (if he has it) will never make him a woman.
Obviously we’re not surprised! This world has gone mad!
Who is actually surprised by this? Cult Transgender has in reality overturned the rule of law in the UK, placing a small group of people, many criminals and/or autogynephiles in charge of what is acceptable and what not.
This will, as my sainted Grandmother would say, “end in tears”.
Me? I’m with Ms.Burchill. Transwomen are NOT women. They are female impersonators, of evil intent.