I'll be happy to pay his fine for him
The judge is clearly an idiot, as he does not understand the difference between being solemn, and being serious
One can be perfectly serious while making a point with humour
And a joke like this is offensive only to someone without a sense of humour.
Pompous people abhor humour as their sense of self-importance cannot survive in a humorus atmosphere
I thought that must be bogus - but it is true. What is this world coming to? Bacon eaters are also less likely to rape children. They commit fewer acts of terrorism. Eating bacon should be compulsory.
Stephen Gray, 65, a retired Cleveland Police officer with about 30 years’ service, was convicted in April 2026 at Newton Aycliffe Magistrates’ Court of sending a “grossly offensive” message under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003. District Judge Steven Hood found him guilty for resharing a Facebook post that showed a rasher of bacon and a man in a turban with the caption: “Fun facts about bacon! People who eat bacon have a lower chance of marrying a 9-year-old!”
Gray said the post was satire referring to traditional Islamic accounts of Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha (married at six, consummated at nine in those accounts) and was meant to raise the issue of child marriage. The judge ruled it was designed to be offensive and could not count as a serious point because it was framed jokily, and ordered him to pay more than £1,000 in fines and costs. He now has a criminal record and is appealing, with the Free Speech Union instructing counsel.