The Destruction of Louis Duxbury

Louis Duxbury was a university student in the UK at the time of the London Bridge terrorist attack in June of 2017. His girlfriend was in the area of the attack that day, and he was unable to make contact with her (it later turned out that she was OK). Frantic with worry, he recorded a video rant against Muslim extremists and uploaded it to Facebook. If he had not been so worried about his girlfriend, he might have been more prudent in his choice of words — everyone in Britain is well aware of what can happen to ordinary citizens who say unkind things about Muslims and the Religion of Peace.

Mr. Duxbury was subsequently tried and convicted for his thoughtcrime, and served time in prison. Now, via the labyrinthine machinations of Her Majesty’s justice system, he is facing re-sentencing tomorrow, and may spend yet more time in durance vile.

In the extensive interview below Louis Duxbury explains what happened to him, and what he is likely to be facing. Many thanks to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for conducting the interview and uploading the video:

Below is the introduction to a post about Mr. Duxbury’s case at Crime Bodge:

Persecution and Prosecution of Louis Duxbury

by Rob Warner
June 16, 2021

In November 2019 Louis Duxbury, a 22 year old university student from York, was sentenced to 18 months in prison for ‘inciting religious hatred’ under section 29E of the Public Order Act 1986. The prosecution was brought as a result of a 17 minute monologue that Duxbury uploaded to Facebook.

I can’t show you the video because the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the courts have effectively outlawed it as religious blasphemy. They don’t call it that of course. The preferred neologism is ‘inciting religious hatred’.

In my opinion the most offensive thing about the monologue is how boring it was. Not a single part of it could be described as a call to arms. It was an expletive riddled, unrehearsed and unsophisticated rant about muslim extremists. Duxbury knew what he was saying was likely to be regarded as offensive and bigoted, and that it could arouse the attention of the thought police, who spend more time patrolling social media than they do the streets. But being an offensive, bigot is not a crime. Nor is spouting hate. And I feel duty bound to defend his right to be an offensive, bigot. The state sees it otherwise. Regardless of whether you think Duxbury deserved to be punished for what he said — and that’s all this is about what he said, and not something he did — there is nothing that justifies the massively disproportionate penalty he has paid for his recklessness.

As a result of the video he put up he was arrested, expelled from university, evicted from his student home, pursued by the Crown Prosecution Service for 2 years, prosecuted across 2 separate trials, convicted, sentenced to 18 months and then locked up in Humber prison. And that was the justice system just getting started, because upon release he is being hounded and tormented by North Yorkshire Police and the Probation Service, who seem determined to further his punishment.

Read the rest of the post at Crime Bodge for a detailed account of Louis Duxbury’s case.

8 thoughts on “The Destruction of Louis Duxbury

    • Fist you must bring them to the island.
      And then:
      How many will betray you to the police?
      Considering how many blindly follow the COVID19 narrative and how many cheered as the british disarmed themselves after a shooting I have no high hopes.
      And have you forgotten Tony Martin, the farmer who defended himself with a shotgun and was sentenced to life (released after three years)?

      I would say that all of Europe is mentally conditioned into learned helplessness and the USA is on the way too.

      • You would be amazed at how simple it is to move weapons from country to country, Britain has a lot of coast that cannot be patrolled, as for the new communist pension grifters, they are easily dealt with by any trained personnel. As for the farmer? He screwed up by not practicing the 3 S’s. That’ll learnem next time not to call the very same people who now will put you in jail versus the bad guys.

  1. This is all about keeping the lid securely on the pot as the pressure builds. The Home Office (police and Judiciary) KNOW that they cannot keep the lid on Islamic racism and violence, so they are desperated to keep the victims of that racism and violence nder tight control.

    They do this using all the weapons of tyranny – censorship, kangaroo courts, flexible legal definitions and violations of human rights.

    Step out of line and you will be thrown to the wolves.

    This is the place of my birth, I serveed in the Royal Navy, I (fled) emmigrated to Israel because the British government is not going to protect Jews from Islamic hate crimes, in fact, I see a re-run of the 1920 Jerusalem pogrom- “the government is with us, kill the Jews” (and Christians).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920_Nebi_Musa_riots#Accusations_of_British_complicity

  2. Islam is not a religion. It is a political organisation using religious elements to destroy and conquer. Until the West wakes up it will continue to be extinguished by demographics.

  3. One wonders where the legions of human rights lawyers have gone?
    Duxbury’s case is arguably one of not only state oppression but lying, tampering with evidence and therefore law-breaking by senior police officers.
    Surely HRLs must be queueing up outside Duxbury’s door?
    Oh but wait HRLs only seem to defend racist and violent non-Europeans.
    If it’s Farakhan, then HR lawyer Sadiq Khan, now mayor of London, for whom it seemed no racist Muslim was too extreme.
    So don’t expect Mr Khan to leap to your defence unless of course you’ve been a supremacist racist ranting against Jews and non-Muslims.
    Where are the legions of white or otherwise neutral HRLs then?
    Rhetorical question obviously.
    Seems they’re too busy holidaying in their Tuscan villas or studios on Hydra with all that tax-payer money made from defending rapists, murderers and terrorists…..sorry I meant to say innocent people of whom evil Western states have discriminated against.
    If the senior cop has been caught on record, not only altering evidence but twisting it to fit a racist narrative he must stand trial.
    Chances of justice happening in the UK these days however- slim to none.

  4. If a country has thought crime laws, like laws against ‘hate speech’ then it is not a free country.
    I am of the opinion that there are few or no free countries left in the world.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.