Tommy Robinson loses bid to challenge prison segregation in High Court

Published

5 months ago

March 21, 2025

admin

Tommy Robinson has lost a bid to bring a High Court challenge over his segregation in prison.

A judge has refused permission for the far-right activist’s application for a judicial review after he brought legal proceedings against Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood.

The High Court was told Robinson, 42, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, was moved to a “closed” unit at Woodhill prison in Milton Keynes after intelligence suggested he “would be killed by a lifer if located on a wing”.

He was jailed for 18 months last October after admitting 10 breaches of a High Court injunction, which banned him from repeating false claims about a Syrian refugee.

Robinson was initially taken to Belmarsh prison, in southeast London, where he told staff “his conflict is with followers of Islam”.

But he was moved to Woodhill after “a large volume of abusive and racist emails and telephone calls were received from his supporters”, according to the judgment.

They included “threats towards the (Belmarsh) governor” Jenny Louis, who is a black woman, the judge Mr Justice Chamberlain said.

Robinson’s lawyers argued his segregation was a breach of his rights under the European Convention on Human Rights and has caused an “evident decline in his mental health”.

His barrister Alisdair Williamson KC said the “significant Muslim population” in Woodhill appears to be “causing a difficulty” and argued he should be moved to another jail, where he could associate with other prisoners ahead of his release on 26 July.

He said Robinson, who he described as a journalist, suffered from ADHD and complex post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) first triggered by his solitary confinement during an earlier prison sentence.

Mr Williamson said that Robinson is worried about his mental health on his release because “he self-harms by abusing substances in order to cope with the stress caused by being held in solitary confinement”.

But Tom Cross, representing the government, said it was “not an arguable claim” and revealed details of the privileges enjoyed by Robinson, who is a Category C civil prisoner, behind bars.

Hundreds of emails, dozens of visits and 1,250 phone calls

Woodhill prison governor Nicola Marfleet said in a statement he gets three hours out of his cell every day – when he can exercise, use the gym or play recreational games such as pool – and another two hours and 45 minutes three times a week when he does painting and decorating work.

She said he has “significantly more visit time than any other prisoner”, with two hours, four times a week, in a room described as “more informal and comfortable”, where he can take in food he’s bought from the canteen.

Robinson has 120 people on his visitors list and has had 93 visits, while he can use the phone for four hours a day and has made more than 1,250 social calls.

Robinson has a television, laptop – on which he receives emails “in their hundreds” – a CD player and a DVD player in his cell, the court heard.

He also attends a weekly bible session and has daily visits from a member of the chaplaincy team and daily visits from an NHS doctor or nurse.

‘Not solitary confinement’

In a ruling, stating Robinson’s case was “not arguable”, the judge said: “It is not accurate to refer to Mr Yaxley-Lennon’s regime as ‘solitary confinement’ at all.”

He accepted the “absence of association with other prisoners has an effect on his mental health” but said it was “not arguable that the regime as a whole gives rise to a breach” of his human rights.

In written submissions, the judge was told after his transfer to Woodhill, Robinson was identified as being of “high interest” to other prisoners and was put in a closed wing at the back of the segregation unit, which can’t be accessed by other inmates.

Intelligence reports suggested two other prisoners were plotting to attack Robinson to gain “kudos and notoriety”, and that he had a “mark on his head” and “would be killed by a lifer if located on a wing”, according to the submissions.

The governor also feared Robinson’s presence on a normal wing would “exacerbate” tensions between Muslim and non-Muslim prisoners and that he may “pose a risk by seeking to radicalise and/or influence other prisoners”, according to her statement.

UK

Asylum seekers face being removed from Epping hotel after council granted High Court injunction

Published

3 hours ago

August 19, 2025

admin

Asylum seekers face being removed from Epping hotel after council granted High Court injunction

A council has won its bid to temporarily block asylum seekers from being housed at a hotel in Essex.

Epping Forest District Council sought an interim injunction to stop migrants from being accommodated at the Bell Hotel in Epping, which is owned by Somani Hotels Limited.

A government attempt to delay the application was rejected by the High Court judge earlier on Tuesday.

The interim injunction now means the hotel has to be cleared of its occupants within 14 days.

Somani Hotels said it intended to appeal the decision.

Several protests have been held outside the hotel in recent weeks after an asylum seeker housed there was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl.

Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, 38, was charged with trying to kiss a teenage girl and denies the allegations. He is due to stand trial later this month.

At a hearing last week, barristers for the council claimed Somani Hotels breached planning rules because the site is not being used for its intended purpose as a hotel.

Philip Coppel KC, for the council, said the problem was “getting out of hand” and “causing great anxiety” to local people.

He said the hotel “is no more a hotel [to asylum seekers] than a borstal to a young offender”.

Piers Riley-Smith, for Somani Hotels Limited, said a “draconian” injunction would cause “hardship” for those in the hotel, arguing “political views” were not grounds for an injunction to be granted.

He also said contracts to house asylum seekers were a “financial lifeline” for the hotel, which was only 1% full in August 2022, when it was open to paying customers.

The hotel housed migrants from May 2020 to March 2021, then from October 2022 to April 2024, with the council never instigating any formal enforcement proceedings against this use, Mr Riley-Smith said.

They were being placed there again in April 2025 and Mr Riley-Smith said a planning application was not made “having taken advice from the Home Office”.

At the end of the hearing last week, Mr Justice Eyre ordered that Somani Hotels could not “accept any new applications” from asylum seekers to stay at the site until he had made his ruling on the temporary injunction.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.

Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

You can receive breaking news alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News app. You can also follow us on WhatsApp and subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.

UK

TikTok and Instagram accused of targeting teens with suicide and self-harm content

Published

15 hours ago

August 19, 2025

admin

TikTok and Instagram accused of targeting teens with suicide and self-harm content

TikTok and Instagram have been accused of targeting teenagers with suicide and self-harm content – at a higher rate than two years ago.

The Molly Rose Foundation – set up by Ian Russell after his 14-year-old daughter took her own life after viewing harmful content on social media – commissioned analysis of hundreds of posts on the platforms, using accounts of a 15-year-old girl based in the UK.

Politics Hub: Follow latest updates

The charity claimed videos recommended by algorithms on the For You pages continued to feature a “tsunami” of clips containing “suicide, self-harm and intense depression” to under-16s who have previously engaged with similar material.

One in 10 of the harmful posts had been liked at least a million times. The average number of likes was 226,000, the researchers said.

Mr Russell told Sky News the results were “horrifying” and showed online safety laws are not fit for purpose.

‘This is happening on PM’s watch’

He said: “It is staggering that eight years after Molly’s death, incredibly harmful suicide, self-harm, and depression content like she saw is still pervasive across social media.

“Ofcom’s recent child safety codes do not match the sheer scale of harm being suggested to vulnerable users and ultimately do little to prevent more deaths like Molly’s.

“The situation has got worse rather than better, despite the actions of governments and regulators and people like me. The report shows that if you strayed into the rabbit hole of harmful suicide self-injury content, it’s almost inescapable.

“For over a year, this entirely preventable harm has been happening on the prime minister’s watch and where Ofcom have been timid it is time for him to be strong and bring forward strengthened, life-saving legislation without delay.”

After Molly’s death in 2017, a coroner ruled she had been suffering from depression, and the material she had viewed online contributed to her death “in a more than minimal way”.

Researchers at Bright Data looked at 300 Instagram Reels and 242 TikToks to determine if they “promoted and glorified suicide and self-harm”, referenced ideation or methods, or “themes of intense hopelessness, misery, and despair”.

They were gathered between November 2024 and March 2025, before new children’s codes for tech companies under the Online Safety Act came into force in July.

Instagram

The Molly Rose Foundation claimed Instagram “continues to algorithmically recommend appallingly high volumes of harmful material”.

The researchers said 97% of the videos recommended on Instagram Reels for the account of a teenage girl, who had previously looked at this content, were judged to be harmful.

Some 44% actively referenced suicide and self-harm, they said. They also claimed harmful content was sent in emails containing recommended content for users.

A spokesperson for Meta, which owns Instagram, said: “We disagree with the assertions of this report and the limited methodology behind it.

“Tens of millions of teens are now in Instagram Teen Accounts, which offer built-in protections that limit who can contact them, the content they see, and the time they spend on Instagram.

“We continue to use automated technology to remove content encouraging suicide and self-injury, with 99% proactively actioned before being reported to us. We developed Teen Accounts to help protect teens online and continue to work tirelessly to do just that.”

TikTok

TikTok was accused of recommending “an almost uninterrupted supply of harmful material”, with 96% of the videos judged to be harmful, the report said.

Over half (55%) of the For You posts were found to be suicide and self-harm related; a single search yielding posts promoting suicide behaviours, dangerous stunts and challenges, it was claimed.

The number of problematic hashtags had increased since 2023; with many shared on highly-followed accounts which compiled ‘playlists’ of harmful content, the report alleged.

A TikTok spokesperson said: “Teen accounts on TikTok have 50+ features and settings designed to help them safely express themselves, discover and learn, and parents can further customise 20+ content and privacy settings through Family Pairing.

“With over 99% of violative content proactively removed by TikTok, the findings don’t reflect the real experience of people on our platform which the report admits.”

According to TikTok, they not do not allow content showing or promoting suicide and self-harm, and say that banned hashtags lead users to support helplines.

‘A brutal reality’

Both platforms allow young users to provide negative feedback on harmful content recommended to them. But the researchers found they can also provide positive feedback on this content and be sent it for the next 30 days.

Technology Secretary Peter Kyle said: “These figures show a brutal reality – for far too long, tech companies have stood by as the internet fed vile content to children, devastating young lives and even tearing some families to pieces.

“But companies can no longer pretend not to see. The Online Safety Act, which came into effect earlier this year, requires platforms to protect all users from illegal content and children from the most harmful content, like promoting or encouraging suicide and self-harm. 45 sites are already under investigation.”

An Ofcom spokesperson said: “Since this research was carried out, our new measures to protect children online have come into force.

“These will make a meaningful difference to children – helping to prevent exposure to the most harmful content, including suicide and self-harm material. And for the first time, services will be required by law to tame toxic algorithms.

“Tech firms that don’t comply with the protection measures set out in our codes can expect enforcement action.”

‘A snapshot of rock bottom’

A separate report out today from the Children’s Commissioner found the proportion of children who have seen pornography online has risen in the past two years – also driven by algorithms.

Rachel de Souza described the content young people are seeing as “violent, extreme and degrading”, and often illegal, and said her office’s findings must be seen as a “snapshot of what rock bottom looks like”.

More than half (58%) of respondents to the survey said that, as children, they had seen pornography involving strangulation, while 44% reported seeing a depiction of rape – specifically someone who was asleep.

The survey of 1,020 people aged between 16 and 21 found that they were on average aged 13 when they first saw pornography. More than a quarter (27%) said they were 11, and some reported being six or younger.

Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK.

UK

Ed Conway: Something odd is happening in the markets – with no compelling explanation

Published

15 hours ago

August 19, 2025

admin

Ed Conway: Something odd is happening in the markets - with no compelling explanation

There is one thing scarier than markets lurching around. And that’s markets lurching around without a very compelling explanation.

Just yesterday, the yield on the government’s 30-year bonds – the best measure out there of the UK government’s long-term cost of borrowing – closed at the highest level since 1998, not long after Oasis released the album Be Here Now. Indeed, the yields on pretty much all UK government debt has been creeping up in recent weeks, though not all are back to Britpop era levels.

Follow the latest in the Money blog

In some senses, this looks very odd indeed. After all, the Bank of England just cut interest rates. In normal circumstances, you would expect measures of borrowing costs to be falling across the board. But clearly these are not normal times.

All of which raises the question: is this a UK-specific phenomenon? Are markets singling out Britain for particular concern, much as they did after Liz Truss’s notorious mini-budget? Actually, there are more questions on top of that one. For instance, is this all about Rachel Reeves’s recent woes, and her need to find another £20bn, give or take, to make her sums add up? Are investors fretting about the Bank of England’s inflation-fighting credibility, given its cutting rates even as prices rise?

The short answer, I’m afraid, is that no one really knows. But a glance at a few metrics can at least provide a bit of context.

The first thing to note is that while government borrowing costs in the UK are up, they have also been rising in other leading economies. The UK, it’s worth saying, is a bit of an outlier with higher yields than in fellow G7 nations. But that’s not exactly a new thing: it’s been the case since the mini-budget. But the UK is a particularly ugly duckling in a lake full of them.

Indeed, look at other nations, and you see that Britain’s budgetary challenges are hardly unique. The US and France have ballooning budget deficits which are rising rapidly. Most European nations have pledged enormous increases in military spending to satisfy Donald Trump’s demands of NATO.

And over the Atlantic, the US administration has just committed to a sweeping set of generous fiscal measures, under its One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Even Elon Musk has voiced concerns about what this means for the deficit (which is set to continue rising ad infinitum, at least on paper).

All of which brings us to the broader, possibly scarier, lesson. There are signs afoot that while G7 nations could depend for decades on other surplus countries – most notably China and other Asian countries – buying vast amounts of their debt in recent years, that might no longer be the case. In short, even as rich countries borrow like crazy, it’s becoming less clear who will lend them the money.

That’s an enormous conundrum, and not good news for anyone.