Britain’s police state can today be unmasked as the Daily Mail can reveal which forces have made the most arrests for ‘offensive’ posts on social media.
Figures obtained by the Daily Mail show that some forces are making arrests for ‘offensive’ social media posts at ‘extremely concerning’ rates.
Cumbria Constabulary had the nation’s highest arrest rate of 42.5 per 100,000 population (217 arrests) in 2024, 20 times higher than Staffordshire Police’s low rate of 2.1 (21 arrests).
Gwent Police came second with a rate of 33.9, a total of 204 arrests.
The crime of sending ‘grossly offensive’ messages or sharing content of an ‘indecent, obscene or menacing character’ on electronic communications networks is punishable by up to two years’ imprisonment or an unlimited fine.
But thousands of people have been detained and questioned for sending messages that simply cause annoyance, inconvenience or anxiety to others.
The alarming differences in arrest rates have provoked criticism from civil liberties groups, who say that some authorities are over-policing the internet and threatening free speech through ‘vague’ communications laws.
Maya Thomas, legal and policy officer at Big Brother Watch, a civil liberties group, said the number of arrests is ‘extremely concerning’ in a liberal democracy like the UK.
Total arrests fell to 9,700 last year from a record high of 13,800 in 2023, but remain higher than pre-pandemic levels.
Your browser does not support iframes.
Your browser does not support iframes.
Ms Thomas said: ‘Despite the prime minister’s assurances that “We’re not censoring anyone” the UK is unfortunately gaining an international reputation as a country where online speech is policed with more enthusiasm than the types of crime causing people the most anxiety and concern.
‘The vast discrepancies in the number of arrests across different police forces speaks to just how open to interpretation British laws on speech are.
‘The right to speak freely is a cherished British freedom that underpins our democracy and yet it is being eroded by these chilling arrests for online speech that may not involve any risk of real-world harm at all.
‘The government should immediately reexamine the laws that allow for this scale of arrest for online speech and rescue the UK’s worsening civil liberties reputation.’
Together, the 39 of 45 police forces that replied to the Mail’s freedom of information (FOI) requests arrested around 9,700 people last year under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 and section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988.
However, the total arrest figures are likely to be higher, as six forces failed to respond to FOI requests or provided inadequate data, including Police Scotland, the second-largest force in the UK.
Your browser does not support iframes.
As director of public prosecutions, Sir Keir Starmer issued Crown Prosecution Service guidance stating that offensive social media messages should only lead to prosecution in ‘extreme circumstances’.
However, concerns have been raised that certain police forces may be ‘overreaching’ and fears that officers could be ‘curtailing democracy’ by arresting people for malicious communications offences.
The outcry that the police are wasting their time has increased because official figures show that 90% of all crime went unsolved in 2023, up from 75% in 2015.
And only 7% of adults say online hate crimes should be a ‘top priority’ for police to investigate, instead saying they would much rather they dealt with violence, burglary, robbery and drug-dealing, according to polling by the Policy Exchange think tank.
David Spencer, the head of its crime and justice team, told the Daily Mail: ‘When Chief Constables choose to use their finite resources on policing social media, it means they are not using that resource to tackle knife crime, sexual offences and shoplifting.
‘As Policy Exchange has previously shown, online “speech crime” is not a priority for the vast majority of the public.
‘The variance in approach by police forces suggests that how much freedom of speech we are allowed depends on where we live.
‘Police chiefs should use their operational independence to focus on what matters to the law-abiding majority and the government should legislate to tighten up over-reaching “speech-based” offences which excessively limit freedom of speech.’
Graham Linehan (above) posted online this photo taken in A&E after he was tested for high blood pressure following his arrest in September 2025 at Heathrow airport
Linehan was arrested in relation to three tweets (above) which police deemed to warrant an arrest on suspicion of inciting violence
The debate over the policing of social media arrests was brought to the forefront of the public’s mind when Father Ted creator Graham Linehan was arrested for sharing his views on trans rights in September.
He was arrested by five armed officers at Heathrow Airport after arriving on a flight from the US in relation to three tweets which police deemed to warrant an arrest on suspicion of inciting violence.
His arrest was met with fury from high-profile figures such as Harry Potter author JK Rowling, who came to his support by branding the detention ‘utterly deplorable’.
A month later, the Crown Prosecution Service announced it would take ‘no further action’ after the Met submitted a file about the case.
Another alarming example of free speech under threat involved Hertfordshire Police officers arresting parents Maxie Allen and Rosalind Levine in January.
Officers held them in a cell for eleven hours, on suspicion of harassment and malicious communications, after their child’s primary school objected to the volume of emails they sent and ‘disparaging’ comments made in a WhatsApp group.
No fewer than six uniformed cops showed up to arrest them for messages which could be deemed sarcastic, but were clearly far from ‘abusive or malicious’.
After a five-week investigation, the force concluded that no further action was necessary.
Another alarming example of free speech under threat involved Hertfordshire Police officers arresting parents Maxie Allen and Rosalind Levine (pictured with children) in January
CCTV shows six uniformed police officers descending on the parents’ suburban home before they were led away in front of their crying daughter
And yet another notorious example of police overreach was that of 71-year-old retired special constable Julian Foulkes in November 2023.
He was detained at his home by six officers from Kent Police – the same force he gave ten years of his life to – after he questioned a supporter of pro-Palestine demonstrations on X in November 2023.
Mr Foulkes had mocked an account supporting the pro-Palestine protests, saying: ‘One step away from storming Heathrow looking for Jewish arrivals’.
Officers searched his home and made comments on his ‘very Brexity’ book collection, before seizing his devices and detaining him for eight hours.
In 2025, Kent Police admitted the caution was a mistake and deleted it from Mr Foulkes’s record, and also awarded him £20,000 in compensation for the ordeal.
In July, Conservative peer David Frost discussed the deeper problems Britain faced with how its laws were designed around policing online speech.
During a House of Lords debate, he said: ‘These laws raise a number of problems. First, there is definition creep, with “grossly offensive”, “abusive”, “insulting” and “false” – says who?
‘What these mean, in fact, depends ultimately not on law but on CPS guidance, which can easily be changed in line with prevailing fashion and fashionable beliefs.
Retired special constable Julian Foulkes was handcuffed on his own doorstep by uniformed officers equipped with batons and pepper spray
Bodycam footage of Mr Foulkes’ arrest in November 2023, shows officers describing his books and literature scattered around his home as ‘very Brexity things’
‘Secondly, there is the chilling effect. In a country where, clearly, there are problems of immigration and integration, one person’s fair commentary is another’s abuse or insult.
‘For example, is commenting on different characteristics of migrant communities in the UK and crime levels among such communities fair political comment or is it ‘stirring up’ racial hatred?
‘The risk of drifting over that border and committing an offence creates a chilling effect that means that people are frightened to comment.’
Jemimah Steinfeld, the chief executive of the Index on Censorship pressure group, told the Daily Mail: ‘In our digitised world, where so much of our speech is now recorded and where it’s impact is still not fully grasped, we’ve been left exposed to the whims of individual police forces.
‘But do we want a system where someone can be questioned by one officer for speech that another officer might not see as problematic?
‘If we want to protect a pluralistic speech environment, the threshold for criminal speech must remain very high, and that must be something universally acknowledged.’
The City of London Police has not been included in the main analysis due to its uniquely low population, which drastically inflates its arrest rate.
A Home Office spokesman said it would not be commenting as the arrests were down to the operations of independent police forces.
When pushed on the Home Office and the Government’s role in controlling the rules for the individual police forces, they refused to comment further.
When asked about its high arrest rate, a Cumbria Police spokesman said: ‘These offences include messages sent by means of letters, electronic communications, such as text messages and social media posts or via an article of any description.
‘Whilst everyone has the right for freedom of speech, we will investigate reports in a proportionate manner and look to prosecute those committing offences under these Acts.
‘These offences can have a massive impact on victims, and we would encourage anyone within our communities to report incidents to us and we will investigate.’
