Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

An 81-year-old British pro-life activist wins a landmark High Court appeal, setting a powerful precedent for free speech and religious freedom in the abortion debate.

Another huge pro-life victory in the United Kingdom is helping lock in precedents that protect free speech.

The British High Court has ruled in favour of 81-year-old David Skinner’s appeal against seasoned local law enforcement, who claimed photos of aborted babies inside a report sent by Skinner had harmed them.

Skinner, a former teacher and leader of UK MassResistance, was convicted on “two counts of breaching the Communications Act” in May 2024.

The first, for “sending grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character.”

The second, for harassment.

Dorset Police Inspector Fern Graham and Yvonne Fenwick (Dorset police administration) claimed Skinner’s letter had caused “distress and anxiety”.

He sent the report in April 2023, telling police that the local abortion establishment was engaged in mass murder.

What Skinner’s Letter Actually Said

“Brutal killings are taking place in Bournemouth, daily at the British Pregnancy Advisory Service,” he wrote in a three-page request for an investigation.

The letter contained an array of facts and eight photos of babies who had been terminated in the womb.

In his report, Skinner argued five points.

Points one and two detail abortion procedures. Point three laid out the human rights abuse.

Point four countered police justifications for not investigating the practice.

“The police will say that they cannot get involved in matters of opinion, belief, ideology or politics,” Skinner wrote, “and that according to the nine Peelian Principles of Policing, they have to remain apolitical and impartial.”

“But this is blatantly not true,” he argued.

“They march to the tune of the LGBTQ+ lobby, the Gaystapo, and dance and prance in uniform in Gay Pride Parades, ride in rainbow police cars and have dedicated Lesbian and Gay Liaison Officers.”

Skinner then used his last point to expand on historical parallels. He then encouraged police to tour the abortion mill to see the practice and its outcome for themselves.

For this, the then 80-year-old, who was also accused of “homophobia”, was ordered to pay over 3,000 pounds in fines and compensation. All within 14 days.

Demands from prosecutors that Skinner be imprisoned for a maximum of two years were rejected.

The court took his age, firmly held Christian beliefs, and first offender status into account.

He was sentenced in May 2025.

Justice Saini’s Ruling: Free Speech Wins

Last month, Justice Sir Pushpinder Saini overturned both Skinner’s conviction and sentencing on appeal.

This was a rehearing of the case, not a review.

In his 11-page decision, Saini said he disagreed with the Poole court’s dismissal of Skinner’s religious freedom and free speech defence, stating,

“This is a case about freedom of expression and freedom of religion in the context of the abortion debate.”

His harassment conviction also had no grounds.

Skinner’s alleged “offensive” correspondence with the officers was a one-off.

Additionally, there was prior contact between Fern Graham and Skinner, where Graham had encouraged him to get in touch if he had “any further concerns.”

This, Saini stated, led Skinner to believe Graham was “open to further dialogue.”

Therefore, the High Court Justice concluded,

“We are not satisfied that when all the facts and circumstances are taken into account, the conviction was proportionate, or justifiable.”

Specifically arguing against validating a precedent for restricting the political speech of pro-life advocates, Justice Saini declared,

“We have no doubt that those who viewed the Images found them deeply distressing.

“But we underline that the Images are part and parcel of a debate on an important matter of public interest, where there are strongly held views both for and against abortion.”

A Pattern of Pro-Life Persecution in Poole

It’s worth noting that Poole is no stranger to a pattern of persecution when it comes to pro-lifers.

See Adam Smith-Conor’s ongoing battle here and here.

Also, Grandmother Dr Livia Tossici-Bolt was arrested, charged and subsequently convicted for “anti-social behaviour”.

Her alleged crime was holding up a sign that simply read, “Here to talk if you want.”

Like Smith-Conor, Tossic-Bolt was accused of breaching Poole’s infamous abortion protection area. (Officially referred to as Public Spaces Protection Order or “safe access zone.”)

Responding to Skinner’s appeal win, UK MassResistance (formerly the Parental Rights Coalition) called it a “stunning victory.”

UK MassResistance (UKMR) is the British chapter of Brian Camenker’s US abolitionist platform.

MassResistance founder and director Brian Camenker took the organisation from its conception as a family coalition in 1995 to a non-violent pro-family resistance movement in 2006.

Skinner took up the British reins in 2017.

Since then, he has helped Camenker establish the US branch’s no-nonsense reputation in the UK by “bringing a wealth of pro-family contacts and years of experience to the table.”

Speaking further, the pro-family activist group contrasted Skinner’s approach with the polite pro-life movement in America, saying,

“Compare this with the pathetic state of the mainstream pro-life movement in the US. They are perpetually afraid of offending anyone.

“They would never present the actual gory photos in their message to the public officials who are part of the problem.

“It’s embarrassing to suggest,” they asserted, “but can Americans learn some lessons on ‘revolution’ from these British?”

Christian Concern’s Andrea Williams commented on the appeal victory, with a special emphasis on the precedent.

This is, Williams said, “a vital and principled ruling.”

“The High Court has confirmed that even where speech is confronting or deeply uncomfortable, the criminal law cannot be used as a shortcut to silence lawful expression on matters of public interest.”

“This case,” Williams determined, “should act as a warning to police and prosecutors against misusing communications laws to chill political or religious speech.”

“David’s ordeal lasted far too long.”

Christian Concern, she added, hopes “this judgment will prevent similar injustices in future.”