On September 10, 2025, the debate over free speech and policing in the United Kingdom reached a boiling point, as Sir Andy Cooke, His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services, publicly called for a dramatic shift in how police forces handle so-called "non-crime hate incidents" and social media disputes. His remarks come amid growing criticism from across the political and cultural spectrum, following several high-profile cases that have put the UK’s approach to online expression and freedom of speech under an unforgiving spotlight.
Sir Andy Cooke didn’t mince words in his assessment of the current landscape. Speaking to reporters during the launch of the inspectorate’s annual state of policing report, he said, “We need, at times, to allow people to speak openly without the fear their opinion will put them on the wrong side of the law.” According to The Times of London, Cooke emphasized that police resources should be focused on "the basics"—catching criminals and protecting society—rather than playing the role of "Orwellian arbiters of hurtful words and damaged feelings."
The issue of "non-crime hate incidents" (NCHIs) has become a flashpoint. These incidents, which are logged by police even when no crime has been committed, are intended to help assess community tensions and preempt trouble. But critics—including Cooke himself—argue that this practice poses a significant threat to free speech. “I’m a firm believer that non-crime hate incidents are no longer required, and that intelligence can be gathered in a different way, which would cause less concern to the public and make recording of such issues much easier,” Cooke told reporters. He added, “We need to separate the offensive from the criminal.”
His comments came just days after the arrest of Graham Linehan, the Irish comedy writer best known for creating Father Ted. Linehan was detained by armed officers at Heathrow Airport over a series of posts he made about transgender issues on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter), while he was physically in America. According to Breitbart News, Linehan, who is not British, was shocked by the heavy-handed response: “In a country where paedophiles escape sentencing, where knife crime is out of control, where women are assaulted and harassed every time they gather to speak, the government mobilised five armed officers to arrest a comedy writer over tweets he had written and shared.”
Linehan’s arrest has become a rallying point for free speech advocates and critics of current policing policy. The optics, as Sir Andy Cooke acknowledged, were far from ideal: “Was it a great public optic? No, it wasn’t. Lessons, I’m sure, will be learned in relation to it.” Linehan himself has vowed to sue the Metropolitan Police and seek asylum in the United States, stating he no longer feels safe in Britain. The episode has fueled a perception that police are prioritizing the monitoring of social media over tackling serious crime—a view that resonates with many across the political divide.
But Linehan’s case is hardly isolated. On September 9, 2025, Cathy Larkman, a retired police superintendent with over three decades of experience in South Wales Police, became the latest figure to be swept up in the controversy. Larkman was visited at her home by officers investigating allegations of "malicious communications" after she referred to transgender activist Freda Wallace as "Fred" in several posts on X. The posts were part of a broader public debate about whether transgender women should be allowed to conduct searches on female detainees—a subject Larkman has publicly opposed.
The complaint against Larkman centered on her use of Wallace’s former name, a practice known as "dead-naming," which is considered deeply offensive by many gender activists. According to The Telegraph, the complaint was reportedly filed by Lynsay Watson, a transgender former police officer who was dismissed from Leicestershire Police in 2023 for gross misconduct. Larkman, who wasn’t home at the time of the police visit, later learned the incident was tied to her social media activity. She did not mince words in her response, accusing the police of serving activist agendas: “The police service keeps demonstrating that it is ideologically captured from the top down. It is failing the public.”
These incidents have intensified scrutiny of Britain’s free speech environment. As reported by Breitbart News, arrests and police investigations tied to online expression are becoming more frequent, with individuals being detained or questioned for social media posts involving gender identity, political commentary, or so-called "hate speech." The expansion of speech-related offenses under laws like the Online Safety Act has created a legal environment where citizens risk criminal investigation simply for expressing views that challenge prevailing ideologies.
Sir Andy Cooke’s intervention signals a growing recognition at the highest levels of policing that the current approach is unsustainable. He told Times Radio, “I’m not here to say the police get it right every time. Our own inspections have shown that is quite clearly not the case and they need to get it right more often. But in order to do so there needs to be a clarification of the laws around a lot of these issues. A lot of the laws that policing has to use to deal with online offences were actually introduced before we saw the social media explosion. So they are not suitable in my view and a full review of the legislation that sits around this and the removal of non-crime hate incidents will certainly make life a lot more sensible for police officers and a lot more understandable for the public.”
Cooke’s call for reform is echoed by many in the legal and civil liberties communities, who argue that the police are too often drawn into ideological disputes that have little bearing on public safety. The Warwickshire case, where police logged a non-hate crime incident against an individual who refused to shake hands during a dispute over gender identity, is cited as an example of overreach that confuses the line between offensive behavior and criminal conduct.
Meanwhile, the College of Policing—the body responsible for setting standards across UK law enforcement—has launched a review of its policies in light of these controversies. The hope among reform advocates is that this review will lead to clearer guidelines and a renewed focus on core policing priorities.
For now, Britain finds itself at a crossroads. The tension between protecting individuals from harm and preserving the right to free expression is more pronounced than ever. With senior police figures like Sir Andy Cooke openly questioning the status quo, and with public confidence in policing under strain, the coming months are likely to see further debate—and, perhaps, long-overdue legislative change.
In the end, the question remains: can the UK strike a balance between safeguarding its citizens and upholding the freedom of speech that has long been a hallmark of its democracy? For many, the answer can’t come soon enough.
