🔴 FATHER TED CREATOR GRAHAM LINEHAN ON TRIAL FOR HARASSMENT

The 57-year-old Irish comedy writer received backing from free speech and women’s rights campaigners as he entered court, three days after being arrested at Heathrow Airport on suspicion of inciting violence over three posts he made on X about trans issues. Linehan, who also created The IT Crowd and Black Books, denies both charges.

The arrest has already sparked political debate, with opposition figures and author JK Rowling criticising the move, while Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley has said his officers are placed in “an impossible position” when asked to police toxic online disputes - LIVE COURT REPORTING ⬇️

🔴 GRAHAM LINEHAN - HARASSMENT TRIAL DAY 3 - PM - LATEST LIVE COURT REPORTING:

🔴 TRIAL SET TO CONTINUE 29 OCTOBER

Court adjourns. The judge states that trial will continue on the 29th October. Join us then @UKCourtsLive for continued live coverage.

🔴 NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. TRIAL ADJOURNS.

The cross-examination of Linehan concludes, with three witnesses yet to take the stand ⬇️

🔴 I’M SORRY I DIDNT TAKE MY OWN ADVICE

Linehan’s tweet “if you encounter Tarquin in the wild try to resist the urge to stick his camera up his arse” is read out in court. Intended to keep others from legal trouble, he regrets not following the advice ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN DISAGREES THAT HE HARASSED BROOKS ONLINE

Linehan says that his tweets must be viewed in the context of Brooks’ own behaviour, which included ‘harassing women & trying to get people to punch them’ ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN CONFIRMS WANTING TO GATHER INFORMATION ON BROOKS

Amid the prosecution’s ongoing attention to disparaging tweets by Linehan, the defendant confirms that asking online if anyone knows where Ms Brooks studies was intentional and could ‘intrude on her life’ ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN EXPRESSED VIEW TRANS RIGHTS ACTIVISTS ARE SADISTS

Asked directly by the prosecution “do you think all Trans Rights Activists are ‘scumbag homophobic sociopathic sadists’?” Linehan responds “yes” ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN’S TWEETS EXAMINED, ASSERTS BASIS FOR CLAIM BROOKS IS HOMOPHOBIC

Linehan tells the court there much evidence of Brooks harassing gay men online was presented to police, who dismissed the case in one day, allegedly not examining the allegations fully ⬇️

🔴 PROSECUTION: NO SOLID EVIDENCE FOR CRICKETS-AT-THE-CONFERENCE INSECT ATTACK LINK

Linehan confirms that only circumstantial evidence links Ms Brooks to the incident where insects were released by trans activists to disrupt a meeting ⬇️

🔴 PROSECUTION: WHY NOT MAKE A PROPER POLICE REPORT?

Linehan tells the court that he does not trust the police to act when complaints are made against Trans Rights Activists, & that he tagged Met Police hoping to influence them into action ⬇️

🔴 MY POSTS WERE TO WARN OTHER, NOT TO TARGET BROOKS

Linehan rejects the prosecution’s suggestion that he posted images & videos of Brooks to target her, describing his motives as being to warn others about her ⬇️

🔴 I’M SORRY I DIDNT TAKE MY OWN ADVICE

Linehan’s tweet “if you encounter Tarquin in the wild try to resist the urge to stick his camera up his arse” is read out in court. Intended to keep others from legal trouble, he regrets not following the advice ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN: I THREW PHONE LIKE A FRISBEE

Linehan tells the court that he threw the phone to get it away, not to cause damage to it ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN: I DIDN’T FEEL THREATENED, I JUST WANTED TO STOP BROOKS FOLLOWING ME AROUND

Linehan, when questioned, says he did not snatch the phone because he felt threatened but because he wanted to stop Brooks following him around, which he agrees was not criminal ⬇️

🔴 PROSECUTION: DIDN’T BROOKS HAVE A RIGHT TO QUESTION YOU?

Under cross examination, Linehan agrees that Brooks had a right to ask why he has associated her with the crickets-at-the-conference protest & labeled her a terrorist but that he equally has a right to not answer ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN QUESTIONED IF HE UNDERSTOOD BROOKS TO BE 17 YEARS OLD

Linehan says that on the basis of Brook’s claim, he had stated that she was 17 in 2024, but had some scepticism ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN CHALLENGES PROSECUTOR: DO YOU THINK HE IS FEMALE?

Linehan refers to having trans friends who all disagree with the Trans Rights Movement, & asks the prosecutor if they believe Sofia Brooks to be female. Judge reminds Linehan that he is the one being questioned ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN REGRETS ‘SISSY-PORN’ HUMILIATION FETSIS COMMENTS

Linehan tells the court that it was only a personal guess that Ms. Brooks watches sexual cross dressing fetish content and he has some regret about making these comments ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN ON BROOKS: HE IS DISGUSTING, HE BULLIES WOMEN

Linehan stands by his labelling of Ms. Brooks as a bully. Linehan: “I think he does what he does because he’s a sadist” ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN QUESTIONED OVER INSULTS USED AGAINST BROOKS

Linehan is questioned about referring to Sofia Brooks as a sociopath, misogynist & incel in online posts ⬇️

🔴 ‘DOXXING IS THE TRANS ACTIVIST’S PLAYBOOK’

Linehan says that these photos of conference attendees are never published or used for ‘citizen journalism’ purposes but are intended to be used for harassment via doxxing ⬇️

🔴 HE WASN’T WORKING FOR REUTERS - WHY WAS HE TAKING PHOTOS?

Linehan argues that taking photos was an act of intimidation in a context where they had an obvious utility in a doxxing campaign & no legitimate purpose could otherwise be found ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN: BROOKS IDENTIFIES INDIVIDUALS SO FALSE ACCUSATIONS CAN BE MADE AGAINST THEM

Linehan associates Brooks with a group who contacts employees of attendees & makes false claims that they are paedophiles & bigots ⬇️

🔴 PROSECUTION: WHY CAN YOU FILM CONFERENCE ATTENDEES, BUT BROOKS CANNOT?

Prosecutors tell the court that the Battle Of Ideas was a public event with photos of panellists published by organisers, and Gender Critical supporters posting videos featuring audience members ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN: POLICE SERVE TRANS ACTIVISTS

Linehan tells the court he believes that there is a policing bias in favour of the transgender community & includes the prosecution of being a part of the biased system ⬇️

🔴 THROWING PHONE FELT LIKE A MISTAKE

Linehan tells the court he threw the phone with the intent of getting rid of the teenage activist but without any attempt to damage his property ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN QUESTIONED OVER PHONE THROWING INCIDENT

Linehan says his motivation in snatching the phone was to stop Brooks. He did not believe that Brooks wanted to engage in any genuine discussion & was instead seeking to provoke ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN: THIS COURT CASE IS THEIR PUNISHMENT FOR ME

Linehan suggests that his accuser is intent on causing distress and harassment to those who are deemed to cause offence to the trans community & criticise their cause: ⬇️

🔴 400 PAGE FILE SENT TO POLICE REGARDING TEEN ACTIVIST BROOKS: NO FURTHER ACTION

Linehan says was among those who compiled a report on Brooks’s alleged ‘sociopathic’ behaviour. Police arrested Brooks & decided on No Further Action ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN: SOFIA BROOKS’ ANONYMITY REPRESENTED A DANGER

Linehan told the court he felt concerned that there was nothing publicly known about the background of Brooks, & felt police needed to be aware of Brooks ⬇️

🔴 TERRORISM LABEL JUSTIFIED

Linehan argues that targeting by Trans Rights Activists is designed specifically to cause terror & fear ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN DEFENDS USE OF ‘DOMESTIC TERRORIST’ LABEL FOR BROOKS

Linehan describes Brooks tactic of wearing a suffragette scarf associated with Gender Critical movement as a disguise as linking Brooks to radical activists who released insects as a Gender Critical event ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN: HE EXPLOITED HIS ANONYMITY

Linehan said that Sofia Brooks exploited anonymity & that Linehan wanted the identity of the trans activist to become known in order to stop them ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN ON SOFIA BROOKS: HE WAS A TYPICAL TRANS RIGHTS ACTIVIST

Linehan describes becoming aware of Brooks at a Lesbian Women’s Spaces events, describing Brooks’ behaviour as abusive & snide ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN: I PAID A PRICE FOR SPEAKING OUT

Giving evidence, Linehan says that his career suffered because of his public statements & police visits & hostile media attention contributed to damaging his marriage ⬇️

🔴 TRANS ACTIVISMS ATTRACTS BAD ACTORS

Linehan stated that after he provided a link to an article which he believed gave a balanced view on the trans debate, he was targeted by trans activists ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN QUESTIONED ON INVOLVEMENT IN TRANS DEBATE

Linehan tells the court that he became aware of ‘bullying’ by trans activists & felt there was one-sided reporting by the BBC & others, & and overall climate where critical opinions were suppressed ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN CONFIRMS IDENTITY & BACKGROUND

Linehan confirms he has been living in Arizona for around six months, having previously lived in London & Norwich.
He states that the breakup of his marriage was related to his involvement in gender debate ⬇️

🔴 COURT BACK IN SESSION, LINEHAN TAKES THE STAND

Defendant Graham Linehan enters the witness box for questioning and makes his witness affirmation ⬇️

🔴 Back at Westminster Magistrates’ Court

for Afternoon session of Day 3 of Graham Linehan’s trial, before District Judge Briony Clarke. Follow our live reporting for accurate updates as they happen ⬇️

------------------------------

🔴 GRAHAM LINEHAN - HARASSMENT TRIAL DAY 3 - AM - LATEST LIVE COURT REPORTING:

🔴 LINEHAN TO GIVE EVIDENCE AFTER LUNCH BREAK

Proceedings are paused for lunch, with defendant Graham Linehan set to give evidence after lunch.

Stay tuned to or all this afternoon’s live reporting.

🔴 CASE WILL NOT BE STRUCK OUT

Judge rules than on the evidence submitted, there is a case to answer. The trial continues ⬇️

🔴 INADMISSIBLE BAD CHARACTER EVIDENCE

Judge states that the video does not meet requirements to be considered as part of this case ⬇️

🔴 JUDGE: VIDEO WILL NOT BE INCLUDED AS EVIDENCE

Judge says that the video, which would count as bad character evidence, would need to be put to Brooks for questioning and comment, and they are not willing to recall Brooks for this ⬇️

🔴 VIDEO SHOWS ‘PUNCH A TERF’ COMMENT BROADCAST BY ACCUSER

The court has viewed a video showing trans activists Brooks with an associate walking around a Women’s Rights event in Hyde Park holding a speaker playing a loop of:

“IF YOU SEE A TERF, PUNCH THEM IN THE F__-ING FACE”⬇️

🔴 COURT CLEARED - NEW EVIDENCE SUBMISSION

—Court is cleared as new video evidence is submitted and reviewed—

🔴 LINEHAN GRABBED PHONE OUT OF ANGER & HOSTILITY, PROSECUTOR CLAIMS

In arguing that the case deserves a hearing, prosecutors say that Linehan’s tweet about being ‘proud’ of grabbing the phone adds to the picture of an act motivated by animosity & anger, not necessity ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN SNATCHING PHONE HAD NO LEGAL JUSTIFICATION

The prosecution argues that trans activist Sofia Brooks was committing no crime bu confronting Linehan at conference & asking questions, & that Linehan was not justified as his actions did not stop or prevent a crime ⬇️

🔴 PROSECUTOR: NO REASON TO DISBELIEVE THAT BROOKS WAS ALARMED AND DISTRESSED

Prosecution argues that repeated use of these words is not a good reason to disbelieve the claim that this is how the accuser genuinely felt ⬇️

🔴 PROSECUTION: LINEHAN PUBLISHED REPEATED ABUSIVE COMMENTS TO A LARGE ONLINE AUDIENCE

Prosecutors argue that Linehan repeatedly targeted an individual who was not engaging with him, constituting grounds for the harassment charge ⬇️

🔴 PROSECUTION: TWEETS AMOUNT TO HARASSMENT

The prosecution responds, telling the court that the volume and duration of tweets by Linehan constitute harassment, and that his large audience should be taken into consideration ⬇️

🔴 DEFENSE: SNATCHING PHONE WAS BEST WAY OF STOPPING BROOKS

The defence tells that Brooks approached and confronted Linehan, filming the encounter, and that grabbing the phone was one of the few options Linehan had for ending the encounter ⬇️

🔴 QUESTIONING THE CONDITION OF SOFIA’S PHONE

While there is no dispute that the phone was thrown, at four years old, the defence argued that damage later documented could have already been there before the incident ⬇️

🔴 OBJECTIONS RAISED AGAINST PHONE DAMAGE CLAIM

Two objections are raised against the phone damage claim, for repairs quoted as costing over £300, as the defence claims there here too, there is no case to answer ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS ACCUSED OF EXAGGERATED & VEXATIOUS CLAIM

Linehan’s barrister puts it to the court that Brooks’ ‘robotic’ claims to be alarmed & distressed are consistent with the scenario of a vexatious claim against Linehan ⬇️

🔴 ‘ALARMED AND DISTRESSED’ CLAIM UNPERSUASIVE

Defence puts forward the suggestion that Sofia Brooks’ claims to be ‘alarmed and distressed’ are robotic and not genuine ⬇️

🔴 DEFENSE: THERE IS A LEGITIMATE CASE THAT SOFIA BROOKS HARASSES OTHERS

Defence claim that while the language used by Linehan to describe Brooks is ‘crude’ and undiplomatic, it is not oppressive ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN SHARED SINCERELY HELD BELIEFS - NOT INCITEMENT

Defence argues that online comments by Linehan referring to Sofia Brooks as a ‘sociopath’ or ‘man who harasses women’ were sincerely held beliefs and that Linehan had asked police to step in and monitor Sofia Brooks. ⬇️

🔴 MET POLICE INFORMED OF LINEHAN’S ACCUSATION AGAINST BROOKS

Defence tells the court that Sofia Brooks had flagged a tweet to Met Police where Linehan had accused Brooks and trans activist associate Freda Wallace of involvement in the earlier insect release attack ⬇️

🔴 DEFENSE : NO GROUNDS FOR ‘DOXXING’ CLAIM AGAINST LINEHAN

Defence counsel argue that the entire ‘Doxxing’ claim relates to Linehan publishing photos of Sofia Brooks at a public event, thus breaching no privacy rules - No private photos were shared ⬇️

🔴 ACCUSERS’S ACTIONS MATTER IN A HARASSMENT CLAIM

Defence claims that Sofia Brooks’s actions have seriously undermined any claim to be a victim of harassment, detailing numerous instances ⬇️

🔴 DEFENSE: SOFIA BROOKS LACKS THE CREDIBILITY TO MAKE HARASSMENT CHARGE

The defence counsel tells the judge that dropping the case would not be a comment on the matter under discussion and principles of the case but on the compromised position of the accuser ⬇️

🔴 DEFENSE SUBMISSION: NO CASE TO ANSWER

The defence counsel announces that they wish to submit that Linehan has:

"No case to answer"

in regards to either charge, citing credibility of the complainant Sofia Brooks as a key factor ⬇️

🔴 ACTIVIST ADVOCATES FOR LARGE FINE FOR LINEHAN

Lynsay Watson writes to police that Linehan is capable of crowdfunding even £100k to pay a fine, but that a large fine imposed on Linehan would have a laudatory deterrent effect against harassment of transgender people ⬇️

🔴 TRANS ACTIVIST CONTACTS POLICE SUGGESTING PUNISHMENTS FOR LINEHAN

Message sent to police by trans activist Lynsay Watson:

“I won’t push you for updates, but just to let you know the protection from harassment act offers unlimited fines.” ⬇️

🔴 SERGEANT: I SHOULD HAVE SAID GENDER-CRITICAL

Sergeant Wells responds under questioning that it would have been more appropriate to refer to Linehan as holding Gender Critical views than Anti-Trans but he was basing his description on available sources ⬇️

🔴 OFFICER QUESTIONED ON POTENTIAL BIAS

A message sent to the Press Bureau announcing that Graham Linehan was invited for interview labelled him as

“Known for his strong anti-transgender views”.

The defence challenges that this is not a neutral statement ⬇️

🔴 CASE REOPENED NEXT DAY - ‘HATE CRIME‘ ACCUSATION

Case is reopened. Police reports detail Sofia Brooks claims that Graham Linehan has committed a hate crime by deliberately using male pronouns, despite transgender Sofia Brooks being a woman ⬇️

🔴 STALKING ALLEGATIONS AGAINST LINEHAN NOT PURSUED

Sergeant Wells tells the court that Brooks wrote to police objecting to them not pursuing criminal damage or harassment case against Linehan, saying that she will make a formal complaint if the case is not pursued ⬇️

🔴 “MURDEROUS HATRED OF TRANS PEOPLE”

Trans activist Lyndsey Watson claimed in complaint to police that Linehan has a “murderous” hatred of trans people and that the situation required an urgent police response ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN REPORTED TO BE ENDANGERING LIVES BY FURTHER TRANS ACTIVISTS

Sergent Wells tells the court that police received another report alleging that an act of criminal damage was committed when Linehan.tweeted, with fear that the situation could escalate to a deadly level ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN IN GOOD STANDING, NO CRIMINAL RECORD

When questioned, the officer confirms that Linehan has no criminal record, with no convictions or cautions ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN ACCUSED OF INCITING VIOLENCE AGAINST ACTIVIST

The complaint by Burrows alleges that Linehan ‘doxxed’ Brooks and hoped for her to be assaulted by one of his 50’000 twitter followers ⬇️

🔴 OFFICER: LINEHAN REPORTED TO POLICE BY MAN CALLED MICHELLE LOUISE BURROWS

An online complaint was made accusing Linehan of approaching a ‘17-year old girl’ trans activist, calling them names, with an assault only narrowly avoided ⬇️

🔴 NO COMMENTS BEYOND PREPARED STATEMENT

Having delivered his prepared statement, Linehan gave no further comments to questions in police interview ⬇️

🔴 I TWEETED ABOUT HIM TO INFORM OTHERS

Linehan describes tweeting about “Tarquin’s” actions with a journalistic intent, to expose the tactics of some trans activists. ⬇️

🔴 GRABBED PHONE IN RESPONSE TO PERSONAL COMMENTS

Linehan’s statement in police interview describes snatching and throwing Brook’s phone in response to these comments ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN: I GRABBED HIS PHONE AFTER HE MENTIONED MY FAMILY SITUATION

Linehan’s police statement described being approached by “Tarquin” (his name for Sofia Brooks) who went on to make what Linehan called “provocative” comments about his divorce ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN: HE PUT CAMERA IN PEOPLE’S FACES TO PROVOKE A REACTION

Linehan’s statement given to police is read out in court. Using male pronouns, he describes Ms Brooks’ behaviour at the conference alleging that

“He put his camera in people’s faces to provoke a reaction”. ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN’S PREPARED STATEMENT ON CLASH OUTSIDE CONFERENCE

Wells confirmed to prosecution police interviewed Linehan on Feb 5 & received his prepared statement ⬇️

🔴 OFFICER CALLED TO TESTIFY

Prosecution calls Acting Det Sergeant Thomas Wells, who handled the Linehan case, to give evidence to the court ⬇️

🔴 COMPLAINANT SUPPORTERS IN GALLERY

Sophia Brooks supporters moved to public gallery after discussion and kerfuffle over seating. Full public gallery, with many supporters for Linehan ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN TRIAL IN SESSION

Court resumes with prosecuting counsel Julia Faure Walker & Linehan’s defence counsel Sarah Vine KC present ⬇️

🔴 Back at Westminster Magistrates’

Court for Morning session of Day 3 of Graham Linehan’s trial, before District Judge Briony Clarke. Follow our live reporting for accurate updates as they happen ⬇️

🔴AFTERNOON SESSION

5:00 UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS CONCLUDES TESTIMONY

Sophia Brooks finished giving evidence in Linehan’s harassment trial at Westminster Magistrates’ Court ⬇️

5:10 UPDATE: TRIAL ADJOURNS

🔴 BROOKS CONCLUDES TESTIMONY

Sophia Brooks finished giving evidence in Linehan’s harassment trial at Westminster Magistrates’ Court ⬇️

🔴 TRIAL ADJOURNED UNTIL TOMORROW

Judge adjourned case until tomorrow morning; Linehan continues to deny harassment & phone damage charges ⬇️

🔴 CASE LIKELY DELAYED TO NEXT MONTH

Judge noted trial is unlikely to conclude tomorrow & may be adjourned until next month, court heard ⬇️

4:50 UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS ACCUSED OF HARASSING LINEHAN

Defence counsel Ms Vine claimed Sophia Brooks harassed women & Linehan, using her phone for that purpose ⬇️

🔴 QUOTE: VINE ON BROOKS’ ACTIONS

“You spent that afternoon harassing women then harassing Mr Linehan, & you used your phone for the purposes of that” ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS DENIES HARASSMENT CLAIMS

Brooks rejected Ms Vine’s accusation, firmly stating “No”.

🔴 PHONE DAMAGE CLAIMS

Linehan’s lawyer challenges Brooks: ‘Whatever damage there was to your phone, you cannot possibly be sure was a result of what Mr Linehan did.’

Ms Brooks replied: ‘I am certain.’

4:40 UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS FILMED LINEHAN FOR APOLOGY

Sophia Brooks told court she filmed Linehan, hoping to shame him into apologising & retracting allegations ⬇️

🔴 DEFENCE QUESTIONS BROOKS’ INTENT

Ms Vine probed Brooks’ motive for confronting Linehan about ‘domestic terrorist’ label at conference ⬇️

🔴 HOPED FOR LINEHAN’S RETRACTION

When Ms Vine asked about best-case scenario, Brooks said she wanted Linehan to apologise & retract claims ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS SAW APOLOGY AS POSSIBLE

Brooks confirmed to Ms Vine she thought filming Linehan might lead to an apology, describing it as “possible”.

🔴 BROOKS QUESTIONED OVER INTENT OF ASKING DEFENDANT FOR APOLOGY - KEY QUOTES:

‘You thought that was the opportunity to do it?’
‘Yes.’
‘The first time you ask him, how likely did you think he would apologise?’
‘Possible.’

4:30 UPDATES

🔴 TEEN DENIES HARASSMENT INTENT

Defence counsel Ms Vine suggested Sophia Brooks aimed to annoy & harass at Battle of Ideas; Brooks replied, “No” ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS CALLS ATTENDEES BIGOTS

Vine noted Brooks viewed attendees, including Linehan, as bigots; Brooks agreed but denied intent to harass ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS REJECTS DEFENCE CLAIM

Brooks told court she believed attendees were bigots but insisted she did not go to conference to harass them ⬇️

4:20 UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS ACCUSED OF PROVOKING GENDER-CRITICAL ATTENDEES

Prosecution in Linehan trial highlights Sophia Brooks’ provocative actions at a 2024 conference, where she called gender-critical women liars for labeling a trans activist’s assault as male violence. ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS: VIOLENCE BY A TRANS ACTIVIST = AN ASSAULT BY A WOMAN

Brooks is cross-examined in Graham Linehan’s harassment trial. Prosecution notes Brooks’ attendance at a gender-critical conference, where she disputed claims of male violence in a 2017 assault.⬇️

🔴 BROOKS ASSETS STANCE: TRANS WOMEN ARE WOMEN

Sophia Brooks, under cross-examination, defends her stance at a gender-critical event, asserting trans activist Tara Wolf, convicted in 2017 for assaulting Maria MacLachlan, is a woman, not a male attacker. ⬇️

4:15 UPDATES

🔴 COURT REVIEWS VIDEO EVIDENCE OF CLASHES

Video footage is shown of activist Sofia Brooks attending Gender Critical conferences, photographing participants and questioning them. ⬇️

3:30 UPDATES

🔴 “YOU WILL PAY”: BROOKS’ VIDEO TARGETS TERFS

Sophia Brooks recorded a video calling TERFS bigots, saying “You will pay,” court heard ⬇️

🔴BROOKS DENIES THREAT IN VIDEO

Brooks insisted her “You will pay” comment was a joke, not a threat, during court testimony ⬇️

🔴AUDIO REVEALS BROOKS’ TECH USE TO LOCATE INDIVIDUALS

In audio, Brooks discussed using technology to find in which ward a person’s home is located, the court heard.

3:15 UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS GAVE POLICE LINEHAN’S DETAILS

Sophia Brooks provided police with Linehan’s name, birth date, home address & mobile number to report him, court hears ⬇️

🔴 GOOGLE MAPS USED FOR ADDRESS

Brooks said she used Google Maps to find Linehan’s London home after he publicized it in a Telegraph interview ⬇️

🔴 ANONYMOUS SOURCE GAVE PHONE NUMBER

Brooks told court an anonymous account supplied Linehan’s mobile number, which she passed to police ⬇️

3:05 UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS QUESTIONED OVER OWN TWEETS

Sophia Brooks told court she “didn’t remember” if she used her Twitter accounts to call anyone a ‘nonce,’ slang for paedophile ⬇️

🔴 DEFENCE SHOWS BROOKS’ TWEETS

Ms Vine presented screenshots of Brooks’ tweets, where she admitted calling someone—not Linehan—a ‘f***ing weirdo nonce’ ⬇️

2:45 UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS QUESTIONED ON FEAR OF TWEETS

Defence counsel Sarah Vine KC asked Sophia Brooks how frightened she was by Linehan’s tweets; Brooks replied, “I don’t remember” ⬇️

🔴 DEFENCE PROBES LACK OF RECALL

When Vine suggested Brooks felt no fear at all, she reiterated, “Again, I don’t remember,” during cross-examination ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS FEARED VIGILANTE ATTACK

Brooks told court she feared a vigilante “stabbing me on the street” or “beating me up” due to Linehan’s posts ⬇️

🔴 QUOTE: I FEARED A STABBING

Brooks tell the court ‘he called me a domestic terrorist.’

Asked about the danger she felt herself in, Brooks replied that she feared ‘A vigilante, possibly stabbing me on the street, otherwise beating me up.’ ⬇️

🔴 VIDEO SHOWS HEATED EXCHANGE

Footage showed Brooks calling Linehan an “incel” for being divorced outside Battle of Ideas conference ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS ADMITS FEELING PLEASED

When Vine said Brooks seemed “pleased with herself” in footage, Brooks confirmed, “Yes,” during court testimony ⬇️

2:30 Updates —

🔴 TRANS ACTIVIST THREATENED LEGAL ACTION

Sophia Brooks, 18, threatened police with judicial review after they initially declined to pursue allegations against Linehan, court hears ⬇️

🔴 DEFENCE CROSS-EXAMINES BROOKS

Sarah Vine KC, defence counsel, resumed cross-examination of complainant Sophia Brooks in Linehan’s harassment trial ⬇️

🔴 TWITTER ACCOUNT TARGETED LINEHAN

Court heard a Twitter account criticized Linehan’s tweets about Brooks, comparing her to murdered trans schoolgirl Brianna Ghey ⬇️

🔴 DOXING CLAIM IN TWITTER POST

Account claimed Linehan was ‘doxing a child’ to ‘ensure they end up like Brianna Ghey,’ referring to public identification ⬇️

🔴 TRIAL FOCUSES ON LINEHAN’S POSTS

Westminster Magistrates’ Court examines Linehan’s alleged harassment of Brooks via social media & phone damage incident ⬇️

Follow our live court reporting below ⬇️
https://x.com/ukcourtslive/status/1963543575280447983

GRAHAM LINEHAN TRIAL — 4 SEP — DAY 2 — MORNING SESSION

🔴 BATTLE OF IDEAS SEEN AS ‘DEMONSTRATION’

Brooks described Battle of Ideas conference as a ‘demonstration’ due to attendees’ shared views ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS DETAILS REACTION TO LINEHAN

Court heard Brooks felt Linehan’s behavior, beyond pronouns, caused significant alarm & distress.

🔴 END OF MORNING SESSION

Trial resumes in afternoon.

MORNING SESSION UPDATES

🔴 DEFENCE TO CROSS-EXAMINE BROOKS

Court hears Ms Vine KC, defence counsel, is now set to cross-examine Sophia Brooks following her testimony ⬇️

🔴 TRANS ACTIVIST STANDS BY DISTRESS

Brooks, identifying as a trans activist, reiterated feeling alarmed & distressed by Linehan’s actions ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS: LINEHAN’S PRONOUNS WERE ‘RUDE’

Under cross examination, Sophia Brooks told court she found Linehan’s use of male pronouns for her ‘rude’ but not alarming or distressing.

MORNING SESSION UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS FEARED FOR SAFETY OVER TWEETS

Sophia Brooks told court Linehan’s posts made her worry for her safety due to his fame & 500,000+ Twitter followers ⬇️

🔴 QUOTE: BROOKS DESCRIBES INSULTS

“A person who is famous with over 500,000 followers on Twitter was endlessly harassing me online… making claims about me being a child, a sociopath, a domestic terrorist.”

MORNING SESSION UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS DISTRESSED BY LINEHAN’S TWEETS

Sophia Brooks told court she felt alarmed & distressed by Linehan’s tweets, including references labelling her as a ‘sociopath’ ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN CALLED BROOKS ‘MAN WITH LONG HAIR’

Brooks said Linehan’s tweet calling her ‘a man with long hair’ caused further distress ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN CALLED BROOKS ‘MAN WITH LONG HAIR’

Brooks said Linehan’s tweet calling her ‘a man with long hair’ caused further distress ⬇️

MORNING SESSION UPDATES

🔴 VIDEO SHOWS LINEHAN CALLING BROOKS ‘GROOMER’

Court viewed footage filmed by Ms Brooks where Linehan allegedly called her a ‘groomer’ & ‘disgusting incel’ ⬇️

🔴 FOOTAGE CAPTURES PHONE INCIDENT

Video showed Brooks filming Linehan post-conference, asking about ‘domestic terrorist’ label; Linehan reached for phone & recording stopped.

MORNING UPDATES

🔴 HEATED EXCHANGE BETWEEN PAIR

Court heard Brooks & Linehan called each other ‘scumbags,’ with Brooks adding, ‘You’re the incel, you’re divorced’ ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN ALLEGEDLY RIPPED PHONE FROM BROOKS

Sophia Brooks told court Linehan grabbed her hand, forcibly took her phone & hid it behind his back ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN THREW PHONE AFTER DEMAND

Brooks said she demanded her phone back; Linehan replied, “Go & get your f***ing phone,” & threw it into road.

MORNING UPDATES

🔴 LINEHAN CALLS BROOKS ‘GROOMER’ AGAIN

Sophia Brooks gave testimony that Linehan had later that day made offensive & derogatory remarks, calling her a ‘groomer’ & ‘CIS-sy porn-watching scum-bag’ during another exchange ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS EXPLAINS ‘CIS-SY PORN’ TERM

When asked, Brooks said ‘CIS-sy porn’ refers to a genre where cisgender males cross-dress, denying any involvement ⬇️
🔴 BROOKS ‘ALARMED & DISTRESSED’

Brooks reiterated to court she felt alarmed & distressed by Linehan’s accusations & insults during confrontation.

MORNING UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS CHALLENGES LINEHAN’S WORDS

Brooks later asked Linehan why he called teenagers ‘domestic terrorists’; he called her a groomer & told her to go away ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS DISTRESSED BY GROOMER CLAIM

Brooks told court she felt distressed by Linehan’s ‘groomer’ accusation, insisting she is not a groomer.

MORNING UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS EJECTED FROM CONFERENCE

Sophia Brooks was removed from Battle of Ideas conference in Westminster last October for taking photos of guest panel ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN CONFRONTS BROOKS

Brooks said Linehan crossed street, recording her & asking how many kids she’d groomed, despite no prior interaction ⬇️

🔴 COURTROOM QUOTE

Brooks: “Mr Linehan crossed the street with his phone recording and he called me a groomer and stated that I groomed kids. Sorry, he asked me how many kids I’d groomed.”

MORNING UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS DENIES USING NAME ‘TARQUIN’

Sophia Brooks told court she never used ‘Tarquin,’ the name Graham Linehan used to refer to her ⬇️
🔴 ‘POSHNESS’ LINKED TO TARQUIN NAME

When asked how ‘Tarquin’ came about, Brooks said Linehan used it due to her perceived ‘poshness’ ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN NAMED AS SOURCE OF ‘TARQUIN’

Brooks confirmed to prosecutor that Linehan was the one who used ‘Tarquin’ to describe her online ⬇️
🔴 BROOKS REJECTS ‘TARQUIN’ ADOPTION

Prosecutor asked if Brooks used ‘Tarquin’ online; she replied she did not, attributing it solely to Linehan.
MORNING UPDATES

🔴 BROOKS DENIES HOMOPHOBIA ALLEGATIONS
Sophia Brooks rejected Linehan’s claims of homophobia, telling court she is bisexual & not prejudiced ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN’S POSTS ALARMED BROOKS

Brooks said Linehan’s posts calling her a “deeply disturbed sociopath” & “domestic terrorist” left her feeling alarmed & distressed ⬇️
🔴 FEARS AMPLIFIED BY LINEHAN’S LARGE FOLLOWING

Brooks told court Linehan’s posts, seen by his 500,000+ followers, made her fear harm due to his fame & influence.

MORNING UPDATES

🔴 TRANS ACTIVIST ATTENDED LGB EVENT

Sophia Brooks attended an LGB Alliance event at QEII centre on Oct 11, eight days before encountering Graham Linehan, court hears ⬇️
🔴 BROOKS DENIES INVOLVEMENT IN INSECT PROTEST ACTION

Brooks told court she disagreed with LGB Alliance’s views but did not enter venue where activists had released insects, stating she had no prior knowledge ⬇️
🔴 BROOKS: LGB ALLIANCE OPPOSES MY RIGHTS

Brooks said she believes LGB Alliance opposes her transgender rights & confirmed she had never met or contacted Linehan before the incident.
MORNING UPDATES

🔴 MS BROOKS TAKES WITNESS STAND

Sophia Brooks entered witness box, wearing blue shirt with long dark hair worn loose ⬇️

🔴 BROOKS CONFIRMS IDENTITY DETAILS

Brooks told court her identity documents list her name as Sophia Abigail Brooks & confirmed she is a student ⬇️

🔴 NAME CHANGE DISCUSSED

Brooks spoke clearly in court, stating she has used name Sophia since 2021 or 2022 ⬇️

MORNING UPDATES

🔴 LINEHAN DENIES HARASSMENT CHARGES

Linehan told police his actions & posts did not amount to harassment, insisting he was not targeting Brooks but responding to her actions ⬇️

🔴 “I’M A JOURNALIST,” LINEHAN CLAIMS

Describing himself as a journalist, Linehan said his posts aimed to expose “tactics” of trans activists, framing them as investigative reporting ⬇️

🔴 TRIAL EXAMINES INTENT BEHIND POSTS

Westminster Magistrates’ Court hears Linehan’s prepared statement to police, as prosecution challenges his claim of journalistic intent.

MORNING UPDATES

🔴 LINEHAN CLAIMS PHONE THROW WAS “REFLEX”

Linehan told police on Feb 5 that throwing Sophia Brooks’ phone was a “reflex response” after she allegedly harassed him by filming at close quarters ⬇️

🔴 “COMPLAINANT HARASSED ME,” LINEHAN SAYS

In his police statement, Linehan refered to Brooks as “Tarquin,” & claimed she provoked him with a statement & filmed him intrusively, prompting his reaction, court hears.

MORNING UPDATES

🔴 LINEHAN’S TWEETS CAUSE DISTRESS

Prosecutor says Ms Brooks “felt alarmed or distressed” by Linehan’s social media posts targeting her gender identity, court hears⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN DENIES HARASSMENT CHARGES

Linehan, facing charges of harassment & criminal damage to Brooks’ phone, denies allegations, with trial ongoing at Westminster Magistrates’ Court ⬇️

MORNING UPDATES

🔴 QUOTE: LINEHAN’S FURTHER TWEET READ IN COURT

Another key tweet from Linehan is read out in court:
“If you encounter Tarquin in the wild, try to resist the urge to stick his cameras up his a***” ⬇️

🔴 PUBLIC GALLERY REACTS TO TWEETS

Linehan’s tweet about “resisting the urge” to make Brooks’ camera inaccessible for use by inserting it in a body cavity prompted laughter from some in the public gallery during the court session ⬇️

UPDATES

🔴 PROSECUTOR HIGHLIGHTS LINEHAN’S MOCKING TWEETS

Court hears prosecutor read out Linehan’s tweets mocking Sophia Brooks’ gender identity, including comments on her driving licence naming her “Sophia” ⬇️
🔴 DRIVING LICENCE POST SPARKS DEBATE

Prosecutor notes someone else posted a redacted copy of Ms Brooks’ driving licence online , referring to “Sophia,” which Linehan used to mock her identity ⬇️

🔴 “HE’S A BLOKE & THAT’S A GIRL’S NAME” QUOTE: LINEHAN ON BROOKS’ FEMALE NAME

Commenting on the redacted driving licence, Linehan mocked online: “That couldn’t be Tarquin cos he’s a bloke & that’s a girl’s name”
UPDATES

🔴 LINEHAN AVOIDED QUESTION, STRUCK PHONE

Prosecutor tells court Linehan didn’t answer Ms Brooks’ question about calling her a domestic terrorist, but angrily whacked the phone out of her hand, damaging it ⬇️
COURT UPDATES

🔴 “GO AWAY GROOMER,” LINEHAN TOLD MS BROOKS

Court hears Linehan shouted at Ms Brooks, “Go away groomer, go away you disgusting incel,” understood to mean “involuntarily celibate,” during the incident ⬇️

🔴 MS BROOKS FILMED, POSED NO THREAT

Prosecutor states Ms Brooks was filming Linehan & asked, “Why do you think it’s acceptable to call teenagers domestic terrorists?” She was not committing a crime or posing a physical threat ⬇️

A.M. COURT UPDATES

🔴 LINEHAN “PROUD” OF THROWING TEEN’S PHONE

Prosecutor says Linehan tweeted he was “quite proud” of grabbing a teen’s phone & throwing it across the road during a confrontation, causing damage to the device ⬇️

🔴 QUOTE: LINEHAN’S “PROUD” TWEET AFTER DAMAGING ACTIVIST’S PHONE

“I’m quite proud that I grabbed his phone & threw it across the road. He was furious” ⬇️

AM COURT UPDATES

🔴 FIRST IN-PERSON MEETING

Prosecutor Julia Faure Walker told court the pair met in person for the first time outside the Battle of Ideas conference on 19 October last year ⬇️

🔴 MS BROOKS ESCORTED OUT

Ms Brooks had been filming inside the venue but was escorted out at around 3.15pm. The incident occurred while she was holding her phone ⬇️

🔴 QUOTE: CALLING LINEHAN OUT

While filming, Brooks called out Linehan’s name & asked why he called her a ‘domestic terrorist’, the prosecution told court ⬇️

🔴 QUOTE: PERSONAL ANIMOSITY

“At this point Mr Linehan could have explained why he called her a domestic terrorist, if he had an explanation or even ignored her. Rather, he responded in a way which is indicative of his extreme personal animosity towards her”

MORNING UPDATES

🔴 CASE CONTINUES

The trial at Westminster Magistrates’ Court continues as the prosecution sets out its allegations, with District Judge Briony Clarke presiding and the public gallery observing proceedings ⬇️

🔴 LINEHAN REFERRED TO TEENAGER AS ‘TARQUIN’

The court heard Graham Linehan called trans activist Sophia Brooks ‘TARQUIN’ on social media, also describing her as a ‘malignant narcissist’ & an ‘absolute psycho’ ⬇️

UPDATES

🔴 PROSECUTION CLAIMS RELENTLESS TWEETS

Prosecutor Julia Faure Walker told court Linehan was ‘relentless’ in sending abusive tweets to trans woman Sophia Brooks, someone he had never met or interacted with ⬇️

🔴 PRONOUN USAGE HIGHLIGHTED

The prosecution said Ms Brooks, now 18, was constantly referred to using male pronouns by Linehan during the abusive social media posts ⬇️

🔴 QUOTE: POSTS NOT MERELY ANNOYING

“These posts were not merely irritating or annoying. These posts were not provoked by anything she (Ms Brooks) did to Mr Linehan. She was not even in contact when he began to post about her” ⬇️

🔴 QUOTE: POSTS UNRELATED TO PERSONAL EXPERIENCE

“They were not based on her personal experience, they had not even met when the posts started” ⬇️

🔴 QUOTE: VERBALLY ABUSIVE AND VINDICTIVE

“Rather, they were verbally abusive and vindictive & reflected, say the prosecution, Mr Linehan’s deep disliking of Miss Brooks”

UPDATES

🔴 JUDGE ISSUES WARNING

District Judge Briony Clarke warns the public gallery that offensive or disruptive behaviour will not be tolerated. Those causing disturbances risk ejection from the courtroom ⬇️
🔴 PRONOUNS CLARIFIED

The prosecution confirmed it will refer to the claimant using female pronouns, while Linehan, if giving evidence, may use masculine pronouns. The judge acknowledged this could upset some in the gallery ⬇️

🔴 COURTROOM ETIQUETTE

Judge Clarke stressed that despite potential offence, the public must remain silent & respectful. Any disturbance will result in immediate removal from Westminster Magistrates’ Court ⬇️

Court Updates

🔴 LINEHAN ARRIVES AT COURT

Graham Linehan smiled & waved to supporters as he entered Westminster Magistrates’ Court. Court 1 ⬇️

🔴 TRIAL DETAILS

The Father Ted creator’s case is being heard by District Judge Briony Clarke. Prosecutor Julia Faure Walker leads the case, while Sarah Vine KC is acting for the defence. All eyes on the courtroom as the trial prepares to begin

🔴 Back at Westminster Magistrates’ Court for Day 2 of Graham Linehan’s trial before - District Judge Briony Clarke.
🔴 FATHER TED CREATOR ON TRIAL

Graham Linehan, 56, faces Westminster Magistrates’ Court accused of harassing trans activist Sophia Brooks, 18, on social media & damaging her £369 phone at London’s Battle of Ideas conference. He denies both charges. Trial now under way