Threats To Farage Online Lead to Conviction

Farage Threats Lead to Prison Sentence Highlighting Laws Around Social Media Posts

Mortons Solicitors are warning that cases like the recent conviction of an Afghan migrant who made threats against politician Nigel Farage on social media highlight how seriously UK courts treat online abuse and threatening communications.

At Southwark Crown Court, 26-year-old Fayaz Khan was found guilty of making threats to kill after posting a series of disturbing videos on TikTok between 12 and 15 October last year. In one of the videos, Khan was seen making gun gestures while saying “pop, pop, pop” and referencing Mr Farage directly.

The Case and Conviction

Khan, who arrived in the UK after crossing the Channel by small boat, had previously posted videos documenting his journey from Europe. His TikTok account, under the username “madapasa”, had amassed hundreds of thousands of views and was used to share inflammatory content before his arrest.

In response to a video uploaded by Mr Farage on 12 October 2024 about illegal immigration, Khan posted a video days later making explicit threats. The prosecution told jurors that Khan’s comments — including gun gestures and references to coming to England — were viewed by many as a direct and credible threat.

[blockquote]“He says he’s coming to England and he’s going to shoot me. I understood that very clearly indeed as did many people who saw it at the same time,”

[/blockquote]The court heard that Khan appeared to headbutt the camera and point to an AK47 tattoo on his face to emphasise he was “not joking”. In a later post, he shared a screenshot of a GB News report about his threat with the caption: “I mean what I say.”

Prosecution and Legal Outcome

Prosecutor Peter Ratliff told the court that Khan’s actions “went far beyond offensive or political expression” and amounted to a clear threat of violence. During the hearing, the Crown Prosecution Service stressed that public figures and politicians must be able to perform their roles without fear or intimidation.

[blockquote]“Elected politicians must be able to carry out their jobs free from the fear of harm or abuse, and we will make sure that those who seek to intimidate them face the full force of the law,”

[/blockquote]Khan was already facing separate proceedings for entering the UK illegally. During police interviews, he claimed he had been “high on cannabis” at the time of recording and had no intention of carrying out the threat. However, the jury found him guilty of making threats to kill, a serious offence under Section 16 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

The Broader Issue: Social Media and Criminal Liability

Mortons Solicitors note that this case serves as a stark warning about the consequences of reckless online behaviour. Threats, harassment, or abusive language posted on platforms such as TikTok, X (Twitter), or Facebook can result in criminal prosecution even when no physical violence occurs.

Under the Communications Act 2003 and the Malicious Communications Act 1988, it is an offence to send messages that are grossly offensive, indecent, or threatening. The courts have repeatedly confirmed that intent to frighten or harm is not always necessary — if a reasonable person would interpret the content as threatening or menacing, charges may follow.

[blockquote]“Even comments made in anger or as a so-called ‘joke’ can have devastating legal consequences,”

[/blockquote]Online communication is not immune from the same criminal standards that apply in public life. Posts, videos, or livestreams can quickly go viral, amplifying their reach — and their impact. Once shared, such content can become evidence in a criminal investigation, as seen in Khan’s case.

Balancing Free Speech and Criminal Law

The courts continue to walk a fine line between protecting freedom of expression and upholding public safety. While individuals are free to express opinions and political criticism, those freedoms do not extend to threats, incitement, or harassment.

In this instance, Khan’s social media activity crossed that line. The case reinforces that online platforms are not “safe spaces” for criminal behaviour — and that offenders can expect to face the same penalties as they would for threats made in person.

Legal Advice and Support

Anyone under investigation for offences relating to social media posts — including alleged threats, harassment, or offensive communications — should seek legal advice at the earliest opportunity. Mortons Solicitors regularly represent clients accused of communications-related offences, including those under the Malicious Communications Act and Offences Against the Person Act.

Our legal team advises individuals to exercise caution when posting online, particularly around sensitive topics or public figures. A single moment of anger, misunderstanding, or poor judgment can have serious, lasting legal consequences.

If you have been contacted by police or served with a notice of investigation relating to online posts, seek immediate legal representation before providing a statement.

How We Can Help

For advice on any aspects of legal representation for Social Media posts– call us now on 0161 477 1121 or email us.