Joey Barton convicted of sending grossly offensive social media posts

By Kim Pilling, PA

Former footballer Joey Barton has been convicted of sending grossly offensive social media posts about broadcaster Jeremy Vine and TV football pundits Lucy Ward and Eni Aluko.

A jury at Liverpool Crown Court found Barton, 43, had “crossed the line between free speech and a crime” with six posts he made on X, formerly Twitter.

He was cleared of six other counts that he sent a grossly offensive electronic communication with intent to cause distress or anxiety between January and March 2024.

Following a televised FA Cup tie in January 2024 between Crystal Palace and Everton, he likened Ward and Aluko in a post on X to the “Fred and Rose West of football commentary”.

He went on to superimpose the faces of the two women on to a photograph of the serial murderers.

Barton also tweeted Aluko was in the “Joseph Stalin/Pol Pot category” as that she had “murdered hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of football fans’ ears”.

Jurors found him not guilty on the Stalin/Pol Pot comparison, and also the commentary analogy with the Wests, but ruled the superimposed image was grossly offensive.

He was also convicted of a post in relation to Aluko in which he wrote “Only there to tick boxes. DEI is a load of shit. Affirmative action. All off the back of the BLM/George Floyd nonsense”.

The ex-Manchester City, Newcastle United and Marseille player – now a social commentator with 2.7 million followers on X – is said to have suggested Vine had a sexual interest in children after the TV and radio presenter sent a message querying whether Barton had a “brain injury”.

Barton repeatedly referred to Vine as “bike nonce” and asked him: “Have you been on Epstein Island? Are you going to be on these flight logs? Might as well own up now because I’d phone the police if I saw you near a primary school on ya bike.”

He was convicted over the Epstein post and a tweet in which he said: “Oh @the JeremyVine Did you Rolf-aroo and Schofield go out on a tandem bike ride? You big bike nonce ya”.

Barton was also found guilty of other tweets in relation to Vine in which he referred to him as “bike nonce” and said: “If you see this fella by a primary school call 999,” and “Beware Man with Camera on his helmets cruising past primary schools. Call the Cops if spotted”.

He was cleared of guilt over three remaining tweets referring to Vine.

Barton was bailed ahead of sentencing on December 8.

The Honorary Recorder of Liverpool, Andrew Menary KC, noted the defendant was wearing a Union flag patterned scarf as the verdicts were returned.

He told the court: “He has chosen to adorn himself with a particular flag which I suppose is a stunt to make a point. He will not be permitted to do that on the sentencing date.”

Giving evidence, Barton, who also managed Fleetwood Town and Bristol Rovers, said he believed he is the victim of a “political prosecution” and denied his aim was “to get clicks and promote himself”.

He said his posts about Ward and Aluko were “dark and stupid humour” and he was “trying to make a serious point in a provocative way”.

His Epstein tweet to Vine was “crude banter” and that “bike nonce” was a known phrase used by non-cyclists about cyclists, he said.

Barton said he had no intention of implying Vine was a paedophile.

In his closing speech to the jury of seven men and five women, prosecutor Peter Wright KC said Barton had crossed the line “by some considerable margin” beyond what is tolerable in society.

He said: “Mr Barton is not the victim here.

“He is not the free speech crusader that he would like to paint himself to be.

“He is not some martyr to be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.

“He is just simply an undiluted, unapologetic bully.

“A little bully who takes pleasure sitting there with his phone in his hand and then posting these slurs.”

Mr Wright said Ward, Aluko and Vine were the “collateral damage of his self-promotion”.

In legal directions to jurors before their deliberations, Judge Menary said the words “grossly offensive” set a high threshold.

He said: “You must set the standards of an open, just and multi-racial society which recognises equality and diversity and which values free expression.

“‘Grossly offensive’ is more than merely offensive, impolite or rude. Many things said online are unpleasant and tasteless.

“The criminal law is not there to punish bad manners, sharp humour, or unpopular opinions.

“The law only intervenes when the content is of such an extreme, degrading or dehumanising character that society as a whole would say – ‘that goes too far, that crosses the line of what we can tolerate’.”

He said it was not their task to “second-guess” how the complainants or Mr Barton’s followers in fact reacted to the posts but they had to be satisfied that causing distress or anxiety “must have been part of his object or aim in sending it”.