UK police visit Trump-supporting cancer patient over online post; case dropped

A British police officer visited Deborah Anderson at her home in Slough in June, telling the American cancer patient she might be required to apologise for a Facebook post that was described to officers as threatening. Anderson, a mother of two and a onetime Trump supporter who now lives in the United Kingdom, said the officer did not specify which post drew the complaint or the exact language involved. The encounter was filmed and later shared by the Free Speech Union, a pressure group that advocates for broad protections for online expression.

Anderson recounted that the officer stated she would have to come to the police station for an interview if she did not apologise. “You’re here because somebody got upset? Is it against the law? Am I being arrested?” she asked. The officer told her she was not under arrest but that she would need to apologise, and warned of police interview requirements if she refused. “I’m not apologizing to anybody, I can tell you that,” Anderson replied, later pointing out that she is a cancer patient and a single mother.

In June, Thames Valley Police said, they had received a report from a person who felt threatened by comments directed at them online. Following engagement with both parties, the force said, no arrests were made and no further action was taken. A police spokesman added that, while people are entitled to express their views, it is the police’s duty to respond to allegations of threatening language and references to violence. The force later confirmed that the case had been dropped.

The Free Speech Union described the interaction as “chilling” in a post about the video, noting that it did not reveal which post had triggered the report and asserting that the record of the complaint had allegedly been deleted. The union said it helped Anderson by raising the matter with police, which contributed to the eventual decision to drop the investigation. The group emphasized that it is concerned about how online speech cases are handled and how the public’s right to express political views is protected.

The incident comes amid a broader debate over the UK’s Online Safety Act, which took effect earlier this year and is designed to curb harmful online content but has drawn criticism from free-speech advocates who argue it empowers authorities to police everyday postings, retweets and conversations. Critics say the law has created a chilling effect, enabling police to pursue cases over ambiguous or non-violent online remarks.

Commentary from think tanks and lawmakers has reflected a spectrum of views about free expression in Britain. Ben Harris-Quinney, chairman of The Bow Group, argued that UK authorities have shown a willingness to “caution, arrest and imprison” people for exercising free speech, a point he said aligns with concerns raised by some American conservatives about political censorship abroad. Maxwell Marlow of the London-based Adam Smith Institute stressed that, despite official denials, recent legislation has created constraints on speech and urged the U.S. government to press Britain to reconsider such policies. Separately, Irish comedy writer Graham Linehan, who had previously moved to the United States citing free-speech concerns, was arrested in a separate incident linked to online posts outlined in unrelated coverage, underscoring ongoing tensions around online discourse.

The incident occurred at a time when high-profile visits by U.S. political figures to the United Kingdom were drawing attention to political and diplomatic tensions surrounding free expression. Thames Valley Police’s jurisdiction includes Windsor, where President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump had been visiting as guests of King Charles, highlighting the international spotlight on how Britain enforces online-speech rules during moments of public attention.

For Anderson, the June visit and subsequent handling of the case have left her wary of online reminders of political division in the United Kingdom. The Free Speech Union described the case as resolved in the sense that the investigation was dropped, but it underscored that the broader consequences for everyday online activity—especially among expatriates and Americans living in the U.K.—remain unsettled. As policymakers weigh changes to online safety and free-speech protections, Anderson’s experience stands as a high-profile case inside a contested landscape where legal boundaries, police practices, and civil liberties are under renewed scrutiny.