@JChimirie66677
The modern British state has discovered a new method of control: if it cannot beat a man in court, it will reclassify him as a danger to children. Not because he harmed a child, or poses any risk, but because his words cut against a policy that depends on silence and fear. The case of Jamie Michael shows how far the system has decayed. A Royal Marine, cleared by a jury in minutes, is now banned from coaching his daughter's football team and marked with a stigma that can haunt a man for life. Not for abuse or violence, but for speaking too harshly about illegal migration.
Safeguarding, created to stop the next Ian Huntley, has been twisted into a tool for policing thought. It no longer protects children from predators, but protects the state from dissent. A man who spent a decade building clubs for local boys and girls is treated as a latent threat, his name blackened, his presence "monitored." He is not punished for an act, but marked for an opinion. He is not judged on evidence, but ideology. The British state cannot close the border or deport criminals, but it can hunt down a father who ranted online after watching little girls stabbed in a dance studio.
The sickness is not administrative incompetence. It is moral inversion. The harmless man is punished with zeal while the dangerous man is ignored with indifference. The state has "misplaced" 53,000 illegal migrants and 736 foreign offenders. It has lost them in the housing estates, car washes, takeaway kitchens, and cash-in-hand underworld it pretends does not exist. It can neither find them nor remove them. It cannot track them, cannot police them, cannot even answer basic questions about where they are. Yet it has the time and the will to brand a decorated veteran a threat to minors and bar him from his own child's football pitch.
This is not safeguarding. It is the laundering of political punishment through child protection bureaucracies. The trick is cunning and cowardly: do not criminalise the speech directly, because juries might refuse to convict. Instead, tarnish the speaker by branding him "unsafe" around children. You do not silence a man by proving him wrong. You silence him by making decent people recoil from him. You do not argue with him. You make him untouchable.
A jury listened, weighed the evidence, and dismissed the case in under twenty minutes. The bureaucratic state ignored the verdict and imposed its own sentence in secret meetings. No discussion of the facts. No review of the video. No right to defend himself. No pretence of fairness. A closed-door verdict delivered by officials who answer to nobody and never have to explain themselves. Britain now runs a shadow justice system where acquittal in court does not save you from conviction by committee.
The deeper truth is plain. A government that cannot control its borders turns inward and seeks to control its subjects. When you fail to stop criminals coming in, you start treating your own citizens as criminals. Patriotism becomes extremism. Anger becomes danger. The father who coaches children becomes a suspect while actual offenders walk free and vanish into the country without consequence. The state is not protecting children. It is protecting its political narrative, even if it means destroying the life of a man who did more for his community than any of the cowards who condemned him.
The real threat to children in Britain is not a father who shouted into a phone. It is a government that has lost control, lost confidence, and now punishes those who notice. A society where ordinary parents must watch their words while tens of thousands of unknown men roam unchecked is not a society in good health. It is a society that has surrendered its borders, lost its courage, and turned its police powers inward to hide the shame. The message is simple and vicious: stay silent, or we will ruin you.
"The case of Jamie Michael shows how far the system has decayed."
