Upskirting
So Laurence Fox has been to court today and denied sharing an intimate image of social media personality Narinder Kaur without her consent on social media. He is alleged to have shared the 'upskirting' image of Kaur on X in April 2024.
Fox appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court charged with two counts under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. During the hearing, he spoke to confirm his identity and enter not guilty pleas to both charges. He was released on bail on condition that he does not contact the complainant directly or indirectly.
The image, taken by paparazzi in 2009 as Kaur exited a taxi, was captured without her knowledge and showed her in a compromising position. She had decided not to wear underwear. Kaur described the incident as "unimaginably mortifying" and reported it to the Metropolitan Police, who launched an investigation.
I can remember seeing all this unfold in real time on my social media feed.
Laurence has claimed that he shared the image in retaliation for Kaur mocking commentator Leilani Dowding online, asserting it highlighted her "hypocrisy." He subsequently deleted the post and issued a partial apology, stating it was not his fault the photo was taken years ago, but doubled down by calling Kaur a "whining cry bully hypocrite." The image had been removed from photo agency archives after upskirting became a criminal offense in England and Wales under the Voyeurism (Offences) Act 2019. But these images lurk forever on the internet.
Back in March, the Metropolitan Police charged Fox with a sexual offence under Section 66A of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which addresses "cyberflashing"—intentionally sharing sexual images without consent to cause alarm, distress, humiliation, or for sexual gratification. Alarmingly, if convicted, he could face up to two years in prison and placement on the Sex Offenders Register.
Laurence denies the charges, calling them "untrue, ridiculous, vexatious and malicious nonsense" and framing the case as an example of a "two-tier British justice system" aimed at silencing him. This has the ring of truth but in Two Tier Britain that may not be the best defence.
Kaur, who waived her right to anonymity, expressed ongoing distress, likening the experience to being "assaulted every day" due to people sending her screenshots of the image. She criticised the police for slow progress in earlier stages but noted their serious handling of the case by September 2024.
Upskirting, criminalized in 2019, carries significant penalties, and this case tests the application of cyberflashing laws to images not originally created by the accused. The outcome could set precedents for handling non-consensual image-sharing on social media. So it’s a pivotal legal case
It’s obviously up to the Court to make a determination and I don’t want to comment on this case beyond making two points;
I know Laurence and think him a good and decent man.
Social Media is a minefield and it is very easy to run foul of the law on it!
****I put out at least three articles a day. If you enjoy all this can I ask you to consider to becoming a PAID subscriber, it’s only £5 a month, you can cancel if you don’t enjoy it but I know you will. I want to thank the kind people who already do this, without your help this becomes impossible. Thank you in anticipation of your support****
The fact that she herself shared the picture a few years earlier should give the court reason to doubt her claim that she was humiliated and upset by its subsequent reposting.
It's clearly a case brought with malevolent intent. It's difficult to call a lady a liar, but then again ladies don't go around without underwear.
Why are people being so naive about this? Of course Kaur knew the paps would be there and deliberately went out without her knickers to get the shot and publicity - she was and is a publicity seeker. She even posted the picture herself at some point! Ridiculous that it has got to court.