The case surrounding the ex-footballer has been taking place at Liverpool Crown Court
The case surrounding the ex-footballer has been taking place at Liverpool Crown Court
The jury in the trial of former footballer Joey Barton, who stands accused of sending “grossly offensive” social media posts, has retired to deliberate its verdicts. Barton, 43, is alleged to have “crossed the line between free speech and a crime” with tweets about broadcaster Jeremy Vine and TV football pundits Lucy Ward and Eni Aluko.
Following a televised FA Cup tie in January 2024 between Crystal Palace and Everton, he compared Ward and Aluko on a post on X, formerly Twitter, to the “Fred and Rose West of football commentary”. He then superimposed the faces of the two women onto a photograph of the notorious killers.
Barton also tweeted that Aluko was in the “Joseph Stalin/Pol Pot category” as she had “murdered hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of football fans’ ears” and in a separate post 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 2.7m followers on X – is allegedly to have suggested Jeremy 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.”
Barton, who has also managed Fleetwood Town and Bristol Rovers, told Liverpool Crown Court that he believes he is the victim of a “political prosecution” and denied his aim was “to get clicks and promote himself”.
He described his posts about Ward and Aluko as “dark and stupid humour”, stating he was “trying to make a serious point in a provocative way”.
His tweet to Vine referencing Epstein was “crude banter”, and he claimed that “bike nonce” was a known phrase used by non-cyclists about cyclists. Barton insisted 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 that Ward, Aluko and Vine were the “collateral damage of his self-promotion”.
In his closing speech, Simon Csoka KC, defending, told the jurors it was for them to decide where the line between free speech and crime was but suggested if it was fixed “far too low” then free speech is “completely worthless”.
He emphasised that free expression in society should not be taken for granted and needed to be safeguarded and cherished, but “it comes with a price”.
Mr Csoka said: “One of the prices is that people will say things that are puerile and offensive. They may say things that are hurtful or in bad taste.
“They may get it wrong with a wind-up. They may not realise the impact of what they say.
“But those are all things, are they not, that can be tolerated and the reason they can is because freedom of speech is so important.
“What we say is that these idiotic or, at times, even offensive, shocking tweets do not go beyond the line. They don’t become grossly offensive.”
Barton, of Widnes, denies 12 counts of sending a grossly offensive electronic communication with intent to cause distress or anxiety between January and March last year.