Last year, the charity Friends of the Dales launched a new campaign calling for an end to the criminal killing of birds of prey in the Yorkshire Dales National Park.
The charity’s Eyes on the Skies campaign, which aims to raise awareness about raptor persecution, launched in October 2025 with a free webinar featuring Kate Jennings, UK Head of Site Conservation & Species Policy at the RSPB, who talked about the work of the RSPB’s Investigations Team and reiterated the RSPB’s stance on licensing for gamebird shooting due to its links to illegal raptor persecution.
Since then there have been two further webinars, one by Detective Inspector Mark Harrison from the National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU) (available on YouTube, here), and another by Indy Kiemel Greene and Adrian Rowe from the charity Hen Harrier Action (available on YouTube, here).
I was due to give a presentation in this series in March this year, but due to unforeseen circumstances I had to postpone. My talk has been re-scheduled for this Wednesday (20 May), from 17.30hrs to 19.00hrs. I’m told a few hundred people have already signed up and spaces are still available to book here (it’s free!).
Friends of the Dales has been advertising my talk across social media:
Predictably, this has led to an avalanche of misogynistic personal abuse from some within the game shooting / hunting industry who seem to think (I’m being generous) this is acceptable behaviour. Here’s a small selection:
Given that they’ve openly posted these comments, under their own names, on the Facebook page of Friends of the Dales, they’re worth a closer look.
When seen collectively, it’s not difficult to spot their shared characteristics. Oh, and is that a National Gamekeepers Organisation tie and badge? And is that a Scottish Gamekeepers Association car sticker? Aren’t these the organisations that claim their members are the victims of so-called ‘hate speech’ from conservationists? Honestly, you couldn’t make it up!
I was at a conference recently where three separate people, whom I’d never met before, came up to say hello and the first question they each asked was along the lines of, ‘How do you deal with the abuse?’.
The answer isn’t straightforward because it’s very much dependent on the context, who it is, whether they’ve posted photographs of my house or car online, whether they’ve published my address and phone number, whether they turn up to events I’m attending, whether I feel threatened, whether it amounts to harassment and/or stalking, or whether it’s just a one-off abusive comment from someone I’ve never heard of and will never hear from again and so the comment is of no consequence to me because, frankly, why would it be?
What’s more sinister, in my view, is the targeted and coordinated attacks by organisations within the game shooting industry on the Chair and the Trustees of Friends of the Dales, simply for launching the Eyes on the Skies campaign to raise awareness of the illegal killing of birds of prey in what is a well-known hotspot for raptor persecution.
Some of the attacks amount to a nasty little smear campaign, undertaken routinely by an anonymous astroturf group which is clearly being funded by well-heeled members of the grouse shooting industry but who don’t want their names associated with the hate campaign, at least not publicly.
Other attacks, by other shooting industry organisations but still working as a coordinated overall attack, amounts to more formal threats like making a complaint to the Charity Commission. Again, a familiar tactic designed to warn off the campaigners. It looks to me like classic intimidation tactics from an industry that really doesn’t like the spotlight being aimed at the criminality within.
Kudos to Friends of the Dales, managed and governed by decent people who care about their local environment and who are, simply and legitimately, campaigning for an end to the illegal killing of birds of prey.
If you want to show your support for them, tune in to the live webinar on Wednesday (book here) and/or sign this petition from Friends of the Dales to the UK Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Mary Creagh MP) to bring in legal reform to help stop the illegal persecution of birds of prey.
Raptor Persecution UK 
So sorry you’re having to deal with this outrageous abuse – keep up the good work! X
Thanks, Steph, I intend to stay around!
Ditto what Steph said, please keep up this good work. I will be tuning in tomorrow – booked it month ago.
A motley collection of mankind’s finest
God what awful people there are out there, sorry you have to face this malicious (and should be illegal) threatening behaviour. I’m sure you know there are thousands of people who support you and your efforts. 👏 Looking forward to the talk. Let’s hope the campaign helps to put you out of a job by ending persecution of our raptors
that xxxxx Murray has been trolling for years. There should be litigation against that xxxxx.
He’s a real charmer. And an absolute devil with the ladies, no doubt.
Of course, we in Animal Interfaith Alliance support you wholeheartedly and very much appreciate all your work, Ruth.
These men damn themselves out of their own mouths.
Not a man among ’em. Just cowards.
Oh my goodness Ruth , some lovely comments from some lovely people NOT , I know you will rise above the idiots and their abuse , take care x
What thoroughly vile individuals, spouting their Trumpian style verbal slop. Well done to you, the Friends of the Dales and all other groups shining a light on these ‘people’.
Well, it goes to prove what type of person is associated with the shooting industry. Your bravery and resilience are shining examples of the good that holds the opposite views. A donation to WildJustice on its way to slightly counterbalance them!
I really like the way you have worded the post. That is telling them and us how it is. I hope that it does not result in more aggressive responses from these criminals. I and many others wish you well and admire everything you do.
Ian Bruce advertises he does dogging – nice one mate! 🤣
These people are horrible without doubt, enabled to be deliberately offensive by social media, in real life face to face most wouldn’t dare for fear of looking what they are. One can only have huge admiration for folk like Ruth, Chris Packham, Mark Avery and their like who prominently put their heads above the parapet and poke the hornets nest of comfortable wilful blindness in those in “country sports.” By and large the have to resort to insult, and threat because the facts overwhelmingly speak for themselves, game shooting is rife with criminality and they know it. Forty even 20 years ago you could have reasonable debate with such folk and a frank exchange of points of view and ideas but largely that time has long gone. Like the hunting fraternity before them they have pulled up the drawbridge and rather than help solve the problems in their midst have become overdefensive, aggressive and close minded over what is frankly indefensible, it is playing the victim card often familiar in international politics. Personal attack replaces reasoned argument because for much of the time they have no real defence against the facts. Driven grouse shooting relies on what we now know are awful land management practices, that are dreadful for the environment and real biodiversity on behalf of the selfish few. Pheasant and partridge shooting is different but equally troubling, not least in the millions of alien birds released per annum that cannot but hugely perturb native ecology for the worse. I have huge admiration for the folk like Ruth who take that fight for truth and justice on and face the awful behaviour of these louts, braggards and the like. Without them we would be much the poorer in our desire to stop wildlife crime and the selfish environmental criminality associated with shooting and other so called country sports.
Contrast the volume, aggression and nastiness of the comments coming from the keepering/shooting rank & file with what they say on actual persecution cases. I poked about a fair bit across shooting social media to see the responses to the Racster Dingwall / Grassington case. Hardly a word said anywhere – I could count the truly condemnatory comments on one hand. Most others were efforts to diminish, obfuscate or distract.
This is adding luminous paint and flashing lights to the elephant bursting out of the room.
I have also noticed what I think is the coordinated targeting of “Friends of the Dales” and targeting of its founders and speakers (including the Police), right across platforms such as the Regional Moorland Groups and C4PMC.
I know these tactics provide succour to the natural supporters, but I don’t think they have assessed how it looks to neutrals. I would say they are slowly but surely digging their own grave in this regard.
I used to do much the same with the pro shooting lobby groups on Facebook but now find myself banned from almost all. Tells you all you need o know about honest debate and their attitude to those of a different opinion. Their persecution complex is huge and brooks no other opinions. The Dingwall case was a very good case in point, I wonder ( I have a reasonable idea) who he works for now and at what as he lives in a small village largely owned by shooting estate owners. Says a great deal more than we ever could about the real attitudes of such people.
Agreed. If a fellow is regarded as keepering gold-dust, a man who can “turn a moor around” or “maximise” or “resuscitate” a “neglected” or “underperforming” moor, then (provided he has done nothing to upset the owner and agent class) someone will want to employ him somewhere. That is the indisputable fact. The “best” keepers can make Owners dreams come true regards producing grouse numbers and cranking up the capital value of their estates.
The unfortunate ones that “never work as a keeper again” as these ignorant or biased Judges seem to bleet in their sentencing (to justify a mere slap on the wrist), are usually the blokes that were seen as performing at or below average prior to their getting caught.
Repellent. Social media is a scourge of modern life. It is, as usual: I don’t agree with you so I will abuse you. The comments are predictably inarticulate, without grammar and demonstrably ill-educated. I say this as a hunter and falconer who also has been on the receiving end of similar unpleasantness. To disagree is legitimate and should be done politely and intelligently. I often don’t agree with what is written here but will defend your right to make your views politely. I am embarrassed to see that some are falconers, a sport recognised by UNESCO and which I have spent over forty years defending.
Well done Ruth, I tremendously admire your honesty and fortitude in the face of evil abuse: it cannot be easy.
You would have thought that these dumbos would have realised by now that each time they spew out their foul invective they effectively condemn themselves out of their own mouths. Well done Ruth and Co.
After having followed this issue for closely for a number of years, I’ve come to the conclusion that the World of the gamekeeper is rather a peculiar and lonely one, with few peers to comment upon their behaviour. Most of them have been doing it all of their lives and from looking at the pictures that Ruth has provided few of them are actually in the first flush of youth.
I suspect that most of them now find themselves in a position of having had a low salary all of their career and dependent upon a tied cottage. It may well have helped them get the girl when they were 16 or 17, leaving school with few qualifications when everybody else studied for A levels and University but later on in life they’re now facing a rather grim future, probably having to work until they drop otherwise they lose their house and try to live off the state pension with no home of their own.
Anyone who challenges what they do receives an aggressive and abusive response because that’s basically all they’ve got left. The so-called “antis” are much more of a threat then the rest of us can imagine, but it doesn’t excuse what they do.
I just wondered if it’s worth saving these comments on social media because I know that they are reviewed by the police now when applications or re applications for shotgun licences are considered in the light of the Plymouth killings a few years ago. Of course I could be wrong in all of this and more than happy for anyone to contradict me but I can only say keep going Ruth there’s a lot more people support you that are against you.
One aspect that has changed in the last couple of decades is the stereotype about underpaid keepers living in damp hovels, with crap vehicles and out of date gear. The best of the best estates (I’m talking grouse here) and the agents that manage them approach things differently on a shrewd business basis. They invest highly , and expect highly. They offer very good renumeration, good housing and vehicles and sometimes private health care to keepers. Equipment such as night vision kit, thermal, drones, ATV’s is provided at a high standard. In return they measure carefully the results on each persons beat and on the estate as a whole, in terms of the 5, 10, 25 yr bag averages, brace (numbers of grouse) shot per acre, and comparisons to next door estates. A beatkeeper doesn’t produce? He is under the scrutiny of the Headkeeper. A Headkeeper doesn’t produce overall? He is under the scrutiny of the Agent / Owner. Then they all know they are under pressure – with a good lifestyle for them and their families at risk of losing.
So very sorry you have to put up with the awful abuse Ruth, you have to be strong minded to keep going! What a star you are – much respect.
They fall under my defination of “Vermin” – keep up the good work Ruth as any decent person recognises your efforts
We will not change estate owners or gamekeepers. There will be a hard core of shooters who are immovable participants.
So how do we persuade casual participants and corporate entities that their sponsorship of this despicable industry does not stand up to any form of wider public acceptability, scrutiny or legality in the times that we now live. We need to concentrate on tackling the economics of the shooting industry by helping to turn off a key element of their income, imo.
Any thoughts or ideas. It seems to me that the Hunt Saboteurs Assoc are tackling similar issues in a far better way.
“It seems to me that the Hunt Saboteurs Assoc are tackling similar issues in a far better way.”
The HSA disrupt hunting with dogs because it is illegal, whereas shooting is not. That is a BIG difference.. never mind the logistical issues involved.
“So how do we persuade casual participants and corporate entities that their sponsorship of this despicable industry does not stand up to any form of wider public acceptability, scrutiny or legality in the times that we now live.”
By persuading Parliament that shooting is seriously detrimental to our environment at every level. That a clear majority of MPs do not yet agree with that says a lot about their collective lack of understanding.
Well that is me put in my place.
“That a clear majority of MPs do not yet agree with that says a lot about their collective lack of understanding.”
Parliament and its MPs are about to agree to ban trail hunting as a direct result of pressure bought by HSA. That was the point I was trying to make. As we all know – shooting birds of prey is illegal and is inextricably linked to game shooting.
Bye
“Parliament and its MPs are about to agree to ban trail hunting as a direct result of pressure bought by HSA.”
Not by the HSA alone: the LACS and, to a lesser extent, the RSPCA have all brought pressure on Westminster to ban trail hunting. I know because I am a member of all of them.
All three are also opposed to game shooting. But your claim that “the Hunt Saboteurs Assoc are tackling similar issues in a far better way.” isn’t true, because of the reasons I have tried to explain.
“As we all know – shooting birds of prey is illegal and is inextricably linked to game shooting.”
Yes, but you cannot directly disrupt the illegal killing of birds of prey by mass interventions for very obvious reasons, and any attempted mass disruptions of legal game shooting could result in lots of arrests.
All HSA members have jobs and responsibilities.
In fact, the most effective way (so far) in tackling the illegal killing of birds of prey is being done not by the HSA but by the RSPB (of which I am also a member).
The HSA do sometimes conduct mass monitoring of some shoots, but that has never resulted in any criminal prosecutions or official warnings of the participants (AFAIK) as has happened frequently – and over a l o n g period of time – with participants of so-called trail hunts actually illegally hunting and killing foxes in front of HSA cameras, among other abuses.
Why not join these organisations?
I have been a member of all of the organisations you mention and have been for many years. I also financially contribute to them all and specifically the RSPB Investigations Team !!!!!
RSPB Investigations (the direct fund) for me too Swaledale. The Police just will not (or maybe cannot as their hands are tied) do the stunningly obvious thing that really worries those that are at it and gets convictions…i.e. put some bloody cameras out in the known hotspots! I was trying to think of cases where convictions had happened with only the Police involved, and I’m struggling. This is why the shooting industry are desperate to try and get the RSPB staff out of the woods and off the moors, they know that without the RSPB the Police alone are no threat to the status quo.
Thanks for your response. Every time their evidence is presented in court I send them £50. £150 so far this year. Money very well spent.
“The Police just will not (or maybe cannot as their hands are tied) do the stunningly obvious thing that really worries those that are at it and gets convictions…i.e. put some bloody cameras out in the known hotspots!”
But they do! Operation Glassbeak comes to mind, where they used covert webcams at Peregrine Falcon nesting-failure hotspots…
https://www.scotland.police.uk/what-s-happening/news/2025/october/peregrine-falcon-breeding-season-supported-during-operation-glassbeak-in-scotland/
“This is why the shooting industry are desperate to try and get the RSPB staff out of the woods and off the moors, they know that without the RSPB the Police alone are no threat to the status quo.”
As always, it is a matter of the relative resources available between the local Police force and a national body such as the RSPB to dedicate days on end in remote locations for covert surveillance. So long as the Home Office refuse to make wildlife crime either a reportable or notifiable offence, even wildlife crime involving guns, there will never be the official crime statistics for any Chief Constable to easily justify the effort required:-(
So that makes it a political matter!
This entire issue of Policing wildlife crime in remote areas – cameras, covert surveillance, gathering evidence and the complete lack of successful convictions – was dealt with by Detective Inspector Mark Harrison of the NWCU very comprehensively and honestly in the Friends of the Dales webinar.
There are some comments which some might find questionable, but – overwhelmingly – this is far and away the best exposition of the current difficulties the Police face in fighting this type of crime.
No one seriously concerned about wildlife crime and how to police it can afford not to watch it:
https://www.youtube.com/@friendsofthedales
Look for: Protecting Birds of Prey – Inside the Work of UK Wildlife Crime Policing
12 Feb 2026
Hi Keith, I detect a bit of devil’s advocate? You probably know I am not referring to standalone and special initiatives like Operation Glassbeak. How many police cameras do you think are currently and routinely “rolling” in the ordinary course of events at hotspots that are so well known they should have signs up. Such as at a score of valleys, hillsides and gills in the YD alone where the same things happen every year and occasionally evidence such as body parts, tags and tracking data , and RSPB obtained footage of keepers throws some light. I will give you my figure of how many cameras I think the Police have out there right now. A big zero! DI Harrison (a good man no doubt but in one of the most frustrating jobs I can imagine) said recently “we cannot enforce our way out of this”* or words to that effect. How does he know? We haven’t tried. 100 cameras, 25 locations, average 4 per location – give it 3 years and let’s see what we have stirred up. We all suffer to live in an intensely “surveillance society” where we are all under the gaze of hundreds of cameras just going about our innocent lives. But just not in the hundreds of thousands of acres of private grouse moors apparently – unless you count the keepers that are watching us all from their drones !
*I dearly hope this isn’t a hint to regressing to “getting around the table’ with the landowners and other talking-shop fake initiatives, which would be to repeat decades of mistakes and wasted time.
Have you watched the video?
I believe so, as I try to follow as much media as I can from all sides at all times. But I will look again to be sure.
Just checked, yes I had seen it and have just sped through it again. It was the video that caused him to get a lot of shit on social media stirred up by several unpleasant pro- industry campaign groups. Like I said he is a good man in what I think is a very frustrating job. I genuinely don’t think I have missed anything regards cameras though? As I remember it, he wrote letters to the moor owners in YD requesting a free hand to put cameras in. They ignored him. And to date the police haven’t put cameras in – to best of my knowledge. My personal reading of it is that he knows that shit is still happening but because tagged harriers have been spared in the last two years in his handful of identified locations, he cannot get the greenlight from above to do it. I say that his hands are being tied and he does not have freedom to do the obvious and relatively cheap strategy. I would love to be wrong and have hopes something will change, as I think he is the right man for the job in terms of knowledge and motivation.
“As I remember it, he wrote letters to the moor owners in YD requesting a free hand to put cameras in. They ignored him. And to date the police haven’t put cameras in – to best of my knowledge….
I say that his hands are being tied and he does not have freedom to do the obvious and relatively cheap strategy.”
The real issue that holds back proactive, official, Police surveillance activity on private land is that wildlife crime is not a notifiable offence. Therefore, no one, from the Home Office down to Chief Constables, the general public and their elected representatives, know the extent of wildlife crime in any particular area.
Therefore, there is no requirement – or ability – to report such figures to Parliament each year, which means no annual scrutiny.
Even wildlife crime involving guns is not an officially notifiable offence:-(
The landed gentry – and the shooting industry – have ensured this state of affairs over centuries.
All wildlife crimes are therefore lumped together with lots of other crimes and together classed as miscellaneous.
When Chief Constables (Police and Crime Commissioners – soon to be scrapped) assess their crime prevention priorities against their annual budget, there is no metric available to them to gauge the cost-effectiveness of such surveillance.
If you want to appreciate just how far down wildlife crime is in official Police statistics then DI Mark Harrison of the NWCU pointed out – in that very video – that no Police Officers are paid to train for the NWCU. They are all volunteers for job, and train themselves at their own expense and in their own time!
That makes it a political issue. We need to change the Home Office’s attitude to wildlife crime, or nothing will seriously change on the detection front.
“I have been a member of all of the organisations you mention and have been for many years.”
Good. But it makes your claim that “It seems to me that the Hunt Saboteurs Assoc are tackling similar issues in a far better way” all the more bizarre, since you must therefore know that the HSA have never successfully prosecuted anyone for the illegal killing of birds of prey.
Unlike the post office they do not have the powers to prosecute.
“Unlike the post office they do not have the powers to prosecute”
You are exposing a level of ignorance, here, I’m afraid.
Anyone in England and Wales has the power to bring a private prosecution.
From: https://www.cps.gov.uk/prosecution-guidance/private-prosecutions
“The right to bring private prosecutions is preserved by section 6(1) of the Prosecution of Offences Act (POA) 1985“
If you are not legally qualified, yourself, to appear in court you must appoint a private prosecution firm to do the job for you.
“Private prosecutions are a vital part of the justice system in England and Wales, allowing individuals and organisations to pursue justice independently, particularly in cases where public bodies, such as the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) or Serious Fraud Office (SFO), have opted not to act.”
The Post Office employed their own legal department to do this for them for years (many, disastrously so:-( which they have now decided to relinquish.
The RSPCA also bring private prosecutions, but they chose to use private legal firms to do so.
So there is NOTHING (legally) to stop the HSA from appointing a private prosecution firm to do the job for them (other than the expense, of course).
Not only have the Hunt Saboteurs Association never privately prosecuted anyone for raptor crime, they have – as far as I know – never supplied any evidence in any CPS prosecution involving raptor crime.
So my point stands.
I have the utmost respect, Ruth, for the way you conduct yourself and this blog, and it sickens me to think about what you have to put up with. I hope it is some consolation to read so many comments from people who support you and all that you do.
Like others, I wonder if the police might take an interest in some of the things the thugs in the shooting business have put their names to.
As others have said it is depressing the abuse you get and I do admire you for being a public figure against raptor crimes. I couldnt do it which is clearly part of why they do it.
I did particularly like Norman Murray’s comment. Claiming you were “very abusive” in a post which otherwise consisted of him hurling abuse at you. I am guessing he hasnt been busy telling all the other charmers that they shouldnt engage in personal abuse against you.
Like all these self-styled “countrymen, he likes to dish it out, but squeals like a baby when he’s challenged. I’m no longer on anti-social media, but regularly used to call his lies out on facebook, by simply posting links to published evidence, or asking him to provide some. Almost every time, he’d accuse me of “trolling” him. What a hypocrite!
Up The Villa!
A sense of irony is evidently not his strong suit! Whilst it must be extremely unpleasant to have to put up with abuse of this kind, the fact that these people resort to spiteful ad hominem insults is a clear indication that they don’t have any better arguments.
Wow, shocking! I guess this form of ‘trolling’ isnt illegal yet, and like so many thngs, wouldnt leave the Police much time todo anything else if it was, but how anyone can support people like this is a sad indictment of the state of our national community; it would however be naive to think it is a new thing, ‘it has got worse’, because the only thing that has changed…probably, is the availability of social media, so abuse can be slung from afar. And from’mature’…sorry ,old men, whose age and position you would thought make the, stop and think.
I guess not.
Keep it up Ruth, with this and W J.
The points I was trying to draw out earlier were
1. The number of hunts is reducing quite rapidly because of the economic pressure placed on them
2. If the law on trail hunting comes in this will further reduce the industry. It will never be eliminated.
3. It is likely that there will be some very experienced Sabs with not a lot to do. A recruitment opportunity.?
4. Obviously there are very clear differences between fox hunting and game shooting and I do not need Keith to tell me that but they both involve the illegal killing of protected species.
5. In the past, sabs have attended grouse shoots to LAWFULLY protest and gained suitable publicity and they are good at it.
6. Mark Avery was saying on his blog recently that we have reached a time where an additional strategy is needed.
Have literally just read the following on the HSA website. Worth sharing with a wider audience I thought
After seeing the footage last week Chris Packham said;
“Snaring is non-selective, savage and should be banned now. This shocking scene reveals the widespread illegal activity associated with the shooting industry and thanks to the sabs it is no longer out of sight and will not be out of the mind of the UK public, a nation of animal lovers who want change now, who want snaring banned now.’
A spokesperson from the Hunt Saboteurs Association said;
“We were angered to see signs of animal torture, though with the blatant positioning of this snare, set at badger height almost in the entrance to a badger sett, it would be unsurprising if the Welbeck gamekeepers hadn’t killed a badger here. Despite the shooting industry’s claims of being custodians of the countryside, we know that they will always prioritise their hideous bloodsports. Shooting estates are littered with cruel traps designed to harm and kill, alongside poison; which causes untold suffering to wildlife and the environment and threatens the public’s enjoyment of the natural world.
The King may have forgotten about snaring, but the Hunt Saboteurs Association has not! Boots on the ground will always be the most important defence for wildlife.”
Well it is really good to post a contribution on this site without Keith Dancey acting as judge and jury !!!
Ruth
Your determination and tremendously controlled response to these disgraceful attacks is hugely impressive. It’s easy for people like me to say keep up the great work but, unfortunately, it does take brave individuals like you, Chris Packham, Bob Berzins and Megan McCubbin and great campaign organisations like the Friends of the Dales, the HSA and RSPB Investigations Teams to stand up to and expose these cruel, vile thugs.
BTW, as you will no doubt know, there are various offences regarding threatening and harassing behaviour but the newish Online Safety Act 2023 may be of interest to you and other campaigners.
Online Safety Act 2003
S181
Threatening communications offence
(1) A person commits an offence if—
(a) the person sends a message (see section 182),
(b) the message conveys a threat of death or serious harm, and
(c) at the time of sending it, the person—
(i) intended an individual encountering the message to fear that the threat would be carried out (whether or not by the person sending the message), or
(ii) was reckless as to whether an individual encountering the message would fear that the threat would be carried out (whether or not by the person sending the message).
(2) “Serious harm” means—
(a) serious injury amounting to grievous bodily harm within the meaning of the Offences against the Person Act 1861,
(b) rape,
(c) assault by penetration within the meaning of section 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50/section/181
S182
Interpretation of sections 179 to 181
(1) This section applies for the purposes of sections 179 to 181, and references in this section to an offence are to an offence under section 179 or 181.
(2) A person “sends a message” if the person—
(a) sends, transmits or publishes a communication (including an oral communication) by electronic means, or
(b) sends, or gives to an individual, a letter or a thing of any other description,
and references to a message are to be read accordingly.
(3) A person also “sends a message” if the person—
(a) causes a communication (including an oral communication) to be sent, transmitted or published by electronic means, or
(b) causes a letter or a thing of any other description to be—
(i) sent, or
(ii) given to an individual.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50/section/182
Courage and integrity are the things these people fear most.
Thanks for doing what you do se well, year in, year out. The wider public are learning.