News

Street preacher and gun nut beats hate speech conviction

Street preacher and gun nut beats hate speech conviction

Daniel Courney, 33, a deranged evangelist who was convicted earlier this year of using “threatening and discriminatory language” during an anti-Islamic rant in Lincoln, had his conviction overturned this week.

Courney, an American missionary who served in the US military and has been a missionary in Nepal and India for eight years, advocates for arming civilians as passionately as he does for Christianity. The picture above on his Facebook page has this caption:

Hooah. I shot expert (38 of 40) and was able to disassemble and reassemble my M16 A2 in a little over a minute when I was in the service. (If civilians didn’t have firearms, the US wouldn’t be free from tyranny today – for all the nay-sayers out there.)

Courney’s conviction in September this year followed a complaint from a Muslim woman and her family who heard him preaching on the street. She claimed the nutter singled them out, called them “ISIS” and told them to “go back to your country”. As a result, Courney was arrested. He denied the charge but was booked under Section 5 of the Public Order Act for using:

Threatening or abusive words or behaviour or disorderly behaviour within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress.

Adrian Clark, a friend of the evangelist, posted on Facebook on September 14, 2017, that Courney was:

Convicted at Lincoln Magistrate Court by a District Judge on two counts of religious and racially motivated public order offences. Conditional discharge and bound for 9 months. £320 costs. The judge was a impassioned multi-culturalist.

He seemed antagonistic to the one person publicly declaring another’s religious beliefs as being wrong. He trusted the prosecution witnesses despite their glaring inconsistencies. Despite Daniel being a man who serves his community in India and Nepal without fear or favour, (all are subject to his generosity), and courageously protected a Muslim from being beaten in Bristol, this seemed to have had no bearing on the judge’s finding. An appeal has been lodged.

Adrian Clark, a Christian clown in kilt. Photo: Facebook.

I am assuming that this is the same Adrian Clark who had a run-in with the law in Bristol last year when he was arrested along with two fellow street screechers. Michael Overd and Michael Stockwell were convicted February 28 at Bristol Magistrates’ Court of a religiously-aggravated public order offence. Earlier, the court dismissed the case against Clark, ruling that there was no case to answer. In June, Overd and Stockwell won an appeal against their conviction.

During Courney’s appeal, the Christian Legal Centre’s solicitor Michael Phillips argued that  English law provides Courney with the freedom to preach Christianity, and that this has been successfully upheld for many years.

The Crown Court judge agreed and overturned the conviction.

Courney lost no time after his victory to return to the streets of Lincoln to resume spouting his special brand of bullshit. But it didn’t go too well. He claimed in a Facebook post yesterday that he was attacked by two drunk females:

Had two inebriated women assault us tonight. Throw my Bible, my bag (which damaged my Macbook), break my microphone, slightly assault me, and another lady ask me a very crude question. Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do!

Of course, Andrea Williams, above, Chief Executive of the Christian Legal Centre, felt compelled to comment on Courney case. It demonstrated, she said, that police do not “understand” free speech laws.

We are proud to represent street preachers in our country as they share the love of Jesus Christ with people on the street. This case once again highlights the need for police operating in these situations to understand how the law protects free speech.

After his conviction was overturned, Courney said that he had come to the United Kingdom to:

Bring back the message of Jesus Christ. The message is a simple one: repent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and do not follow false religions. Unfortunately, I’ve had to travel to and from the United Kingdom four times in the past three months. I have had other restrictions on my liberty during that time. I have been held in police custody and accused of being a hate preacher. At all times I simply wanted to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Courney thanked the Christian Legal Centre for their help, support and free legal counsel.

In reporting the Courney case, Dorothy Cummings McLean  of Life Site News, said Christian street preachers in the UK are fighting an uphill battle to revive faith in a country where Christianity is on its way to extinction.

Approximately 60 percent of people in the United Kingdom declare themselves to be Christians. But, according to United Kingdom’s “Faith Survey”, the number of Christians born in Britain is falling at a staggering rate. Between 2001 and 2011 the number of Christians born in the U.K. fell by 5.3 million.

“With a continued rate of decline at this level, the number of UK-born Christians would reduce to zero by 2067,” the survey predicted.

38 responses to “Street preacher and gun nut beats hate speech conviction”

  1. Broga says:

    Courney is an example of the kind of person Bertrand Russell identified: “The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent at full of doubt.”

    Religion encourages, indeed creates, certainty in those of limited intelligence.

  2. Mohammed al bash says:

    Its time to preach the gospel of Jesus christ to the whole world a BIG AMEN.Come join us barry duke and be cleance with the blood of Jesus.

  3. andym says:

    We seem to be attracting a more illiterate breed of troll lately.

    I’m still in shock that he won while using the Christian Legal Centre

    Not sure why this was overturned. He seems to have crossed the line from free speech to targeted harassment.

  4. Frank says:

    He would look perfectly at home dressed in Daesh Garb with the black flag in the background and standing over a dead gay man in a pool of blood at the foot of a high building. In fact had he been born in Syria or Iraq then thats probably what he would have turned out to be. There is really not much difference between him and a jihadist … both fundamentally religious, not that bright, impressionable, arrogant, gun loving, bitter, mal adjusted stupefied big mouth halfwit.

  5. John the Drunkard says:

    Um, the number of children ‘born Christian’ in 2001 was ZERO, and fell to ZERO by 2011.

    A rate perfectly matched by Muslim, Sikh, Zoroastrian, Jain, Shintoist children as well.

  6. Barry Duke says:

    Unlike you, Mohammed, I am in full possession of my faculties, so I’ll pass on your invitation to join you in a Jesus blood-bath.

  7. Angela_K says:

    “…do not follow false religions” This idiot doesn’t realise they are all false. Street preachers are an irritant but if we have the time, my partner, who has a very good knowledge of the bible, use this against them to wind them up – great fun!

  8. Cali Ron says:

    Mo al bash: Bathing in blood seems to not only be gruesome, but also an extremely bad way to try and cleanse oneself. I suggest water and soap for cleansing and atheism to cleanse your mind of the religious delusion it has become infected with. And to you a BIG AH MAN, religious claptrap again!

  9. Cali Ron says:

    I am wondering, are Andrea’s eyebrows permanently arched into the ‘WTF’ position from too many cosmetic surgeries or does she spend her whole life in a constant state of awe?

  10. Broga says:

    Mohammed al bash : Your lack of ability to formulate a coherent sentence offers a poor example of the calibre of Jesus’ followers. No thanks.

  11. I can understand fully where you are all coming from, I honestly understand your dislike for street preaching/preachers.

    But I was there that day and he did not break the law, the Muslim lady told lies.

    Now, think about it, please, do you seriously want to see Christian street preachers arrested and charged unlawfully, and their freedom of speech taken away?

    Before you answer that, please remember, if we lose our free speech, then you all lose yours.

  12. StephenJP says:

    “60% of people in the UK declare themselves to be Christians”. That would be the 2011 census figure. The latest British Social Attitudes survey puts it at about 40%. Only 15% are CofE. Less than 2% of the population attend church on a regular Sunday.

    But I would still allow these clowns – in kilts or not – to proclaim their ridiculous dogmas on the streets, provided that the rest of us are equally free to mock and argue back. The open air is the best disinfectant, even against extremism of other faiths. In the long run, the best defence against the likes of Amjad Choudary is not to ban them, but to provide every opportunity to laugh at them.

  13. Barry Duke says:

    Dale, I and many Freethinker supporters are totally in agreement with you. In 2013 I posted this piece. Read the comments it elicted.

    If, as you claim, the Muslim woman lied, then she should be prosecuted for perjury.

  14. Barry, glad to hear there are some reasonable minded folk like yourself.

    All the best to you.

  15. Vanity Unfair says:

    I think Courney overstepped the mark but in a different direction.

    …complaint from a Muslim woman and her family who heard him preaching on the street. She claimed the nutter singled them out, called them “ISIS” and told them to “go back to your country”.

    I think this is actionable as the tort of slander

    https://www.lawontheweb.co.uk/legal-help/libel-and-slander

    Slander is defamation of a person through a transient form of communication, generally speech….
    The claimant must prove in a case of slander that the effect of the defamation has actually been damaging to them….
    However, there are several instances of slander where the damage is assumed and it need not be proven – this is called slander ‘actionable per se’. These include: an accusation of committing an imprisonable crime; of having a contagious disease; or of being incapable in their office, profession or business.

    ISIS is a proscribed organisation and it is a criminal offence to be, or profess to be, a member.
    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/648405/Proscription_website.pdf

    Of course, legal aid for defamation cases is severely limited so the chance of this reaching court is minimal.

    Incidentally, I do not think he is wearing a kilt. The pleating looks wrong and it does not look as though there is a minimum of four yards of material for a lightweight kilt let alone nine yards for a traditional kilt. I think he is wearing a skirt. There is nothing wrong with this, of course; women wearing trousers do not elicit criticism except from some of the weirder fringes of society. He would have seen all sorts of dress conventions in India and Nepal. Is there a kilt expert out there who can give an authoritative opinion?

  16. Duuuhhhuuhuhhh says:

    I knew I’d see Andrea Williams before. Seems evolution is true then.
    https://goo.gl/images/6zkFI8

  17. Angela_K says:

    @Dale, if what you say is true, why did you not go to the Police and make a statement?
    I agree with you about free speech, we should hear these idiots so we can challenge them and laugh at them. Many years ago there was a nutter going on about homosexuality in Taunton [seem to remember him mentioned here] my partner and I “baited”him and did a big sloppy kiss in front him, to applause from some passers by.

  18. Angela, Daniel had witnesses defend him in court and although the magistrates and cps decided to prosecute against all the evidence, he quite rightly won on appeal.

    This shows that justice and truth prevailed.

    On another note, I often wonder why people living homosexual lifestyles feel the need to kiss in front of street preachers or hold hands as they pass by, we get this a lot and perhaps they think they are making some kind of bold statement that will affect the preacher/preaching??

    In reality though it has no effect whatsoever and is a little bit silly to be honest, to the point of childishness.

    We care very little about your chosen sexual preference and care immensely for your soul and where you will spend forever, that is why we preach the good news that all of your sins can be forgiven [no matter what they are] the slate wiped clean and you can have certainty of going to a better place when you die, if of course God grants you repentance and faith in what Jesus Christ did on the cross to save all kinds of sinners from the wrath of God.

    Repent and believe the Gospel before it is too late.

  19. Angela_K says:

    @dale. Childishness is part and parcel of your irrational belief system and your nonsense about sins being forgiven is without evidence and absolute bollocks. The reason my partner and I did what we did was because the preacher was boarding on hate with his rant against LGBT people and it seems you share the same bigoted views.

  20. Barry Duke says:

    @Angela. What we need is more gulls in areas where these crackpots gather. Here’s a piece I wrote last week for Round Town News in Spain.

  21. barriejohn says:

    We care very little about your chosen sexual preference.

    What a load of fucking bollocks! Is he deluded or just an outright liar?

  22. Broga says:

    Dale: ” God grants you repentance and faith in what Jesus Christ did on the cross to save all kinds of sinners from the wrath of God.”

    How do you know? What evidence do you have to support that statement? What do you mean by God?

    I don’t expect you to answer because believers depend on statements without any evidence for them. You have no answers. Prove me wrong. The prime motivation, in my opinion, for “people of faith” believing in a God and a heaven is because they are terrified of death. So they desperately cling to a fantasy.

  23. barriejohn says:

    Vanity Unfair: If that’s a kilt, I’m, erm…a Scotsman!

    Free speech should be sacrosanct, but slander and personal abuse is another thing entirely. Just what happened on this occasion it seems difficult to judge.

  24. Angela_K says:

    I forgot to add in reply to Dale that I had no choice in my sexuality whereas Dale and his bigots do have the choice whether or not to believe a load of superstitious twaddle and then use it to spout hate. And, Dale you don’t care about my sexuality, you just believe it offends your god, which means even according to your silly mythology your god made me the way I am, he/she/it seems to have made you an idiot.

  25. ray metcalfe says:

    Dale why shouldn’t gay people hold hands and kiss in front of you? If I walked by holding my girlfriends hand and kissed her would you think that was different from two men or women kissing. I suspect they are exercising there freedom to live and love as they want. I think it is a way of putting two fingers up at your and your fellow deluded brain dead bigot.If you care little about there sexuality then why do you and your fellow religious preachers come out and say so.

  26. There appears to be, not surprisingly, a distinct lack of tolerance in some of these comments, which is a tad ironic given the title of it, don’t you think?

    I have no desire to alienate myself further from you all and you do have the right to run your website how you see fit, but out of respect for those who have replied to my comment, I will do the same.

    @Broga – the evidence that God exists is that without Him you cannot know anything whatsoever. The reality is that everyone God created knows that He exists and are without excuse on the day of judgement.

    @barriejohn – Your comment did not make any sense I’m afraid. Obviously, I and many other Christians do not believe that people are born with a propensity to commit certain sins, in this context the sin of homosexuality. But why would you accuse me of lying? please explain.

    @Angela – I’m afraid I do not buy into the propaganda the media and government spew out daily. Christians are not driven by political correctness and never will be.

    We are people who know the truth and the truth has set us free, we have been brought out of darkness into God’s marvellous light and cannot go back.

    As for your accusation of bigotry, perhaps you should find out what it means before you use this kind of language?

    ‘Bigotry’ – “The fact of having and expressing strong, unreasonable beliefs and disliking other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life” – Cambridge Dictionary

    @ Ray Metcalf – Please see the above comments.

    Please be tolerant of my beliefs. 🙂

    Thank you for allowing me to post here, I seriously do care for your souls and know for certain that if you die without your sins forgiven, it will not be a happy ending for any of you.

    Repent and believe the Gospel.

    Dale

  27. Angela_K says:

    Freethinking is just that, thinking without the blinkers of religious dogma, examining evidence to determine if something is fact our fiction – something the religious are incapable of doing. Why should I respect your irrational beliefs when they are full of unsupported assertions, superstition and factual errors. Perhaps you’d like to present evidence for your god, heaven, hell and life after death – quite simply you cannot. Your repent nonsense convinces nobody except your deluded self.

  28. Broga says:

    Dale: “The reality is that everyone God created knows that He exists and are without excuse on the day of judgement.”

    I know he doesn’t exist. Or, to be a little circumspect, the character of God as described by Christians means he is vanishingly unlikely. Man in God’s image? Really. With billions of stars and billions of galaxies many light years away why does your God need eyes, arms, heart etc.

    There is no God. He is a fantasy conjured up by ancient primitive men who had no other explanations available. As science advances God retreats. He is used to fill in the gaps in scientific knowledge but he is being pushed out all the time.

    Stop panicking when you cannot find an explanation. Just face the facts and conjure up some intellectually honesty.

  29. Broga – Could you be wrong about everything you claim to know for certain?

  30. barriejohn says:

    We care very little about your chosen sexual preference. Untrue, as you are obsessed with sexual matters!

    My comment makes perfect sense, unlike any of your bilge.

    And there’s no such thing as “sin”, as it only exists in the minds of the religiously deluded.

  31. @barriejohn – Ahh, now I understand your comment better, thank you.

    I am far from obsessed with sexual matters my friend, I am far too busy occupying myself with truth and knowing the God who saved me, this is my obsession.

    It is in the context of concern for men and women’s souls that I wrote “we care very little about people’s chosen sexual preference” This does not mean that it is something we ignore and do not have anything to say on the matter. We have not buried our head in the sand, God’s Word is not silent on the matter of human sexuality and neither are His people.

    Our concern when speaking to folk about their eternity is not their sexual preference, God can save anyone no matter how far they have fallen into sin.

    Your Comment – “And there’s no such thing as sin”

    That’s not what God says.

    .

  32. Marcus says:

    Had Dale Mcalpine spent the £7,000 plus costs he won from the police a while back on a good psychiatrist he would not be posting his delusional claptrap on sites like this. The man is clearly unhinged and I appeal to Barry Duke to block any further posts from this mentally ill troll.

  33. @Marcus Thanks for the link Marcus, usually folk just post links to the arrest and fail to mention the compensation and apology from police that followed.

    I have no desire to upset anyone here, no need to ban or block me, I will not comment again.

    Respect
    Dale

  34. Angela_K says:

    @Marcus.As Dale himself has said, no to block him, he is another hit an run religious fool who disappears when challenged – probably a mate of loony Bob and Seff.

  35. andym says:

    So he is for real. A good example of why society should tolerate religious fanatics,ensure their rights are protected, but their views allowed nowhere near any sort of political power over the lives of others.The basis for his belief system is entirely circular. Broga could be wrong about everything, but a hell of lot of objective,independently verified data would also have to be wrong. Ultimately the only support for this man’s belief system is his own subjectivity-citing the views of similarly-minded others does not count as they are also based on an entirely subjective faith.

  36. barriejohn says:

    @andym: You’re forgetting that God has told him “The Truth”, and, of course, what other possible explanation (for example) could there possibly be for the existence of such a complex organ as the eye than the existence, also, of a divine creator?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-42264946

  37. Broga says:

    Dale. Perhaps I am wrong. But I started out a Christian, tepid and unthinking as most are, and spent much time and effort in trying to discover what was sensible and rational to believe. What I had believed become impossible when examined objectively and with as open a mind as I could summon. You should try it some time.

    I have used the intelligence which you would claim God gave to me. You have rejected it by believing incredible nonsense and, on your terms, insulted your God. What you, and may of like mind, fail to understand is that atheism is not casually reached. A core belief system is personally too important to adopt without much consideration.

    One thing I detest about your fictitious, tyrannical God is his unrestrained cruelty and his insatiable demand to be flattered. He is an unworthy thing, deserving of contempt and rejection, and I give him that in full measure.

  38. Angela_K says:

    @barriejohn. It amuses me when the religious harp on about the “design” of the eye because it could not have evolved. My retort is that if their god designed the human eye then he did a bad job. We have a blind spot, a convex lens that means our brains must invert the image and humans cannot see down in the infra-red or up into ultra-violet as other mammals do.