Isabel Vaughan-Spruce: the ‘crime’ of silent prayer

In December 2022, a charity worker, Isabel Vaughan-Spruce was arrested and charged on four counts after she told the police that she ‘might’ be praying silently in her head outside an abortion clinic, within the 150 metre ‘buffer’ or ‘safe access zone’ that has been created by some local councils. She was also searched and interrogated by the police for what was, essentially a ‘thoughtcrime’. This concept was first introduced into the English language by George Orwell, who used it frequently in his dystopian novel 1984. For example any notions such as ‘feeling a sexual desire towards another person, negative thoughts against Big Brother and doubting Oceania’s war’ you would be arrested by the party and tortured to your death.

When I first heard about this case it made me feel sick. After watching the video, I started to think about what sort of country we are and who is letting these fools run it. In fact, we are ruled (at least nominally) by a monarch who is the supreme head of the Church of England; therefore, I do not understand why engaging in prayer is considered an offence in the first place. Perhaps King Charles III could be doing more? Fortunately, the arrest of Vaughan-Spruce sparked fury in her supporters, and in February she was acquitted.

However, weeks after being found not guilty, she was arrested for the second time for the ‘offence’ of silently praying in her head again, within the exclusion zone. They charged her on the basis that her silent prayers amounted to ‘intimidation’ of mothers attending the abortion clinic.

How can she be intimidating someone if she is thinking in her head? The accusation is bizarre. She was also prohibited from attending an area within the vicinity of the abortion clinic. As if this case were not already ludicrous, the prosecutors were asked to provide evidence to the court to substantiate the ‘thoughtcrime’. Needless to say, they did not find any and her name was cleared once again. This should not be a law in the first place and surely if someone has been arrested twice and found innocent on both occasions, it should make the MPs overturn the law and allow praying outside of an abortion clinic. The fact that it is possible to be prosecuted for praying in your head shows the desperation in some circles for ‘thoughtcrime’ to exist.

The police officers have obviously not done their research properly, but they should know the law. The Public Order Bill contains powers to make it an offence to interfere with, intimidate or harass women accessing, or people providing, abortion services. Protesters found guilty of breaching the ‘safe access zone’ could be fined. Vaughan-Spruce was not protesting as she had no banner stating what she was thinking; she was alone, and she was not voicing her objections.

While worse crimes are being committed–for example murder, robberies, arson and espionage–these police officers decided to interrogate, search and arrest a woman who was standing in the street praying in her head. It is frightening to think that we can be accused, essentially, of thinking and I do not understand the people who embolden a world where Orwell’s predictions come true. Free speech is already under threat, but this goes beyond free speech. This is about ‘free thought’, which according to Wikipedia is ‘an epistemological viewpoint which holds that beliefs should be reached by methods such as logic, reason and empirical observation instead of authority, tradition, revelation or dogma.’ My guess is that this is not in Mr Plod’s handbook.

Jack Watson is a Year 9 student at Sirius North Academy, Kingston upon Hull. He blogs about being a Hull City fan at Ten Foot Tigers