Graham Linehan the creator of Father Ted was arrested by five armed police at Heathrow Airport over a simple tweet about trans people.

The Conservatives have slammed the arrest as “ridiculous” and the police have been accused of “arresting people for making jokes.”

He was detained by five armed cops at Heathrow after he flew from Arizona after he made three tweets.

Author and campaigner JK Rowling said the arrest of the Father Ted creator is “totalitarianism” and “deplorable.”

Linehan was arrested and taken to a police cell then questioned over the posts he wrote some four months ago, it has been reported that part of his bail conditions means he is not allowed the freedom of speech or expression to post on X.

Read more related news:

‘What the f*** has the UK become?’ as Father Ted creator arrested by the Met ‘for making jokes’ on X

Starmer and Cooper branded ‘callous’ and accused of hating the public over free speech

Starmer told ‘no US free trade without free speech’ in a brilliant attack on the thought police

Farage to embarrass Stazi government at US Congress as the UK has ‘lost its way’ with freedom of speech

As such the Free Speech Union has declared that Linehan is “striking back” following his “wrongful arrest.”

A spokesman from the Free Speech Union said, “Daniel Berke, a top free speech solicitor, is to represent Graham in claims for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment, and breaches of his free speech rights.

“We want to send the police a message with this case.”

On Wednesday the Metropolitan Police chief has said that his coppers must not be “policing toxic culture wars debates,” which comes as legal action is being launched.

Sir Mark Rowley said this in response to the deplorable arrest of Linehan over simple social media post, he is calling for the law to be changed and said his officers will only take action “where there is a clear risk of harm or disorder,” on social media.

Rowley said in a statement, “On Monday, officers arrested a man in his 50s at Heathrow in relation to allegations of inciting violence, linked to posts on X.

The officers involved in the arrest had reasonable grounds to believe an offence had been committed under the Public Order Act.

While the decision to investigate and ultimately arrest the man was made within existing legislation, which dictates that a threat to punch someone from a protected group could be an offence, I understand the concern caused by such incidents given differing perspectives on the balance between free speech and the risks of inciting violence in the real world.

Most reasonable people would agree that genuine threats of physical violence against an identified person or group should be acted upon by officers. Such actions can and do have serious and violent real-world implications.”

The statement continued: “When it comes to lesser cases, where there is ambiguity in terms of intent and harm, policing has been left between a rock and a hard place by successive governments who have given officers no choice but to record such incidents as crimes when they’re reported.

“Then they are obliged to follow all lines of enquiry and take action as appropriate. I don’t believe we should be policing toxic culture wars debates and officers are currently in an impossible position.

I have offered to provide suggestions to the Home Office on where the law and policy should be clarified. Greater clarity and common sense would enable us to limit the resources we dedicate to tackling online statements to those cases creating real threats in the real world. If agreed, we could be ready to test new approaches quickly, within a matter of weeks.

“As an immediate way of protecting our officers from the situation we find ourselves in today, we will be putting in place a more stringent triaging process to make sure only the most serious cases are taken forward in future, where there is a clear risk of harm or disorder.”