Pictures of aborted foetuses are a record of medical fact, not "grossly offensive".

I think this is a particularly insidious offence against our (largely non-existent) right to free speech : using the law to exclude facts and reality from a debate.

This same judgment could easily be used against journalists trying to expose the brutality of a military occupation (and thus silence critics of the USA, Israel, etc...) or the savage results of sharia law in action (and thus silence critics of Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, etc...).

This conviction was clearly a politically-motivated abuse of the Act it was brought under, and as such represents an abuse against Democracy.

I'm appalled this awful judgment went all the way to the High Court and yet still failed to be put right.