Ricky Jones #

Introduction #

Ricky Jones is a British Labour councillor who has represented the Princes ward on Dartford Borough Council since 2019, and who at the time of the controversy was employed as a full-time official for the Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA) union. He became a national news figure in August 2024, when a video from an anti-racism counter-protest in Walthamstow, east London, showed him calling far-right demonstrators “disgusting Nazi fascists” and telling the crowd: “We need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all,” while drawing a finger across his throat. The clip went viral, Labour suspended him within a day, and he was arrested on suspicion of encouraging murder before being charged with encouraging violent disorder — a charge he denied. In August 2025, a jury at Snaresbrook Crown Court took less than an hour to find him not guilty.

Background Information #

Jones had been a borough councillor in Dartford, Kent, since 2019, representing the town’s Princes ward, and combined the role with his work for the TSSA union. It was from this position — a local Labour representative with a union day job — that the video of the Walthamstow speech catapulted him into a national story about the boundaries of protest rhetoric.

The rally he attended on 7 August 2024 was a counter-protest organised in response to plans for a far-right march outside the Waltham Forest Immigration Bureau, and it took place amid the nationwide violent disorder that followed the murder of three young girls at a dance-themed party in Southport. The Labour Party had written to its councillors reminding them to follow police advice “not to take part in, attend or encourage others to attend, any sort of demonstration or counter demonstration” — but jurors at his trial heard that Jones had been told by the party to stay away from the protest and turned up anyway. He told the court he felt it was his “duty” to attend counter-protests.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation #

During the Walthamstow event, in a speech amplified through a public address system and delivered surrounded by cheering supporters, Jones said of the far-right demonstrators: “They are disgusting Nazi fascists. We need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all.” He drew his finger across his throat as he spoke. A video of the moment spread rapidly on social media after the protest. Prosecutor Ben Holt told his trial that Jones had used “inflammatory, rabble-rousing language in the throng of a crowd” described as a tinderbox, and argued the speech came “in a setting where violence could readily have been anticipated.”

The institutional consequences moved within a day. On 8 August 2024, the Metropolitan Police said a man in his 50s had been arrested in south east London on suspicion of encouraging murder and for an offence under the Public Order Act — an arrest on suspicion, not a finding of guilt — and Jones remained in custody. The Labour Party suspended him the same day, meaning he was unable to sit on the Labour benches at Dartford Borough Council meetings, with a party spokesperson saying: “This behaviour is completely unacceptable and it will not be tolerated.” Reform UK leader Nigel Farage had publicly called on X for Jones to be arrested. He was subsequently charged with one count of encouraging violent disorder, which he denied.

Public Reaction and Consequences #

Jones’s account, given to police and repeated in court, was that the words had not been meant literally. He told police he was “sorry” he made the comments “in the heat of the moment” and had not intended them to be “taken literally by anyone.” He said his remarks were aimed not at rioters but at far-right activists who, he said, had left National Front stickers on a train with razor blades hidden behind them — pictures of which, he told police, had upset him. Giving evidence, he said he was “appalled” by political violence: “I’ve always believed the best way to make people realise who you are and what you are is to do it peacefully.”

The case became a political battleground in its own right. After the verdict, shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: “It is astonishing that this Labour councillor, who was caught on video calling for throats to be slit, is let off scot-free, whereas Lucy Connolly got 31 months prison for posting something no worse,” and warned of what he called two-tier justice. Nigel Farage called the acquittal “another outrageous example of two-tier justice.” A Ministry of Justice spokesperson responded that “Sentencing decisions are made by the independent judiciary and are not for us to comment on.”

Current Status #

Ricky Jones was acquitted. On 15 August 2025, after a trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court, jurors deliberated for just over half an hour before finding him not guilty of encouraging violent disorder. The verdict came almost exactly a year after his arrest, resolved the criminal case in his favour, and left him without a conviction for the speech. His suspension by the Labour Party, however, remained in place at the time of the acquittal: it was understood that a party investigation remained ongoing and that its outcome would decide what happened to his membership.

Impact on Their Career/Life #

The clip outlived the trial. Within 24 hours of the Walthamstow speech, Jones had gone from a Dartford ward councillor and union official to a suspended politician facing a criminal charge, with his name raised in the House of Commons-adjacent debate over how the 2024 disorder was policed and prosecuted. The year of proceedings that followed — arrest, charge, Crown Court trial and national coverage — ended with a jury clearing him in under an hour, but the professional damage was already done and largely stayed done: the Labour suspension imposed the day after the speech continued even after the acquittal, keeping him unable to sit with the party group on Dartford Borough Council while the party investigation ran on. An acquittal means the criminal case cannot be held against him; the open question left at the time of reporting was whether his party, rather than a court, would decide his political future.