An army veteran defiantly breached the ‘buffer zone.’

LONDON — Today, a British army veteran who deployed to Afghanistan was found guilty of praying in silence outside an English abortion clinic.

The Poole Magistrates Court in Poole, close to Bournemouth, Dorset, England, ruled that Adam Smith-Connor had violated a Public Spaces Protection Order by doing this.

After reviewing the case, the court issued a conditional discharge for Mr. Smith-Connor. Mr. Smith-Connor will only face sentencing if he is found guilty of additional offenses within the next two years.

According to Smith-Connor, “the court has decided that certain thoughts—silent thoughts—can be illegal in the United Kingdom today.” “That cannot be right. All I did was pray to God in the privacy of my mind, and yet I stand convicted as a criminal?”

The court found Smith-Connor guilty of an act of “disapproval of abortion,” though he was only thinking about his son, who had been aborted many years before, according to Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) International.

Smith-Connor had slightly bowed his head and clasped his hands in prayer on a public green in a buffer zone near the abortion facility in Orphir Road, Bournemouth, in November 2022. During a confrontation with police officers that he recorded, they asked him, “What is the nature of your prayer?”

The streets close to the abortion clinic were previously subject to a Public Spaces Protection Order, which established the buffer zone. The Public Spaces Protection Order established a buffer zone to prevent pro-life activities near the facility, such as offering prayers or assistance to women facing crisis pregnancies, according to a press release from ADF International.

Defense attorneys argued that Smith-Connor’s prayerful thoughts, beliefs, and opinions were not a crime, especially as he stood peacefully and silently on a public street. He stood behind a tree, spoke to no one, and had his back to the facility.

The court also ordered the father of two children to pay 9,000 British pounds (USD 11,700) in prosecution costs.

Mr. Smith-Connor considered the court ruling made by a panel representing the nation where he had served as a soldier.

During my 20-year service in the Army Reserves, I completed a tour of duty in Afghanistan to protect the core liberties that form the foundation of our country. I carry that service ethic as a volunteer in the church and as a healthcare professional.

I am deeply troubled by the erosion of our freedoms and the prosecution of thought crimes in the U.K.

After the ruling, Jeremiah Igunnubole, legal counsel for ADF UK, called the result a “legal turning point of immense proportions.”

“A man has been convicted today because of the content of his thoughts—his prayers to God—on the public streets of England,” Igunnubole said. “We can hardly sink any lower in neglecting basic freedoms of free speech and thought.”

He said ADF International would look closely at the judgment and consider options for appeal.

“Human rights are for all people—no matter their view on abortion,” Igunnubole said.

Sir Edward Leigh, “Father of the House of Commons,” meaning the most senior member of parliament, expressed outrage at the outcome.

In 2024, in the United Kingdom, Leigh expressed his dismay that someone could face trial simply for quietly praying within the confines of their thoughts.” Unfortunately, we have seen repeated free speech cases under threat in the U.K. regarding the expression of Christian beliefs. To offer a prayer silently in the depths of your heart cannot be an offense.

It is imperative that the government promptly clarifies the protection of freedom of thought as a fundamental human right.

ADF International stated that Bournemouth, Christchurch & Poole Council spent 90,000 British pounds (USD 116,990) prosecuting the former soldier for praying, an offense that carried a maximum penalty of 1,000 British pounds (USD 1,300).

Former U.K. Member of Parliament Miriam Cates reacted to funds spent on prosecution for praying.

“This isn’t ‘1984,’ but 2024. Nobody should be on trial for the mere thoughts they hold in their mind,” Cates said. “It’s outrageous that the local council is pouring taxpayer funding into prosecuting a thought crime when resources are stretched thin.”

She said buffer zone regulations are disproportionately wide, leaving innocent people vulnerable to prosecution simply for offering help or holding their own beliefs.

Five U.K. councils implemented buffer zones near abortion clinics, and the recently elected Labour Government has vowed to enforce zones near abortion clinics across the country under the Public Order Act on October 31. This move bans any attempt to “influence” a woman’s decision to access abortion services, according to ADF International.

Igunnubole pointed out the discrepancies in interpreting what “influence” means.

“We all influence each other’s decisions all the time—be it through the advice of a parent, the concern of a friend, or the information made available through a charitable volunteer,” he said. “But the Public Order Act is written so vaguely that these everyday, peaceful, caring conversations could be made illegal on certain streets of England when it comes to discussing abortion.”

Igunnubole referred to international law protecting freedom of thought and speech, arguing that these allowed consensual conversations or silent prayers.

“Yet the lack of clarity in the law could result in many more citizens like Adam being interrogated or even charged for simply directing silent thoughts towards God,” he said. “This is a watershed moment for British freedoms, and one the public must not take lightly.”

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, director of the pro-life organization U.K. March for Life, recently received compensation after police officers arrested her for praying near an abortion clinic.