Does a viral post correctly describe two criminal cases when it claims "three British men" were jailed longer than an "illegal migrant rapist" asylum seeker they protested against? No, that's not true. According to court records, the men were caught on video clashing with the police, and the judge made it clear that it was not protesting that brought them to jail, it was violent disorder. While an asylum seeker living at the hotel that was the scene of the protest did commit a crime, it was a sexual assault that did not amount to rape, the sentencing remarks show, and he was jailed and deported.
The claim originated from a post (archived here) published on TikTok on January 24, 2026. The text across the video read:
I've had enough of this now. Protecting a PDF file makes you culpable in their crimes. You're just as bad as the offender. 😡In the UK, three British men who protested because a young girl was r*ped by an illegal migrant have been jailed for a longer period than the illegal migrant r*pist. 😢
Please make any of this make sense.
#fyp #for #foru #foruyou #foryoupage❤️❤️ @The patriotic photographer. @👑👸 QUEEN FIXER CLAIRE 👑👸 @thumbgirl @Jo🏴Gen⚔️ArmyMajor @2 Angry Vets @RachaelH92🪷 @TikTokTaxiChick @Khadeja / Disgruntled Citizen @Lylas Law
On February 11, 2026, the same video was shared (archived here) by Elon Musk on X. This is what it looked like at the time of writing:
(Image source: Lead Stories screenshot of post at x.com/elonmusk)
The photos of the three men originally appeared in a press release (archived here) issued by the Essex police. It read:
Three men have been jailed for a total of more than six years after committing violent disorder in Epping while officers had tried to facilitate a peaceful protest.
Each of the men had been seen on body worn video acting violently during disorder...
Each of the men were subsequently charged with violent disorder.
They admitted their offences at an earlier hearing ...
The sentencing remarks (archived here) detail the events of July 17, 2025:
That day, the manager of the Bell Hotel received a call from an unknown male, asking 'Are you ready for tonight?' Further phone calls were received by police, describing that group chats had been established to organise attendance at the Bell Hotel. Police were informed that attendees had been advised to 'mask up' and bring 'rage', and that the plan was to attack migrants at the hotel for being 'racist scum.
At its peak, the protest involved approximately 500 people gathered outside the Bell Hotel. Officers were subject to sustained attacks for many hours, including being pelted with 2 bottles, eggs and other objects. A counter-protest, in support of the refugees, was also organised, but unable to take place, being driven into retreat by aggressors...
According to the court records, Stuart Williams (26), Dean Smith (51) and Martin Peagram (33) were seen clashing with the police, and the judge emphasized:
Let me make plain--attending a protest is not the issue, and that is not what you are being sentenced for. But what each of you did went beyond attendance at a protest, and that became criminal when you acted as you did.
At the time, the Bell Hotel, which became the scene of disorder, was used to house asylum seekers (archived here).
What preceded that was the case of 38-year-old Hadush Geberslasie Kebatu, who was found guilty of sexual assault of a 14-year-old female victim and jailed for that. Later, in the fall of 2025, he was deported to Ethiopia (archived here).
Contrary to the claim on social media, Kebatu did not rape a minor.
The sentencing remarks (archived here) describe the nature of his offense:
On the 7th July [2025 - LS] you approached V1 [victim 1 - LS], a 14 year old girl and her friends. You told V1 and her friend that they were pretty, that you wanted to have babies with them and you invited them back to the Bell Hotel. You followed them around the Epping area. When you encountered them again you made inappropriate remarks. You offered V1, and her friends, some alcohol. None of them took this from you. You attempted to kiss V1 and she moved her head away to prevent you doing so...
The judge described the events of the next day as "the most serious of the offences" committed by Kebatu:
...on the 8th July you made contact with V1, touching her thigh when you sat next to her on a bench and as you made inappropriate comments to her.
...on 8th July 2025, having approached V1 and her friends and continuing with your inappropriate behaviour, you asked V1 to kiss W1. Of course, she had told you that he was her boyfriend in an attempt to dissuade you from pestering her. She thought that if she kissed W1, you might get the point and leave her alone. It did not have that effect. It had very much the opposite effect. You became visibly aroused at this stage, and it must have been disgusting and sickening for V1 to have realised what had occurred.
