A Glasgow father accused of being an “invader” who was filming children has raised more than £35,000 to pursue a defamation case against Tommy Robinson.
Quroum Beg says he was recording an anti-immigration protest near his home in the Gorbals when a video of him was published from Robinson’s social media account with a false description of what he was doing. The post was deleted from X and followed by an apology. Robinson later disowned both the original post and the apology, blaming people who administer his accounts.
Beg, 43, has now instructed Glasgow law firm Bannatyne Kirkwood France & Co and launched a CrowdJustice campaign to fund legal action under Scottish defamation law. “I never expected to end up here,” he wrote. “Tommy Robinson’s accusation about me, a Glaswegian dad, went viral before it was ever checked, and I’m not willing to just let that stand, or let him do it again.”
What happened in the park
Beg was in a park near his Gorbals home with his children in July when an anti-immigration protest entered the area. He took his children home before returning to challenge the demonstrators and film the march. Footage shows him telling protesters: “I’m not afraid of you, keep on walking.” After people in the crowd responded, a police officer warned Beg not to antagonise the demonstration. Further exchanges followed and officers moved him towards a playground, where he sat on a swing.
A second recording, filmed from the protest, captured a woman asking why he was filming children. Beg replied that he was filming the demonstration. Protesters then began chanting “get him out” as police escorted him away. There is no evidence in the published footage that Beg was recording children for any improper purpose, and the Times subsequently reported that police stressed he had done nothing wrong. A shortened version of the incident was then circulated online without that context.
The allegation published from Robinson’s account
A post from an account operated in Robinson’s name shared the video with the words: “Another invader hanging around a park filming children. Glasgow again too!” Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, had approximately two million followers on X at the time.
Beg says the post received more than 139,000 views during its first 48 hours, a figure from his own crowdfunding page that hasn’t been independently audited, though the size of Robinson’s following meant the allegation reached a far larger audience than Beg’s own reach could match. Beg says he was followed after the post spread, that people searched for his car, and that his children witnessed him being racially abused, with police involvement needed to protect him. Those claims form part of his account of the harm caused and would need to be supported with evidence if the dispute reaches court.
The apology that didn’t last
Following reporting by STV News, the original post was removed and Robinson’s account published a correction: “I have to correct the record here. In this instance I got it wrong, as did many others, so for that I apologise and I have deleted that post.” It also urged followers to be more careful about establishing facts before sharing similar allegations.
That could have ended it. It didn’t. Robinson later appeared in a video denying he’d personally written either the accusation or the apology: “I haven’t apologised to him because I didn’t even share the story. I didn’t even know about the story. One of my admins did.” He called Beg’s behaviour “pretty weird,” adding: “I’m not sorry at all because I didn’t say s***.”
The video came with a screenshot apparently from a WhatsApp group used by Robinson’s social media team, showing discussion over who’d published the post and whether an apology was warranted. A subsequent message from Robinson’s account, labelled “Admin Post,” apologised for the previous apology: “I am sorry I apologised for another admin’s post. I will never apologise for another admin’s post again.” At the time of STV’s report, the original allegation remained live on Robinson’s Telegram channel despite its removal from X.
Beg is taking the account, not the explanations, to court
Robinson’s claim that an administrator wrote the post may become relevant if proceedings are issued. It doesn’t answer every question about how material gets approved, published and retained on accounts operating under his name. Beg has decided not to keep arguing about those explanations online. “He keeps changing his position,” he told STV. “I’m not going to play that back-and-forth. I’m seeking legal advice and will let that process take its course.”
His CrowdJustice appeal had passed £35,000 toward an initial £50,000 target at the time of writing. The money’s being held for legal fees and any costs involved in enforcing a judgment, none of it will be paid to Beg personally. The campaign is upfront about the risks too: no legal aid funding the case, no guaranteed outcome, and possible liability for the opposing side’s costs if Beg loses. A successful judgment wouldn’t necessarily mean every penny of any award or costs order is actually recoverable.
You can donate here.
‘I have ordinary people’
Beg says this isn’t about revenge. “It’s whether a lie should be allowed to travel further and faster than the truth, just because it has a bigger platform behind it.” His appeal contrasts his own position with the resources available to some high-profile online figures: “I don’t have rich friends. I don’t have a billionaire as an ally. I have ordinary people like you. Real people. But that’s more than enough.”
That line captures the actual imbalance at the centre of this. An allegation published to millions can spread in minutes. Correcting it means the person targeted has to reach many of the same people, establish what actually happened, and, if it comes to that, find tens of thousands of pounds for lawyers.
Robinson’s previous libel defeat
This wouldn’t be the first defamation case brought against Robinson over an allegation shared with his followers. In 2021, the High Court ruled he had libelled Syrian schoolboy Jamal Hijazi by making false accusations about the then-15-year-old. Hijazi was awarded £100,000 in damages, and the court imposed an injunction preventing Robinson from repeating the claims. Robinson was later jailed for contempt of court after admitting breaches of that injunction, with his sentence subsequently reduced after he gave an assurance he’d comply with the order.
That earlier judgment doesn’t determine the merits of Beg’s proposed case, the circumstances, jurisdiction and publications are different, and any new claim would be decided on its own evidence. It does show Robinson has previously been held legally responsible for spreading serious, unsubstantiated allegations about an individual to a large online audience.
Robinson has remained prominent in public political campaigning throughout this period, appearing alongside Laurence Fox at the Oxford Union this summer, where their motion on Western attitudes toward Islam was defeated in two separate votes.
The courts will decide what the apologies didn’t
Beg was born in Glasgow and says his family has lived in Britain for generations. The word “invader” wasn’t merely abusive, it falsely presented a Glaswegian father as a recent foreign arrival, while an accusation involving children spread alongside it.
Robinson’s account initially accepted the post was wrong. He then said he hadn’t written it, withdrew the apology, and criticised Beg’s conduct anyway. An administrator subsequently apologised for apologising. None of that has given Beg a correction he considers adequate.
The proposed legal action will face real practical and evidential hurdles, including questions over who published the posts and what reputational harm Beg can actually prove. Those are matters for lawyers and, if the claim proceeds, the Scottish courts. For now, more than 2,000 people have contributed to give him the chance to put those questions in front of a judge.
Leave a Reply