On October 11, 2024, a group of trans terrorists known as Trans Kids Deserve Better released thousands of crickets in a homophobic terror act at a gay rights conference held by LGB Alliance. This was done out of hate for believers in reality and to draw attention to a realityphobic crowdfunding campaign.
While he denies involvement in the event, Tarquin was present at the time the crickets were released.
Consequences
Despite the deliberate and highly disruptive nature of the attack, no arrests were made. All six perpetrators were simply ejected from the venue by security and allowed to leave. Critics point to this as part of a broader pattern of activist immunity, where ideologically aligned protest groups—particularly those involving trans-identifying minors—are shielded from legal consequences that would be applied swiftly to other offenders. The Metropolitan Police cited no charges, despite potential offences including aggravated trespass, public nuisance, and criminal damage. Opponents argue that political optics and fear of backlash for arresting “trans kids” at an LGBT-related event outweighed the enforcement of the law, effectively granting the group a free pass for what has been described as homophobic political terrorism.
What the Law Says
UK law provides multiple avenues for prosecuting disruptive acts like the cricket attack. Entering a private event to deliberately cause chaos can be prosecuted as aggravated trespass, while creating fear, distress, or major disruption can fall under public nuisance. If any damage occurs—whether to property, equipment, or the venue—criminal damage applies, and if attendees feel physically threatened, even without direct contact, common assault could be argued. Releasing thousands of live insects indoors may also breach health and safety or biosecurity laws. In short, there was ample legal basis for arrest and prosecution—making the lack of action a matter of discretion, not absence of law. Any of the following charges could have been pursued if the UK police weren’t captured by the trans cult:
Legal Context – Offences Potentially Applicable to the Cricket Attack
| Offence | Relevant Law | Possible Application |
|---|---|---|
| Aggravated Trespass | Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, s.68 | Entering private premises (conference venue) with intent to disrupt lawful activities. |
| Public Nuisance | Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, s.78 | Causing serious distress or disruption to the public through a deliberate act. |
| Criminal Damage | Criminal Damage Act 1971 | Potential if the crickets or disruption caused damage to property, equipment, or venue fixtures. |
| Common Assault | Criminal Justice Act 1988, s.39 | Could be argued if attendees felt physically threatened or intimidated by the sudden release of insects. |
| Biosecurity / Health & Safety Breach | Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 | Releasing large numbers of insects into a confined public space could be viewed as a health hazard. |