A UK undergraduate who has received death threats, hate mail and malicious phone calls following a bust-up with a pro-Palestine activist has criticised his university’s decision to report him to anti-terrorism authorities, arguing “inflammatory” social posts directed towards his alleged harassers is lawful free speech.

Brodie Mitchell, a third-year politics student at Royal Holloway, University of London, made when he was awarded compensation over his treatment by his institution, which suspended him for comparing a Palestinian activist’s headscarf to a tea towel.

Mitchell, who describes himself as a non-Jewish Zionist, became involved in what he called a petty “spat” at the university’s Freshers’ Fair in September 2025 after Huda El-Jamal, the president of the Friends of Palestine society, allegedly described him as a “wannabe Jew” and asked why he was not wearing a Jewish yarmulke or kippa.

He claims he responded to El-Jamal, who is of Palestinian origin, by stating: “You’re wearing a tea towel on your head,” referring to her keffiyeh scarf. El-Jamal denies this version of events, claiming she was the victim of an unprovoked

ɫ��ֱ��

Mitchell was suspended for nine weeks while a university investigation took place. With the support of the Free Speech Union, Mitchell went to the High Court to challenge Royal Holloway’s “unfair” disciplinary measures. In an out-of-court settlement the university expressed regret for the “length of time” Mitchell had been suspended and “distress this caused him as a result” and agreed to pay him an undisclosed sum as a “gesture of goodwill”. He accepted his comment was “poorly expressed and inappropriate” but maintains it was not unlawful.

While the two parties , the student said he is now considering fresh legal action over what he called a “two-tier” disciplinary system at the Surrey institution after receiving online threats, which he has been told come from Royal Holloway students. 

ɫ��ֱ��

Mitchell has also raised concerns over the university’s decision to report him to police and the Prevent anti-terrorism scheme after he posted on X about the threats he had received both online and in person.

“People will run up to me and shout ‘genocide supporter’ in my face and run off,” Mitchell told Times Higher Education, which has seen copies of social media posts warning the 20-year-old that his life in danger, urging students to “jump him” and “murder that racist cunt”.

“I have people sending me pictures of a knife across my throat, saying ‘you’re going to get it’,” he said.

According to information gained via a subject access request, Mitchell was reported to police in late April after posting: “Most of the harassment I’ve faced comes from Muslim students – the largest religious group here. My friends have witnessed it. Pakistani Muslims leaking my address? They don’t belong here. Send them home.”

“Royal Holloway disgusts me. Protect British students or shut these radical societies down NOW,” he added.

A university panel ruled this “could constitute hate speech given the targeting of a particular group on the basis of a protected characteristic (religious belief) and potential incitement to violence”.

It should be “investigated formally and should be shared with police as part of their ongoing enquiries” related to the September incident involving El-Jamal, which was reported as a “suspected hate crime”, the panel found.

Mitchell was also referred to Prevent, with a staff member claiming his X comments “suggest more extreme right-wing views and thoughts which may further be assessed as hate speech”.

ɫ��ֱ��

ɫ��ֱ��

“There are concerns that his freedom of speech rights may be moving into more concerning rhetoric,” she added, stating his “use of social media in recent days [had expressed] views which may be regarded as hate speech”.

That approach over what were described as “inflammatory comments” was dismissed by police. In an email sent on 2 June, the force stated there is “no evidence to suggest the subject is developing an extremist mindset” that sought to advance an “ideology based on violence, hatred or intolerance”.

“The subject is not being drawn into terrorism or drawing other people into it and as such it doesn’t meet the Counter Terrorism criteria for adoption,” the officer added.

Reflecting on the case, Mitchell said: “My original comment may be viewed as offensive to some, but it was lawful – the keffiyeh isn’t a religious symbol, it’s a political accessory – and this took place in the context of an argument at a university freshers’ fair.”

Mitchell said the referral was “particularly troubling”, having taken place just a week or so after he had settled his case on 13 April. “Being referred to Prevent over a tweet that expressed the mental strain of receiving repeated death threats and harassment felt both disproportionate and, frankly, retaliatory,” he said.

Those responsible for student welfare seemed “more concerned with policing political opinions they disliked than with genuine safeguarding”, he claimed.

“Prevent exists to stop terrorism and extremism – whether Islamist or neo-Nazi – not to monitor students’ tweets or, in the words used about me, their ‘thoughts’. Using a counterterrorism mechanism to pass on controversial but lawful speech is a serious misuse of the system and a waste of resources,” he said.

“To discover I had been placed on a Prevent referral pathway as an extremism case was both shocking and, in a dark way, almost laughable.”

A spokesperson for Royal Holloway said it “would not be appropriate to comment on matters relating to individual students” but it took its “responsibilities in relation to student welfare, data protection and the safety of our community extremely seriously”.

“When concerns are reported to us, we take immediate action in line with our duty of care to all our students and colleagues, as well as our wider legal obligations.”

ɫ��ֱ��

jack.grove@timeshighereducation.com