Comedian’s Show Cancelled Over Liverpool Parade Crash Joke
Comedian Andrew Lawrence has had his show cancelled after joking online about the Liverpool parade crash that injured 65 people. The Telegraphhas the story.
Andrew Lawrence, 37, said he would “drive through crowds of people” to get out of the city, just a day after 65 people were injured when a Ford Galaxy ploughed into onlookers at Liverpool FC’s Premier League victory parade.
He wrote on X: “To be fair, if I was in Liverpool, I’d drive through crowds of people to get the f— out of there as well.”
Video footage of the attack showed the Ford Galaxy being driven at speed through supporters on Water Street, with people flung across the bonnet for 200 yards before some were crushed under its wheels when it came to a halt. …
On Wednesday, Caddies, a Southend-on-Sea comedy club, announced that Mr Lawrence’s performance had been cancelled in the wake of his social media post, which it said it did not “condone or support”.
Posting on X, the venue wrote: “The event organisers who had hired our comedy club for the Andrew Lawrence night have cancelled the event.
“We do not condone or support the comment that has been made online, and we send everyone impacted by the tragic events in Liverpool our support and prayers.”
Responding to the announcement on social media, Mr Lawrence wrote: “This venue lost their courage after being bombarded with abuse and threats of violence from online trolls. Understandable, but disappointing.
“I will reschedule for later in the year at a different venue. Southend, sorry for the inconvenience, have a great day.”
Mr Lawrence’s X page displays a location tag with the words “cancelled bin”. He has more than 100,000 followers on the social media site.
Stop Press: Why won’t Andrew Lawrence’s critics just admit that they’re offended? wonders Andrew Doyle on his Substack. Pretending that a comedian is not telling jokes is the most infantile form of criticism.
It wasn’t a particularly funny comment but it’s one of those edgy comments that edgy comedians are expected to make.all I can say is po-faced pearl clutchers.
And that’s being much more polite than they deserve.
I think it would’ve been interesting to see how many fans still attended the show, off the back of his comment. People should be allowed to make their own minds up and vote with their feet, but unfortunately the daft venue made that decision for them.
BTW, I ‘liked’ your comment and now it’s gone. The DS voting system doing its strange and illogical thing once again in subtracting green numbers. Seriously, what’s the point in having them at all, then?
Hardliner, anything to add in the way of enlightenment here..?
Doesn’t any private business venue also have association rights as well? A catholic church would not want a protestant sermon, and a prog rock venue might not want jazz funk. A Christian bakery should not have to promote political opinion it disagrees with. A comedy venue might want comedy rather than just swearing and sex references.The key distinction is between basic rights and freedom rights and you should not conflate them. This cuts both ways and telling jokes is a freedom right and not a basic one.
As a further point of clarity the comedian or anyone else should be entitled to say anything up to inciting violence or the degredation of other basic rights in a public commonwealth space . The joke in hand did not cross any line here. I take most social media to operate as if they are public commonwealth spaces and so should be held to account accordingly. But once you enter a private space, even if it’s open to the public it’s not a commonwealth space. The freedom rules of association of that space then apply and if they think your jokes are crap and unhire you, then you will just have to find a venue that promotes crap jokes.
So as another add on point there will of course be ambiguity as to whether some spaces are basic public commonwealth or private freedom association spaces. But the rule would be that anything necessary to underpinning basic rights ( the platform from which to express freedoms ) must also be a public commonwealth space. So for example all supermarkets must be public spaces as would power, water and most transport. Comedy venues hardly. But a way to clarify would be for all non public enterprises which are not clearly providing a service which must be public, to actually state whether their private association rules will apply or whether they are happy to align with basic public commonwealth rules. This approach would help avoid the current problems caused by a conflation of rights as if they are all of one type, which then need progressive woke judges and politicians who will not see the problem to line up in order of importance and cause a complete mess.
Freedom is the basic Right from which all other Rights stem.
Take away freedom and what Rights are left?
“A catholic church would not want a protestant sermon… “
Yet ecumenical, interdenominational services are held in Catholic Churches – they were popular in the 1970s.
A comedy venue is not selling comedy, it is selling its facilities for others to use, just as the Albert Hall isn’t selling music it is selling facilities where events can be held.
How the downvoting/upvoting thing works is a mystery to me too, I assume it comes with the software package (WordPress).
It’s not a big enough deal to fret about I’m afraid, we just accept the occasional weird outputs. It’s certainly not driven by any of the editorial team
Ah OK then. I’ve just never seen it go the other way: like if someone gets more likes than dislikes, the red numbers start to reduce until they reach zero. Always the green numbers that go down. One should have no effect on the other, by rights. Just an odd quirk, then…
Would you be saying the same thing if you had organised an anti lockdown or anti woke event and the venue had pulled out?
Maybe you would. I agree it’s up to the venue as a private business to associate freely, though of course it’s the venue not the paying public that making the decision that he’s a “crap comedian” – unless a lot of the people who had booked to go have tried to cancel, which I doubt given that fans of AL probably know what to expect.
See further below. Of course we are currently in a situation where public basic rights and private freedom ones are all conflated as one piece and the advance of DEI is trying to lock that in place leaving it to the progressives in power to adjudicate. But by picking apart basic commonwealth rights from freedom private association rights i think you have a workable independent scheme to resolve the conflict . So in a public space freedom of speech which is a basic right must hold sway . In a private space association rules may apply.
Problem is the woketard takeover here has been pretty comprehensive. In the US you probably stand more chance of getting a venue. Dave Chapelle manages, despite offending lots of groups including the one group it’s best not to offend in the US.
Our political culture is close to being beyond saving.
Thanks. I don’t think there is a status quo in the past to get back to. The analysis of rights has always been incorrect, it’s just that in the past people have been more reasonable and so this was not noticed. With the extremist woke take over the fact the rights formulation is distorted is now brought into stark contrast. The business environment is such that venues have to take this woke nonsense into account. But even in a proper formulation private association rights should still enable cancellation. But if it’s a public space or service the cancellation should be impossible. Nigel farages banking cancellation comes to mind .
True, though I do struggle with a consistent definition of public vs private. It’s easy when the contrast is obvious – there are lots of small coffee shops, one of them decides not to serve a certain group of people, but members of that group can just go to other coffee shops. But there are very few banks, and banking is essential, so if they all decide to debank you, you are screwed. But there are shades in between and that’s where I find it difficult. But outside of nutty little groups like ours, we’re not even having the debate in the UK.
I guess they would lose money if very few people came – I presume there is a revenue sharing arrangement in place for venues over a certain size rather than a flat fee for booking the venue. Equally if they cancel late on then they may lose money anyway as they may not be able to host some other event at short notice and a lot of their costs may be fixed rather than related to actually opening.
If I ran a comedy club in Liverpool I would be tempted to book the twerp and then ‘throw’ him to the audience. It would be harsh but fair.
Since, clearly, having him perform likely would most likely damage the venue’s reputation, especially with the valuable local audience, I’d tell him instead to take a long hike (off a short pier). Comedy fails when it’s just nasty.
The “twerp” was one of the few public figures I know to speak out against lockdowns. He is not afraid to upset people and speaks his mind, at great personal cost. So if I had to choose a “twerp” to stand in the trenches with me and have my back, he’d be on my list.
It’s called black humour. We have had it since God was in short trousers. It’s what helps us stay sane and be Human, not little puddles of guilt and emotion.
Perhaps he was speaking out about the mawkish, trite, tragedy-fest and wallowing in the faux empathising, we always get – the obligatory “our hearts and prayers go out to..”
And pretending we actually give a damn about people – innocent victims… isn’t everyone these days! – we don’t know and to whom otherwise wouldn’t give the time of day.
Joking about people who have just been deliberately run over by a lunatic is not how one stays sane and human. Quite the opposite in fact. This is how humanity is degraded into inhuman insanity and that is a key aim of cultural marxism.
We don’t have to condone, like, appreciate or support any publicly made comments, but we all need to accept the right to say them. The alternative is way worse.
Exactly – he can still be seen as being a prat for making a bad joke, but he’s free to be a prat. If I was him, I wouldn’t go wandering around Liverpool of an evening anytime soon though, they might not appreciate his freedom of speech in this case
10navigator
10 months ago
I concede he’s ‘Marmite’ rather like Katie Hopkins, and like Ms Hopkins, the majority of his short monologues on YouTube are cutting, edgy, well observed (and dare I say it, right wing).. If you don’t like either of ’em, switch off.
His Liverpool monologue focussed on the way the police quickly disclosed the WHITEness of the suspect, rather than hiding it until securing a conviction.
Regarding this case, though, I’ve never seen so many conspiracy theories going around. If it’s not his ears it’s his hair that’s different, and did the artist in court have their eye on a completely different bloke when they did the sketch? 😮 I’ve still not read anything about motive. A lot of emphasis on the fact he’s a former Marine and wouldn’t he have had nerves of steel and not be spooked by a few thugs, but I think he left the Marines years ago and maybe you revert to being just like any other citizen over time, anyway.
And what happened to the witness account that he came out of a bar inebriated? Where did the ‘attempted murder’ and ‘drug driving’ charges go? And going by the many newspaper reports you’d think the fact he lives in a cul-de-sac somehow negates the fact he drove like a proper psychopathic madman into a huge crowd full of families!
Anyway, just to add to all that, he’s also got a doppelganger;
Have you seen this one? Someone whose face isn’t visible appears to be wearing latex gloves and seems to remove the licence plate but there’s another underneath.
It could be just camera angles and lighting trickery, or something, messing with our eyes. Not sure. See what you think;
That doesn’t look realistic to me. I’m not saying it’s definitely fake, but I’d want to see it from someone else’s camera angle before I didn’t suspect it was AI fake.
AI is going to become the biggest driver of false information.
Yes, you definitely have to be wary of AI because it’s often impossible to tell the difference. Community Notes used to pop up and clarify if a video was AI altered/generated but I’m not sure they’re 100% reliable.
I always take things shared on Twitter with a pinch of salt but many gullible people are ready and willing to suck anything up, so long as it confirms their bias. It’s also why it’s my pet peeve when people just post something as fact and provide no sources. It’s obviously just for clicks.
It’s a nonsense. There could easily be a court appointed photographer to take the dock snapshot.
It brings to mind the government banning the voices of Sinn Fein personnel, so the news had to overdub with voice actors. Pointless, and very quickly realised as so.
A non-scouser joking about Liverpool is pretty much the same as a North Korean joking about Kim Jong Un’s new haircut. The punishments may be slightly different but give it time.
That is Andrews view of the world and he’s been consistent about saying what he thinks and damn the consequences all the time i’ve been aware of him (since Covid times). I like some of his stuff. I dont like other bits. He shouldn’t be told to shut up ‘just because’, and as he’s been cancelled multiple times before and comes back stronger, well, I think that sends its own message.
Presumably the venue, when booking him, knew his style of comedy. Not afraid to offend and definitely not to everyone’s taste. So why are they acting surprised now?
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Having your show cancelled for advertising you are a really crap tasteless comedian, is not a free speech issue, it just business.
It like a singer showing they can’t sing in tune.
It wasn’t a particularly funny comment but it’s one of those edgy comments that edgy comedians are expected to make.all I can say is po-faced pearl clutchers.
And that’s being much more polite than they deserve.
I doubt that the on-line trolls and abusers were “po-faced Pearl clutchers”
Or a tone deaf audience?
I think it would’ve been interesting to see how many fans still attended the show, off the back of his comment. People should be allowed to make their own minds up and vote with their feet, but unfortunately the daft venue made that decision for them.
BTW, I ‘liked’ your comment and now it’s gone. The DS voting system doing its strange and illogical thing once again in subtracting green numbers. Seriously, what’s the point in having them at all, then?
Hardliner, anything to add in the way of enlightenment here..?
Funnily enough Mogs, and you will be shocked by this but I have just given JDee’s comment a like.
😀😀😀
😄
Doesn’t any private business venue also have association rights as well? A catholic church would not want a protestant sermon, and a prog rock venue might not want jazz funk. A Christian bakery should not have to promote political opinion it disagrees with. A comedy venue might want comedy rather than just swearing and sex references.The key distinction is between basic rights and freedom rights and you should not conflate them. This cuts both ways and telling jokes is a freedom right and not a basic one.
As a further point of clarity the comedian or anyone else should be entitled to say anything up to inciting violence or the degredation of other basic rights in a public commonwealth space . The joke in hand did not cross any line here. I take most social media to operate as if they are public commonwealth spaces and so should be held to account accordingly. But once you enter a private space, even if it’s open to the public it’s not a commonwealth space. The freedom rules of association of that space then apply and if they think your jokes are crap and unhire you, then you will just have to find a venue that promotes crap jokes.
So as another add on point there will of course be ambiguity as to whether some spaces are basic public commonwealth or private freedom association spaces. But the rule would be that anything necessary to underpinning basic rights ( the platform from which to express freedoms ) must also be a public commonwealth space. So for example all supermarkets must be public spaces as would power, water and most transport. Comedy venues hardly. But a way to clarify would be for all non public enterprises which are not clearly providing a service which must be public, to actually state whether their private association rules will apply or whether they are happy to align with basic public commonwealth rules. This approach would help avoid the current problems caused by a conflation of rights as if they are all of one type, which then need progressive woke judges and politicians who will not see the problem to line up in order of importance and cause a complete mess.
“… if they are public commonwealth spaces and so should be held to account accordingly.”
Yer wot? How would Speakers’ Corner – a public commonwealth space – be held to account for what is said there?
Freedom is the basic Right from which all other Rights stem.
Take away freedom and what Rights are left?
“A catholic church would not want a protestant sermon… “
Yet ecumenical, interdenominational services are held in Catholic Churches – they were popular in the 1970s.
A comedy venue is not selling comedy, it is selling its facilities for others to use, just as the Albert Hall isn’t selling music it is selling facilities where events can be held.
Audiences can choose what they want to see/hear.
How the downvoting/upvoting thing works is a mystery to me too, I assume it comes with the software package (WordPress).
It’s not a big enough deal to fret about I’m afraid, we just accept the occasional weird outputs. It’s certainly not driven by any of the editorial team
Ah OK then. I’ve just never seen it go the other way: like if someone gets more likes than dislikes, the red numbers start to reduce until they reach zero. Always the green numbers that go down. One should have no effect on the other, by rights. Just an odd quirk, then…
Would you be saying the same thing if you had organised an anti lockdown or anti woke event and the venue had pulled out?
Maybe you would. I agree it’s up to the venue as a private business to associate freely, though of course it’s the venue not the paying public that making the decision that he’s a “crap comedian” – unless a lot of the people who had booked to go have tried to cancel, which I doubt given that fans of AL probably know what to expect.
See further below. Of course we are currently in a situation where public basic rights and private freedom ones are all conflated as one piece and the advance of DEI is trying to lock that in place leaving it to the progressives in power to adjudicate. But by picking apart basic commonwealth rights from freedom private association rights i think you have a workable independent scheme to resolve the conflict . So in a public space freedom of speech which is a basic right must hold sway . In a private space association rules may apply.
Yup I’m with you on that.
Problem is the woketard takeover here has been pretty comprehensive. In the US you probably stand more chance of getting a venue. Dave Chapelle manages, despite offending lots of groups including the one group it’s best not to offend in the US.
Our political culture is close to being beyond saving.
Thanks. I don’t think there is a status quo in the past to get back to. The analysis of rights has always been incorrect, it’s just that in the past people have been more reasonable and so this was not noticed. With the extremist woke take over the fact the rights formulation is distorted is now brought into stark contrast. The business environment is such that venues have to take this woke nonsense into account. But even in a proper formulation private association rights should still enable cancellation. But if it’s a public space or service the cancellation should be impossible. Nigel farages banking cancellation comes to mind .
True, though I do struggle with a consistent definition of public vs private. It’s easy when the contrast is obvious – there are lots of small coffee shops, one of them decides not to serve a certain group of people, but members of that group can just go to other coffee shops. But there are very few banks, and banking is essential, so if they all decide to debank you, you are screwed. But there are shades in between and that’s where I find it difficult. But outside of nutty little groups like ours, we’re not even having the debate in the UK.
And the owners of the venue lose money.
I guess they would lose money if very few people came – I presume there is a revenue sharing arrangement in place for venues over a certain size rather than a flat fee for booking the venue. Equally if they cancel late on then they may lose money anyway as they may not be able to host some other event at short notice and a lot of their costs may be fixed rather than related to actually opening.
If I ran a comedy club in Liverpool I would be tempted to book the twerp and then ‘throw’ him to the audience. It would be harsh but fair.
Since, clearly, having him perform likely would most likely damage the venue’s reputation, especially with the valuable local audience, I’d tell him instead to take a long hike (off a short pier). Comedy fails when it’s just nasty.
The “twerp” was one of the few public figures I know to speak out against lockdowns. He is not afraid to upset people and speaks his mind, at great personal cost. So if I had to choose a “twerp” to stand in the trenches with me and have my back, he’d be on my list.
What was the twerp ‘speaking out against’ when making light of the actions of a man who had just driven at a crowed people?
I’m not bothered about that
I would trust him to have my back if I was in trouble- that counts for a lot in my book
Four children were amongst the 63 people injured, one child seriously. I’m not laughing. I only wish for people of quality to ‘watch my back’.
Did Lawrence run people over in his car? Is he encouraging others to run people over in their cars?
I’m not laughing either – not because I think it’s “bad taste” but because I didn’t find it funny. Others may find it amusing- we’re all different.
It’s called black humour. We have had it since God was in short trousers. It’s what helps us stay sane and be Human, not little puddles of guilt and emotion.
Perhaps he was speaking out about the mawkish, trite, tragedy-fest and wallowing in the faux empathising, we always get – the obligatory “our hearts and prayers go out to..”
And pretending we actually give a damn about people – innocent victims… isn’t everyone these days! – we don’t know and to whom otherwise wouldn’t give the time of day.
Joking about people who have just been deliberately run over by a lunatic is not how one stays sane and human. Quite the opposite in fact. This is how humanity is degraded into inhuman insanity and that is a key aim of cultural marxism.
We don’t have to condone, like, appreciate or support any publicly made comments, but we all need to accept the right to say them. The alternative is way worse.
Exactly – he can still be seen as being a prat for making a bad joke, but he’s free to be a prat. If I was him, I wouldn’t go wandering around Liverpool of an evening anytime soon though, they might not appreciate his freedom of speech in this case
I concede he’s ‘Marmite’ rather like Katie Hopkins, and like Ms Hopkins, the majority of his short monologues on YouTube are cutting, edgy, well observed (and dare I say it, right wing).. If you don’t like either of ’em, switch off.
His Liverpool monologue focussed on the way the police quickly disclosed the WHITEness of the suspect, rather than hiding it until securing a conviction.
Yes, saw that one.
Regarding this case, though, I’ve never seen so many conspiracy theories going around. If it’s not his ears it’s his hair that’s different, and did the artist in court have their eye on a completely different bloke when they did the sketch? 😮 I’ve still not read anything about motive. A lot of emphasis on the fact he’s a former Marine and wouldn’t he have had nerves of steel and not be spooked by a few thugs, but I think he left the Marines years ago and maybe you revert to being just like any other citizen over time, anyway.
And what happened to the witness account that he came out of a bar inebriated? Where did the ‘attempted murder’ and ‘drug driving’ charges go? And going by the many newspaper reports you’d think the fact he lives in a cul-de-sac somehow negates the fact he drove like a proper psychopathic madman into a huge crowd full of families!
Anyway, just to add to all that, he’s also got a doppelganger;
https://x.com/TrevPDS/status/1928492423157613044
Either something’s amiss or Elizabeth Cook, court sketch artist, needs to go to Specsavers;
https://x.com/suespeaksup/status/1928425560016847088
I agree!
TPTB are absolutely over the moon it’s not a ROPer, and looking to make the most of it.
Sick bastards.
And I suspect there’s more to it than we are being told…
Definitely.
Bloody hell Mogs. Great find.
Definitely a con job going on.
Have you seen this one? Someone whose face isn’t visible appears to be wearing latex gloves and seems to remove the licence plate but there’s another underneath.
It could be just camera angles and lighting trickery, or something, messing with our eyes. Not sure. See what you think;
https://x.com/BGatesIsaPyscho/status/1928382362498343235
That doesn’t look realistic to me. I’m not saying it’s definitely fake, but I’d want to see it from someone else’s camera angle before I didn’t suspect it was AI fake.
AI is going to become the biggest driver of false information.
Yes, you definitely have to be wary of AI because it’s often impossible to tell the difference. Community Notes used to pop up and clarify if a video was AI altered/generated but I’m not sure they’re 100% reliable.
I always take things shared on Twitter with a pinch of salt but many gullible people are ready and willing to suck anything up, so long as it confirms their bias. It’s also why it’s my pet peeve when people just post something as fact and provide no sources. It’s obviously just for clicks.
If I was a media editor, I wouldn’t book Elizabeth Cook again.
But why do they even bother with sketch artists? Isn’t it easier and more accurate to just take a photo?🤔
It’s a nonsense. There could easily be a court appointed photographer to take the dock snapshot.
It brings to mind the government banning the voices of Sinn Fein personnel, so the news had to overdub with voice actors. Pointless, and very quickly realised as so.
In 1937 John Betjeman joked about bombing Slough. These days he would dropped by his publisher.
A non-scouser joking about Liverpool is pretty much the same as a North Korean joking about Kim Jong Un’s new haircut. The punishments may be slightly different but give it time.
“53 year old white British male”
“53 year old white British male”
“53 year old white British male”
“53 year old white British male”
Andrew Lawrence
Till my tongue stiffens, Britain and British Forever!
🇬🇧🇫🇴🇬🇧🇫🇴🇬🇧🇫🇴
RULE BRITANIA https://youtu.be/Sgd9nYqVz2s?si=LZwVxG938jbAoho5
https://youtu.be/-tW0QqiT2LU?si=abCIRYALdPB7pDjB
https://youtu.be/MKRHWT6xdEU?si=TDueICDU6IdTSdmD
Till my tongue stiffens! English and British and proud!
Are you British or not?
61 year old British male, never had a single criminal offence against my name, but I think it’s time to sully that reputation, for all that is British
Pardon, did you say WHITE? Did the police say he was WHITE?
Yes, strange I know!
22 year old black Eritrean illegal immigrant!
Do you think you’ll hear that announcement within 2 hours?
I thought it was funny!
Ah, but that’s because I am a WHITE MALE.
Did I say, I am a WHITE MALE?
That means, not a Welsh choirboy.
Steady on, your thought game!
Does laughing make me a bad person?
I like how the article is very informative about the make and model of the car.
That is Andrews view of the world and he’s been consistent about saying what he thinks and damn the consequences all the time i’ve been aware of him (since Covid times). I like some of his stuff. I dont like other bits. He shouldn’t be told to shut up ‘just because’, and as he’s been cancelled multiple times before and comes back stronger, well, I think that sends its own message.
Presumably the venue, when booking him, knew his style of comedy. Not afraid to offend and definitely not to everyone’s taste. So why are they acting surprised now?