In November 2020, during the nationwide lockdown due to the coronavirus pandemic, Nicola Packer took a pregnancy test, believing she was unlikely to be pregnant. At 41 years old, she suspected she was experiencing perimenopausal symptoms. Feeling unwell, she finally agreed to take a test after a friend suggested it, intending only to “prove him wrong.”
However, when the result came back positive, she was “shocked,” but her decision was clear from the start. Uninterested in having children, she quickly sought an abortion. Thanks to emergency measures adopted during the pandemic—later made permanent—abortion pills could be sent by mail after a remote consultation for pregnancies up to ten weeks.
After taking the pills, she expected to only see “blood clots in the toilet bowl,” as her defense attorney, Fiona Horlick KC, recounted in Isleworth crown court. Instead, hours later, she unexpectedly delivered “a small but fully formed baby.”
This event was traumatic for Packer, but it was just the beginning. She went to the A&E department at Charing Cross hospital, bleeding and in shock. Staff told her she had arrived at the wrong hospital and directed her to Chelsea and Westminster, but they did not provide an ambulance, leaving her to get there herself.
Packer brought the fetus with her but initially withheld the fact that she had taken abortion medication, fearing it might affect her treatment. When she finally disclosed this to a midwife, who assured her of their support and care, the police were called.
Uniformed officers arrived, and despite being in recovery after the birth, Packer was arrested. Her devices were seized, marking the beginning of a four-and-a-half-year ordeal that culminated in her testifying at a two-week trial.
During the trial, Packer occasionally stood with poise and quiet pride, but often her composure gave way as she was subjected to an intense and personal interrogation, being asked to recount one of the most painful days of her life while the prosecution probed her memory on details she could not recall.
Although she maintained a strong front at times, there were moments where tears overtook her. Supportive friends accompanied her in court, holding her hand as she entered and leaving with her during breaks from questioning.
At one point, the judge had to send the jury out and reprimand her friends for their audible reactions during particularly probing lines of inquiry that they found inappropriate.
As the trial concluded, Horlick addressed the jury one last time, stating that her client was still “utterly traumatized.” She emphasized that while the facts of the case were tragic, they did not constitute a crime.
Though the prosecution was coming to an end, Packer, now 45, would carry the irreversible consequences of the entire experience. Private aspects of her life—including her medical history, prior terminations, sexual preferences, a family tragedy regarding loss of a baby, and even intimate photographs—were made public to establish her lack of pregnancy.
In the upcoming days, scrutiny will be directed at the Crown Prosecution Service for pursuing the case, particularly after Judge Edmunds KC suggested reviewing the public interest in prosecuting the case “four and a half years after the events.”
Judge Edmunds noted during a pre-trial hearing that there was a “heavy burden” on the prosecution, especially considering the backlog in the court system.
Jonathan Lord, an NHS consultant gynaecologist who oversaw Packer’s care at MSI Reproductive Choices, criticized the prosecution as “vindictive and brutal,” stating that the CPS effectively utilized victim-shaming tactics. He highlighted that unnecessary details about her relationships and sexual life were included in the prosecution’s opening statement, aware of how they would be reported.
He also condemned the police for playing recordings of Packer’s private medical consultations in open court, showcasing CCTV footage of her arriving in distress at A&E, and forcing her to present intimate photographs of herself in her defense before a packed courtroom. He asserted that no woman should ever undergo such public humiliation and shaming, especially in 2025 England.
This case has sparked renewed calls for legal reform, which may take place as soon as this summer, as two Labour MPs plan to propose amendments to the criminal justice bill aimed at decriminalizing abortion.
Tonia Antoniazzi, one of the MPs who spent a day in court during the trial, remarked that while it may be a relief that Nicola has evaded conviction, the fact that she faced the humiliation and upheaval of a trial is entirely unacceptable. After meeting Packer recently, she observed the profound impact that this harsh and unnecessary investigation has had on Packer’s life over the past four and a half years.
Antoniazzi identified the true injustice as the years lost to a law that predates women’s suffrage, over an offense that is not even recognized in two parts of the United Kingdom. She described Packer’s ordeal as one marked by being transferred from her hospital bed to a police cell, denied timely medical treatment, and exhausting all her resources on legal defense. She condemned this as utterly unacceptable and described it as anything but justice.
Lord added, “Every agency Nicola needed turned against her. In this case, as in others, those tasked with treating, protecting, and safeguarding vulnerable women have inflicted the most harm, breaching confidentiality and treating victims like criminals.”
He asserted that the issue is not merely about Packer encountering unsympathetic individuals or organizations but about how current abortion laws have encouraged these actions against her. He concluded that the legislation is causing life-altering damage to women involved, and occasionally to their children as well.
“The national scandal lies in how women and their children are being treated, including those experiencing premature labor and natural pregnancy losses,” he stated.
