Their bodies are the only agency they have left
A British couple who set out to circle the world by motorcycle now sit in Tehran's Evin Prison, their appeal against a ten-year espionage sentence rejected without explanation and without their presence in the courtroom. Lindsay and Craig Foreman, arrested in Iran in January 2025, have turned to hunger strike as their only remaining form of protest — a choice their son understands even as it deepens his fear. Their case has reached Iran's Supreme Court, but the machinery of justice there moves in ways that offer little comfort to those waiting on the outside.
- Craig Foreman has refused food for 25 days and Lindsay for 16, their bodies now the only instrument of protest available to them inside Evin Prison.
- Their appeal was heard without them present, and they were asked to sign documents in a language they cannot read — a process their barrister calls a systematic violation of their fundamental rights.
- All communication with their family in Britain has been severed since the couple gave a BBC interview over a month ago, leaving their son Joe with no way to reach them.
- The last British consular visit took place in December, and the family is now hoping the embassy can gain access to deliver vitamins, fresh clothes, and a reason to eat.
- The case has passed to Iran's Supreme Court, but with no timeline, no clarity, and a travel warning from the UK government that a British passport alone can be grounds for detention in Iran.
Lindsay and Craig Foreman left home in January 2025 on a motorcycle journey around the world. Iran was as far as they got. Arrested on espionage charges they have always denied, they were sentenced in February to ten years in prison by an Iranian court.
Nearly four months later, their appeal was rejected — no explanation given, and neither of them allowed to attend the hearing. Their UK legal team reports they were also asked to sign documents in Farsi, a language they do not read. They refused. Their barrister has described them as innocent tourists subjected to arbitrary detention and the systematic denial of basic legal rights.
In protest, both have stopped eating. Craig, a carpenter, has gone twenty-five days without food, surviving on sugar, milk, and water; his son says he is visibly wasting away. Lindsay, a life coach, returned to her hunger strike after a brief pause and is now on day sixteen. The couple has been unable to contact their family in Britain since giving a BBC interview more than a month ago — the same period their hunger strike began.
Their son Joe Bennett described the particular weight of not knowing where to turn. He hopes the British embassy will be permitted a prison visit soon, bringing basic supplies and perhaps enough reassurance to convince his parents to eat. He understands, though, why they feel their bodies are the only leverage they have left.
The case now sits with Iran's Supreme Court, though the family has little sense of what that means in practice. The UK Foreign Office has called the detention unjustified and continues diplomatic efforts, even as its own travel advisory warns that holding a British passport can be reason enough for Iranian authorities to detain you. Richard Ratcliffe, whose wife Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe spent nearly six years in Iranian custody, sees the rejected appeal as a deliberate message to the British government rather than any act of justice. For Joe Bennett, the horizon remains blank. "We just want them home," he said.
Lindsay and Craig Foreman set out on a motorcycle in January 2025 to circle the world. They made it as far as Iran before their journey stopped. The couple was arrested while passing through the country, accused of espionage—a charge they have consistently rejected. In February, an Iranian court sentenced them both to ten years in prison.
Nearly four months later, the Foremans learned their appeal had been rejected. No explanation was provided. More troubling still, neither of them was permitted to be present when their case was heard. According to their legal team in the UK, they were also asked to sign documents written in Farsi, a language neither could read. They refused. Barrister Haydee Dijkstal, part of their defense, described them as innocent tourists subjected to arbitrary detention and systematic violations of their fundamental rights.
In protest of their circumstances, both have stopped eating. Craig, a carpenter, has refused food for twenty-five days, consuming only sugar, milk, and water. His son reports he is becoming visibly thinner and weaker. Lindsay, a life coach, briefly resumed eating but returned to her hunger strike; she is now on day sixteen. Their only contact with the outside world came through families of other prisoners until even that channel grew thin. The couple has been unable to call their family in Britain since they gave an interview to the BBC more than a month ago—the same period during which their hunger strike began.
Their son, Joe Bennett, expressed the particular cruelty of their isolation. "It's really tough, I don't know where to turn now," he told the BBC. "I'm massively worried for them. But it's hard because I can't talk to them." The last consular visit from the British embassy occurred in December. Bennett hopes the embassy will be permitted to visit the prison soon, bringing basic necessities—vitamins, fresh clothes—and perhaps persuade his parents to resume eating. He understands, though, why they feel their bodies are the only leverage they possess.
The case has now moved to Iran's Supreme Court, but the family has little clarity on what that means or how long the process might take. The British Foreign Office has called their detention unjustified and appalling, and continues diplomatic efforts to secure their release. Yet the government's own travel advisory carries a stark warning: having a British passport or ties to the UK can be sufficient reason for Iranian authorities to detain you.
Richard Ratcliffe, whose wife Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe was held in Iran for nearly six years before her release, sees the rejection of the Foremans' appeal as a deliberate signal. "The Revolutionary Court is a theatre of punishment rather than a real court," he said. "So when something like this happens it's a signal from the Iranian authorities to the British government." For Bennett, the hardest part is not knowing what comes next. "We just want them home," he said. For now, there is no visible path toward that outcome.
Notable Quotes
It is a serious human rights violation, and it is one more reason why two British citizens, with no other options left, are now starving themselves in protest.— Joe Bennett, their son
The Revolutionary Court is a theatre of punishment rather than a real court. So when something like this happens it's a signal from the Iranian authorities to the British government.— Richard Ratcliffe, whose wife was detained in Iran for nearly six years
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why would Iran deny them the right to attend their own appeal hearing? What does that accomplish?
It removes any pretense of due process. If they're not there to hear the charges or mount a defense, the outcome is predetermined. It's control—the state demonstrating it doesn't need to justify itself to the accused.
And the documents in Farsi they were asked to sign—what would have happened if they'd signed them?
That's the trap. They likely would have been signing away rights they didn't understand, or confessing to things they didn't do. By refusing, they've protected themselves legally, but it's also cost them. Everything costs them now.
The hunger strike seems like a desperate move. Do they think it will actually change anything?
It's the only tool they have left. When the courts won't listen, when you can't attend your own hearing, when you can't even call your family—your body becomes the only statement you can make. It's not a strategy with a clear endpoint. It's desperation.
Why is the British government seemingly powerless here?
Iran doesn't recognize the same legal frameworks Britain does. Diplomatic pressure works when both sides share some common ground or fear consequences. Iran has shown it's willing to hold British citizens indefinitely on thin charges. The leverage is asymmetrical.
What does Ratcliffe's comparison to a "theatre of punishment" really mean?
It means the verdict was decided before the trial began. The court isn't weighing evidence; it's performing authority. The appeal wasn't a genuine review—it was another act in the same play, with the same ending already written.