Ricky Jones Cleared

😂😂oh dear.

Tell me - what did You see when you watched the video where Ricky incited people to slit other people’s throats?

No. But it was completely different treatment to Ricky Jones.

And she has been denied an appeal.

But this only points to a further aspect of two-tier justice; namely, who has the means to fight their case. The privately-paid solicitor will naturally make sure his privately-paying client is aware of all the defences available to him. By contrast, the harried duty solicitor is not exactly best-placed to give considered advice.

That is nothing new, nor isolated to this case. People with money get better outcomes. If that upsets people now then where have they been these past 1,000 years ?

The Spectator 🙄

The evidence is that Ricky Jones has walked free whilst Lucy Connolly is in prison, following a judicial process which treated them differently

What's your hard proof for your touching trust that the system is fair, hasn't gone awry, and doesn't need fixing?

Do you have any evidence that Connelly was coerced into pleading guilty? Have you considered the fact that she actually is guilty?

...and?

Anything can be bought up in defence, the judge can direct accordingly.

Once again, LC pleaded guilty.... there fore, of course, her defence had sailed....

Why is this a difficult concept for you?

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-radical-barristers-who-really-lay-down-the-law-in-britain/

‘One important difference is that, whereas Lucy Connolly pleaded guilty last summer, Ricky Jones fought his charges in court (defended by a silk from Garden Court chambers).

But this only points to a further aspect of two-tier justice; namely, who has the means to fight their case. The privately-paid solicitor will naturally make sure his privately-paying client is aware of all the defences available to him. By contrast, the harried duty solicitor is not exactly best-placed to give considered advice.

Either way, I suspect few who hear about these two cases will care very much about distinctions like guilty and not guilty pleas. Most will simply compare the two ‘offences’ with the respective punishments doled out, and judge for themselves.

Crucially, like most of those arrested at the time, Lucy Connolly was denied bail. Facing a potential delay of months inside while awaiting trial, she may have felt that she had no choice but to plead guilty to the charges laid before her. This element of potential coercion was perhaps the starkest example of ‘two-tier justice’. Since Jones was granted bail, he had more than a year to prepare his defence after multiple delays to his trial.

Two-tier justice exists across multiple realities and manifestations; from the granting of bail to financial disparity – not to mention the fact that activist lawyers are sometimes only too happy to waive fees where they agree with the accused. ‘

And look at the silk who defended him attached here, a Very Interesting and depressing read) . The chambers who defences. Hamas and are very left wing.

Again Labour stinks from top to bottom.

You're contradicting yourself. You seem to be arguing that Connelly and Jones should be treated exactly the same by the judicial system even though the laws they broke, the circumstances of the offence and their pleas were different.

You've been peppering your posts with misinformation eg bail, sentence and charges.

Expected social or community opinion/reaction should in no way change the process followed for them or the outcome of any case against them.

Yet you're saying that the outcome reached by the jury is wrong because it doesn't meet the expectations of the chronically uninformed on social media.

Lucy Connolly’s potential mitigations as the mother of a young daughter, who had previously lost her infant son in tragic circumstances which naturally made her sensitive to the news of murdered children, seem not to have mattered as much. ‘

Potential mitigation. She should have elected to put that in front of a jury.

For people who feel she was badly advised, the Court of Appeal didn't seem to agree.

(Are we allowed to post facts ?)

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Lucy-Connolly-v-The-King-1.pdf

So you don't know, and haven't watched the video, then?
Or is it just that you don't want to answer the question? It's a simple question.

Indeed part of his defence was that he has ADHD and suffered from ‘emotional arousal’ 🤯🤯🤯🤯

‘By way of mitigating circumstances, Jones’s defence argued that he may have been affected by ADHD, and suffered from ‘emotional arousal’ which could ‘override deliberate decision-making’ (which presumably therefore made it harder to understand the impact of calling for throats to be slit).

Lucy Connolly’s potential mitigations as the mother of a young daughter, who had previously lost her infant son in tragic circumstances which naturally made her sensitive to the news of murdered children, seem not to have mattered as much. ‘

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/ricky-jones-and-the-reality-of-two-tier-justice/

"Evidently"

So you have hard proof of your allegations.... goody, look forward to reading them.

It doesn't matter which group he was referring to, or how abhorrent you or I think their political opinions are.

The are equally protected by the law.

Odd that. You'd think they'd want to prove they aren't morons instead ....

Oh no! If you call them morons, they vote Reform!

In my opinion everyone in the UK should be treated the same by our justice system, yes.

Their political views (within the constraints of the law, eg not supporting terrorist organisations) should not matter.

Expected social or community opinion/reaction should in no way change the process followed for them or the outcome of any case against them.

Everyone should be equal under the law. Equally constrained. Equally protected.

That shouldn't be controversial. It's currently evidently not the case.

I dunno, a few facts do seep in.

Juries are randomly selected members of the public. Men and women from all walks of life and all political backgrounds.

Only a moron of irredeemable proportions would even think of suggesting that a jury verdict represents some deep state “two-tier justice”.

The Secret Barrister

Of course I watched it. I make sure I'm well informed and aware of all the facts before opining on a subject. Don't you do the same? (Your other posts don't give me much hope to be honest.)

Did you watch it? Could you then please clarify for me exactly which specific group of people he was referring to? (Hint: it's not "protesters" or "people he disagrees with".)

Of course, but you've yet to explain or produce evidence of jury rigging and judges being influenced by the Govt of the day.... which is what you re saying is happening in the UK.

No, she admitted the offence the same day as being arrested.

Or you.

This is a discussion forum.