Ricky Jones Cleared

The most sensible post on this thread. Spot on.

I think some posters on here don't understand why people are so angry about 2-tier justice because they actually agree with it. So long as it favours the people they think it should, of course.

Possibly, she was charged with a more serious offence, but she didn't, she admitted the charge, had a history of tweeting racist stuff & showed no remorse.

She also messaged that she would play the MH card.

You re arguing that we have a 2 tier justice system based on an "IF"

I believe Jones was initially remanded.

But wouldn’t have Connelly have still been remanded in custody if she had pleaded not guilty?
If she had then that would have been a two tier justice system. Jones wasn’t remanded.

Exactly, hence his arrest, charge and trial.....

Ultimately, its the outcome of the trial that you don't like.

We don't need to know whether a NF member put up a sticker with a razer blade behind it, because that doesn't excuse calling for protesters throats to be slit or even those who put up stickers with razer blades.

Just as an asylum seeker being charged with sexual assault of a 14 year old in Epping doesn't excuse calls for violence against asylum seekers or even those who commit sexual violence.

Inciting violence is never OK. Even against people you really don't like. Everyone is meant to be protected by the law. From everyone. Equally.

If someone is excused from breaking the law because you don't like the group of people they have acted against as much as the group attacking them that is exactly two tier justice.

Jones was charged, went to trial, as is his right, as could off LC, found not guilty, she pleaded guilty at the first opportunity.

LC made her tweets during a time of widespread rioting, RJ didn't.

He was charged with a slightly lesser charge, possibly as his was a "one off" offence, LC had posted racist/hate tweets and showed no remorse.... so posed a re offending risk, hence no bail.

They were treated the same.

I bet you’d have a very different stance if he were a Tory or Reform councillor.

Show us the proof that NF members ( haven't heard of them for years) did this and I don't mean a photo.

Whose reply?

Well I personally wouldn’t want any political figure on any side talking about slitting anybody’s throats ! Has politics got that low?!

Politicians are supposed to be rational, diplomatic people! Doing this when riots were going on across the country was hardly going to do any good was it ?! Labour advised everyone from the party not to attend any protest or counter protest.

Jones ignored the warning. Had he simply done as advised , an expensive public court case not bit have happened and he wouldn’t have made the media.

His reputation is hardly going to stand him in good stead now is it ? He’s also helped damaged the reputation of the Labour Party.

it was rioters whose throats he suggested be cut.

It wasn’t actually. It was the NF members who put razor blades under stickers in public places.

No, it's not the same as Connolly. She made several racist comments then her most incendiary one, was advised by family to take it down, said she'd 'play the mental health card', found the situation funny, didn't seem to understand what she'd done wrong and pleaded guilty to incitement.

Jones was found not guilty of intent, the jury were so convinced that he didn't mean it, they made a decision in 30 minutes.

Starmer will 'be in trouble' by Reform voters and conspiracy theorists no matter what he does. Not that he has any sway over the jury.

Oh sorry I didn't read the barrister's whatever. Clearly you did. Please don't enlighten me. I can't be arsed. I know how I feel about the whole Jones' thing. I despise him. He's a coward and a creep. If only he'd had the guts to own up but he didn't and now he's free.

Where's the irony?

Thankfully, it wasn't up to you, but 12 people who aren't you.

No, you're wrong. I do not believe Jones was referring to stickers and blades. He was referring to the rioters. He's a disingenuous coward as I said in one of my previous posts.

But you could say the same of Connelly. She made a stupid comment , deleted it after a few hours. She don’t actually tell anyone to burn anything down or do anything violent. But the she pleaded guilty to inciting violence- and paid the price.

Jones has had a whole year to seek legal advice and come up with every excuse under the sun. Autism, racism , bullied as a child…

His smart move was to plead not guilty and go to Court. It paid off and now he’s got off. I wouldn’t be surprised if he comes back as a councillor.

But I guess this will help right wing politics, and may have done Reform a favour in the long run. Rightly or wrongly more people will think it’s a two tier justice system.

Starmer is in more trouble than he was before

It's comments like this that reinforce to me how little knowledge some people have of our Criminal Justice system.

With an added twist of irony that it's those who understand it least are most likely to fall foul of it ...

Treat everyone from the aftermath the same maybe?

It's comments like this that reinforce to me how little knowledge some people have of our Criminal Justice system.

Suspects who are arrested and charged for different offences cannot all be given the same treatment. There are rules in place regarding procedures for arrest, interview, charge, remand/bail and court appearance.

It is not just a one-size-fits-all.

RJ was able to explain to a jury and they believed him - or they didn't believe the prosecution.

Bear in mind had be been found guilty, he would have received a stiffer sentence.

Of course it is. The OP was about Jones being found not guilty. But the very first reply waded in with 'whatabout Lucy'...

Jones was found not guilty of intent to encourage violence. What he said was despicable but the jury believed that he did not intend for people to cut the throats of the far right. No one's throats were cut after what he said.

It was rioters whose throats he suggested be cut.

You're perfectly aware that that isn't true. In the video he talks about the far right who put stickers with razor blades on trains. He didn't mention rioters.

Connolly pleaded guilty to intent to incite racial hatred. People tried to set light to occupied buildings and she was found guilty of intent to endanger life.

What did you find the most interesting part of the barristers commentary ? For me it was the details of the court process that were involved in LCs case and the fact of RJ being denied bail initially. And the fact that judges are very sniffy about politicians sticking their noses into cases (a point made by JRM from personal experience).

This again you see. A claim that RJs out burst was a nothing to see here moment. move along and LCs was inciting violence. He made his remarks because of the riots. It was rioters whose throats he suggested be cut. What did I want Starmer to do, you ask. Treat everyone from the aftermath the same maybe?