Edited to say that this was supposed to be posted in response to @MyBreezyGreyBiscuit in response to their 12.47pm post but I forgot to quote. Apologies - I have cut and pasted the text below.
It isn't an "alleged crime" is it. Jones was caught on video which is now on the thread and Connolly had her screen shots taken. How can a tweet of apathy on social media be equal to someone shouting cut their throats to a crowd regarding incitement?
A court system has jailed a woman for over 2 years for a tweet and sent a man home screaming "cut their throats" so yes it does need to be overhauled into the 21st century along with other outdated institutions like the house of Lords/ monarchy and stop these medieval traditions
All crimes are "alleged" until a court finds the defendant guilty.
In the case of Ricky Jones, you think it was a crime. For what it's worth, on the basis of what I've seen, I think it probably was too. However, rightly or wrongly, the court in this case did not agree. I don't actually know why the jury reached the verdict that they did after considering all of the evidence, but it doesn't matter, because it was their duty to decide and not mine. And not yours either.
We can't have a justice system that is based on what random people on the Internet might think, it is for the courts to decide. And whether you have juries or judges to determine guilt, or some other system, courts will always produce some verdicts that some members of the public disagree with. Either because the court has made a perverse decision or because the public don't necessarily have access to all of the relevant facts.
If you can't get your head around this, then I'm not sure that there is much point in debating the topic further. There is no perfect system which everyone will find perfectly fair all of the time, and there never will be. That doesn't mean that we have "two tier justice". It simply means that different people have different perceptions and interpretations of the same evidence. Courts are fallible. Judges are fallible. Juries are fallible. The general public are fallible. Sometimes, decisions are controversial. Sometimes, mistakes are made.
You seem to think that the only valid ustice system would be one which always reflects your own personal take on whether or not a crime has been committed and sentences which always reflect your own personal perception of how serious - or not - any particular crime might be. I'm sorry, but it isn't ever going to work that way.