Lucy Connolly sentenced

[Rockalittle78]

Lucy Connolly sentenced to two and a half years.

Poor kids?
Two words
Hew Edwards

Our system is flawed

Makes you wonder what sentence Ricky Jones will get.

Hes evidently pleaded not guilty and is heading for trial...

Edit: I see another poster questioned the same.

We all feel that about Huw Edwards, Theuna, but he is absolutely finished, has no future, cannot hide (unless he has plastic surgery), will be vilified wherever he goes for the rest of his life. He has also lost his wife and family - goodness knows how his five adult children are coping with the shame, and the disbelief that their father is guilty of something so heimous. When he crosses my mind all I can see, frankly, is a black hole.

Lucy Connolly will probably be out in six months and able to carry on her life, may even be hailed as a martyr in some quarters.

I don't think we can compare the two cases, they are vastly different, like a drunk driver with a fraudster.

So you would send your children to be cared for by a violence inciting racist, because Huw Edwards didn’t receive a custodial sentence?

It will be interesting to compare her sentence to whatever Ricky Jones gets. He is black Labour councillor who said “They are disgusting Nazi fascists and we need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all.” This happened the same week and was in relation to the same current affairs though obviously he wanted white people dead.

He said this in person in a speech to a group of baying followers rather than on x.

She plead guilty, he has plead not guilty but it was filmed.

Did this result in any action taken do you know @SinisterBumFacedCat ?

It wasn’t the mass deportations bit that got her jailed, it was the setting fire to human beings bit that led to her sentence.

The problem with the free speech argument is that people confuse free speech with freedom of consequence. The classic argument is shouting fire in a crowded theatre that causes a stampede that leads to death and injury. The person yelling fire may have been exercising his right to free speech does that mean they shouldn’t face the consequences?

Lets remind ourselves what happened, a Christian citizen killed three young girls and the far right piled onto social media and spread misinformation about Muslim asylum seekers. As a consequence, thousands of people poured onto the streets to create riot and disorder, costing the country millions, terrifying innocent people and injuring police officers. A new government faced with a prison place crisis, released prisoners early to free up spaces so they could lock up the worst offenders and provide a deterrent. Some of those sentences appeared disproportionate but the aim was to provide a deterrent.

Being Britain, there is of course a class element, not many on mumsnet were complaining about Wayne the lager lout getting eighteen months rather than six but time has passed and when that pretty middle class lady gets a similar treatment for her part in this awful situation then it seems unfair. It isn’t, she may not have hurled bricks at police but why should Wayne have to do the time for his moment of madness while Lucy gets a slap on the wrist.

Are you disappointed that the leader of Hope Not Hate hasn’t also been jailed for a similar offence?

I don’t know about this case. Can you shed more light?

The leader of HNH erroneously tweeted about an acid attack on a Muslim woman in Middlesbrough which led to masked racist gangs on the streets looking to take revenge.

Cleveland police later confirmed that no such acid attack had ever taken place and that the whole incident was fabricated.

He apologised and nothing further was done.

FFS, she wasn't jailed for saying that asylum seekers should be deported. She was jailed for inciting people to burn down the hotels in which asylum seekers were accommodated.

Can you really not see the difference? Do you honestly think that "free speech" means that people should be free to call for certain groups of people to be burned alive as long as it's just a generalised rant and not a conspiracy with a specific group of thugs?

What happens if others read her words and are inspired and encouraged by that "rant on the Internet" to go out and threaten or kill real people?

Words have consequences. Personally, I think it's absolutely right that we have some guardrails around "free speech" that seek to curb the freedom to say things that are likely to threaten the safety of others. Inciting violence, even in the form of a "rant on the Internet" puts people at risk.

I mean it’s a stupid thing to do, but did he say “set fire to them” or anything similar? Racist gangs, you say? Who were they being racist towards?

Nothing.

Are you disappointed that the leader of Hope Not Hate hasn’t also been jailed for a similar offence?

Yes I'm disappointed that lots of people who I think should have sentences don't get them.

However in the HNH case he didn't incite people to go out and hurt others.

I think anyone who says incorrect information should suffer a consequence - ban for SM or something. But those who actually type for people to go out and harm others are as responsible as the dickheads who actually do it.

Words can be as harmful as actions.

@KatieL5 The cases are very different. Nick Lowles tweeted an unsubstantiated news story. That was a mistake, for which he apologised. Connelly called for direct violence against asylum seekers.

What’s the difference? Is there any action taken against people inciting violence against women ever?

I avoid a lot of SM but I’m sure it’s everywhere

Did Connelly not have a history of similar inciteful/racist tweets, or am I thinking of someone else? And there was a pattern with this specific tweet that put it at ground zero for a cascade of retweets that built up into the collective movement to target the asylum hotel.

That’s terrible. Why wasn’t any further action taken?

The HNH leader tweeted that there were reports of acid being thrown at a Muslim woman. It was a bloody irresponsible thing to do without properly fact checking whether the report was a reliable source, and he was rightly slated for it, but it wasn't a criminal act

Inciting setting fire to hotels full of people is slightly different. Lucy Connolly had thousands of followers and knew exactly what she was doing, she's a nasty racist. And seems to glory in being a racist.

The excuses a small number of posters keep coming up with to defend her actions and complain about the (short) jail sentence she's received are quite bizarre.

That's similar to Bernadette Spofforth's case.

She tweeted the fake name of Southport attacker and later apologised when she realised the information was wrong.

She was arrested but all charges were dropped.

Of course there isn't, expecting a bit much I'm afraid for people to be prosecuted for inciting violence against women.

The big difference between those 2 cases is that she proved that she was just retweeting what turned out to be incorrect information.

In the HNH case I’m not aware that it was a retweet as no evidence of an original source has been put forward as far as I know. Surely at the very least an arrest and investigation is needed to clarify this if people are to have confidence that the law is being administered consistently.

I wish Bernadette Spofforth could have been charged too - imo this whole issue is 'why can't more people face the consequences of their actions', not that Connolly's sentence is too harsh.

For the apologists, it seems the opposite: their starting point is poor Lucy Connolly, she didn't really mean it; she's a mum, it was a 'visceral moment', 'she's allowed to have racist opinions'.... etc etc etc

People do not have any confidence that the law is being administered consistently, it is now absolutely political which is a disgrace. Sarah Jane Baker was let off after telling a crowd to punch a terf - one of many cases of incitement of violence against women let off. And as I said upthread incitement against Jewish people has also been allowed. So seems to depend on the identity of the victim (and sometimes offender). And by the way to the poster upthread, there is absolutely no evidence the murderer is a Christian so you are as bad as those speculating on him being a Muslim.