Ricky Jones Cleared

[DancingFerret]

Unbelievable (but not unexpected).

www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-15003437/Labour-councillor-cleared-cutting-throats-comment-rally.html

@PandoraSocks

"So do you think the jury was rigged?"

of course the jury wasn't rigged but bearing in mind you only need more than 3 jurors out of 12 to find him not guilty for the case to be dismissed then I do believe that more than 3 jurors were influenced in their decision by their own personal political sympathies rather than the (video) legal evidence presented to them.

Having a jury decision based upon the jurors political views means that any crimes involving a political opinion, sympathies or side creates a scenario where offenders can be let off regardless of the legal evidence put to them.

This in turn creates a two tier judicial system based on political sympathies. It also brings into question whether the jury system is still fit for purpose.

I think I have made it very clear that I have zero sympathy for either of them. I am only commenting on the fact that the jury in one case decided that he was not guilty, and that is the end of the matter. Suggesting the jury was somehow rigged to come to this conclusion is insanity. But this is MN so insanity on these matters is hardly unusual.

As for empathy I have no empathy for people who advicate violence against others. Something that an awful lot of people on this site do not share, based on many posts advocating or empathising with the deliberate murder of asylum seekers. But I won't be answering further and will be hiding this thread - the MN baying mobs may have at their echo chamber.

I mention the jury a lot, because it delivered the verdict!

But why the need to say that they need protecting? When no-one else has mentioned them?

How can one not meet the threshold of the charge and the other be so egregious that a sentence of three years be beyond the threshold of an appeal? When the former is whipping up a crowd of protesters to commit murder and the other is a tweet that expressed apathy if other people committed murder?

I mean, I understand how that can happen, but how can you sell this to a population who has less and less faith in a judicial system they believe to be ideologically rigged?

You were the only one suggesting that the jury was rigged! You put words into other people's mouths.

I'm a Tory councillor in a large city (not specifying for obvious reasons) This really worries me. You bet if he'd been reform or Tory, he'd have been convicted. I've received abuse and rape threats online and it's now spreading to the doorstep. This will put off decent people wanting to make a difference in their area from standing for election, especially women.

The jury wasn't rigged of course, but different courts tend to have juries that lean one way or another. Oxford is famously liberal for example.

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

We all saw and heard what Jones did. We all read what Lucy Connolly tweeted. We've all seen what justice was served on both. Whatever the reason we can all see this is not equal justice.

Yep

Telling people to burn hotels whilst occupied is passive?

Pretty much this.

The optics of this are very poor. The law appears to be an ass.

No, I meant empathy.
I have no sympathy for what LC did, she was wrong. But I do have empathy for her when I see what's happened to her since.

It's not an airport...

What do you think her tweet said?

It was passive, his was active

Ricky Jones is a nasty piece of work. The jury made a decision that is hard to understand. But there is a lot of hate being whipped up online against the jury. Really horrible things are being said on X.

That is why I said what I said.

Mass deportation now. Set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards for all I care. While you’re at it, take the treacherous government and politicians with them. I feel physically sick knowing what these families will now have to endure. If that makes me racist, so be it.

It was shared over 300k, she pleaded guilty to incitement to stir up racial hatred before a racist riot where people attempted exactly that. Hardly passive.

Agree with your comment about X. Which is why I said the optics are awful, this is going to cause even more anger towards Labour. They are perceived as Teflon with no accountability. This verdict just solidifies that opinion and increases Reform popularity.

An all blind and deaf jury then. It stinks.

The ‘for all I care’ is what makes it passive.

She’s not telling people to burn hotels, she saying she doesn’t care if they do.

It’s not the same thing.

It’s not a nice tweet, but it’s also not telling people to burn hotels as you stated.

If we’re going to discuss this it’s important that we do so with accuracy, and not put words into peoples mouths.

But this case wasn't dismissed. The jury found him not guilty. It was a unanimous decision by the jury taken after less than an hour of deliberation. The judge would not accept a majority verdict after such a short length of time.

Just for the record, I am also surprised by the verdict but the point here is that none of us know the reasons why that decision was taken. Maybe we will learn more in time.

Edited to add this was in response to the post from @1dayatatime regarding cases being dismissed. The quote didn't attach for some reason.

RJ said so and we must believe the disingenuous, cowardly piece of sh*t.

“Everything I don’t like must be a left wing conspiracy”

Agree; I've heard similar attitudes from others being called for jury duty. I remember watching that jury experiment on the TV; they took two different groups and observed how they responded to a renactment of a real case. Both came up with different results but what shocked me were the attitudes and biases emerging within the jury members. I'm wondering if something similar happened here.

Ah unlike everything against Labour = Russian/Reform manipulation of the media + spreading of misinformation??