Lucy Connolly appeal Rejected

Maybe because they regard any potential victims as "lesser" in some way?

Because we hold different views. We think the sentencing was too harsh. I hold particular views about non violent offences, I don't actually think if she hadn't pled guilty she would have been found guilty of incitement, etc, all sorts of reasons. But it is nearly impossible to have those discussions.

Do you mean people in this thread lafegar.

growstuff

I think you and I want to live in the same kind of society Doodledog.

Me too

Galaxy

Because we hold different views. We think the sentencing was too harsh. I hold particular views about non violent offences, I don't actually think if she hadn't pled guilty she would have been found guilty of incitement, etc, all sorts of reasons. But it is nearly impossible to have those discussions.

No, it's not impossible to have those kind of discussions. I don't think the question has been raised. The fact that you're giving your opinion shows that it's not impossible to state it.

I think Galaxy you are using the royal ‘we’. People disagree, but you don’t get threads that run to over 200 comments where there has not been a proper discussion, with many different views aired. Do you mean that this discussion hasn’t covered a very particular aspect that that you personally want to discuss- that she did plead guilty, a discussion of ‘what if’ she didn’t?

Well, in terms of "had she pled guilty", the same evidence would have come out as in the sentencing appeal. All the things she posted, the psychiatrists report, the explanation of the law and its definition as applied. The very public airing of family matters...I dont see how it would have been different.

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

Points 48 and 49 are relevant as to did she understand the full implications of pleading guilty including a custodial sentence. Also that a psychiatric report had already been done.

The post in question encouraged people to murder other people. If Lucy does not know it's illegal to do so she will know now. However it seems she is stupidly reactive and misinformed. She needs anger management.

She 'deserves' a prison sentence as someone who broke that law, , but pragmatically she is unlikely to be an effective criminal in future. And the use to society for imprisoning her will demonstrate that incitement to murder will not be tolerated. It is probably worth paying the cost of imprisoning her.

I mean that it is quite difficult to have the conversation because people focus on the idea that those who question the sentence are of 'the right' or see others as lesser, etc, and I don't think that is the case for many of the posters on here who are asking questions.
Its not her circumstances, it is more that they would have had to demonstrate it was incitement and there are quite strict criteria for that, the wording of the tweet ' for all I care' would I think have caused them difficulty. A number of those from the Southport riots who went down the not guilty route and who sought advice from the FSU were found not guilty.

Galaxy

I mean that it is quite difficult to have the conversation because people focus on the idea that those who question the sentence are of 'the right' or see others as lesser, etc, and I don't think that is the case for many of the posters on here who are asking questions.
Its not her circumstances, it is more that they would have had to demonstrate it was incitement and there are quite strict criteria for that, the wording of the tweet ' for all I care' would I think have caused them difficulty. A number of those from the Southport riots who went down the not guilty route and who sought advice from the FSU were found not guilty.

Why would that phrase have caused difficulty? This is what she tweeted:

“Mass deportation now. Set fire to all the f***ing 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.”

To me, "for all I care" implies that she couldn't care if people died - quite honestly, that (to my mind) makes what she wrote even worse.

In any case, she did plead guilty. Her appeal wasn't based on any alleged right to free speech. The judge and the appeal court followed procedures. In the judgment, the appeal judges were quite clear that what she wrote was incitement.

I haven't claimed that anybody who disagrees with the courts' decisions is "of the right" or see them as "lesser". Where is the evidence for your claim?

I just happen to believe that the sentencing was right and that procedures were followed. It's not actually relevant to the case directly, but I don't want to live in a society where people think they have the right to encourage others to commit murderous acts, however aggrieved they may be.

This vile woman knew exactly what she was doing and deserved to be punished, why would anyone try to defend her

This was the question I answered with a possible reason. I don't know why people seek to defend, raise funds or mention the likes of Edwards.
I did not mention "the right"

Here is an example of one who was found not guilty. He posted some pretty nasty stuff, but did not directly incite rioting, murdering and fire attacks. He certainly shared really horrible hate!

uk.news.yahoo.com/wing-former-prison-officer-not-135123933.html

so judges were being very precise as to what constitutes the offences Connelly was charged with

lafergar

*This vile woman knew exactly what she was doing and deserved to be punished, why would anyone try to defend her*

This was the question I answered with a possible reason. I don't know why people seek to defend, raise funds or mention the likes of Edwards.
I did not mention "the right"

I haven’t (and wouldn’t) defend Lucy Connolly.

I just think that the due to the prison system being on its knees, it is time for a rethink regarding what constitutes a crime deemed suitable for a prison sentence.

Cyber and online crime is relatively new, robbery, rape, child abuse and crimes of violence are age old.

Maybe it’s all in the publics perception of crimes and the punishment along with who is the perpetrator, which leads to such divides…

Relevant laws have been in place for some time but you are probably right that public perception may differ greatly - but on the other hand, thinking on it, so has public perception of rape and child abuse.

The ground breaking TV series "Obsession" has definitely brought online hate crime into the spotlight, this was misogyny not racial but what it does show is just how powerful social media is and how it can incite and to take it seriously.

growstuff

I haven't claimed that anybody who disagrees with the courts' decisions is "of the right" or see them as "lesser". Where is the evidence for your claim?

I just happen to believe that the sentencing was right and that procedures were followed. It's not actually relevant to the case directly, but I don't want to live in a society where people think they have the right to encourage others to commit murderous acts, however aggrieved they may be.

It’s what lafergar wrote in the post at the top of this page.
No, we even if it’s only Galaxy and me ( it isn’t) think the sentence too harsh and agree that she should have pleaded not guilty.We don’t see the potential victims in this case as ‘lesser’ at all.
Why doesn’t everyone agree that we all have different views on this case, or indeed, any other.

lafergar

*This vile woman knew exactly what she was doing and deserved to be punished, why would anyone try to defend her*

This was the question I answered with a possible reason. I don't know why people seek to defend, raise funds or mention the likes of Edwards.
I did not mention "the right"

I see quite clearly that you don’t see why even tho posters have explained their thoughts.

GrannyGravy13 I wouldn't disagree that there needs to be a review of custodial sentencing, not just because it's expensive but whether or not it works. There are so many different views about what a prison sentence should be about. Is it revenge, a deterrent, to keep people out of society?

Nevertheless, it wasn't in the judge's or the appeal court's remit to conduct a review of sentencing procedures. They had to work with the laws as they currently stand.

The present government are thinking about letting violent offenders out of prison after serving a third only of their sentence.

Oreo

growstuff

I haven't claimed that anybody who disagrees with the courts' decisions is "of the right" or see them as "lesser". Where is the evidence for your claim?

I just happen to believe that the sentencing was right and that procedures were followed. It's not actually relevant to the case directly, but I don't want to live in a society where people think they have the right to encourage others to commit murderous acts, however aggrieved they may be.

It’s what lafergar wrote in the post at the top of this page.
No, we even if it’s only Galaxy and me ( it isn’t) think the sentence too harsh and agree that she should have pleaded not guilty.We don’t see the potential victims in this case as ‘lesser’ at all.
Why doesn’t everyone agree that we all have different views on this case, or indeed, any other.

I do agree that we all have different views. I'm not at all sure who is considered "lesser".

I happen to think you and Galaxy are wrong - I'm sure you would agree that I have every right to my opinion.

Oreo

The present government are thinking about letting violent offenders out of prison after serving a third only of their sentence.

I know. It's irrelevant.

It isn't only me and you Oreo, lots of discussion from many including those on the left about the sentencing, the tweet etc.

Its complicated!

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cql22xwg62vo#:~:text=Violent%20prisoners%2C%20including%20those%20convicted,made%20in%20a%20landmark%20review.

What do we take money from to fund prisons/community alternatives?

Galaxy

It isn't only me and you Oreo, lots of discussion from many including those on the left about the sentencing, the tweet etc.

Thousands of people agree with you Galaxy. I have listened to many radio phone ins and TV discussions regarding this and I would say the overwhelming majority agree with you.

Nobody agrees with the comments she made, but there is no proof her comments incited anybody to take part in criminal activities. Often Mothers are spared prison if they have young children, which she has. They are punished by other means. She has been singled out for special treatment which was announced before she was sentenced and that is very wrong.

I was a bit startled to find I was on the 'same side' as Jeremy Corbyn for about 5 minutes but he seems to have changed his mind.