By David Furness
The situation involving Lucy Connolly brings to light essential issues surrounding free speech in Britain today. Her experience resonates with wider concerns about civil liberties and freedom of expression. It has captured global attention, particularly on social media, where it went viral. Elon Musk shared a tweet regarding her case, which has been viewed over 58 million times.
Lucy Connolly is a devoted young mother and a supportive wife to her ill husband. Widely respected in her community, she excels as a childminder and is respected by the families she works with.
However, after the horrific murder of three little girls and the attempted murder of ten others by the son of Rwandan migrants in Southport last summer, she tweeted the following:
“Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f—ing hotels full of the b—–ds 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.”
Lucy Connolly quickly recognised her error and deleted the tweet. However, by then, it had already been seen by over 250,000 people. While her comments were ill-considered, does that warrant a nearly three-year prison sentence? She felt pressured to plead guilty and was denied bail. Although she became eligible for temporary release last November, prison authorities continue to deny her the chance to spend time with her 12-year-old daughter and ailing husband.
The treatment of Lucy Connolly by the British state and the justice system, with the backing of Prime Minister Keir Starmer, is atrocious. This case illustrates Britain’s ‘two-tier’ justice system.
Had she not been white, her treatment would have differed. She would likely have received a suspended or significantly reduced sentence.
The Sentencing Council has recently put forward a proposal suggesting that being part of a religious, gender, or racial minority group should be viewed as a mitigating factor during sentencing. This proposal raises the concern that white individuals might receive harsher penalties. Furthermore, it appears that considerations such as being a first-time offender, caring for a seriously ill spouse, having a young child, or being on medication aren’t given proper weight in sentencing decisions. It also seems that experiencing PTSD does not seem to qualify as a mitigating factor.
Lucy Connolly lost her firstborn, aged just 19 months, due to inadequate care from the NHS. She was diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), from which she has never fully recovered. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that she felt deeply distressed by the atrocity involving young children in Southport.
PTSD is an anxiety disorder that arises from extremely stressful, frightening, or distressing events, especially after prolonged traumatic experiences. I can personally attest to this definition. I narrowly escaped a house fire and collapsed on the front lawn. I was taken to the hospital by ambulance and treated for smoke inhalation. For a long time afterwards, even the mention of the word ‘smoke’ would visibly upset me.
The Labour government has implemented an ‘early release’ program to reduce prison overcrowding. One such inmate, Lewis Bell, who had been convicted of violent disorder, was released under this scheme. On the very same day of his release, he went on to kill someone.
This case vividly illustrates our ‘two-tier’ justice system, which is releasing violent criminals from prison to make way for Lucy Connolly and others who posted ill-judged comments on social media.
This two-tier justice system recently decided to give Labour Member of Parliament Mike Amesbury a suspended sentence after he was caught on camera physically assaulting one of his constituents. In striking contrast, Lucy Connolly, who did not punch anyone, received a nearly three-year sentence.
A disgraced former BBC News presenter named Huw Edwards somehow managed to avoid jail because he was given a suspended jail sentence for making indecent images of children.
On a quiet residential street in Hertfordshire, two police cars and a police van came to a screeching halt. Six police officers stepped out to arrest a couple who had been arguing—via WhatsApp—with their daughter’s school. The pair were taken into custody and spent eight hours in a police cell. After a five-week investigation, the police informed the couple that no further action would be taken against them.
Astonishingly, British police authorities make approximately 12,000 arrests yearly due to online media posts. Many of these arrests occur because someone feels anxious or uncomfortable when reading these posts.
It’s now abundantly clear that Starmer and the Labour government are utterly determined to destroy free speech in Britain, especially when it relates to mass immigration and the explosive rise in illegal immigrants and bogus asylum seekers. So, they will use any excuse whatsoever to harass, bully and threaten to send people to jail.
Freedom of speech can sometimes come across as confrontational. However, speech may be deemed incitement when it’s likely to lead to imminent violence or a crime. If you face arrest because of something you’ve posted online, remember that advice from a duty solicitor to plead guilty might not always be the best move. Consulting with an independent lawyer could provide you with better options.
Royal Marine Jamie Michael was arrested and charged after sharing a video online—days after the Southport murders—criticising illegal migration and calling for peaceful protests. He was charged with stirring up racial hatred. In the video, he said that illegal immigrants have “the numbers to take over” the country.
Unlike many others in his situation who were arrested for expressing their views on the internet, Jamie Michael did not plead guilty. So, it went to trial, and the jury took less than an hour to find him not guilty.
Join us!
Click here to join us as a member.
Or sign up for our free email newsletter at the bottom of the page.
Follow us and share our content on these social media platforms using the links below:
Excellent article by Dave Furness. The two tier justice system has long been in place, it is only now that they are making it official. The next step will be even more politically correct media censorship and the persecution of those who reveal what the mass media is seeking to hide and distort.
Well done for telling the truth