By David Furness
Lucy Connolly faced charges for ‘stirring up racial hatred’ under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986 due to a social media post. However, the prosecution failed to identify which specific racial group was impacted. This oversight is similar to charging someone with theft without detailing what was actually stolen.
Police Techniques Used To Get A Conviction
A standard police interrogation technique involves presenting the accused with just two choices.
Option 1:
“You can plead not guilty, and then the case will proceed to trial. The jury will easily find you guilty on the evidence we have, and the judge will probably sentence you to jail for at least five years!“
Option 2:
“You can plead guilty, and then the case will proceed straight to sentencing. The judge will be pleased that you pleaded guilty, and you will probably get a suspended sentence. If the judge does impose a jail sentence, it will likely be for a short time, probably just a few months at most!“
Presenting the accused with only two options is a common tactic employed by law enforcement. This approach can be particularly intimidating for individuals who are experiencing an arrest and interrogation for the first time.
What the police may not tell the accused is that there is a third option.
Option 3:
“You can plead not guilty, and then the case will proceed to trial. The jury may find you not guilty on the evidence we have, and then you will be free to go.“
I suspect that Lucy Connolly was only given Options 1 and 2.
Jamie Michael was threatened with Option 1 (the maximum sentence of seven years for ‘stirring up racial hatred’ under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986) after he posted a video on Facebook encouraging people to protest against mass immigration. He added that illegal immigrants have “the numbers to take over” the country.
He made the bold decision to plead not guilty, opting to trust the jury to hear his case and render a fair judgment. When the case went to court, the jury found him not guilty in just 17 minutes.
In the high-stakes world of police interviews, another tactic they employ involves telling unsuspecting suspects they are free to walk away whenever they want. But there’s a twist—often, a stern-looking officer stands guard right in front of the door, creating an electrifying tension that keeps the suspect on edge! It’s a psychological game of cat and mouse that adds a layer of drama to the interrogation process.
Nationalists and patriots are under attack by this Labour government, so it’s essential to establish an effective system for handling questioning by the police. A pertinent comparison can be drawn to the legal protections in the United States, where individuals have a right under the Sixth Amendment to legal counsel if they are arrested. If a person cannot afford an attorney, a public defender or a court-appointed attorney will be made available. It is best for those who find themselves in such situations to assert this right, remain silent, and ask to consult with a lawyer before engaging in any questioning or discussing their case.
The ‘duty solicitor’ scheme in the UK is a resource that provides free and immediate legal advice to those suspected of a crime. This scheme can play a crucial role in our justice system, potentially influencing the outcome of cases. However, the police do not always inform suspects about this invaluable scheme, highlighting the need for greater awareness and transparency.
The ‘duty solicitor’ scheme, while a commendable initiative, has several disadvantages that underscore the need for improvement. Most of these duty solicitors are young and inexperienced. They have heavy caseloads, limited time and resources for individual cases, and a potential lack of specialised experience for specific charges. Typically, their services only cover a single initial court appearance; any further representation requires private payment or a successful application for legal aid.
Recognising these challenges, it becomes clear that there is a need to ensure that all individuals have access to fair and effective legal representation.
Many people mistakenly think that the police are always truthful—this is not the case! One of the main objectives of the police is to secure a conviction.
Lucy Connolly is believed to have received the longest prison sentence in the world for a single tweet.
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:
Lucy Connelly and others who have been treated in such a contemptible manner by this awful Government and it’s henchmen namely the Police should take legal action again Starmer’s regime for wrongful imprisonment this loathsome Prime Minister is on borrowed time Politically His administration needs removing a Nationalist Government is on the way all Foreigners allowed in from Blair’s 1997 Government to the Starmer Government 2024 should be expelled from Great Britain and to hell with the likes of Bolsheviks at the UN and ECHR
Don’t forget with the Southport murders Starmer and co came on tv and implied that these “rioters” must be locked up ASAP ! Any ambitious person in the police or judiciary will strive to get a “result” in order to advance themselves.
You missed the most important point.
Police arrest you and look you up in a cell on your own for an indeterminate time, at least a few hours. A so called interview follows. Most people are claustrophobic and will agree to anything to get out of the police station. Further unless you are a professional criminal your solicitor will side with the police, anything for an easy life.