She was advocating terrorism and should have been charged under section1, Terrorism Act, 2006. She wasn't, whereas a Muslim who posted an equivalent tweet almost certainly would have been. She has got off very lightly.
There should be no excuses made for her and is rightly serving an extensive prison sentence. But by the same measure Labour councillor Ricky Jones should be looking to serve a similar sentence when he was filmed calling for "throats to be slit" of what he deemed as "right wing nazi" counter protesters who opposed the free Palestine marches. What's good for the goose is good for the gander 🪿 🤷🏻♂️
This is not true. If you check sentences, muslims invariably get lighter sentences than whites and are not even charged for crimes whites are, that is why imans can say similar disgusting things and there are no consequences to them.
@@KeithBrighouse-m4g What do you mean "check"? What you assert cannot be checked as you have used categories which are meaningless and unverifiable in terms of sentencing data. What if a Muslim is white, as 8-10% of Muslims in the UK are?
It seems harsh unless you've discussed with these people, they recklessly spew hate from the side lines egging people on to do terrible deeds from the safety of their keyboards, such incitement must have consequences.
Lucy Connolly’s child did not die through NHS neglect. That was an entirely different Lucy Connolly that happened to be married to an Asian gentleman in Northampton.
Normally I would say a prison sentence should only rarely be the answer to criminal behavior. Usually though when I say that I have in mind a fairly typical type of offender. A younger person, likely from a disadvantaged background, possibly with a history of anti social and/or criminal behavior and substance abuse, problems at school and home, and so on, the type of court attendee that I am familiar with all too well. However this woman had led a privileged life, she was in a stable economic situation, no previous criminal history, a mother aged 44 years old, in short, she has no good excuse. There is little to take in mitigation for her crimes. Calling for arson and murder, with all the racial aggravation in the world. She probably deserves prison. Maybe it will give her time to reflect fully upon the nature of her offence.
The court more or less agreed with you. I also think "lack of privilege" isn´t much of an excuse for most crimes. Most people I know from poor backgrounds, wouldn´t dream of doing something like this, no matter their views on immigration etc.
@@Minimmalmythicist It is a fact that most prisoners of the UK, come from disadvantaged backgrounds often replete with abusive and/or substance abusing carers/parents. Approximately 70% of prisoners are the victims of serious child abuse. Physical psychological and otherwise. Many prisoners are illiterate or semi literate. Around 80% of prisoners have substance abuse issues. The correlation is undeniable from my pov.
@@Minimmalmythicist We should expect better from one whom has had opportunity and access, to develop and grow. Although perhaps the word excuse, is problematic. A better word is mitigation.
@@Minimmalmythicist One other thing is that while there are many different crimes one can commit. There are particular types of crime, that are very common and make up the bulk of offending, such as burglary and other offences of dishonesty, also drug offences are a bread and butter staple of any magistrates court. Offences like the one we are discussing, are much less frequent. The kind of people that fill our prisons and clogging our courts and keeping our officers busy, are not calling for genocidal acts online. They are instead, seeking to get high or obtain easy money, mostly.
@@DoubleDragon539 It´s an interesting question as to how much personal mitigation there can be for harsh personal circumstances. I do think someone shoplifting because they are dirt poor is different to someone rich who does it just because they want more shiny things. I think for some offences it isn´t of any value of mitigation at all, i.e violently assaulting people, participating in riots, inciting racial hatred.
There should be no excuses made for her and is rightly serving an extensive prison sentence. But by the same measure Labour councillor Ricky Jones should be looking to serve a similar sentence when he was filmed calling for "throats to be slit" of what he deemed as "right wing nazi" counter protesters who opposed the free Palestine marches. What's good for the goose is good for the gander 🪿 🤷🏻♂️
There should be no excuses made for her and is rightly serving an extensive prison sentence. But by the same measure Labour councillor Ricky Jones should be looking to serve a similar sentence when he was filmed calling for "throats to be slit" of what he deemed as "right wing nazi" counter protesters who opposed the free Palestine marches. What's good for the goose is good for the gander 🪿 🤷🏻♂️
Freedom of Speech to me means freedom from the government for what you say... It doesn't defend one from me or other private individuals. At least that's the way it works in the USA but conservatives often think that it gives them freedom from the repercussions of what they say.
I must disagree. If she had said this on a random facebook post, let´s say when nothing much was going on, then I would agree with you and the courts would probably agree too. If you do it, when you know far right mobs are actively targetting mosques, then you deserve to go to jail. You´re effectively pouring petrol on a volatile situation.
People put; (he/him), (she/her), (they/them) to indicate their preferred pronouns, so that it's clear for others to use in conversation. It's particularly useful if someone's pronouns are not easily identifiable, like a non-gender specific name; like "George", or "Sam". It simplifies things, so no one need worry about offending others, or having to ask what they may feel is an awkward question, or making assumptions... Basically treating people with respect, kindness, and consideration.
@JimmyDreadNDMS but it's already simple. He's a man, everyone can see that. How would someone make a mistake? And why is it so offensive if someone thinks he's a woman?
I'm hoping you're asking in good faith, but even if you're not, someone will be reading it, and genuinely curious. No one should be offended, because their is nothing wrong with being who you are are; however, society socialised us to see certain traits as inferior and superior, plus, people want to be recognised for who they are. One man with an effeminate voice, might not be offended by being misgendered, another might; and vice versa. It would be great to fix all the social issues in society, but in the meantime, if we can, let's address ways to mitigate the issues around them. Does that make sense?
The amount of racist and far right TH-camrs trying to excuse her posts is approaching the hundreds. Virtually all, careful not to actually include her “Posts”. She is lucky she was not charged with “threats to kill”
Using the law to prosecute somebody for something they've said makes me feel incredibly uncomfortable. There's not a government in the world I would want to have that power. But this is not a "free speech" issue, I think that needs to be the angle we approach this from. She incited to violence, from an (slightly, because of her Tory connections) influential position. We have to be able to say and dispute controversial and offensive topics; but the law is clear (well, technically, if not in practice): if someone feels plausibly afraid that you will commit violence upon them, that's assault -- the actual assault is not needed. She encouraged mobs to burn people alive. This is a criminal issue, not a free speech issue.
She should have been locked up for applying 1000 filters to her Facebook photo. Her mug shot doesn't even resemble the photo that was used by the media.
She was advocating terrorism and should have been charged under section1, Terrorism Act, 2006. She wasn't, whereas a Muslim who posted an equivalent tweet almost certainly would have been. She has got off very lightly.
There should be no excuses made for her and is rightly serving an extensive prison sentence.
But by the same measure Labour councillor Ricky Jones should be looking to serve a similar sentence when he was filmed calling for "throats to be slit" of what he deemed as "right wing nazi" counter protesters who opposed the free Palestine marches.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander 🪿 🤷🏻♂️
This is not true. If you check sentences, muslims invariably get lighter sentences than whites and are not even charged for crimes whites are, that is why imans can say similar disgusting things and there are no consequences to them.
@@KeithBrighouse-m4g What do you mean "check"? What you assert cannot be checked as you have used categories which are meaningless and unverifiable in terms of sentencing data. What if a Muslim is white, as 8-10% of Muslims in the UK are?
Too bad she is a mum but there were mums and kids in those hotels
nhs neglect? what does that have to do with being a racist bigot
It seems harsh unless you've discussed with these people, they recklessly spew hate from the side lines egging people on to do terrible deeds from the safety of their keyboards, such incitement must have consequences.
She's in the "Find out" part of the two part system 😅
She looks like Kate Middleton. Lock her up
Lol😂😂😂
clown
Thank you for speaking sensibly rationally and reasonably.
It is very easy to be right wing
At long last someone learns about cause and effect.
Tiktok ffs
If a grown man uses tiktok, his opinion on anything can be safely dismissed
Lucy Connolly’s child did not die through NHS neglect. That was an entirely different Lucy Connolly that happened to be married to an Asian gentleman in Northampton.
I bet she was put away just for threatening the politicians as the country doesn't seem to care about vulnerable people at all.
Political prisoner 😂
Normally I would say a prison sentence should only rarely be the answer to criminal behavior. Usually though when I say that I have in mind a fairly typical type of offender. A younger person, likely from a disadvantaged background, possibly with a history of anti social and/or criminal behavior and substance abuse, problems at school and home, and so on, the type of court attendee that I am familiar with all too well. However this woman had led a privileged life, she was in a stable economic situation, no previous criminal history, a mother aged 44 years old, in short, she has no good excuse. There is little to take in mitigation for her crimes. Calling for arson and murder, with all the racial aggravation in the world. She probably deserves prison. Maybe it will give her time to reflect fully upon the nature of her offence.
The court more or less agreed with you. I also think "lack of privilege" isn´t much of an excuse for most crimes. Most people I know from poor backgrounds, wouldn´t dream of doing something like this, no matter their views on immigration etc.
@@Minimmalmythicist It is a fact that most prisoners of the UK, come from disadvantaged backgrounds often replete with abusive and/or substance abusing carers/parents. Approximately 70% of prisoners are the victims of serious child abuse. Physical psychological and otherwise. Many prisoners are illiterate or semi literate. Around 80% of prisoners have substance abuse issues. The correlation is undeniable from my pov.
@@Minimmalmythicist We should expect better from one whom has had opportunity and access, to develop and grow. Although perhaps the word excuse, is problematic. A better word is mitigation.
@@Minimmalmythicist One other thing is that while there are many different crimes one can commit. There are particular types of crime, that are very common and make up the bulk of offending, such as burglary and other offences of dishonesty, also drug offences are a bread and butter staple of any magistrates court. Offences like the one we are discussing, are much less frequent. The kind of people that fill our prisons and clogging our courts and keeping our officers busy, are not calling for genocidal acts online. They are instead, seeking to get high or obtain easy money, mostly.
@@DoubleDragon539 It´s an interesting question as to how much personal mitigation there can be for harsh personal circumstances.
I do think someone shoplifting because they are dirt poor is different to someone rich who does it just because they want more shiny things.
I think for some offences it isn´t of any value of mitigation at all, i.e violently assaulting people, participating in riots, inciting racial hatred.
This might be you one day in the future,
Well it would never be me as I'd never go onto a forum and spout racist bile wishing the demise of others.
Two x's. The law is dead.
She didn't have the right to defend herself against genocide.
What an animal should have been a longer sentence now What do we do about the extreme right wing in England what's going on in England
sadly groups like AFA and Red Action and Class War who removed the far right from street politics in the 90's are no longer around !
There should be no excuses made for her and is rightly serving an extensive prison sentence.
But by the same measure Labour councillor Ricky Jones should be looking to serve a similar sentence when he was filmed calling for "throats to be slit" of what he deemed as "right wing nazi" counter protesters who opposed the free Palestine marches.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander 🪿 🤷🏻♂️
Define extreme right
Undercover documentary Channel Four Monday night.@@Anygodwilldo
British Empire tings
There should be no excuses made for her and is rightly serving an extensive prison sentence.
But by the same measure Labour councillor Ricky Jones should be looking to serve a similar sentence when he was filmed calling for "throats to be slit" of what he deemed as "right wing nazi" counter protesters who opposed the free Palestine marches.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander 🪿 🤷🏻♂️
Curtis, The Farage Riots not Race riots!
Even in the US this would be covered under the fighting words exception to the first amendment…
Freedom of Speech to me means freedom from the government for what you say... It doesn't defend one from me or other private individuals. At least that's the way it works in the USA but conservatives often think that it gives them freedom from the repercussions of what they say.
this is brilliant :)
The Right's reaction is laughable..Yet i think she should have got a suspended sentence..
I must disagree. If she had said this on a random facebook post, let´s say when nothing much was going on, then I would agree with you and the courts would probably agree too.
If you do it, when you know far right mobs are actively targetting mosques, then you deserve to go to jail. You´re effectively pouring petrol on a volatile situation.
Problem is random hate was close to inciting murder.
Hi guys, hope you're well
I asked this before but nobody answered
Why does he type he and him after his name?
Please reply specifically, thanks
He is advising of his preferred pronouns. No biggie.
Please reply, thanks.
why do people like this type he and him? I mean what precisely goes through their mind when they actively decide to do this?
People put; (he/him), (she/her), (they/them) to indicate their preferred pronouns, so that it's clear for others to use in conversation.
It's particularly useful if someone's pronouns are not easily identifiable, like a non-gender specific name; like "George", or "Sam".
It simplifies things, so no one need worry about offending others, or having to ask what they may feel is an awkward question, or making assumptions...
Basically treating people with respect, kindness, and consideration.
@JimmyDreadNDMS but it's already simple. He's a man, everyone can see that. How would someone make a mistake?
And why is it so offensive if someone thinks he's a woman?
I'm hoping you're asking in good faith, but even if you're not, someone will be reading it, and genuinely curious.
No one should be offended, because their is nothing wrong with being who you are are; however, society socialised us to see certain traits as inferior and superior, plus, people want to be recognised for who they are.
One man with an effeminate voice, might not be offended by being misgendered, another might; and vice versa. It would be great to fix all the social issues in society, but in the meantime, if we can, let's address ways to mitigate the issues around them. Does that make sense?
The amount of racist and far right TH-camrs trying to excuse her posts is approaching the hundreds. Virtually all, careful not to actually include her “Posts”. She is lucky she was not charged with “threats to kill”
@@MadeleineTakam why is every thing far right and nazi with you lot .grow the f up you stupid child .
It's best to have the facts before you go off on an intoxicated (probably) rant.
The facts in this case are clear, she incited a mob during a riot and was rightly punished for it.
Daviemooo sounds like a mincer 😂
Why, do you fancy him?
You sound like a dickhead
Thing is, what do you sound like?
Using the law to prosecute somebody for something they've said makes me feel incredibly uncomfortable. There's not a government in the world I would want to have that power. But this is not a "free speech" issue, I think that needs to be the angle we approach this from. She incited to violence, from an (slightly, because of her Tory connections) influential position.
We have to be able to say and dispute controversial and offensive topics; but the law is clear (well, technically, if not in practice): if someone feels plausibly afraid that you will commit violence upon them, that's assault -- the actual assault is not needed. She encouraged mobs to burn people alive. This is a criminal issue, not a free speech issue.
She should have been locked up for applying 1000 filters to her Facebook photo. Her mug shot doesn't even resemble the photo that was used by the media.
😂😂😂 lefty shills
31 months it should have been 60 months