Lucy Connolly, a mother and wife of a Tory councillor, was sentenced to 31 months in prison for a racist tweet expressing anger following the Southport stabbings. Her tweet, which called for the deportation of migrants and the burning of hotels, was widely condemned and viewed as inciting violence.
Connolly posted the tweet in the heat of the moment and deleted it within hours. However, it had already been viewed 310,000 times, and she was charged under Section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986. She pleaded guilty, hoping to expedite the process and return home to her family.
The judge linked Connolly's tweet to subsequent riots and gave her a 31-month sentence for inciting serious violence. The article's author, Jenni Murray, argues that this was disproportionate, comparing it to lenient sentences for domestic violence and the lack of prosecution for online misogynistic content. Many disagree with the harsh sentence given that she removed her tweet promptly, apologized, and showed no sign of further violence. Her request for ROTL (Release on Temporary Licence) was also denied due to press and public perception.
The author concludes that while Connolly's tweet was hateful and deserved punishment, a 31-month prison sentence was excessive and inappropriate given the circumstances. The case highlights concerns about the disproportionality of punishment for online hate speech, the need for consistent application of the law, and the impact of public and press perception on judicial decisions.