Petition questioning jail sentences for online posts hits target
A petition calling for an urgent review of sentencing after a woman was jailed for a racist social media post has hit its target of 100,000 signatures in under 24 hours.Lucy Connolly, from Northampton, was jailed for 31 months in October after urging her followers on X to "set fire" to hotels housing asylum seekers on the day of the Southport attacks.Ex-Reform UK MP Rupert Lowe's online petition said prison terms for cases of "opinion-based online speech" caused "serious public concern" and alternative sanctions would be more appropriate.Connolly's appeal was rejected in May, with the Court of Appeal ruling there was "no arguable basis" that her prison sentence was excessive.
The 41-year-old childminder, the wife of a Conservative councillor, posted the swearword-ridden message on 29 July 2024, the day three girls were murdered at a dance class in Southport.While calling for "mass deportations now", she wrote: "If that makes me racist, so be it."She urged readers to set fire to "all the hotels" that were "full" of those she wished to deport.The post had been deleted before Connolly was arrested on 6 August but had already been viewed 310,000 times.Lowe, who represents Great Yarmouth as an Independent, said the jailing of Connolly was "morally repugnant" and his petition had the full support of her husband, Ray."Lucy, and others like her, should not be in prison for foolish things they posted on the internet," said Lowe in a post on X."It's all just so disgusting, and if I can use my elected position to do anything, it has to be worth a go."
The petition says imprisoning individuals for posts on social media "sets a dangerous precedent and raises wider questions about freedom of expression, proportionality in sentencing, and the misuse of limited prison resources."The day after Connolly's appeal was rejected, Sir Keir Starmer said he was in favour of free speech and against inciting violence after Lowe used Prime Minister's Questions to ask if her jail term was an "efficient or fair" use of prison.A UK Government and Parliament petition that attains 100,000 signatures is assessed by the Petitions Committee for its level of support and whether the government could act on its demands. If approved for consideration, it is then debated in Westminster Hall.
Follow Northamptonshire news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
29 minutes ago
- The Sun
TV star Selina Scott viciously attacked and robbed by gang of eight in lawless London as she slams police
BROADCASTER Selina Scott was viciously attacked and robbed by a gang in broad daylight last week, she revealed. The ex- ITV News at Ten anchor, 74, bravely fought back but said the ordeal left her 'shattered and traumatised'. She said she was leaving a Waterstones in Piccadilly, Central London, when she was struck on the back of her right knee and thought she had been stabbed. A gang of around seven or eight men and women, in expensive sportswear and seemingly of East Asian origin, who were in front of her then turned and hemmed her in. They tried to grab her designer backpack, which she tightly held onto. Another group then barged into her and she realised she was being 'attacked from both sides at the same time'. Selina managed to keep hold of the bag when she fought back and the gang walked off laughing. She later realised they managed to unzip the bag and take her purse, which had her driving license, cards and cash. Ms Scott, a TV icon since the 1980s who famously interviewed Donald Trump, slammed the lack of police presence to deter or catch the criminal thugs. She said she walked 'up and down some of London's busiest central areas' and did not see a single officer. The journalist wrote in the Mail on Sunday that the events were 'so swift and practised that it was clear it was a coordinated assault." She added: 'I was right by a busy bus stop, although no one would have known what was going on. "It was slick, brief and clearly engineered to happen in the middle of a crowd. 'I still feel shattered after what has happened. I can't believe it happened to me. 'I'm mentally resilient and physically fit, but if they can attack me in such a brazen way they can attack anyone. 'You're left feeling not just traumatised, but stupid that you have somehow let it happen. 'I'm also furious about the lack of police on our streets. No wonder the gang who set about me have a sense of impunity - they can do anything they want because they know no one will stop them.' She suffered bruising to her leg but said she was relieved they did not use a knife. The Met Police said: 'While we understand that the victim was frustrated that she couldn't see any police officers on the street, a significant number of officers patrol the West End every day - not just in uniform on foot, but also in plain clothes and in vehicles to have the best opportunity to identify and apprehend suspects. 'We would be happy to talk to the victim to better understand her concerns.' 2
The Guardian
29 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Kneecap's Glastonbury performance not ‘appropriate', says Keir Starmer
Kneecap's Glastonbury festival performance next Saturday is not 'appropriate', Keir Starmer has said. Kneecap member Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh appeared in court on Wednesday after allegedly displaying a flag in support of the proscribed terrorist organisation Hezbollah and saying 'up Hamas, up Hezbollah' at a gig in November last year. In an interview with the Sun, the prime minister was asked if he thought the trio should perform at Glastonbury. 'No, I don't, and I think we need to come down really clearly on this,' Starmer said. 'This is about the threats that shouldn't be made, I won't say too much because there's a court case on, but I don't think that's appropriate.' Earlier on Saturday the Conservative party leader, Kemi Badenoch, said she thought the BBC 'should not be showing' Kneecap's performance at the festival. In a post on X, accompanied by an article from he Times that claimed the BBC had not banned the group, Badenoch said: 'The BBC should not be showing Kneecap propaganda. One Kneecap band member is currently on bail, charged under the Terrorism Act. 'As a publicly funded platform, the BBC should not be rewarding extremism.' Badenoch previously called for the group to be banned from Glastonbury. Last year Kneecap won a discrimination case against the UK government in Belfast high court after Badenoch tried to refuse them a £14,250 funding award when she was a minister in the previous government. A BBC spokesperson said: 'As the broadcast partner, the BBC will be bringing audiences extensive music coverage from Glastonbury, with artists booked by the festival organisers. 'Whilst the BBC doesn't ban artists, our plans will ensure that our programming will meet our editorial guidelines. Decisions about our output will be made in the lead-up to the festival.' On Wednesday, Ó hAnnaidh, who performs under the stage name Mo Chara, was cheered by hundreds of supporters as he arrived with bandmates Naoise O Cairealláin and JJ Ó Dochartaigh at Westminster magistrates court in 'Free Mo Chara' T-shirts. Ó hAnnaidh was released on unconditional bail until his next hearing on 20 August. After the hearing, the rapper said: 'For anybody going to Glastonbury, you can see us there at 4pm on the Saturday. 'If you can't be there we'll be on the BBC, if anybody watches the BBC. We'll be at Wembley in September. 'But most importantly: free, free Palestine.' The charge followed a counter-terrorism police investigation after gig footage came to light, which also allegedly showed the group calling for the deaths of MPs. In April, Kneecap apologised to the families of murdered MPs but said footage of the incident had been 'exploited and weaponised'.
The Independent
31 minutes ago
- The Independent
Streeting: Assisted dying will take ‘time and money that is in short supply'
Wes Streeting has warned that legalising assisted dying would take 'time and money' away from other parts of the health service. The Health Secretary, who opposed the legislation in the Commons, said better end-of-life care was needed to prevent terminally ill people feeling they had no alternative but to end their own life. Mr Streeting, writing on his Facebook page, said he could not ignore the concerns 'about the risks that come with this Bill' raised by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Royal College of Physicians, the Association for Palliative Medicine and charities representing under-privileged groups. The Government is neutral on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill which cleared the Commons with a majority of 23 votes on Friday. Mr Streeting, who was one of the most senior opponents of the legislation, said: 'Gordon Brown wrote this week that 'there is no effective freedom to choose if the alternative option, the freedom to draw on high-quality end-of-life care, is not available. Neither is there real freedom to choose if, as many fear, patients will feel under pressure to relieve their relatives of the burden of caring for them, a form of coercion that prioritising good end-of-life care would diminish.' He is right. 'The truth is that creating those conditions will take time and money. 'Even with the savings that might come from assisted dying if people take up the service – and it feels uncomfortable talking about savings in this context to be honest – setting up this service will also take time and money that is in short supply. 'There isn't a budget for this. Politics is about prioritising. It is a daily series of choices and trade-offs. I fear we've made the wrong one.' Mr Streeting said his Department of Health and Social Care 'will continue to work constructively with Parliament to assist on technical aspects of the Bill' as it goes through the House of Lords. Assisted dying campaigner Dame Esther Rantzen urged peers not to block the landmark legislation. Dame Esther told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'I don't need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job. 'They know it very well, and they know that laws are produced by the elected chamber. 'Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose. 'So yes, people who are adamantly opposed to this Bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons who have voted this through.' Dame Esther, who turns 85 on Sunday and has terminal cancer, acknowledged the legislation would probably not become law in time for her to use it and she would have to 'buzz off to Zurich' to use the Dignitas clinic. Paralympian and crossbench peer Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson told BBC Breakfast: 'We're getting ready for it to come to the Lords and from my personal point of view, about amending it to make it stronger. 'We've been told it's the strongest Bill in the world, but to be honest, it's not a very high bar for other legislation. 'So I do think there are a lot more safeguards that could be put in.' Conservative peer and disability rights campaigner Lord Shinkwin said the narrow Commons majority underlined the need for peers to take a close look at the legislation. He told Today 'I think the House of Lords has a duty to expose and to subject this Bill to forensic scrutiny' but 'I don't think it's a question of blocking it so much as performing our duty as a revising chamber'. Lord Shinkwin added: 'The margin yesterday was so close that many MPs would appreciate the opportunity to look at this again in respect of safeguards as they relate to those who feel vulnerable, whether that's disabled people or older people.' Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who steered the Bill through the Commons, told the PA news agency she hoped peers would not seek to derail the legislation, which could run out of parliamentary time if it is held up in the Lords. She said: 'I would be upset to think that anybody was playing games with such an important and such an emotional issue.'
