logo
Lucy Connolly poses no risk to anyone – let her go!

Lucy Connolly poses no risk to anyone – let her go!

Telegraph16-05-2025

Lucy Connolly should be at home today. Snuggling up with her daughter on the sofa, reassuring the distraught 12-year-old, 'It's OK, Mummy's here now'; reclaiming her kitchen, making dinner for Ray who has stoically held the fort for 10 months but badly misses his wife's steak, egg and chips.
Times are really hard for the Connollys.
So why isn't the 42-year-old Northampton childminder back where she belongs after a 10-month ordeal that began back in July when she posted a horrible tweet on the night of the Southport massacre? The official explanation is that, on Thursday, after several hours of dense legal argument the Court of Appeal decided that it couldn't reach a decision that day and would instead offer a written judgment 'as soon as possible', even though the three judges had all the documentary evidence they needed to make a decision there and then. And further delay meant another weekend in prison for Lucy.
The unofficial explanation was offered by Ray Connolly, who was sitting on the bench next to me in court seven when we heard the devastating news that his wife would not be let out.
'It's terrible, but it's not surprising,' Ray sighed. 'Every time with Lucy there's a delay or some reason why they won't let her have things. Other girls who have done far worse than her, drug dealers, violent women, they get bail, they get let out early, they get ROTL (Release on Temporary Licence) because they need to pay their mortgage or whatever, but Lucy doesn't even get ROTL to be with our daughter.'
Ray, a Conservative county councillor who narrowly lost his seat in the Reform Local Election tsunami, has got used to the fact that the woman he clearly adores became the poster girl for Sir Keir Starmer's crackdown on 'far-Right thuggery' during last summer's riots. To show mercy to Lucy Connolly now would be in some way to admit that the Prime Minister was mistaken and the sentences doled out to protestors were, in many cases, outrageously harsh. Although he was expecting bad news, Ray visibly flinched and reached for my arm when, at around 4.45pm, Lord Justice Holroyde said he knew that the lack of a decision would be 'disappointing' to Mrs Connolly.
Just a bit disappointing, Your Lordship. On her 279th day in captivity, Lucy appeared in court via video-link from HMP Drake Hall in Staffordshire. She wore a floral dress, her brown, shoulder-length hair was nicely blow-dried; she was trying to look as presentable as a weary jailbird could. Ray told me Lucy had been physically sick with nerves the night before, but she presented herself impeccably, giving thoughtful, intelligent answers to her barrister, Adam King KC (a godsend paid for by the Free Speech Union).
She managed to stay calm even when the barrister for the Crown goaded her, saying she was a racist who wanted immigrants to die. While she made no attempt to avoid culpability or downplay her 'disgusting' tweet, Lucy otherwise held her ground, saying that anyone who was human was incredibly upset about the slaughter of three little girls at a Taylor Swift dance club. Her concern, she insisted, was with undocumented young male migrants coming to our country who, yes, did pose a risk to children and women.
'Any time people speak out about immigration you're always 'racist'. It's not racist. I just ignore it now,' she said staunchly. I wanted to cheer in that hushed mausoleum of a courtroom. The system has tried to make Lucy Connolly a sacrificial lamb, but she won't go meekly to the slaughter.
The only time she broke down was when her two children were mentioned. Holly, who will become a teenager in July, was so angry she was being a 'monster' at school, Lucy said, starting to cry. Her decision to plead guilty (a disaster, as it turned out) was so she could be reunited sooner with her previously good-natured, high-achieving daughter. Harry, the Connollys' firstborn, a gorgeous, sunny little boy, died in 2011 aged 19 months following catastrophic failures by the NHS. Lucy and Ray awoke to find Harry's stiff, lifeless body next to them; Lucy was later diagnosed with PTSD.
Ever since, reports of children suffering or dying have sent her into a dark spiral, as they did on July 29 when she tweeted in her rage and her anguish about the horror Axel Rudukabana had unleashed on a roomful of infants. Amazingly, the barrister for the Crown made very little on Thursday of the irrecoverable impact of Harry's tragic death. 'If you've never lost a child, you can't have known what the [Southport victims'] parents were going through. I did,' Lucy told me.
'Mrs Connolly has never trusted authority since Harry's death,' her barrister said, and there she was at the Royal Courts of Justice getting another taste of why 'impartial' authority could not be trusted to do the right or decent thing.
I can't tell you how angry I got in that courtroom. No common sense, no kindness, no forgiveness, no mercy. What a chasm there is between the magnificently-appointed, wood-panelled legal bubble in which those clever men argued back and forth and the real world where the majority of people simply can't believe that one horrible tweet, posted in the heat of the moment and deleted within four hours, gets a woman of previous good character 31 months in jail! If it wasn't for the fact that it would have made things worse for Lucy, I was tempted to stand up and shout at the three elderly judges on their exalted perch, 'WHAT THE HELL'S WRONG WITH YOU? LUCY POSES NO RISK TO ANYONE – LET HER GO!'
The disproportionate, nay, vindictive treatment of Lucy Connolly is fast adding to popular fears about two-tier Keir and a two-tier justice system in which white people seem to them to fare worse than ethnic minorities. (Judge Melbourne Inman, who lectured Lucy Connolly about our diverse and inclusive society before giving her that crazy sentence, was altogether more lenient with a defendant who had posed with a deactivated AK-47 in a video threatening Tommy Robinson, had 11 previous convictions and had been previously jailed for 12 months!)
Is it really an exaggeration to call Lucy a political prisoner in a week when the Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced plans to release prisoners early to free up prison spaces that could involve letting free recalled sex offenders and domestic abusers? I don't think so.
Robert Jenrick, Mahmood's Tory shadow, weighed in on Julia Hartley-Brewer's talk show, asking how could it be right for Lucy to go to prison for such a long time for a single offensive tweet, which she quickly deleted, when 'dangerous people' like a man who had just escaped jail 'despite it being found that he had 12,000 pornographic images on his computer', including a one-year-old being raped? 'I think that offends most people's sense of fairness,' Mr Jenrick said. It certainly does.
Even in legal circles there is disquiet. 'It's the most appalling and unfair case,' a senior magistrate told me at a recent lunch. 'I would be looking for any reasons to avoid giving someone like Lucy a custodial sentence.'
A veteran observer of the criminal justice system draws comparisons: 'I've seen a litany of cases in recent years where a liberal judiciary pats itself on the back for giving truly terrible people the benefit of the doubt and the shortest possible sentences. There is no doubt in my mind that Lucy Connolly was made a scapegoat. She was not even connected with any violence. The fact that, nearly a year later, Appeal Court judges are not accepting the woman needs to get out and be with her innocent young daughter, who is sustaining potentially long-term damage, well, it's unconscionable.'
It is unconscionable that people whom we look to for wisdom, and to apply the law fairly, behave in this flagrantly biased way. 'Modern judges are weak,' explains a famous barrister. 'When we protected them from politics they were amazing. Now, too many are low-grade politicians. To get appointed and to advance their careers they must demonstrate a 'commitment to equality and diversity'. This is how they all got captured – by pursuing self-interest.'
Such woolly, smug liberalism seems increasingly and woefully out of step with the country that the judiciary presides over. Immigration now dominates the headlines, with the vast majority saying they don't want more than 100,000 new arrivals a year. Lucy Connolly's 'bigoted' concerns about migrants posing a threat to children and women are common parlance. Even Sir Keir is suddenly accessing his inner Enoch Powell, warning there's a risk of becoming strangers in our own land. By the PM's own lights, surely that makes him a 'far-Right thug'? If I had to nominate one person who was responsible for the rioting after the Southport mass murder, it wouldn't be Mrs Connolly for a single tweet, it would be Keir Starmer for depriving the public of information about the radicalised killer.
Outside the Royal Courts of Justice, members of the Free Speech Union held a protest, carrying a banner that said: 'Police Our Streets Not Tweets.' The FSU is campaigning to have certain laws repealed so this kind of travesty never happens in future. We should hope that one lasting legacy of the Lucy Connolly case will be a rebalancing of the criminal justice system away from insanely unjust punishment for social media posts in favour of a tough approach to those who actually cause physical harm.
As the August deadline for her release approaches, prison authorities have outrageously warned Lucy that she should not expect to go straight home. Due to 'media interest', they'd rather put her in Approved Premises with key workers first.
'What you have to understand, Allison,' an eminent lawyer told me yesterday, 'is the reason they don't want to free Lucy Connolly is because their worst nightmare is you sitting down for a face-to-face interview with Lucy and everyone realising she's not the racist witch it suited them to paint her as, just a really lovely person.'
You know, I think the public has already decided whose side they're on. Just after those three Appeal Court judges cruelly declined to make a decision, a crowd-funder was set up to help Lucy Connolly rebuild her shattered life – whenever, that is, the injustice system deigns to give Lucy her freedom back.
The total raised in under 24 hours stood at an amazing £24,000. You can help Lucy – and tell Sir Keir what you think about his two-tier justice – by donating too.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

West Mercia Police officer banned for 'vulgar' comments
West Mercia Police officer banned for 'vulgar' comments

BBC News

time9 minutes ago

  • BBC News

West Mercia Police officer banned for 'vulgar' comments

A gross misconduct hearing has upheld allegations that a male police officer engaged in inappropriate behaviour repeatedly towards female colleagues. PC Nathan Rogers would have been dismissed from West Mercia Police if he had not already resigned, the force said after the hearing on Tuesday. Mr Rogers made "highly offensive" and "vulgar" comments as well as initiating unwanted contact through social media - with his behaviour deemed "derogatory" and "harassing in nature". The former officer, who was based in the Operations and Communications Centre in Worcestershire, will be banned from working for a UK police service in the future. The hearing upheld an allegation that his behaviour, between June 2023 and May 2025, amounted to gross Mercia Police said his conduct was first formally addressed in June 2023, when he was sanctioned with a written warning. The force said despite both informal and formal interventions he continued to breach policing standards of professional behaviour. It said: "Despite prior disciplinary measures, Rogers repeatedly failed to uphold professional standards, showing a blatant disregard for his colleagues and for the values of the force. "The hearing found his actions breached the standards of authority, respect, and courtesy, and amounted to discreditable conduct."Mr Rogers resigned from the force in April Chief Constable Rachel Jones said: "Nathan Rogers was given opportunities to learn and change his behaviour, but he continued to act in a wholly unacceptable and unprofessional manner."His actions were highly unprofessional and undoubtedly made his female colleagues feel deeply uncomfortable and such behaviour will not be tolerated."He will now be added to the College of Policing's barred list, banning him from working for a UK police service in the future. Follow BBC Hereford & Worcester on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.

Ryanair introduces £500 fines for disruptive passengers
Ryanair introduces £500 fines for disruptive passengers

The Independent

time20 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Ryanair introduces £500 fines for disruptive passengers

Disruptive Ryanair passengers removed from planes will be fined £500, the airline has announced. The carrier said this will be the 'minimum' punishment, and it will continue to pursue passengers for civil damages. Ryanair expressed hope the new policy will 'act as a deterrent to eliminate this unacceptable behaviour'. A spokesperson for the airline said: 'It is unacceptable that passengers are made to suffer unnecessary disruption because of one unruly passenger's behaviour. 'To help ensure that our passengers and crew travel in a comfortable and stress-free environment, without unnecessary disruption caused by a tiny number of unruly passengers, we have introduced a £500 fine, which will be issued to any passengers offloaded from aircraft as a result of their misconduct. 'While these are isolated events which happen across all airlines, disruptive behaviour in such a confined shared space is unacceptable.'

M18 mound of earth could be removed after fatal crash
M18 mound of earth could be removed after fatal crash

BBC News

time24 minutes ago

  • BBC News

M18 mound of earth could be removed after fatal crash

A coroner has called for National Highways to take action to prevent future deaths on a stretch of motorway after a teenager was killed in a Mongan, 18, was a passenger in an Audi being driven by his brother John, 19, when it left the M18 between Doncaster and Rotherham last inquest previously heard the car hit a mound of grass on the central reservation which caused it to become "airborne" before it landed in woodland some 42 metres its conclusion, senior coroner Nicola Mundy said the presence of the mound placed "road users at risk". National Highways said it would be providing a "comprehensive response" to her concerns. The inquest, which was held at Doncaster Coroner's Court last week, heard the Audi was travelling at about 100mph when the crash happened and that both men were thrown from the hearing was told Patrick died instantly while John remained in a serious condition in hospital and had not yet been told of Patrick's brothers, from Cottenham, Cambridgeshire, had been at a pub in the Doncaster area. 'Catastrophic effect' South Yorkshire Police forensic collision investigator Steven Gardner told the inquest the manner of driving was the "sole causation" of the crash, although the mound has also posed a Mundy's call for National Highways to take action was raised in a prevention of future deaths it, she said the forensic collision investigator had advised the "mound of earth creates a continuing hazard to motorway users and any vehicle which might have legitimate cause to veer to the central reservation and in doing so strikes the mound".She said even if a vehicle was travelling within the speed limit "it would be subjected to the same effect on the vehicle (in that control of the vehicle would be lost) with potentially catastrophic effects". The coroner added: "The continued presence of this hazard (the mound of earth) places road users at risk of death."A spokesperson for National Highways said: "Any death on our roads is one too many and our thoughts remain with the family and friends of Patrick Mongan."We are reviewing the coroner's comments and will provide a comprehensive response to the report."The report said National Highways had 56 days to respond to its stated: "Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out the timetable for action. "Otherwise you must explain why no action is proposed." Listen to highlights from South Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store