How one woman's racist tweet sparked a free speech row
Lucy Connolly's 51-word online post in the wake of the Southport killings led her to jail and into the centre of a row over free speech.
For some, the 31-month jail term imposed for inciting race hate was "tyrannical", while one commentator said Connolly was a "hostage of the British state", and another that she was "clearly a political prisoner".
Court of Appeal judges, however, this week refused to reduce her sentence.
Asked about her case in Parliament, Prime Minister Keir Starmer said sentencing was "a matter for the courts" and that while he was "strongly in favour of free speech", he was "equally against incitement to violence".
Rupert Lowe, the independent MP for Great Yarmouth, said the situation was "morally repugnant" and added: "This is not the Britain I want to live in."
Others said her supporters wanted a "right to be racist".
Warning: This report contains racist and discriminatory language
In July last year, prompted by a false rumour that an illegal immigrant was responsible for the murder of three girls at a dance workshop in Southport, Connolly posted online calling for "mass deportation now", adding "set fire to all the... hotels [housing asylum seekers]... for all I care".
Connolly, then a 41-year-old Northampton childminder, added: "If that makes me racist, so be it."
At the time she had about 9,000 followers on X. Her message was reposted 940 times and viewed 310,000 times, before she deleted it three and a half hours later.
In October she was jailed after admitting inciting racial hatred.
Three appeal court judges this week ruled the 31-month sentence was not "manifestly excessive".
Stephen O'Grady, a legal officer with the Free Speech Union (FSU), said the sentence seemed "rather steep in proportion to the offence".
His organisation has worked with Connolly's family since November and funded her appeal.
Mr O'Grady said Connolly "wasn't some lager-fuelled hooligan on the streets" and pointed to her being a mother of a 12-year-old daughter, who had also lost a son when he was just 19 months old.
He said there was a "difference between howling racist abuse at somebody in the street and throwing bricks at the police" and "sending tweets, which were perhaps regrettable but wouldn't have the same immediate effect".
Connolly's case was also "emblematic of wider concerns" about "increasing police interest in people's online activity", Mr O'Grady said.
The FSU had received "a slew of queries" from people who were "very unsure" about "the limits of what they can they can say online", he said, and who feared "the police are going to come knocking on the door".
"There's an immense amount of police overreach," he added.
He cited the example of a retired special constable detained after challenging a pro-Palestine supporter online, a case the FSU took on.
Responding to Mr O'Grady's claim, a National Police Chiefs' Council spokesperson said that Article 10 of the Human Rights Act "protects a person's right to hold opinions and to express them freely" and that officers received training about the act.
They added: "It remains imperative that officers and staff continue to receive training commensurate with the demands placed upon them."
After the appeal was dismissed, Connolly's husband, Conservative town councillor Raymond Connolly, said she was "a good person and not a racist" and had "paid a very high price for making a mistake".
Her local Labour MP, Northampton South's Mike Reader, said he had "big sympathy" for Connolly and her daughter, but there was no justification for accusing the police of "overreach".
He said: "I want the police to protect us online and I want the police to protect us on the streets and they should be doing it equally."
It was a "fallacy" and "misunderstanding of the world" if people did not "believe that the online space is as dangerous for people as the streets," he added.
"We're all attached to our phones; we're all influenced by what we see, and I think it's right that the police took action here."
In his sentencing remarks, Judge Melbourne Inman said Connolly's offence was "category A" - meaning "high culpability" - and that both the prosecution and her own barrister agreed she "intended to incite serious violence".
For Reader, this showed "they weren't arguing this was a silly tweet and she should be let off - her own counsel agreed this was a serious issue".
At her appeal, Connolly claimed that while she accepted she intended to stir up racial hatred, she always denied trying to incite violence.
But Lord Justice Holroyde said in a judgement this week the evidence "clearly shows that she was well aware of what she was admitting".
Sentencing guidelines for the offence indicate a starting point of three years' custody.
While the prosecution argued the offence was aggravated by its timing, "particularly sensitive social climate", the defence argued the tweet had been posted before any violence had started, and that Connolly had "subsequently attempted to stop the violence after it had erupted".
The judgement also highlighted other online posts from Connolly that the judges said indicated her "view about illegal immigrants".
Four days before the Southport murders, she responded to a video shared by far-right activist Tommy Robinson showing a black man being tackled to the ground for allegedly performing a sex act in public.
Connolly posted: "Somalian, I guess. Loads of them," followed by a vomiting emoji.
On 3 August, responding to an anti-racism protest in Manchester, she wrote: "I take it they will all be in line to sign up to house an illegal boat invader then. Oh sorry, refugee.
"Maybe sign a waiver to say they don't mind if it's one of their family that gets attacked, butchered, raped etc, by unvetted criminals."
The FSU said she was likely to be eligible for release from August, after serving 40% of her sentence.
Some, including Mr O'Grady, argued her jail term was longer than punishments handed to criminals perceived to have committed "far worse" crimes.
Reform UK's Mark Arnull, the leader of West Northamptonshire Council, said it was not for him "to pass comment on sentences or indeed discuss individual cases".
But he added: "It's relatively easy to understand why constituents in West Northamptonshire question the proportionality of Lucy's sentence when they see offenders in other high-profile and serious cases walk free and avoid jail."
The issue for writer and activist Shola Mos-Shogbamimu was that "those who have committed worse crimes" should "spend more time in jail, not less time for Lucy Connolly".
Dr Mos-Shogbamimu added: "It's not 'freedom of speech without accountability'. She didn't tweet something that hurt someone's feelings; she tweeted saying someone should die."
In her view, those making Connolly a "flag-bearer or champion" for free speech were asking for "the right to be racist".
Free speech advocate Mr O'Grady said "no-one is arguing for an unfettered 'right' to incite racial hatred".
Connolly's case was about "proportionality", he added, and "the sense that online speech is increasingly being punished very harshly compared to other offending... such as in-person violent disorder".
Follow Northamptonshire news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
PM defends courts over Lucy Connolly racist post
Woman jailed for race hate post on X loses appeal
Tory politician's wife jailed for race hate post
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
19 minutes ago
- Business Insider
DA says 40 UnitedHealthcare execs got bodyguards, and one dyed her hair after Luigi Mangione killed CEO Brian Thompson
Luigi Mangione, charged in the December ambush shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, is indeed a terrorist, a New York prosecutor said in a court filing Wednesday night. Some 40 UHC executives were so afraid after the murder that they enlisted bodyguards, the prosecutor argued in an 82-page rebuke of defense lawyers' efforts to get Mangione's state terrorism charge dropped. One exec who received death threats dyed her hair and moved to a temporary home out of fear she might be harmed next, the new court filing said. Thompson's December 4 "assassination" on a Midtown Manhattan sidewalk does not reflect a robbery or personal vendetta, wrote the lead state prosecutor, Assistant District Attorney Joel Seidemann, citing the writings Mangione left behind for law enforcement. In the writings, Mangione"made crystal clear that his target was the insurance industry," Seidemann wrote. The prosecutor noted that the defendant's manifesto hoped the shooting would "hit a real blow to the company financials" and referred to Thompson as "a greedy bastard that had it coming." "Brian Thompson and UHC were simply symbols of the healthcare industry and what defendant considered a deadly greed-fueled cartel," Seidemann wrote. The murder had the desired effect, fueling a panic in the company and the wider healthcare insurance industry, the filing said. "To a limited extent, defendant achieved his dastardly goals by inspiring a vocal minority of individuals to engage in a broader campaign of threats of violence against UHC employees and other health insurance workers," he wrote. The filing gave the clearest peek yet into the grand jury that voted to indict Mangione on state terrorism charges. It said an executive of UHC parent company UnitedHealth Group described to the jurors the pro-Mangione posters that appeared in New York City days after the murder. The posters showed Thompson with his face covered by an "X" alongside the faces two other UHC executives. Grand jurors heard of the broader impact the murder had on the company, Wednesday's filing said. UHC doctors and civilians involved in sending out coverage denial letters "feared for their safety and requested they not be required to sign their names to the denials," the filing said grand jurors were told. Plainclothes police were hired to protect UHC headquarters in Minnesota, some UHC physicians quit their jobs in fear, and the company advised employees not to wear company-branded clothing in public, the filing also said grand jurors learned. Prior to their vote to indict Mangione on murder as an act of terrorism, the grand jury also heard a UHC call center recording. In response to the question, "Who do I have the pleasure of speaking with?" a caller says, "You are gonna hang," and "You know what that means. That means the killing of Brian Thompson was just a start. There are a lot more that are gonna be taken out." There were several similar calls made to the center, the filing said. "Defendant's sensational assassination of Brian Thompson at the annual investor conference was certainly not a normal street crime," the filing said. "Defendant demonstrated in his manifesto that he was a revolutionary anarchist who would usher in a better healthcare system by killing the CEO of the fourth-largest company in the United States by market cap," it said. "This brutal, cowardly murder was the mechanism that the defendant chose to bring on that revolution." Mangione was arrested in Pennsylvania on December 9, 2024, after a five-day manhunt over the shooting death of Thompson in Manhattan. Thompson was attending a healthcare convention, which he was about to enter when he was killed. Mangione, an Ivy League graduate and son of a prominent Maryland family, was first charged with local gun and forgery charges in Pennsylvania. Then, both New York and federal prosecutors brought their own charges, including the state's murder as an act of terrorism count, which carries a potential maximum sentence of life without parole. The government has said it intends to seek the death penalty for Mangione's federal murder charge. Mangione's defense team in May argued in a 57-page New York state filing that there is no evidence showing he intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, which is required to prove their charge of murder as a crime of terrorism. "Applying New York's terrorism statute to this case would impermissibly trivialize and redefine the Legislature's definition of terrorism," Mangione's attorneys wrote. Since he was named as a suspect, Mangione has attracted a following of sympathizers who flock to the courthouses where he's scheduled to appear, send him mail, and voice their support online. On Wednesday, lawyers for Mangione asked the state court judge to allow him to appear at his next state court hearing, scheduled for June 26, unshackled and without the bulletproof vest he has previously been required to wear in court. "The authorities — both state and federal — have already prejudiced Mr. Mangione in the media more than virtually any defendant in recent memory," the lawyers wrote. "This commenced with the NYC Mayor-led staged perp walk, and it continues until today." By bringing him to court in shackles and a vest, authorities are crafting a "false narrative" that Mangione is in unusual danger or requires extra security, they wrote. "There is no disputing that he has been a model prisoner, a model defendant in court, and has treated everyone in the court and prison system with cooperation and respect," the lawyers wrote. Mangione's state-level judge, New York Supreme Court Justice Gregory Carro, has yet to weigh in publicly on the handcuffs or the defense request that the terrorism charge be dismissed. Mangione has pleaded not guilty to — and continued to fight — all three of his indictments.
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
USA Today Quietly 'Updates' Fluff Piece On Boulder Terrorist's Daughter
USA Today initially published a fluff article about a family member of the illegal alien who set fire to pro-Israel protesters on June 1 in Colorado. However, rather than standing by its narrative and providing a stand-alone follow-up piece, the outlet quietly revised the originally published article after facing public backlash. Mohamed Sabry Soliman, a 45-year-old Egyptian in the country illegally, lit fire to a crowd of pro-Israel protestors in Boulder, Colorado, on June 1, as The Dallas Express reported. According to KDVR, officials recently updated the number of victims to 15 – plus a dog. The FBI is investigating the attack as a 'targeted act of terrorism.' USA Today published an article on June 3 titled, 'Boulder suspect's daughter dreamed of studying medicine. Now she faces deportation.' The article still had this headline when The Dallas Express archived the page early the afternoon of June 4. At that point, it read as a glowing feature of the terrorist's daughter, Habiba Soliman. However, after the article sparked a public backlash, the outlet watered down the title – and toned down the original piece. After The Dallas Express archived the piece, USA Today changed the title and reworked the original article to 'Habiba Soliman wanted to be a doctor. Then, her father firebombed Jewish marchers in Boulder.' Instead of writing a new piece, the outlet chose to cover its tracks. The outlet also the article to focus more on the horrific attack. A note at the top of the piece reads, 'This story has been recast and updated with new information.' At the time USA Today published the original article, Tarrant County GOP Chairman Bo French replied on X: In the first version of the article, USA Today Habiba's life 'had been headed in a before the attack' – a phrase not present in the updated piece. It said she 'had written about her hope of accomplishing great things in the U.S.,' citing her hopes of a 'future medical career.' The outlet kept the latter phrases in the updated piece but slightly reframed or altered them. Before his terror attack against pro-Israel protestors, Habiba's father, Mohamed, recorded a tirade against America and the 'Zionists.' 'Allah is greater than the Zionists, Allah is greater than America and its weapons,' he said. 'Do not forget that Allah is greater than everything. Not the Zionists, America, Britain, France, or Germany.' Mohamed overstayed his visa under former President Joe Biden's watch, as The Dallas Express previously reported. According to The Greeley Tribune, Soliman lived in Kuwait for 17 years and then arrived in America in 2022 on a tourist visa that expired in February 2023. He overstayed the visa and then a work authorization. The White House posted on June 3 that Soliman's family was set for 'expedited removal' as early as that night. However, a Biden-appointed U.S. district judge in Colorado, Gordon Gallagher, blocked their deportation on June 4, according to Fox News. The State Department reportedly revoked the visas for Soliman's family. At the time of publication, it was unclear whether or not Habiba Soliman, her siblings, or her mother had committed visa violations. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced on June 3 that ICE had Soliman's family on suspicions they could have known about or aided the attack. She said Soliman would be 'prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.' 'We are investigating to what extent his family knew about this heinous attack, if they had knowledge of it, or if they provided support to it,' Noem wrote. 'I am continuing to pray for the victims of this attack and their families. Justice will be served.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Badenoch launches review into possible ECHR exit
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch is to set up a commission to examine whether the UK should withdraw from a series of international legal agreements and overturn some domestic legislation which she fears may be binding the hands of British governments. Among the agreements being looked into is the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Badenoch is expected to appoint Tory peer and former justice minister Lord Wolfson of Tredegar to chair the commission, which is expected to report by autumn, when the party meets for its annual conference. Last month, the government announced plans to bring forward legislation to "clarify" the extent to which ECHR would impact UK immigration cases. Labour's immigration plans at a glance UK may have to leave human rights treaty, says Badenoch The ECHR was established in 1950 and sets out the rights and freedoms people are entitled to in the 46 signatory countries. The treaty is a central part of UK human rights law and has been used to halt attempts to deport migrants who are deemed to be in the UK illegally. The treaty was also recently cited in a case that allowed a Palestinian family the right to live in the UK, after they originally applied through a scheme designed for Ukrainians. During the Conservative leadership election, the ECHR became a key dividing line between candidates, with Badenoch telling her party leaving the treaty would not be a "silver bullet" to tackling immigration. Her nearest rival Robert Jenrick, now shadow justice secretary, argued his party would "die' unless it left the ECHR. But in February, Badenoch hardened her stance, claiming the UK would "probably have to leave" the treaty it continued to stop the government acting in the country's national interest. The impact of the ECHR on asylum claims and the deportation of foreign criminals will be examined as part of the Wolfson review, the BBC understands - as will the Refugee Convention. Domestic law such as the Climate Change Act, the Equality Act and the Human Rights Act are also likely to be looked at. The party leadership is worried about what is seen as a creeping sense of "lawfare", which senior figures believe contributes to a feeling of stasis and a lack of ability for governments to make substantive changes. Last month when the government set out its plans for tackling illegal immigration in a White Paper, ministers said they would bring forward legislation to "make it clear that Parliament needs to be able to control our borders and take back control on who comes to and stays in the UK". The White Paper specifically referred to Article 8 of the ECHR, the right to a family life, and said there was a need to "strike a balance between individual family rights and the wider public interest". Badenoch will set out her plans in a speech on Friday, just over a month on from local elections in England where the Conservatives were crushed – and a series of opinion polls where support for the party had tumbled into the teens. The Tories secured 24% of the vote in last year's general election, when they won the fewest seats in their history. There is growing concern within the party about the resilience of support for Reform UK and the existential threat this poses to the Conservatives. "It is a make or break summer," one former Conservative cabinet minister told me. "We are a resilient brand but we have to stay alive. And that's far from certain at the moment." Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.
