Teacher, 56, who was dubbed 'Islamophobic' after labelling Lucy Connolly's prison sentence as 'two-tier policing' hits out and says he is fighting to clear his name
Simon Pearson, a former employee of Preston College, was subject to an internal investigation following his comment that Connolly 'should not have been jailed'.
Connolly, the wife of a Conservative councillor, had been handed a 31-month sentence in October after pleading guilty to a charge of inciting racial hatred in a social media post following last year's Southport riots.
The post, which the 42-year-old later deleted, said: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the b******* for all I care... if that makes me racist so be it.'
In his online comment, Mr Pearson described Connolly's words as 'obviously wrong', but said he believed her prison sentence was a 'two tier policy from the top down'.
Speaking to GB News, the 56-year-old this evening said he 'very much' agreed his free speech had been 'violated'.
Mr Pearson explained: 'I've served at Preston College for 20 years - I've served my students faithfully, I've been defending their rights as well from whatever race, from whatever religion.
'I've demonstrated to the college as well that they have no basis in their actions and unfortunately they dismissed me.'
Pictured: Mr Pearson's Facebook post that eventually resulted in his dismissal. Preston College's investigation deemed the post a violation of its policies, damaging of professional relationships and likely to bring the college's reputation into disrepute
The teacher said he had stated Connolly's post was 'appalling' and 'indefensible' - but also that she had deleted it soon after and 'obviously didn't mean what she said'.
Mr Pearson added: 'Policing social media is awful for our country - it has been for me; being labelled Islamophobic has made it very difficult for me to find another job. And it's not true.
'You should be able to express what you really believe - what is of concern in society - without fear of recrimination.'
He clarified it had not been his Union that made the report but in fact 'two people who were on my Facebook friends (list)'.
'They were the ones who'd told the Union what I'd written and through the Union they brought that to the college,' he said.
Mr Pearson concluded: 'It's a travesty really and that's why I'm fighting to clear my name.'
An internal investigation was launched following a complaint submitted by a Muslim representative of the National Education Union (NEU) at the school who alleged that the post was 'Islamophobic' and 'racially discriminatory'.
Mr Pearson said that following the concern, he apologised and also claimed to have provided evidence of his support for both Muslim students and asylum seekers.
Simon Pearson, a teacher at Preston College, has said he fell victim to an unfair 'witch hunt' which resulted in his dismissal from his position at Preston College after he publicly criticised Lucy Connolly's (pictured) prison sentence
However, the college's investigation deemed the posts a violation of its policies, damaging of professional relationships and likely to bring the college's reputation into disrepute.
Mr Pearson previously said he had been left 'appalled' by the decision, particularly given his long-standing commitment to helping support and educate students 'from all walks of life'.
Describing his dismissal as a 'grave injustice', he told The Telegraph: 'As soon as I was branded "Islamophobic" for expressing concern about violent crime, I became a marked man.
'It was clear that I had to be found guilty by the college, it became a witch hunt, and I had to be eliminated no matter what.'
Mr Pearson, who has now launched legal action at an employment tribunal, has claimed wrongful dismissal, unfair dismissal, harassment and discrimination under the Equality Act 2010.
Lord Young of Acton, founder of the Free Speech Union, told the Daily Mail he was 'shocked' by the decision to sack Mr Pearson, criticising the NEU (National Education Union) for 'siding with the bosses rather than the workers when it comes to breaches of workplace speech codes'.
It comes after Connolly, of Northampton, was sentenced at Birmingham Crown Court in October and imprisoned at HMP Drake Hall, Staffordshire after admitting to making her 'racist' post on X, formerly known as Twitter.
The 42-year-old former childminder, wife of Conservative councillor Ray Connolly, lost her 19-month-old son, Harry, in 2011.
With around 9,000 followers on X at the time, Connolly's message was reposted 940 times and viewed 310,000 times before she deleted it around three and a half hours later.
The mother-of-one was arrested on August 6 last year, by which point she had deleted her social media account. But other messages which included other condemning remarks were uncovered by officers who seized her phone.
Her X post was made just hours after killer Axel Rudakubana murdered three young girls and attempted to murder 10 others at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class on July 29, sparking nationwide unrest.
A number of public figures and politicians have spoken out since Connolly was handed her sentence, claiming that she is a victim of 'two-tier justice'.
Connolly's husband, Raymond, a former West Northamptonshire Conservative councillor, said on the day she lost her appeal: 'Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood says she will release 40,000 prisoners, some of them dangerous men on tag.
'Lucy has not been allowed out on tag and she has been denied leave to see our child who is struggling.
'The court had the opportunity to reduce her cruelly long and disproportionate sentence, but they refused. That feels like two-tier justice.'
Adelle Healy, 42, who has been friends with Connolly for nine years, previously told the Daily Mail: 'Lucy was horrified and heartbroken that three little girls had been murdered. She let her emotions take over and wrote something that she definitely shouldn't have done but she has paid a very dear price.
'She should not be behind bars for a tweet. I think it's ludicrous that it's got to this point.'
In May, Connolly lost an appeal to shorten her 31-month sentence despite telling the Court of Appeal in London she 'never' intended to incite violence and did not realise that pleading guilty would mean she accepted that she had.
Meanwhile, earlier this week, The Daily Mail revealed a friend of Connolly had shared a post to X saying she believed the convict would be 'with a glass of Whispering Angel in-hand' this time next month.
It is understood Connolly will be released on August 21.
The National Education Union said in a statement: 'The management of Preston College reached a decision to dismiss the teacher following disciplinary procedures.
'The NEU was not directly involved in these processes and it will be for the Employment Tribunal to consider the fairness of the dismissal if and when the claim reaches a hearing.'
Preston College added: 'Upon receipt of complaints from a number of our staff, an internal investigation was undertaken into whether some of Mr Pearson's social media posts were a breach of the College's Staff Behaviour Code and Values.
'Following an investigation and subsequent disciplinary process, Mr Pearson was dismissed from his employment at the College.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Revealed: Full list of London police station front desks being shut - see on our map if your local counter is being axed
Half of the front desks at London police stations will close as the Met has unveiled a new money-saving plan. The Mail's interactive map shows the full list of affected areas after Scotland Yard admitted it would break its pledge to have one counter accessible 24 hours a day in each of the capital's 32 boroughs. Only 20 desks will remain open with 18 set to be axed by the Metropolitan Police as the force scrambles to balance its £260million budget shortfall. The Met has faced criticism it will now be 'less accessible' as critics claim the change is 'another nail in the coffin of community policing'. Met Assistant Commissioner Matt Twist and Kaya Comer-Schwartz, Sadiq Khan 's deputy mayor for policing and crime, are expected to face a number of angry London Assembly members at an extraordinary additional meeting where the proposals will be discussed. The full list of affected police stations can be viewed in the map below. The closures will impact Kentish Town in Camden; Tottenham in Haringey; Edmonton in Enfield; Harrow; Bethnal Green in Tower Hamlets; Dagenham; Chingford in Waltham Forest; Kensington; Hammersmith; Twickenham in Richmond; Lavender Hill in Wandsworth; Wimbledon in Merton; Hayes in Hillingdon; and Plumstead in Greenwich. Four more stations, which already operate with reduced desks, will also shut - at Barking Learning Centre, Church Street in Westminster, Royalty Studios in Kensington and Chelsea and Mitcham in Merton. Shadow home secretary Chris Philp posted on X: 'The police will now be less accessible and Londoners even less safe.' Liberal Democrat MP for Twickenham Munira Wilson also wrote to the Home Secretary demanding she fully commits to funding the force. It comes as Yvette Cooper has been warned 'further cuts only put another nail in the coffin of community policing'. As a result of the policy, residents in south west London will now no longer be able to walk in and speak to an officer face-to-face due to the losses in Twickenham, Merton, Wimbledon, Lavender Hill and Mitcham. There are also fears those on bail may have to travel miles to report as part of their conditions - increasing the risk a defendant could abscond. But surprisingly, Kingston police station will remain open so the nearest 24-hour counter Richmond is not Acton, Sutton or Lambeth. Last week the Mail revealed London as the 15th most dangerous city for crime in Europe. The capital, which is also the 100th worst out of 385 locations around the world, is less safe than rival European cities from Athens to Brussels and Milan to Barcelona. London is also worse than major US cities such as New York, Los Angeles and Dallas as well as other global destinations from Cancun to Cairo and Bali to Bangalore. The city is however only the fifth worst UK location for crime - behind Bradford, Coventry, Birmingham and Manchester, according to Numbeo's Crime Index. Stella Creasy, Labour MP for Walthamstow, where a young woman was raped in the town centre on June 29, claimed the police in her borough did not want to 'engage with the public at all'. Her comments came upon hearing Chingford would close and residents would have to go to Stratford or online if they wanted to contact someone. Paula Dodds, chair of the rank-and-file Met Police Federation, said: 'If we close police station front counters the public can't have access to us when they need it most. 'We can't hide behind technology because not everyone has access to technology to call the police or go online to report a crime – they want that personal interaction. The public are going to have to go further to get access to a police station if they need it out of hours.' A Met spokesman said: 'Just five per cent of crimes were reported using front counters last year, with only one per cent of these being made during the night. 'At the busiest front counter in London on average 15 crimes are reported a day – less than one an hour - and in the least busy, only 2.5 crimes are reported a day. 'Londoners tell us they want to see more officers on our streets. 'The decision to reduce and close some front counters will save £7million and 3,752 hours of police officer time per month allowing us to focus resources relentlessly on tackling crime and putting more officers into neighbourhoods across London.' The force added the Met 'is focusing ruthlessly on visible policing on London's streets, modernising services and increasing visibility in neighbourhoods with over 300 additional PCSOs and over 300 additional officers'.
Times
25 minutes ago
- Times
Ignoring prison crisis won't make it go away
Of all the bin fires raging across government last summer that might have prompted Rishi Sunak to chuck it in and call an election, the problem of Britain's overflowing prisons was one of the fiercest. And now we learn just how fierce, thanks to a review that reveals jails repeatedly came within three days of being officially 'full' in the two years before the election, until ministers finally came to the rescue with a brilliant scheme simply to release criminals earlier. Labour ministers no doubt feel sore about it. It was they who ended up releasing offenders like Isaac Donkoh, a gang leader convicted of kidnapping and torturing a teenage boy; or Lawson Natty, convicted of manslaughter for killing a 14-year-old boy; or Jason Hoganson, released early in error and, within a day, back to assaulting his ex-partner. These were not the headlines with which a party in possession of a stunning victory wanted to launch its 'decade of renewal'. The government can now happily point to the review by Dame Anne Owers in arguing that the lucky breaks handed to Donkoh and co were at least a decade in the making, with more than a walk-on part for Tory cuts and the unfailingly cloddish machinations of one Chris Grayling, a name that shall serve for ever as a watchword for misbegotten numbskull-duggery. Dame Anne was the doyenne of the jailhouse under Blair, serving as chief prisons inspector from 2001 to 2010. And it's probably fair to say that the 'tough on crime' brigade would not share all her views. But her report reads as bland fact rather than polemic. Besides, she has been warning about a prison capacity crunch since the Blair days. The Tories trumpeted her first warning in early 2007, when David Cameron accused the then-government of having 'stuck its head in the sand'. They don't make sandpits deep enough for the Tory justice ministers and Treasury officials since then who have pretended to believe the prison population is not going to keep growing despite repeatedly adopting policies that fuel population growth and tougher sentencing. The result, as described by Dame Anne, is 'a cycle of prison capacity crises'. While the prison population rose most sharply under Labour, from 66,300 in 2001 to 85,002 in 2010, it has kept rising since, to 87,726 last year. Whereas there used to be more women, children and young men in jail, and more men serving short sentences, the past decade has seen fewer women and many fewer children locked up, with more capacity filled by older men serving longer sentences. The exception is the backlog of people sitting in jail while waiting for a court date, which now accounts for a fifth of prisoners, compared to a seventh in 2015. Despite promises to be tough on crime, the 2010 coalition found it convenient to adopt projections saying that more prison space wouldn't be needed. The Treasury had no intention of releasing cash to build prisons — and indeed, was keen to save money by selling them off and laying off experienced prison officers. First Ken Clarke and then Grayling both appear to have connived in the delusion, so that by 2017, the system was running with fewer than 1,000 free places. Under the radar, more criminals were tagged or detained at home under curfew rather than being jailed. For a short time, things stabilised, though another crunch was coming when Covid hit. Afterwards, with Boris Johnson's thousands of extra police officers on the beat and the courts jammed up, things started to spiral. Day-to-day work at the Ministry of Justice was taken over by all sorts of special committees and meetings, in which frazzled officials crunched the numbers to work out exactly how Donald Ducked the whole system was and then, having found it was indeed just days from catastrophe, sounding the alarm. In these emergency phases, officials, police and prison officers would kick off the first of several rounds of a sliding puzzle game at 5.30am each day, shunting prisoners frantically between police cells, crowded jails and court rooms, a task in which, as the review puts it, 'the marker of success was 'whether everyone got a bed last night''. The costs were wild: filling a proper prison cell costs the Treasury £150 a night, whereas a police cell costs £688, with the result that the government has spent £70 million and counting on not having enough jail space. The usual congratulations are due to the Treasury for its characteristic forethought in generating such staggeringly expensive savings. Obviously, something had to give, and that something was the enforcement of judge-given sentences. There were two chaotic early release schemes, the first at the end of the Tory government and the second at the start of Labour's. Already stretched probation officers scrambled to assess who could be released and when, under various overlapping criteria, sometimes at a few hours' notice — followed by a dash to arrange the services meant to help stop an ex-convict falling instantly back into a life of crime, like addiction treatment or temporary accommodation. Similar stress in the probation service means monitoring all this properly is basically impossible. Even if you are among those who believe in locking up fewer people, it is clear that a country with a growing population and decades of overcrowded jails needs more prisons. Less crowded jails are safer, better able to police violence and drugs and more likely to rehabilitate at least some of the population. So why haven't we been building them? It's a different face to the same old problem: we can't build anything. It has always been a bit more expensive to house people in prisons than houses, but the cost gap is now absurd. Per person housed, it costs about six times more to build a jail than it would to build them each a one-bedroom flat. There are environmental regulation, shortages of building materials and workers and so on, but even where big capital spending has been earmarked for prisons, it doesn't get spent because of a 'major block', as Dame Anne calls it, within the government's own control: planning. Even with prisons full and dangerous criminals being released prematurely to cope, it is still taking prison projects at least two years to get planning permission. Usually, it takes longer. Three major projects first proposed in 2020 only made it through the process with the help of central government rulings four years later. It does not take a statistician to see that at this rate, more offenders will go free earlier and earlier before anything changes. A few weeks ago, the Tories were out promising a 'zero-tolerance' approach to petty crime. Unfortunately for them, the country has zero tolerance for this dipstickery. There are neither enough prisons, nor probation officers nor court hours to punish all the people they want to put away. 'Tough on crime' requires building on time, and they didn't.
Telegraph
25 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Reeves has driven Britain to the brink. Full-blown crisis will soon be upon us
Britain's fiscal reckoning has arrived. The £20bn 'black hole' has, according to one new estimate, doubled in size under Rachel Reeves's dubious stewardship. Most of the money we are now borrowing is going not towards servicing our debt, but the interest on that debt. Colossal off-the-book liabilities, such as public sector pensions, have been hidden from voters by successive governments. They are now falling due. For years, the country has behaved like a household hooked on payday loans. Now, the bills have come through the letterbox and we've no cash left to cover them. Even the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, traditionally Left-leaning, is warning that if the Chancellor is to remain within her fiscal rules, she must raise taxes or cut spending by £51bn. Not even the Office for Budget Responsibility can maintain the fiction that the current trajectory is sustainable. Reductions in spending are out of the question, as the ludicrous welfare row exposed. What many may not realise is that around 75 per cent of government expenditure is mandated – benefits, pensions, for instance – and cannot be avoided in the short-run. Only a quarter is discretionary – areas such as transport, or defence. This means that major spending cuts would require primary legislation, which feckless Labour backbenchers will never swallow. It also means that further tax rises, which Reeves in January insisted would not be necessary, are inevitable. No wonder asset managers are telling clients to prepare for 'very real, very targeted moves on people with portfolios, pensions and property'. Keir Starmer has refused to rule out further tax increases in the autumn Budget. Be afraid, be very afraid. How did we get into this mess? Not since 2001 has a chancellor presented a balanced Budget. Despite lip-service to fiscal probity, the desire to splurge has consistently outweighed the need for restraint. Lord, give me continence, but not yet. Politicians, of whatever stripe, have engaged in a collective delusion: that the Treasury is so awash with cash it is scrambling to find things to spend it on. Pay rises across the public sector? Green subsidies? A pointless railway to Birmingham? Bring it on. But the overall state of the public finances tells a grim story. In 2024-25, the state is projected to spend £1.2tn. Some £450bn of this will go on welfare, health and pensions – more than the entire take from income tax, National Insurance and VAT combined. The UK entered this century with debt at around 30 per cent of GDP; it's now pushing 100 per cent. The tax burden is at a post-War high, set to be around 37.5 per cent of GDP for the rest of this Parliament, yet core public services are crumbling and the crowd yells out for more. Polling suggests the public are closer to grasping our fiscal reality than politicians, with economic optimism now half what it was in July 2024. But even growing pessimism isn't enough to slake their thirst for more spending. Some 9.1 million people of working age are currently economically inactive. Over half of households are taking more from the state than they are putting in. As the number of net contributors shrinks, who, exactly, do people believe is footing the bill? More than two centuries ago, Adam Smith wrote: 'Little else is requisite to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence... but peace, easy taxes and a tolerable administration of justice.' Peace is uncertain, the administration of our increasingly wonky justice has time lags measured in years, and taxes increasingly drag us down. Council tax on our homes. The licence fee. VAT on virtually every product we consume. Vehicle Excise Duty. Congestion charges, tolls, Ulez. The sugar tax. A Digital Services tax on any online orders or subscriptions. Income tax. National Insurance Contributions raised for employers, but which in the end the employee will pay. It's enough to drive us to – massively taxed, of course – drink. And the more convoluted the system becomes, the easier it is for governments to mask the scale of the extraction and the harder it is to scrutinise – or object. Taxes should be visible and just. Currently, they are neither. This is not by accident, but design. Worse still, the public has been fed a series of monstrous lies about tax-and-spend. That it is not only necessary for the state to plunder our earnings and assets, but moral. That squeezing the private sector to fund the public mysteriously delivers growth. That the 'rich' aren't paying their 'fair share', despite all the evidence to the contrary. That we could tax the 'wealthy' without punishing the middle classes. Of all Labour's pledges, none has unravelled faster than the self-defeating promise to shield 'working people' from tax hikes. They punished businesses, and since the start of the year, employment is down, unemployment is up, wage growth has stalled and vacancies are falling. They waged war on independent schools, and since January 50 have closed, with all the job casualties that brings. The affluent, as the Telegraph this week reports, have paid their fees in advance – a luxury poorer parents, those who strain every sinew to privately educate their children, cannot afford. The list goes on. Reeves's inheritance tax assault on family farms has triggered the worst collapse in rural businesses since 2017. Non-doms are fleeing almost as fast as small boats are arriving, taking with them billions in tax receipts, spending and investment. Labour said they would deliver the kind of 'growth' that would haul us out of the post-lockdown economic crisis, but are giving us stagnation. Even if they renege their manifesto pledge not to hike income tax, VAT or National Insurance, it might not be enough. There are major structural problems in our economy – a broken planning system, suffocating regulation – to which this Government has no answer. And, at some point, tax takes begin to destroy growth, with one study suggesting each 10 per cent rise in tax reduces the growth rate by around 1.2 per cent. We are completely boxed in. Politically, of course, breaking their tax triple lock would be a disaster. As Professor John Curtice tells me, it could prompt a tuition-fees moment – a betrayal that would be forever etched in the public's memory. Our overall approach to the public finances is self-evidently unsustainable. A retrenchment of state expenditure is coming at some point and the longer we wait the more painful it will be. We've lived in Neverland for too long. It's time to say no, we don't believe in fairies.
