You are so convinced of your imagined facts, that you are unwilling and unable to consider the actual facts of the cases you refer to. First the claim is made that a Conservative government appointed judge with a history of applying the law as intended was too "liberal". The facts of the case and the judge's history do not support that claim. Next you demand that the judge is too liberal because he applied the law as written. A judge does not write the laws. he applies it. The law has been on the books since 1986. Successive Conservative governments had an opportunity to change it if it was that "bad" of a law. The penalty that was applied was rather more strict than the penalties applied on similar cases. Next you go off on a tangent raising the Connolly case as if it was a harmless tweet that caused no harm. Well, it did, and she was held accountable for her attempts to incite arson and harm to others. Lucy Connolly, was charged on indictment with an offence of inciting racial hatred contrary to section 19(1) of the Public Order Act 1986 because of the following criminal message and her subsequent actions, “Mass deportation now. Set fire to all the f** cking hotels full of the bastards for all I care. While you’re at it, take the treacherous government and politicians with them. I feel physically sick knowing what these families will now have to endure. If that makes me racist, so be it.” She intentionally wanted to cause arson and bodily injury to others. The fact that the potential deaths were prevented, does not relieve her of responsibility for what she did. Your logic is like a person who fails at a murder demanding to be released because the target was not killed. The woman was inciting violence against people and it was a contributing factor to the ensuing Southport riots. Her post was viewed 340,000 times and reposted 940 times. People who were arrested for vandalism and violence admitted to having read the message and incited to act out. When she was investigated, she intentionally lied and attempted to blame others for what she had done. The penalty given was light in consideration of what the law set out in Part III of the Public Order Act 1986 which provides for a maximum penalty of 7 years’ imprisonment. The much mentioned 31 month custodial sentence only required that 12 months be served in custody.
