1 minute ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

Or because she had no defence. She wrote it. 

Her defence was what I said. Her lawyers took the easy way out for themselves not for her on the guidance of the government who is 100% in favour of the illegals..

3 minutes ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

Or because she had no defence. She wrote it. 

 

The defence was not guilty, no jury would have convicted on a charge of a racist post, with no mention of race

4 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

She NEVER set set fire she said I dont care if someone does. Not the same thing and certainly not inciting violence. I think you need to learn how to read.

She was not charged with ‘setting a fire’.

1 minute ago, Photoguy21 said:

Her defence was what I said. Her lawyers took the easy way out for themselves not for her on the guidance of the government who is 100% in favour of the illegals..

 

He scared her by saying a not guilty plea would result in 5-7 years, 

18 minutes ago, Taboo2 said:

Please note, all Americans will never, ever, ever send our sons to die for the UK again if you guys continue this nightmare of sending an old lady to prison.  

 

You are on your own.  Listen to JD Vance, we are not going to support Europe or the UK if you continue down this path.

 

No more blood for Europe. 

 

 

You really do have a ridiculously inflated opinion of yourself and your country don't you, especially as you clearly have no idea what is going on in the UK. Just listen to yourself.

3 minutes ago, proton said:

 

Don't you have an execution of a 'far right bigot' to attend today Chomper? 😆

Where on earth did you pull that garbage from?

 

You’re losing it lad.

 

Just now, proton said:

 

He scared her by saying a not guilty plea would result in 5-7 years, 

He told her she would basically get a very minimal sentence if she pleaded guilty which was wrong and lawyers like the ones she had should be struck off from practicing.

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

She was not charged with ‘setting a fire’.

She was charged for hurty words. The sentence was way over the top even Barristers say that.

4 minutes ago, proton said:

 

The defence was not guilty, no jury would have convicted on a charge of a racist post, with no mention of race

You live in LaLa land. The jury would take direction from the judge and that as many Barristers now are saying was biased.

1 minute ago, Photoguy21 said:

He told her she would basically get a very minimal sentence if she pleaded guilty which was wrong and lawyers like the ones she had should be struck off from practicing.

The beek got it wrong.

 

100 hours cleaning a migrant hotel on Community Service would have made her more careful next time.

4 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

Her defence was what I said. Her lawyers took the easy way out for themselves not for her on the guidance of the government who is 100% in favour of the illegals..

You’ve claimed ‘her lawyers took the easy way out for themselves’ but have provided zero evidence to back that up.

 

A guilty plea undoubtedly reduced the amount of time the lawyers would spend on the case and charge to their client.

 

There is a financial insensitive for lawyers to recommend a not guilty plea.

 

 

 

29 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Sorry, but that's an extremely flimsy argument. The spirit of Lucy Connolly's texts was very obviously not meant to convey her indifference to burning immigrants or hotels, but rather it is quite obvious that her message was meant to convey extreme  anger, disgust and that message would be interpreted as incitement by 99% of judges.

 

Her text was not meant to convey "ambivalence", it was very clear what she was saying. She also tweeted, commenting on a sword attack  "I bet my house it was one of these boat invaders.”  So there's really no question that her texts were incitement under the laws in the UK.

 

Otherwise she wouldn't have pled guilty of course. 

 

And by the way, I have successfully argued legal matters in the Senior Courts of England, so my English is vastly superior to yours.

I just enjoyed the content of one of Cameroni's posts, I did not expect that to ever happen, but well done. And well said.

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

You’ve claimed ‘her lawyers took the easy way out for themselves’ but have provided zero evidence to back that up.

 

A guilty plea undoubtedly reduced the amount of time the lawyers would spend on the case and charge to their client.

 

There is a financial insensitive for lawyers to recommend a not guilty plea.

 

 

 

Have a look on line. There are Barristers who have come to this conclusion. I can be wrong but I think Barristers know what happened.

I'm still waiting for these racists that sit in Pattaya pontificating about free speech - about whether they feel there is free speech in Thailand. 

 

I'd like to see them try it out and see the consequences. 

2 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

She was charged for hurty words. The sentence was way over the top even Barristers say that.

She was not charged with ‘hurty words’.

 

That you and others need to wander into fantasy in search of arguments to support her is an indication of precisely how weak her case was.

3 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

The beek got it wrong.

 

100 hours cleaning a migrant hotel on Community Service would have made her more careful next time.

The ‘Beek’ was bound by sentencing guidelines.

 

She appealed her sentence which the appeal court upheld.

Just now, Photoguy21 said:

Have a look on line. There are Barristers who have come to this conclusion. I can be wrong but I think Barristers know what happened.

 

 

Or, she had no defence. She wrote it. 

 

Had she written this in America she also would have been arrested. 

5 minutes ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

 

America does not have free speech. speech that incites violence, defamation, obscenity, and harassment is against the law. The exact crime this woman was done for. 

 

There is literally no free speech in America. You had students being arrested and deported for protesting about Palestine (peacefully). You have John Bolton being raided by the FBI this week, with most commentators saying it's because of his constant attacks on Trump. 

 

Let's be honest these 'free speechers' are just wanting to be racist and don't like it when they can't. 

 

 

If Lucy Connolly had sent exactly the same message in the US, nothing would have happened.

 

America does have one of the world's strongest legal frameworks for free expression compared to many countries, with protections for even offensive or unpopular speech.

Yes, hundreds of students and activists have been arrested during pro-Palestine protests at places like Columbia University, UCLA, and UT Austin. For example, in April-May 2024, over 2,000 arrests occurred nationwide, often for trespassing or disorderly conduct during encampments.

FBI agents executed a search warrant at Bolton's residence on October 23, 2024. The raid lasted several hours, during which agents seized electronic devices, documents, and other materials. Bolton was present but not arrested, and no charges have been filed against him as of now.

 

The raid stems from a long-running Justice Department investigation into the potential unauthorized disclosure of classified information. Specifically:

It relates to Bolton's time in the Trump administration, where he had access to highly sensitive national security briefings, including details on intelligence operations, foreign leaders, and U.S. military strategies.

Prosecutors believe Bolton may have improperly shared or disclosed classified material, possibly through his book, speeches, or other public statements. The book itself was heavily redacted after review by the government.

2 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

The beek got it wrong.

 

100 hours cleaning a migrant hotel on Community Service would have made her more careful next time.

Yet the Labour Representative (cant remember which area he was representing) indicates a hand drawn across his throat which is a clear incitement to violence yet walks out of the court a free man. Is that what you call justice/

5 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

She was charged for hurty words. The sentence was way over the top even Barristers say that.

 

 

Hurty words hey ?

 

Come to Thailand and write down hurty words like she did and see how you get along. You won't be here much longer either. 

 

If a muslim had written those 'hurty words' too they would have been classed as a terrorist. 

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You’ve claimed ‘her lawyers took the easy way out for themselves’ but have provided zero evidence to back that up.

 

A guilty plea undoubtedly reduced the amount of time the lawyers would spend on the case and charge to their client.

 

There is a financial insensitive for lawyers to recommend a not guilty plea.

 

 

 

Had she pleaded innocent she would have had a few hours community service at best.

2 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

Have a look on line. There are Barristers who have come to this conclusion. I can be wrong but I think Barristers know what happened.

There absolutely are people offering opinions online.

 

Some might even be Barristers.

1 minute ago, mikeymike100 said:

If Lucy Connolly had sent exactly the same message in the US, nothing would have happened.

 

America does have one of the world's strongest legal frameworks for free expression compared to many countries, with protections for even offensive or unpopular speech.

Yes, hundreds of students and activists have been arrested during pro-Palestine protests at places like Columbia University, UCLA, and UT Austin. For example, in April-May 2024, over 2,000 arrests occurred nationwide, often for trespassing or disorderly conduct during encampments.

FBI agents executed a search warrant at Bolton's residence on October 23, 2024. The raid lasted several hours, during which agents seized electronic devices, documents, and other materials. Bolton was present but not arrested, and no charges have been filed against him as of now.

 

The raid stems from a long-running Justice Department investigation into the potential unauthorized disclosure of classified information. Specifically:

It relates to Bolton's time in the Trump administration, where he had access to highly sensitive national security briefings, including details on intelligence operations, foreign leaders, and U.S. military strategies.

Prosecutors believe Bolton may have improperly shared or disclosed classified material, possibly through his book, speeches, or other public statements. The book itself was heavily redacted after review by the government.

 

 

Nonsense of the highest order. 

 

America has one of the largest rates of lawsuits against people who say 'hurty words' to someone else. They are literally one country that doesn't have free speech. 

 

Go read up on the peaceful protestors at the universities being arrested for peaceful protesting about Palestine. Where was the free speech for them ? 

 

Let's be honest, you just want to be racist innit bruv

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You’ve claimed ‘her lawyers took the easy way out for themselves’ but have provided zero evidence to back that up.

 

A guilty plea undoubtedly reduced the amount of time the lawyers would spend on the case and charge to their client.

 

There is a financial insensitive for lawyers to recommend a not guilty plea.

 

 

 

There are Barristers on the internet that state it.

3 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

If Lucy Connolly had sent exactly the same message in the US, nothing would have happened.

 

America does have one of the world's strongest legal frameworks for free expression compared to many countries, with protections for even offensive or unpopular speech.

Yes, hundreds of students and activists have been arrested during pro-Palestine protests at places like Columbia University, UCLA, and UT Austin. For example, in April-May 2024, over 2,000 arrests occurred nationwide, often for trespassing or disorderly conduct during encampments.

FBI agents executed a search warrant at Bolton's residence on October 23, 2024. The raid lasted several hours, during which agents seized electronic devices, documents, and other materials. Bolton was present but not arrested, and no charges have been filed against him as of now.

 

The raid stems from a long-running Justice Department investigation into the potential unauthorized disclosure of classified information. Specifically:

It relates to Bolton's time in the Trump administration, where he had access to highly sensitive national security briefings, including details on intelligence operations, foreign leaders, and U.S. military strategies.

Prosecutors believe Bolton may have improperly shared or disclosed classified material, possibly through his book, speeches, or other public statements. The book itself was heavily redacted after review by the government.

But she wasn’t in the U.S. when she posted her hate message.

 

She was in the UK.

 

UK law applies.

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You’ve claimed ‘her lawyers took the easy way out for themselves’ but have provided zero evidence to back that up.

 

A guilty plea undoubtedly reduced the amount of time the lawyers would spend on the case and charge to their client.

 

There is a financial insensitive for lawyers to recommend a not guilty plea.

 

 

 

Check with Barristers on the internet

3 minutes ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

 

Or, she had no defence. She wrote it. 

 

Had she written this in America she also would have been arrested. 

Absolute garbage, under the first amendment, she would have been fine!

Connolly’s post, while offensive and inflammatory, does not meet the strict U.S. legal threshold for incitement under Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), which requires intent to provoke imminent illegal activity and a likelihood of producing it. Her comment, posted online and deleted within hours, lacks evidence of immediate incitement or direct targeting of individuals.

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

But she wasn’t in the U.S. when she posted her hate message.

 

She was in the UK.

 

UK law applies.

You are missing  the point.....on purpose of course!!!!

5 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

Had she pleaded innocent she would have had a few hours community service at best.

I’m not sure on what basis you make that claim.

 

Perhaps non at all beyond being unable to deal with the facts as they are.

2 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

Check with Barristers on the internet

I’m not going to waste time looking for stuff on the internet that you claim as the basis of your posts.

 

That’s your job,