Riot!

[Bromptonaut]

If you read the full account of his trial it's quite clear that the extracts of Ricky Jones's speech that went viral we're out of context and aimed at National Front activity involving stickers and razor blades.

The fact that the jury was only out for 30 minutes suggests that there was no energy for a guilty verdict.

 

[spen666]

The law should be equal to anyone meaning that saying ''lets burn these hotels'' should have the same legal implications at ''lets cut some throats'' butlegal loopholes, leftish people in general being a bit smarter or i should say a bit better in legal wordings has lead to many situation when you can say just a bit more as left-wing lunatic than a right wing lunatic.
Despite their not being an legal difference.

Not sure you understand how the law works in England.

So they make a law that deals with the saying "lets burn these hotels" and sets out the legal implications for it. Great idea, but then people will say simply "lets burn those hotels" and its then not covered by your law.

 

[AuroraSaab]

The charge was stirring up racial hatred. The prosecution would surely have had to show that her post had led to specific acts, otherwise she hadn't stirred up racial hatred, she was just gobbing off in the heat of the moment, same as Ricky Jones. Moot point really though as she pleaded guilty and was unfortunate enough to get a deterrent sentence. If she hadn't, and had the benefit of a trial long after the event, she might have done better.

Even the National Front have the right to be protected from people calling to cut their throats.

 

[Bromptonaut]

The charge was stirring up racial hatred. The prosecution would surely have had to show that her post had led to specific acts, otherwise she hadn't stirred up racial hatred, she was just gobbing off in the heat of the moment, same as Ricky Jones. Moot point really though as she pleaded guilty and was unfortunate enough to get a deterrent sentence. If she hadn't, and had the benefit of a trial long after the event, she might have done better.

Even the National Front have the right to be protected from people calling to cut their throats.

They just need to show the comments were intended to stir up racial hatred and were likely to do so.

The text of the legislation, taken from the Court of Appeal decision on Lucy Connolly's appeal against sentence, is as follows:

19.
Publishing or distributing written material

(1) A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting is guilty of an offence if

(a) he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred,

(b) having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.

<the next section is irreleavant and not quoted by the court>

(3) References in this Part to the publication or distribution of written material are to its publication or distribution to the public or a section of the public.