Best Of

From the BBC:

"MP James Cleverly, the shadow secretary for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, said on social media platform X that the verdict was "unacceptable".

"Perverse decisions like this are adding to the anger that people feel and amplifying the belief that there isn't a dispassionate criminal justice system," he said."

It seems a weird decision but I do not think that even shadow Ministers should be undermining the courts or our jury system like this. Its not a responsible thing to do for someone in such a position. I thought Cleverly was supposed to be one of the smarter ones.

That's pretty disgraceful from Cleverly. It's tantamount to saying that the 12 jurors, who have no stake in the criminal justice system but simply give a verdict based on the evidence they hear and the guidance they are given by the judge, of being corrupt.
He should withdraw that tweet.

The big question is: why did Lucy Connelly plead guilty? I hope she wasn't pressured into it.

At best she was badly advised, and pleaded guilty to a serious offence at a time of heightened tensions.

If she’d been up in front of a jury a year or more later, her case might have had a different outcome.

I’ve commented in the past - that I don’t think anyone grasped how the sentencing would play out so what looked liked she would end up with a suspended sentence become something different as the aggravating circumstances (rioting) seriously increased the severity of the crime.

So I can see why a quick guilt admission was recommended and how everyone ended up in this mess

Maybe.

But that doesnt explain why she's still in prison.

I thought you were good at maths - 31 months *.4 is a minimum of 12 months before release and I don’t know why when she was jailed or placed on remand

She still is in prison.

Theres nothing stopping the courts to send her home and put a tag on her to restrict her movements. And hasnt been sice she was sentenced.

The courts have screwed up on the sentencing and then doubled down on it.

No they haven’t - sentences are tied to strict guidelines and the two tier justice you seem to want is because the person in jail is female and pretty (look g at both Lucy Connelly and Lucy Letby).

LOL the two tier justice works the other way. The resort to "because she's pretty" is from a 1970s sitcom.

The system have made her a martyr of sorts - newspaper deals, TV interviews etc. beckon when she leaves. Whereas a suspended sentence would have meant nobody would have heard of her.

Again - sentencing guidelines implemented between 2010 and 2024 - made any sentencing leeway impossible .

I don’t know how many times I’m going go have to repeat the same point until you grasp it

Here's more recent polling that you won't hear Trump or Farage supporters mentioning.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/692522/surge-concern-immigration-abated.aspx
...Americans have grown markedly more positive toward immigration over the past year, with the share wanting immigration reduced dropping from 55% in 2024 to 30% today. At the same time, a record-high 79% of U.S. adults say immigration is a good thing for the country.

These shifts reverse a four-year trend of rising concern about immigration that began in 2021 and reflect changes among all major party groups...

The paradox of the migration debate.

Most people want the total numbers to fall, but don't want the numbers in most migration scenarios to fall. It's not quite "less migrants in theory but not in practice", but it's pretty close;

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/52704-is-there-public-support-for-large-scale-removals-of-migrants

The way that most people square that circle is to massively overestimate the proportion of immigration that is irregular/illegal because the boats are so visible. From that YouGov link,

Our research shows that almost half of Britons (47%) think there are more migrants staying in the UK illegally rather than legally, including fully a third of the public (32%) who think the illegal figure is “much higher”.

As our American friends are currently discovering, anti-immigrant talk is much more popular than anti-immigrant action.

Those YouGov findings are really important. The radical right has done a very good propaganda job of convincing people that most immigrants are illegal and coming for benefits. Instead of pandering to them, the Labour government needs to push back and make clear how that's not true and that immigrants are mostly the sort of immigration people like.

lol

You should put that on the bus along with "they're not really 4 star hotels because often room service is slow"

Centrist dads don't understand the difference between facts and truth. And they get all upset when others do.

Do you mean that in MEGA world alternate facts are truths?

Best illustrated with an example, I think, since it's a complex philosophical area:

The vast majority of immigrants to the UK come here legally and are decent, law-abiding people. This is FACT.

We are being swamped by illegals most of whom get put up in luxury hotels leaving their rooms only to rape and pillage. This is TRUTH.

President Trump grasps this important distinction better than anyone on earth. Hence the name of his platform. It's not FACT SOCIAL is it.

Lucy Connolly was bullied into pleading guilty by a police force and prosecution service determined to make examples. Weirdly, they didn’t do that to Ricky Jones

I suspect Connolly was told she would get a very minor punishment if she pleaded guilty.

It would be interesting to know who told her that, if it's true.

I would guess plod regularly do similar.

Hasn't it been regularly mentioned that plod encourage people to accept cautions without mentioning that cautions count as a criminal record ?

Didn’t that happen recently with the guy who was carrying a trowel and other garden tools home.

If people’s starting point in life is ACAB and work back based on personal experience they won’t be badly served

General rule is to never accept a police caution as it can be career-ending (teachers etc) or life-limiting (DBS check for helping out with your kid's sports team)

But if everybody did that there'd be lots more CJS resource absorbed dealing with minor offences.

Or it would be dropped because there isn't a case or it's not in the public interest, they're offering you a caution because it's an easy way of closing the paperwork with a result for them and the offence, if any, is minor.

Even questioning evidence, in the right way, can get cases dropped. There is the famous "When was the breathalyser/speed camera last calibrated?....

There was one lawyer who had a nice line in demanding a better, more stringent drugs test for his clients at magistrates court. Because of extra cost, this usually led to cases being dropped.

Fearing the creation of a new Mr Loophole, some quiet words were said. Every time he asked demanded the extra test, the test was granted and it was made sure the case was pushed to a conclusion - no more dropping smaller cases for time etc. So all his clients started going down.

Here's more recent polling that you won't hear Trump or Farage supporters mentioning.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/692522/surge-concern-immigration-abated.aspx
...Americans have grown markedly more positive toward immigration over the past year, with the share wanting immigration reduced dropping from 55% in 2024 to 30% today. At the same time, a record-high 79% of U.S. adults say immigration is a good thing for the country.

These shifts reverse a four-year trend of rising concern about immigration that began in 2021 and reflect changes among all major party groups...

The paradox of the migration debate.

Most people want the total numbers to fall, but don't want the numbers in most migration scenarios to fall. It's not quite "less migrants in theory but not in practice", but it's pretty close;

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/52704-is-there-public-support-for-large-scale-removals-of-migrants

The way that most people square that circle is to massively overestimate the proportion of immigration that is irregular/illegal because the boats are so visible. From that YouGov link,

Our research shows that almost half of Britons (47%) think there are more migrants staying in the UK illegally rather than legally, including fully a third of the public (32%) who think the illegal figure is “much higher”.

As our American friends are currently discovering, anti-immigrant talk is much more popular than anti-immigrant action.

Those YouGov findings are really important. The radical right has done a very good propaganda job of convincing people that most immigrants are illegal and coming for benefits. Instead of pandering to them, the Labour government needs to push back and make clear how that's not true and that immigrants are mostly the sort of immigration people like.

lol

You should put that on the bus along with "they're not really 4 star hotels because often room service is slow"

Centrist dads don't understand the difference between facts and truth. And they get all upset when others do.

You are Jeffrey Archer and I claim my five pounds.

Yeah, there's some truth in that- visceral experience beats numbers. To a degree. But there are two important buts.

First is that human progress tends to come from paying more attention to the factual and less to the visceral. It's uncomfortable, but it's what makes our lives relatively pleasant.

Second is that numbers can only be trumped so far. We have a situation where a near-majority of British people think that there is more illegal migration to the UK than legal. And that's not true. It's a lie. How the hell do you run a country on the basis of a lie, even if it's commonly held? And why is that lie so commonly held? (See also polling that shows that the public think that international aid and MPs expenses are meaningful items in the national budget.)

I don't really have answers to either of those questions, but they're important.

From the BBC:

"MP James Cleverly, the shadow secretary for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, said on social media platform X that the verdict was "unacceptable".

"Perverse decisions like this are adding to the anger that people feel and amplifying the belief that there isn't a dispassionate criminal justice system," he said."

It seems a weird decision but I do not think that even shadow Ministers should be undermining the courts or our jury system like this. Its not a responsible thing to do for someone in such a position. I thought Cleverly was supposed to be one of the smarter ones.

That's pretty disgraceful from Cleverly. It's tantamount to saying that the 12 jurors, who have no stake in the criminal justice system but simply give a verdict based on the evidence they hear and the guidance they are given by the judge, of being corrupt.
He should withdraw that tweet.

The big question is: why did Lucy Connelly plead guilty? I hope she wasn't pressured into it.

At best she was badly advised, and pleaded guilty to a serious offence at a time of heightened tensions.

If she’d been up in front of a jury a year or more later, her case might have had a different outcome.

I’ve commented in the past - that I don’t think anyone grasped how the sentencing would play out so what looked liked she would end up with a suspended sentence become something different as the aggravating circumstances (rioting) seriously increased the severity of the crime.

So I can see why a quick guilt admission was recommended and how everyone ended up in this mess

Maybe.

But that doesnt explain why she's still in prison.

I thought you were good at maths - 31 months *.4 is a minimum of 12 months before release and I don’t know why when she was jailed or placed on remand

She still is in prison.

Theres nothing stopping the courts to send her home and put a tag on her to restrict her movements. And hasnt been sice she was sentenced.

The courts have screwed up on the sentencing and then doubled down on it.

No they haven’t - sentences are tied to strict guidelines and the two tier justice you seem to want is because the person in jail is female and pretty (look g at both Lucy Connelly and Lucy Letby).

Lets shoot this Fox - Lucy Letby is not pretty. At best a 5/10.

A Labour councillor who called for far-right protesters' throats to be cut at an anti-racism rally has been found not guilty of encouraging violent disorder.

Ricky Jones, 58, has been on trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court after he called demonstrators "disgusting Nazi fascists" and said "we need to get rid of them all" while addressing a crowd in Walthamstow on 7 August last year.

Mr Jones told police his remarks, captured on video, were "ill-advised" and not intended to incite or encourage violence.

The Dartford councillor, who has since been suspended by the Labour Party, had denied the charge.

He was arrested the day after making the comments and told the court he felt it was his "duty" to attend counter-protests.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjeykklwn7vo

Do what you want if you are a leftie

Lucy Connolly was bullied into pleading guilty by a police force and prosecution service determined to make examples. Weirdly, they didn’t do that to Ricky Jones

Ricky Jones knew his rights and used them and has been rewarded.

Don’t talk to the Police and don’t co-operate with them. They are not your friends

This video is 13 years old, and still as true as ever.

Don’t Talk to the Police.

When my eldest son was being clinically diagnosed as autistic my wife asked the consultant for his best advice on how my son should progress his life as a juvenile and adult. The consultant suggested he never answers a question from the police without legal representation. He quoted Stefan Kiszko as a salutary lesson.

Lucy Connolly was bullied into pleading guilty by a police force and prosecution service determined to make examples. Weirdly, they didn’t do that to Ricky Jones

I suspect Connolly was told she would get a very minor punishment if she pleaded guilty.

It would be interesting to know who told her that, if it's true.

I would guess plod regularly do similar.

Hasn't it been regularly mentioned that plod encourage people to accept cautions without mentioning that cautions count as a criminal record ?

Didn’t that happen recently with the guy who was carrying a trowel and other garden tools home.

If people’s starting point in life is ACAB and work back based on personal experience they won’t be badly served

General rule is to never accept a police caution as it can be career-ending (teachers etc) or life-limiting (DBS check for helping out with your kid's sports team)