Lucy Connolly’s criminal charge for stirring up racial hatred against asylum seekers online was fast-tracked for approval by Labour’s Attorney General, it has been revealed.
The former childminder, who is married to an ex-Conservative councillor Raymond Connolly, was jailed for her posts following the Southport murders in 2024.
She pleaded guilty to inciting racial hatred by publishing and distributing “threatening or abusive” written material on X.
It has now emerged Mrs Connolly’s case was treated as an “emergency charging decision”, which saw specialist counter-terrorism prosecutors given consent for her prosecution from Lord Hermer’s office within 12 hours of it being requested, The Telegraph reported.
The details were disclosed in Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) documents obtained by Mrs Connolly through a subject access request.
This request gives individuals the right to obtain a copy of their personal data.
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said the revelation shows the Government “wanted to make an example of Lucy Connolly”, adding she was “scapecoated”.
A spokesman for Lord Hermer said: “Decisions to prosecute are, rightly, made independently of Government by the Crown Prosecution Service.
Lucy Connolly was handed a 31-month prison sentence
|
NORTHAMPTONSHIRE POLICE/PA
“For a small number of offences, it is a legal requirement that the CPS obtains the Attorney General’s consent after it has decided to prosecute.
“This case was responded to in the same manner and timeline as many other similar cases at the time.”
Mrs Connolly was handed a 31-month sentence following a tweet on July 29, 2024, which read: “Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the bastards for all I care … if that makes me racist so be it.”
The 42-year-old was arrested on August 6, by which point she had deleted the message.
Lucy Connolly was jailed for her comments online
|
GB NEWSThe post was viewed 310,000 times in three and a half hours before she removed it.
A bid to challenge her sentence at the Court of Appeal was dismissed in May last year.
In a written judgment, Lord Justice Holroyde, said: “There is no arguable basis on which it could be said that the sentence imposed by the judge was manifestly excessive.”