The wife of a former Conservative councillor has lost an appeal against her 31-month prison sentence for an online rant about migrants on the day of the Southport attacks.
The judgment handed down by Lord Justice Holroyd at the Court of Appeal on Tuesday said there was “no arguable basis” that Lucy Connolly’s original sentence was “manifestly excessive”.
“The application for leave to appeal against sentence therefore fails and is refused,” it said.
Connolly, whose husband Raymond Connolly was a Tory West Northamptonshire councillor until he lost his seat in May, was arrested on 6 August 2024 after calling for “mass deportation now” in an X post on 29 July, which also said hotels housing asylum seekers should be set on fire.
“If that makes me racist so be it,” she wrote.
The post was viewed 310,000 times in the three-and-a-half hours before Connolly deleted it.
She was sentenced to 31 months in prison at Birmingham Crown Court last October, after pleading guilty to a charge of inciting racial hatred. She was ordered to serve 40% of the sentence in prison before being released on licence.
Image: Raymond Connolly outside the Court of Appeal. Pic: PA
Connolly shared her X post on the same day three young girls were killed in a knife attack at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Southport last year.
False information claiming the perpetrator was a Muslim asylum seeker spread online, leading to riots and unrest in multiple locations across the UK.
Axel Rudakubana, 18, was jailed for life with a minimum term of 52 years in January after pleading guilty to murdering Elsie Dot Stancombe, Bebe King, and Alice Dasilva Aguiar in Southport that day.
Connolly, from Northampton, later apologised for acting on “false and malicious” information.
Reacting to the appeal decision, her husband described it as “shocking and unfair”, adding that Connolly is a “good person and not a racist”.
Image: (L-R) Southport victims Elsie Dot Stancombe, Bebe King, and Alice Dasilva Aguiar
Southport murders resurfaced anxiety over son’s death
Connolly last week told judges she was “really angry, really upset” and “distressed that those children had died” when she shared her X post.
She said via videolink from prison that her own son died tragically around 14 years ago and that news of the children’s murders in Southport had caused a resurgence of grief-related anxiety.
“Those parents still have to live a life of grief,” she said. “It sends me into a state of anxiety and I worry about my children.”
Connolly also told the judges that, despite conversations with her legal team, she had not understood that by pleading guilty she was accepting that she intended to incite violence.
When asked if she intended for anybody to set asylum hotels on fire, Connolly said: “Absolutely not.”
Defendant ‘took care of children of African heritage’
But in his judgment on Tuesday, Lord Justice Holroyd said that the principal ground of Connolly’s appeal was “substantially based on a version of events put forward by [her]”, which he and his colleagues Mr Justice Goss and Mr Justice Sheldon have “rejected”.
In a statement released shortly after the judgment on Tuesday, Mr Connolly insisted that his wife is “not a racist”.
“As a childminder she took care of small children of African and Asian heritage; they loved Lucy as she loved them,” he said.
“My wife has paid a very high price for making a mistake and today the court has shown her no mercy. Lucy got more time in jail for one tweet than some paedophiles and domestic abusers get.”
He said he believes the “system wanted to make an example” of his wife to ensure they were “scared to say things about immigration”.
“This is not the British way,” he said.
He added: “The 284 days of separation have been very hard, particularly on our 12-year-old girl.
“Lucy posted one nasty tweet when she was upset and angry about three little girls who were brutally murdered in Southport. She realised the tweet was wrong and deleted it within four hours. That did not mean Lucy was a ‘far right thug’ as Prime Minister Keir Starmer claimed.”
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.
A hostile environment era deportation policy for criminals is being expanded by the Labour government as it continues its migration crackdown.
The government wants to go further in extraditing foreign offenders before they have a chance to appeal by including more countries in the existing scheme.
Offenders that have a human right appeal rejected will get offshored, and further appeals will then get heard from abroad.
It follows the government announcing on Saturday that it wants to deport criminals as soon as they are sentenced.
The “deport now, appeal later” policy was first introduced when Baroness Theresa May was home secretary in 2014 as part of the Conservative government’s hostile environment policy to try and reduce migration.
It saw hundreds of people returned to a handful of countries like Kenya and Jamaica under Section 94B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, added in via amendment.
In 2017, a Supreme Court effectively stopped the policy from being used after it was challenged on the grounds that appealing from abroad was not compliant with human rights.
More on Theresa May
Related Topics:
However, in 2023, then home secretary Suella Braverman announced she was restarting the policy after providing more facilities abroad for people to lodge their appeals.
Now, the current government says it is expanding the partnership from eight countries to 23.
Previously, offenders were being returned to Finland, Nigeria, Estonia, Albania, Belize, Mauritius, Tanzania and Kosovo for remote hearings.
Angola, Australia, Botswana, Brunei, Bulgaria, Canada, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Latvia, Lebanon, Malaysia, Uganda and Zambia are the countries being added – with the government wanting to include more.
Image: Theresa May’s hostile environment policy proved controversial. Pic: PA
The Home Office claims this is the “the government’s latest tool in its comprehensive approach to scaling up our ability to remove foreign criminals”, touting 5,200 removals of foreign offenders since July 2024 – an increase of 14% compared with the year before.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: “Those who commit crimes in our country cannot be allowed to manipulate the system, which is why we are restoring control and sending a clear message that our laws must be respected and will be enforced.”
Foreign Secretary David Lammy said: “We are leading diplomatic efforts to increase the number of countries where foreign criminals can be swiftly returned, and if they want to appeal, they can do so safely from their home country.
“Under this scheme, we’re investing in international partnerships that uphold our security and make our streets safer.”
Both ministers opposed the hostile environment policy when in opposition.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
In 2015, Sir Keir Starmer had questioned whether such a policy was workable – saying in-person appeals were the norm for 200 years and had been a “highly effective way of resolving differences”.
He also raised concerns about the impact on children if parents were deported and then returned after a successful appeal.
In today’s announcement, the prime minister’s administration said it wanted to prevent people from “gaming the system” and clamp down on people staying in the UK for “months or years” while appeals are heard.
TRM Labs says the Embargo ransomware group has moved over $34 million in ransom-linked crypto since April, targeting US hospitals and critical infrastructure.