Wow, UK has lost freedom of speech

[Mojo]

I am guessing you also did not know she tweeted she was going to 'play the mental health card'...? Perhaps ask yourself how it was possible for her to appeal that the judge didn't take this into consideration more if there if it did not come up in the first place. Another chap who was able to show clinical depression got a much lower sentence than she did on the exact same charges and he actually went out to riot. Question for you to reflect on: how did he manage to prove he had clinical depression and get a lesser charge?

Do you have any evidence that the judge ordered a "special report"?

 

[Vixen]

Do you have any evidence that the judge ordered a "special report"?

I gave you the citation.

 

[Mojo]

I gave you the citation.

No, you didn't. The only reports you have provided evidence for, even indirectly, are the usual pre-sentence report, a 2012 psychiatric report, and a further psychiatric report, obtained by the defence before sentencing, that was not used "because it did not assist the applicant", according to the Court of Appeal.

Do you have any evidence that the judge ordered a "special report"?

 

[Mojo]

Oh, and by the way, you still haven't explained why you capitalised "Special Report".

 

[Andy_Ross]

Andrew Bridgen
@ABridgen
Dinner this evening with 2 convicted criminals who are on terrorist watch for ‘hurty words’ both SCARY Mappa 2 Level 3 (highest government monitoring). Great evening with Alex Belfield and Lucy Connolly. What a mad world we are currently living in. Keep the faith

https://twitter.com/x/status/2007583919281979775

 

[Vixen]

No, you didn't. The only reports you have provided evidence for, even indirectly, are the usual pre-sentence report, a 2012 psychiatric report, and a further psychiatric report, obtained by the defence before sentencing, that was not used "because it did not assist the applicant", according to the Court of Appeal.

Do you have any evidence that the judge ordered a "special report"?

You have been told Connolly claimed special mitigation because of her own bereavement of a child. The reports provided by the probation officers/doctors/ psychiatrists, etcetera are confidential and not available to the public under GDPR so it is not reasonable for you to demand these be produced. Suffice to say Connolly herself and her husband brought it up themselves outside court, about how their kid died of dehydration thanks to Northampton hospitals [IIRC] and this claim also constituted her grounds for appeal. It is not reasonable for you to claim this report into her emotional state over her bereavement was never ordered by Judge Lucking, KC.

 

[Mojo]

You have been told Connolly claimed special mitigation because of her own bereavement of a child. The reports provided by the probation officers/doctors/ psychiatrists, etcetera are confidtnetial and not available to the public under GDPR so it is not reasonable for you to demand these be produced. Suffice to say Connolly herself and her husband brought it up themselves outside court, about how their kid died of dehydration thanks to Northampton hospitals [IIRC] and this claim also constituted her grounds for appeal. It is not reasonable for you to claim this report into her emotional state over her bereavement was never ordered by Judge Lucking, KC.

Do you have any evidence that the judge ordered a "special report"?

ETA: I am not asking for the report to be produced, I am just asking for evidence that it existed. For example, the CA judgment mentions the pre-sentence report and the two psychiatric reports. If there had been a "special report" ordered by the judge and relied upon by the defence at appeal, this would have been mentioned in the appeal court's judgment. There is no mention of it there.

 

[Vixen]

Do you have any evidence that the judge ordered a "special report"?

ETA: I am not asking for the report to be produced, I am just asking for evidence that it existed. For example, the CA judgment mentions the pre-sentence report and the two psychiatric reports. If there had been a "special report" ordered by the judge and relied upon by the defence at appeal, this would have been mentioned in the appeal court's judgment. There is no mention of it there.

Who else do you think instigated the 'bereaved mother' mitigation if not Connolly herself, and as indicated by her husband outside the court? How would a judge know to ask for a report for something that happened fourteen years earlier unless someone raised it as an issue for the court to consider in its PSR? The only way to do it - other than 'because of age' is to claim the 'vulnerability' slot. Hence, 'special'. Whilst it is a horrible thing to have happened to Connolly, clearly the court did not consider it relevant to her crime. I am sorry this has come as a surprise to you but it is hardly my fault you didn't know about it.

 

[Vixen]

Here's Judge Inman's sentencing comment re the mental health issue:

9. You have had tragedy in your own life with the loss of your very young child some years ago. I have read the psychiatric report from some twelve years ago as to the psychiatric difficulties you then suffered. 20. I accept that you still very keenly feel that loss. 21. There is no recent psychiatric evidence and whilst you may well have understood the grief of those who suffered their own tragic losses in Southport you did not send a message of understanding and comfort but rather an incitement to hatred. There is no evidence of any mental disorder having any material affect on you committing this offence. Rex -v- Lucy Connolly His Honour Judge Melbourne Inman KC Recorder of Birmingham Sentencing Remarks

 

[Mojo]

Who else do you think instigated the 'bereaved mother' mitigation if not Connolly herself, and as indicated by her husband outside the court? How would a judge know to ask for a report for something that happened fourteen years earlier unless someone raised it as an issue for the court to consider in its PSR? The only way to do it - other than 'because of age' is to claim the 'vulnerability' slot. Hence, 'special'. Whilst it is a horrible thing to have happened to Connolly, clearly the court did not consider it relevant to her crime. I am sorry this has come as a surprise to you but it is hardly my fault you didn't know about it.

Here's Judge Inman's sentencing comment re the mental health issue:

9. You have had tragedy in your own life with the loss of your very young child some years ago. I have read the psychiatric report from some twelve years ago as to the psychiatric difficulties you then suffered. 20. I accept that you still very keenly feel that loss. 21. There is no recent psychiatric evidence and whilst you may well have understood the grief of those who suffered their own tragic losses in Southport you did not send a message of understanding and comfort but rather an incitement to hatred. There is no evidence of any mental disorder having any material affect on you committing this offence. Rex -v- Lucy Connolly His Honour Judge Melbourne Inman KC Recorder of Birmingham Sentencing Remarks

How could the judge have ordered a psychiatric report a dozen years before the crime was even committed? In England and Wales, judges are required to follow not only legislation (whether or not they "bother with" it) but also the laws of thermodynamics. In any case, you have assured us that the "special report" is "nothing to do with psychiatric evidence".

Where is your evidence that any of the judges involved in the case ordered a "Special Report", prepared by social workers?

 

[Vixen]

How could the judge have ordered a psychiatric report a dozen years before the crime was even committed? In England and Wales, judges are required to follow not only legislation (whether or not they "bother with" it) but also the laws of thermodynamics. In any case, you have assured us that the "special report" is "nothing to do with psychiatric evidence".

Where is your evidence that any of the judges involved in the case ordered a "Special Report", prepared by social workers?

Stop playing semantics. Of course the report written twelve years ago cannot have been written in 2024. I am not sure you understand how the justice system works. Here Holroyde KC explains the reasoning for rejecting Connolly's appeal on the special issue ground of her past bereavement:

24. The judge was assisted by a pre-sentence report (“PSR”). This referred to the very sad fact that in 2011 the applicant’s son, then aged just 19 months, had died in circumstances which had given rise to complaints of negligence against the medical practitioners who had treated the child. The death of the child had affected the applicant’s mental health, with a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder. The author of the PSR recorded that the applicant had explained that the events in Southport had brought back memories and emotions relating to her own loss, and had said that she acted out of a desire to protect her own and others’ children. The PSR also noted that the applicant, when questioned by the author, had denied that her tweet had any racist undertones or could incite hatred or violence, and had downplayed her behaviour. The author assessed the applicant as having failed sufficiently to consider the consequences of her actions, particularly in the context of the influence of social media and her underlying racist attitudes. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL, CRIMINAL DIVISION ON APPEAL FROM THE CROWN COURT AT BIRMINGHAM The Recorder of Birmingham, HH Judge Inman KC 34NA0759424

[Bear in mind there are no written reasons for convictions in a criminal trial.] This 'author' - we are not told their status but likely a social worker/probation officer - sets out Connolly's claims about her emotions as of the time of her crime. Holroyd rejects the appeal on this point of law on the grounds that Judge Inman, KC, at the sentencing trial did deal with the specific claim of mitigation by way of past bereavement PTSD being triggered. Inman also gave specific detailed reasoning for rejecting this claim. This tells you that it was a special pleading or Inman would not have mentioned it. A judge can only decide on what has been pleaded. As Inman, KC did make a decision on that one specific pleading, Holroyde judged that Inman, KC., did deal with the case correctly and as per legal protocol. Had Inman KC., completely skipped the issue in his sentencing remarks, then it would indicate it was either (a) never pleaded as a specific mitigation, or (b) he had failed in his legal duty and therefore, the appeal would have been upheld. Because the appeal on this specific ground was rejected, it informs us it was specifically pleaded, and indeed, it was appealed against on a point of law that Inman, KC., had not given the pleading sufficient consideration. Holroyde decreed Inman did directly deal with it and that his reasoning was adequate within the bounds of what a judge is allowed to decide (the criteria being it must be reasonable and within the bounds of what any reasonable judge is allowed to decide, even if another judge might have decided differently).

You can keep pretending this is to do with semantics and whether or not probation officers can be classed as social workers - who cares? - the fact remains I noted at the time of the 'Guilty' plea that the judge had ordered (colloquially) a special report into Connolly's expressed mitigation claim as part of and specific to the PSR. Your claim it didn't happen is patently incorrect.

 

[Darat]

You made up your "Special Report" - it never existed.

 

[Vixen]

You made up your "Special Report" - it never existed.

It must have done as both Inman and Holroyde specifically refer to it. You can have the last word.

 

[Mojo]

[Bear in mind there are no written reasons for convictions in a criminal trial.] This 'author' - we are not told their status but likely a social worker/probation officer - sets out Connolly's claims about her emotions as of the time of her crime.

The 'author' referred to is explicitly described as the author of the PSR, not of any "Special Report"

Do you have any evidence that any of the judges in the case ordered a "special report"?

Also, please can you explain why you capitalised 'Special Report'?

[edited to fix typo]

 

[Mojo]

It must have done as both Inman and Holroyde specifically refer to it.

Please link to, and quote, Inman and Holroyde specifically referring to the "special report", rather than the PSR or the two psychiatric reports that they refer to in what you have so far posted.

 

[Mojo]

[Bear in mind there are no written reasons for convictions in a criminal trial.]

Irrelevant, as you have specifically said that the report was to do with mitigation, and there are written reasons for the sentencing stage.

 

[Mojo]

The Sentencing Act you refer to describes legal requirements. It then lists the EXCEPTIONS [as to when these can be disregarded as a mandatory PSR not needed] and it is this section which refers to persons under 18, persons between 18 and 25 and persons deemed potentially vulnerable.

Nope, it doesn't say anything about persons between 28 and 25, or persons deemed potentially vulnerable. It just sets out requirements relating to PSRs for people over and under 18.

 

[junkshop]

@Vixen, you seem to have lost track of the conversation. You posted this:

Absolute rubbish. The judge ordered a Special Report*, which means social workers looked at every possible mitigating factor.

*Usually called for when the defendant is deemed a potentially vulnerable person (for example, a mother with very young children).

And this:

It was at the pre-trial stage. Nothing to do with psychiatric evidence.

These are the claims you are being asked to support.

HTH.

 

[Darat]

Just a thought: if it was pre-trial why would the judge be involved?

 

[theprestige]

Just a thought: if it was pre-trial why would the judge be involved?

Dunno how it is in the UK, but in the US the trial is a culmination of a series of judicial proceedings. A judge is involved from the very beginning, from the initial arraignment all the way to trial and sentencing.

Who presides over pretrial court proceedings in the UK? An effigy of Guy Fawkes?