Up next in 10
Commentator Matthew Stadlen has claimed that Lucy Connolly's remarks posted online, which resulted in her being jailed for 31 months, were "outrageous and despicable"Stadlen told GB News: "It was a disgusting, racist, horrific tweet that could could have been interpreted as incitement to murder. I thought it was an outrageous and despicable thing for her to say. "And by the way, there was another tweet, I think, from a few days earlier, which was completely racist. But my view is that 31 months in prison for what she did was excessive."WATCH ABOVE.
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:00
The design of that, the intent behind that legislation
0:04
I can't remember whether it was Tory legislation originally or Labour legislation, is to protect vulnerable people
0:10
vulnerable women, from being harassed. It's not to stop the free speech of the protesters
0:15
As I say, they can make their voices heard on social media, in the street indeed, just don't do it in a way
0:21
that is actually seen to be harassing of women in those circumstances
0:26
On the Lucy Connolly thing, I looked into the appeal court decision
0:32
I read all 13 pages of it, as I recommend everyone at home does before forming a view on this
0:38
Having looked into it, my view is, and this is very personal
0:43
everyone will have their view on this, is I thought that the original judge probably, probably
0:50
I may be wrong, got it wrong. Because of the way in which her tweet was couched
0:55
It was a disgusting, racist, horrific tweet that could, could have been interpreted as incitement to murder
1:05
But my view, and it's very personal, the way she did it by saying, for all I care
1:10
meant that I don't think either that she intended for people to be murdered
1:16
either asylum seekers or members of the government, because she talked about the government as well
1:20
but also I don think a reasonable person looking at that tweet would have thought I am going to now go and burn down an asylum hotel or murder the government because of that tweet That my view
1:31
I thought it was an outrageous and despicable thing for her to say. And, by the way, there was another tweet, I think, from a few days earlier
1:36
which was completely racist. My view is that 31 months in prison for what she did was excessive
1:43
But let's remember that that was a judge. It was not a politician who sentenced her
1:47
And also that the act under which she was sentenced was from the 1980s, which was when Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister
1:55
Listen, I mean, I felt it was an excessive sentence as well, and, again, I wasn't in court and I'm always very aware
2:02
not just being a former politician but having been a former lawyer, that it's very easy to jump onto particular bandwagons
2:08
The more general point about free speech is we've all got to relax
2:12
a little bit more and we've got to recognise that we can get offended
2:16
And I worry that we're getting more and more offences on the statute book, more and more restrictions on free speech
2:22
that are in play. But this wasn't a question of offence. The question here was, was it incitement to racial hatred
2:30
and to violence, for goodness sake? And if the intent was, you people go out and burn down that asylum hotel
2:39
or go and burn down the government or any MPs, then of course you have to be published
2:44
It just my personal view and the judge took a different view My personal view of that particular post was it was not intended actually to incite real violence but I may be wrong But the other point is
2:56
She says it wasn't intended. But the other point is, and you allude to this
3:01
this is legislation that's now 40 years old, and we're living... And again, I'm not defending the way
3:06
in which people are using social media, but evidently attitudes have changed fundamentally
3:12
People get away with, often anonymous tweets, in social media that are saying dreadful things
3:18
that, again, within the light of legislation that is 40 years old
3:22
we need to look at things in a different light. And as I say, I think there broadly needs to be more tolerance
3:27
of free speech. But, Mark, against that, and I think this is crucial, because of social media, which is a reality
3:33
I said it had a democratising force earlier, but clearly social media can do things such as spark a riot
3:42
If you have hundreds of thousands of people viewing horrific posts, and you then have people acting on those posts
3:50
I'm not saying specifically this post, we live in a society where, as a consequence in part of social media
3:57
ethnic minority families up and down the country were living in terror of their lives
4:02
Children were terrified. So, hold on. You have to take social media responsibly
4:05
OK, OK, yeah. With the privilege. But you also have to prove a connection
4:09
with what has happened with that particular post And if you can prove that this particular post made that happen which is very difficult to do then I think you have to tread carefully So Mark Field do you think very briefly that Donald Trump was right to start looking into the way we
4:25
are interpreting freedom of speech? It wasn't his business necessarily to interfere with UKFS, but I think hopefully it will open
4:33
a debate, a reasoned debate on these issues around free speech. But do you think he's right to be doing that
4:39
sending boys or people here to have a chat with those people to try and understand how we are interpreting our free speech laws
4:46
Well, if it was being done with the intention of writing a very detailed, considered paper on this..
4:53
Well, we don't know why. One suspects it's only being done for the..
4:57
So do you think yes or no? So I worry that this is being done as a public relations exercise
5:03
So was he wrong? Irrespective of that, in your opinion, yes or no? I think the real opportunity is that we have got an opportunity
5:09
Can you answer yes or no? This is a typical politician. I'll answer. Typical politician. Ramble, ramble, ramble
5:13
You've got about ten seconds and we've got... I'll answer. You haven't given me an answer, yes or no. Was he right? Yes or no
5:18
On balance, no. I would say no. And one of my main worries here is that he's doing the bidding
5:24
I would suspect, I don't have the proof of it, of Elon Musk, who just happens to be within government
5:29
but also owns the digital town square in the form of X
5:33
formerly Twitter. And it would be in Musk's interests, if there is a total free-for-all when it comes to social media use
#Government
#Legal
#news
#Social Issues & Advocacy
#Discrimination & Identity Relations
#Human Rights & Liberties
#Social Sciences
#Communications & Media Studies
#Violence & Abuse