[librasteve]

i suppose that the nasty surprise for Lucy Connelly was to post something (totally disgraceful) to a public forum that she would perhaps say to a small circle of friends and then find that it is considered to have a substantive influence on real rioters actually ready to set light to hotels with real people in them … even now I post stuff by way of semi private thoughts here and I do not fully appreciate the extent to and rapidity with which they will be shared … this is not to condone Lucy, but to wonder if she really did mean those vile things in practice or whether it was a very misguided emotional vent … should there be another level of proof of intent required in relation to social media … for sure her sentence is justified if she said those same words through a megaphone in front of the rioters ready to storm the hotel gates

i honestly don’t know - making people think twice about what they post is a social good and maybe we should keep the law simple and let the courts drive through this new harsh application