Britain’s Legal Circus: Tweets, Terrorists, Thought Crimes, and Now Nose Crimes – Labour’s Justice for the 21st Century

Welcome to the United Kingdom’s premier absurdist theatre: the justice system, now under Labour’s stewardship, where you can be jailed for a tweet, but chanting for genocide through a loudspeaker gets a free pass if no one can remember who had the mic. Add in a ban on silent prayer, and now—wait for it—a Manchester Airport punch-up that left a police officer with a broken nose, still unresolved three months on, and you’ve got a farce even Monty Python couldn’t top.

First, the main event: Lucy Connolly. A 41-year-old mother, with no criminal record, mental health struggles, and the misfortune of being married to a Conservative councillor. After one ill-fated evening on Twitter, where she posted something offensive enough for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to label it “stirring up racial hatred,” she was sentenced to 31 months in prison. No prior convictions, no violent outbursts—just one click too far. Off to prison she goes.

Meanwhile, across the country, we’ve got a carload of men who gleefully drove through Finchley Road, broadcasting calls for the death of Jews and the rape of their daughters through a loudspeaker. Surely this would make it into the CPS’s “let’s get this sorted ASAP” file, right? Wrong. The CPS decided not to prosecute because they couldn’t pin down exactly who was on the loudspeaker. No names, no blame, apparently. So off they went, without so much as a caution, presumably to double-check the satnav for future hate rallies.

And then there’s Tyler Kay, whose vile online comments about burning down hotels full of asylum seekers led to a 38-month prison sentence. Rightly punished, you might say—except when you realise that while this loudmouthed tweeter was sent down with alarming speed, actual incitements to violence from more progressive camps get the same treatment as a neighbourly dispute over a hedge. Call to “punch a Terf”? Well, that’s just political activism, isn’t it? No harm done. Move along, nothing to see here.

And then we reach the newest chapter in this unfolding farce: Manchester Airport. Picture the scene. A police officer, trying to do their job, ends up with a broken nose following an altercation. Not a peaceful protest, not a tweeted insult—a full-blown act of violence. Naturally, you’d expect a quick and decisive response. After all, when someone causes actual bodily harm to a member of law enforcement, you’d imagine the CPS would be all over it, right? Sadly, we’re three months in and still waiting for their position. Perhaps they're stuck in traffic, or maybe they’re too busy prosecuting people for, you know, thinking too hard near abortion clinics.

Yes, while violent criminals who break a police officer’s nose sit comfortably in limbo, the CPS has been laser-focused on policing the thoughts of those who dare to stand silently within 150 metres of an abortion clinic. Under Labour’s new Public Order Bill, the UK has officially criminalised silent prayer. No shouting. No waving placards. Just… thinking. Because in this brave new world of social justice, apparently your thoughts can do more damage than a broken nose.

You might wonder why it takes three months to decide whether or not smashing a police officer’s face warrants a charge. Perhaps the CPS has a complex chart on the wall that helps them sort crimes by political inconvenience. Tweets? That’s a definite go. Silent prayer? Dangerous territory—better send someone in with handcuffs. Nose-breaking? Well, that’s tricky; let’s just sit on it for a while.

Labour’s Legal Morality Play: Whose Speech (or Silence) Deserves Punishment?

This is what happens when a government gets so caught up in signalling its own virtue that it can’t keep its eye on the actual ball. Labour’s justice system has become less about protecting the public and more about ensuring they are on the right side of the culture wars. The result? A legal system that moves at lightning speed when prosecuting politically inconvenient speech but stalls when it comes to actual violence, as long as it’s not deemed too “problematic.”

The Manchester Airport debacle is the latest farcical episode in this ongoing drama. It’s hard to imagine a more straightforward case: a police officer, performing their duties, gets punched in the face, nose broken, right there in front of witnesses. You’d think that case would take all of five minutes to process. But no, three months later, the CPS is still mulling over the incident. They might be waiting for the stars to align—or perhaps for public interest to fizzle out before they quietly sweep it under the rug. Meanwhile, law enforcement officers are left wondering if their own safety even matters in this bizarre hierarchy of legal priorities.

Compare that to the rapid response in cases where someone tweets something offensive or vaguely incendiary. If you’re Tyler Kay, posting a disgusting comment about deportations, Labour’s legal henchmen are at your door before you can even refresh your Twitter feed. Three months? Forget about it. You’ll be standing in the dock before you can say, “I was hacked!” But break an officer’s nose at an airport? Don’t worry, it’s on the back burner for now.

Silence is Violence, But Actual Violence? That’s Complicated.

Labour’s justice system has fully embraced the idea that speech is violence, but actual violence? Well, that’s open to debate. We now live in a world where praying silently near an abortion clinic—because someone assumes you’re thinking the “wrong” thoughts—can be criminalised. Meanwhile, real, physical harm, inflicted on a police officer, is left gathering dust in a CPS file, waiting for someone to decide whether it’s worth pursuing.

And let’s not forget the inconsistencies in how the CPS deals with political rhetoric. The fact that incitement to violence from the wrong political group is met with the full force of the law, while the right kind of rhetoric is waved through with a smile and a nod, is a sign of how warped Labour’s priorities have become. If you’re part of a protected class or cause, feel free to call for violence—you might just get away with it. But dare to express a contrary opinion, or worse, silently pray near a restricted zone, and expect to feel the full weight of the law on your shoulders.

Labour’s Justice System: A Masterclass in Inconsistency

The problem Labour faces is that they’ve tried to become the moral compass of the country without any clear direction. They’ve embraced identity politics and progressive causes with such zeal that they’ve forgotten the basics of what justice is supposed to be—fair, consistent, and blind to political affiliation. What we’ve ended up with is a system that punishes speech or silence more harshly than violence, and where a tweet can land you in prison while actual bodily harm is left to the whims of the CPS’s timetable.

The broken nose at Manchester Airport is just the latest example of this topsy-turvy justice system, where it’s unclear what’s more illegal—causing physical harm to an officer or having the audacity to think the wrong thing in public. Labour’s legal priorities are all over the place, and the public is left wondering if the party has any idea what justice even means anymore.

While the CPS waits to decide on the nose incident, maybe they should consider Labour’s next logical step: banning silent thinking altogether. After all, if we’re criminalising prayer, surely idle thoughts in the wrong postcode can’t be far behind.