Lucy Connolly has been mistreated by prison officers who have handcuffed and stripped her of privileges, Richard Tice has claimed.
Reform UK’s deputy leader claimed Connolly was ‘manhandled without provocation’ after visiting her today at HMP Peterborough, where she is serving a 31-month sentence for posting a racist tweet in the wake of the Southport attacks.
The former childminder, who is the wife of Tory councillor Ray Connolly, posted a 51-word online rant about migrants hours after Axel Rudakubana killed three young girls in Southport on July 29 last year.
Misinformation that the attacker was a Muslim asylum seeker who arrived in the UK in a boat – when he was born in Cardiff to Rwandan parents – spread rapidly online and led to riots breaking out across the country.
Connolly’s sentence, which she unsuccessfully appealed last month, has been at the epicentre of a free speech row, with critics including former PM Boris Johnson and Tory leader Kemi Badenoch claiming it was too harsh.
Mr Tice has even proposed a bill – called ‘Lucy’s Bill’ – which would permit people to mount mass appeals against punishments they believe to be too harsh or lenient.
Connolly was allegedly mistreated after she was told she wouldn’t be moved to an enhanced wing with full privileges, but would instead be tossed into a 23-hour-a-day lockdown with the most violent criminals.
When she contested the decision, she was allegedly restrained by officers with handcuffs and taken to her new cell in what Mr Rice claimed was a ‘politically motivated’ response.
After visiting Ms Connolly in prison, Mr Tice told reporters: ‘Five days after the incident, the bruises on her wrists are still significant – yellow. It was obviously horrible what she went through.
‘On Thursday, she was manhandled, mistreated with no provocation. She was denied enhanced accommodation to which she was entitled and they gave her, frankly, the Nutters Wild Wing – druggies, violence.
‘You have to think it’s politically motivated. I think the next few weeks before her release are going to be very challenging, worrying. I think it would suit the authorities to want to provoke a violent reaction from Lucy. I told Lucy to be very careful.’
The deputy Reform leader said he met with HMP Peterborough’s head of security, explaining: ‘He is looking at the complaint seriously. When we get the result of that complaint – if they have ‘lost’ the bodycam footage or any of that funny business then I will escalate the complaint and meet the Governor.’
Mr Tice added: ‘I genuinely fear that she is actually being treated as a political prisoner for political purposes.’
An HMP Peterborough spokesperson said: ‘We cannot comment on individuals. Our staff are trained to follow all applicable policies and procedures to ensure the safety and well-being of the women in our care. All incidents are subject to review afterwards.’
It comes after Connolly was incarcerated for posting on X: ‘Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the bastards for all I care … if that makes me racist so be it,’ in the wake of the Southport stabbings.
At the time, she had about 9,000 followers on X. Her message was reposted 940 times and viewed 310,000 times before she deleted it three and a half hours later.
Last month, the Court of Appeal rejected an appeal against her sentence.
Mr Tice said he would be raising his ‘serious concerns’ in the Commons tomorrow when he introduces his ‘Ten-minute Rule Bill’.
The ten-minute rule permits a backbench MP to make a case for a new Bill in a speech lasting up to ten minutes. An opposing speech can also be made before the House determines whether or not to introduce the Bill.
If Mr Tice is successful, the Bill is taken to have had its first reading.
The Bill will be presented to the House of Commons on Wednesday and would mean campaigners could get the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) to reconsider cases considered excessively harsh.
He said he hoped the Bill would enable a ‘treble check’ on sentences.
‘The whole point about justice is it has to have the confidence of the British people,’ Mr Tice said.
‘We’re not calling into dispute the brilliance of our legal system and our judges.
‘What we’re just saying is, sometimes, however good you are, you might not quite get it right, and it’s not unreasonable to have a treble check of the sentence itself.’
He said that the number of people required to sign the petition could be up for debate.
He added: ‘To get 500 signatures on a form is not an easy thing. You’ve got to explain it to 500 people, and they’ve got to be convinced.
‘You can always say at the margin something might be abused. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t talk about it.’
When asked why the public should get a say in legal cases, Mr Tice said: ‘Never underestimate the common sense of the Great British public and their gut instinct for where something is fair or not fair. We’re all human, judges can get things wrong, and sometimes there can be political pressure.
‘In this situation, we had a prime minister that effectively ordered the judges to give very strict sentences, and people have very serious concerns about that.
‘There’s a lot of concern amongst the British public that Lucy Connolly and others were the victims of two-tier justice.’
Under the Bill, campaigners would need to get 500 people to sign a petition against a punishment handed down in Crown Court.
The CCRC would review those cases for eight weeks before deciding whether to send them to the Court of Appeal.
Mr Tice said of choosing the CCRC over the Attorney General: ‘The Attorney General is a busy person and ultimately a political person, whereas the (CCRC) should not be that.
‘It could potentially be extra work but it wouldn’t be very many cases a year. It might be an opportunity for the CCRC to say ‘We actually need to relook at our competences, how we operate, our procedures. Are we getting it right? Can we improve ourselves?’.
He did not say how much the proposal could cost the taxpayer but added: ‘I want to have the debate and the discussion and give the British people the ability to have ever more confidence in our justice system.
Who would have believed that in 2025 our government would be locking up people for their views and beliefs?
Thirty-one months (2.5 years) in jail for a tweet is appalling, and she’s been made a political prisoner and has been made an example of. Ultimately, it will come back and bite our government in the backside very badly.
She should be allowed out of prison now. The government have made their point and let’s face it they’re letting everybody else out of jail because allegedly they don’t have space and serious criminals are being released early, so why not her?
People should be cautious and overly concerned because this could happen to any one of us who says anything or disagrees with the government. Unfortunately, she as well as others have fallen victim to a government that will stop at nothing to control the people, that’s unless you’re not born to this country.
The poor woman didn’t deserve the punishment she got or the treatment that she is suffering in prison. Quite clearly she’s been stitched up, and she must be terrified in there.
If it had been another person who had been accused of a more violent offence they would have likely got a shorter sentence, but she was given a ridiculous sentence to prove a point and to keep everyone running scared so that they can beat us into submission.
THE MONTHLY MOSQUITO 