No Further Action To Be Taken Against Woman Who Re-Tweeted...

[sandyRoe]

...false information which could have sparked anti-refugee riots.

Have others been convicted and sentenced for doing the same thing?

If that has happened why has she received preferential treatment?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13864063/Bernadette-Spofforth-accused-sparking-Southport-riots-police-drop-case.html

[Canary42]

She's rich.

[youngmafbog]

There was no evidence, plod acting like Stasi now have to back down.

I suspect the difference here is she could afford a brief rather than one in Chairman Starmers pocket who stood up for her.  The others should not be in jail unless proven to have caused it, which is really unlikely.

Its highly unlikey the yobs that threw bricks at the rozzers and were rightly locked up were infulenced by anything than their usual thiggish attitudes.

 

 

[webbo3]

No action against this man.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/05/nick-lowles-hope-not-hate-apologise-tweet-acid-attack/

[jno]

her offence seemed rather cautious, she said "If this is true..." and deleted her post when she found it wasn't. On the other hand she was the first to publicise the fake name, which did much to prompt the riots, so she's caused the country a lot of bother and expense; so no sympathy from me about her time in the cells.

[Clone]

I doubt she received preferential treatment. My guess is, she wasn't stupid enough to admit to something she didn't do.

 

[sandyRoe]

If you retweet a post is there no record of it on your phone or computer?

[ToraToraTora]

if action was taken against everyone who re tweeted things that my be slightly iffy then the jails would be fuller than they are.

[sandyRoe]

"If this is true...", seems to be a get out of jail card.

Use that and you can them post hate-filled,  racist, rubbish, and know you've nothing to worry about.