Keir Starmer has been embroiled in a hypocrisy row after the Prime Minister's own guidelines "should have spared Lucy Connolly from jail".
The case has sparked controversy regarding the Prime Minister's stance, with critics arguing the mother has been unfairly targeted and a subject of "two-tier" justice.
Lucy Connolly faces imminent release from custody on Thursday following her imprisonment for publishing inflammatory content targeting asylum seekers.
**ARE YOU READING THIS ON OUR APP? DOWNLOAD NOW FOR THE BEST GB NEWS EXPERIENCE**
The childminder received a 31-month sentence after posting on the social media platform X during the day of the Southport murders, when three children lost their lives at a dance class.
Her message encouraged followers to "set fire" to accommodation housing asylum seekers, adding "for all I care."
The post reached approximately 310,000 views and garnered 940 shares before Connolly removed it three and a half hours later, expressing regret for her actions.
A controversy has emerged over Sir Keir Starmer's backing of the prosecution as during his tenure as director of public prosecutions in 2013, he issued guidance suggesting prosecutors should take a more lenient view when suspects quickly removed offensive posts and showed authentic regret.
The guidelines highlighted that legal action might be "unlikely to be both necessary and proportionate" in cases where individuals took "swift and effective action" to delete problematic content.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
Lucy Connolly faces imminent release from custody on Thursday following her imprisonment for publishing inflammatory content targeting asylum seekers
|GETTY
In subsequent interviews, Sir Keir said that spontaneous offensive remarks that are quickly removed "don't necessarily need to be prosecuted," particularly content posted on weekend evenings and taken down by morning.
Despite defending Connolly's conviction by citing his opposition to violence incitement, the Prime Minister's current position appears at odds with his previous recommendations.
The 2013 guidance included caveats, warning it wasn't comprehensive and that individual cases required separate assessment.
Legal professionals observing Connolly's situation pointed out that public order violations like racial hatred incitement might fall outside these protective measures.
Lucy Connolly was jailed for 31 months at Birmingham Crown Court for stirring up racial hatred on X | Northamptonshire PoliceCurrent prosecution guidelines maintain similar language but have modified the original phrasing.
Where the 2013 version suggested prosecution could be "unlikely," today's guidance advises prosecutors to exercise "particular care" in determining whether legal action remains "necessary and proportionate."
Frank Ferguson from the Crown Prosecution Service's special crime division emphasised that whilst holding strong political opinions isn't illegal, inciting racial hatred constitutes a criminal offence.
Evidence presented included racist posts from Connolly's account both before and after the Southport incident, according to the CPS.
Keir Starmer previously said that spontaneous offensive remarks that are quickly removed "don't necessarily need to be prosecuted," particularly content posted on weekend evenings and taken down by morning
| ReutersOpposition figures have condemned the prosecution as evidence of "two-tier" justice in the justice system.
Chris Philp, shadow home secretary, argued that the Prime Minister's support for prosecution contradicted his own guidelines, given Connolly's quick deletion and expressed remorse.
Mr Philp said: "This suggests Keir Starmer is guilty of hypocrisy and double standards by supporting a breach of his own prosecution guidelines."
He highlighted that Lord Hermer personally approved the prosecution, suggesting "another example of two-tier justice" considering the lengthy sentence compared to those who engaged in physical violence.
Chris Philp, shadow home secretary, argued that the Prime Minister's support for prosecution contradicted his own guidelines, given Connolly's quick deletion and expressed remorse
|GETTY
Lord Toby Young of the Free Speech Union claimed the Prime Minister should have followed his own 2013 advice.
He said: "Sentencing her to more than two and a half years for a single tweet which she quickly deleted and apologised for has undermined public confidence in the criminal justice system."
A Government spokesman said: “Sentencing is a matter for independent courts, and we support the action taken by the courts, as well as the police, to keep our streets safe.
"In all cases where Law Officers’ consent is required, the Law Officers carefully consider whether to grant consent, including all relevant factors to the public interest in the prosecution."