Lucy really got screwed over by her original lawyer:
But she told the Court of Appeal in London that she had no idea the full extent of what she was admitting, and that her solicitor Liam Muir had not properly explained what 'inciting violence' meant in the context of her tweet.
She said her solicitor Mr Muir advised her not to go to a basis-of-plea hearing with the judge setting out her reasons for admitting guilt and giving her the opportunity to dispute elements of the prosecution case.
She said Mr Muir told her it 'wasn't worth the risk'.
Mr King asked: ‘Was it made clear to you that what Mr Muir was saying to the prosecution was that you would concede you were intending to incite serious violence?’
Connolly replied: ‘No.’
Mr King asked: ‘Would you accept being sentenced on the basis of attempting to incite serious violence?’
Connolly replied: ‘No, never. He (Mr Muir) said it was always going to be a custodial sentence and this was just damage limitation.’
Note: the crime was stirring up racial hatred, but the sentencing guidelines for this place you in the highest category if you incite violence while doing this. Her solicitor didn't bother to explain this, and simply conceded that she had incited violence. Nor did he bother to argue that she shouldn't be sentenced on the basis of the widespread disorder, since her Tweet was days before things kicked off, and she also Tweeted against the violence. It was over a week after her tweet that things kicked off near an invader hotel. Her new barrister actually bothered to argue that she was simply saying she wouldn't care if migrant hotels were burnt down.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14714323/Tory-councillors-wife-Lucy-Connolly-Southport-Appeal-Court.html