Government Threatens To RETURN Lucy Connolly To PRISON For Sharing Joke Post On X

She shared a quip about Trump hauling off the PM Venezuela-style

STEVE WATSON

Lucy Connolly, the 42-year-old UK woman previously sentenced to two years in prison for a post on X is back under the microscope of Britain’s speech enforcers, with the government threatening to put her back behind bars for merely reposting a satirical jab at Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

The latest drama stems from Connolly reposting a comment that read: “Could Trump could come and take Starmer like they did in Venezuela.”

Probation officials deemed it “not of good behaviour,” with Connolly noting: “Apparently… somebody called probation and said they were very offended by this post and it’s inciting violence.”

Lucy Connolly – who has already spent ten months locked up for a singular post on X – is facing a recall to prison because she retweeted a joke about Donald Trump arresting Keir Starmer.
Officials told her it was inciting violence.
THERE IS NO FREE SPEECH IN THE UK!@LucyTCWife pic.twitter.com/W3LtW5czA3

— Dan Wootton (@danwootton) January 14, 2026

The fact that some random person called in the thought crime to the authorities is arguably equally as disturbing as the resulting threat to send Connolly back to prison. It highlights how there are hordes of bootlicking citizens eager to act as the thought police and to tattle to the State.

Connolly has also been cautioned over remarks about British-Egyptian extremist Alaa Abd el-Fattah, who has a history of posting extremist threats against British people, yet was welcomed into the country recently by Kier Starmer after being released from prison by Egyptian authorities.

Connolly first hit the headlines after the horrific Southport attacks, where three young girls were murdered by a second-generation Rwandan migrant. In the heated aftermath, she tweeted: “Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f***ing hotels full of the bastards for all I care.”

Judge Melbourne Inman KC labeled it “grossly offensive” and handed her the maximum 31-month sentence under the Public Order Act, despite no prior offences or direct threats. She served 380 days before release on licence in August, under conditions typically reserved for serious offenders.

Her case drew fire from proponents of free speech, who blasted it as proof of Britain’s “two-tier justice system.” Before his tragic murder, Charlie Kirk noted such words “would not be any prison time in America,” underscoring how the UK has slid toward a “totalitarian country.”

Connolly insists she hasn’t posted anything offensive or inciting since her release, even suggesting authorities provide a list of “things she was allowed to say” to avoid these traps.

Connolly has also had to deal with her 13-year-old daughter, Edie, being barred from a new school after the headteacher rescinded a trial placement upon discovering her mother’s conviction. The educator claimed “racism doesn’t go down well” and that Edie’s presence would cause a “ruckus.”

Connolly called it “outrageous discrimination,” asking: “In what world is this ok?” and adding, “My daughter is being punished for my views. She’s innocent, and now she’s the one suffering.”

The Maduro quip that landed Connolly in hot water—suggesting Trump should swoop in and haul Starmer away like Venezuelan tyrant Nicolás Maduro—was no isolated gag. Thousands of frustrated Brits have cracked similar jokes across X and beyond, venting rage at a regime seen as trampling freedoms while bungling borders and the economy.

Posts like “Trump is gonna Maduro your ass next!” and “We really need Trump to repeat the Maduro operation with Starmer” rack up likes in the hundreds or thousands for mocking the PM’s fate. If resharing such satire warrants prison time, what’s next—a mass roundup of every citizen daring to poke fun at the powers that be?

This reeks of selective tyranny, cherry-picking targets to stifle dissent while ignoring the real threats fueling public fury.

Connolly’s ordeal is just one thread in Britain’s expanding speech gulag. Last year alone, police arrested nearly 10,000 people for “grossly offensive” social media posts under draconian laws like the Communications Act—averaging 30 busts a day.

Forces raid homes over sarcastic emails, old tweets, or WhatsApp chats, diverting resources from real crimes like burglaries and knife attacks. We’ve even seen early releases for violent offenders to make room for thought criminals.

Take the case of Luke Yarwood, jailed 18 months for two anti-immigration tweets viewed just 33 times. The judge called them “odious in the extreme,” despite no real-world impact or followers acting on them. Such minimal-reach rants get hammered harder than child abusers in some courts, exposing priorities skewed against ordinary Brits raging against open borders.

Starmer’s regime has recently gone as far as suggesting a complete ban on X, citing its Grok AI for generating fake images as a convenient excuse for what is clearly an effort to target the platform where unfiltered truth is allowed to reach the masses.

Now the government is turning its attention once again to Online Safety Act’s Section 121, empowering Ofcom to force platforms like WhatsApp to scan private messages via client-side tech—shattering end-to-end encryption.

Officially for child exploitation and terrorism, it flags everyday views on mass migration as radicalization risks: researching immigration stats, defending British rights, or protesting cultural shifts.

Schools are even using games labeling such concerns as paths to extremism.

The use of the “Maduro joke” shared by Connolly to crackdown on free speech echoes globally. In Spain, ex-senator Carles Mulet has denounced bullfighter Fran Rivera and right wing activist Vito Quiles for jokingly urging Trump to “continue” after Venezuela by intervening in Spain and eyeing Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez.

Ridiculously, the pair are now facing 5-10 years in prison, with authorities citing treason and provocation, among a litany of other offences.

This global assault on free expression demands fierce pushback. When mere reposts or quips land ordinary people in the crosshairs and families bear the brunt, it’s evident: the real danger isn’t online words, but regimes worldwide desperate to silence opposition to their rejected agendas.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

---

This article (Government Threatens To RETURN Lucy Connolly To PRISON For Sharing Joke Post On X) was created and published by Modernity News and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Steve Watson

CINDY HARPER

Lucy Connolly, a 42-year-old former childcarer who served more than a year in prison for a social media post, says she has been warned she could be sent back to jail over her recent online activity.

She revealed on the Dan Wootton Outspoken show that probation officials have issued her a “warning letter” accusing her of “not good behavior” for posts they considered inappropriate under the terms of her release.

“I generally don’t know what is okay by their standards to say and what is not,” Connolly said. “I’ve been pulled up for several things last week with a warning letter, which is telling me that [the posts] are not of good behavior. And none of which I’m in agreeance with.”

The incident centers on a reposted comment on X that jokingly referred to President Donald Trump “taking” UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer in the same way the United States targeted Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro.

Connolly said the remark was clearly “tongue-in-cheek” but that someone reported it to probation as “inciting violence.”

The free speech martyr explained that she now feels she must second-guess everything she says online. “I don’t think you’ll find anything on my Twitter since I’ve made a return to Twitter since I’ve been to prison, that you would deem offensive or incitement,” she said.

Connolly later sought to clarify claims that she was facing an imminent return to prison.

In a post on X, she said she had not been recalled to custody and had attended a probation meeting, stressing that “all is well.” While confirming she had received a reprimand, she said she maintains a “positive relationship” with probation and is aware of her license conditions.

Connolly was released in August after serving 380 days of a 31-month sentence. Her release was on license, a system that imposes behavioral restrictions until the sentence period ends.

Such licenses are usually used for people convicted of terrorism or sexual offenses and allow the government to recall a person to custody if they are judged to have breached the rules, even without a new criminal charge.

Connolly said she had also been warned about posts relating to her daughter’s school application and about activist Alaa Abd el-Fattah.

Abd el-Fattah, a dual Egyptian-British national, has been at the centre of controversy after messages emerged online calling for violence against Zionists and police.

He has since apologized and said that some of his words were “completely twisted out of their meaning.”

According to reports, the letter sent to Connolly warned that further comments of a similar nature could be deemed a breach of license and lead to her being recalled to prison.

Connolly’s case has become emblematic of a wider change in how speech is controlled. The government’s growing use of probationary powers and license conditions means individuals can face ongoing restrictions long after their formal punishment has ended.

While the state insists these measures protect the public from harm, they have become a tool for policing expression without due process.

Connolly’s arrest and imprisonment for online speech have drawn international scrutiny, with foreign media and political figures questioning how a democratic government could impose such a lengthy prison term over a single social media post.

Officials in the United States have reportedly raised the issue through diplomatic channels, expressing concern that the case reflects a growing intolerance toward free expression in the United Kingdom.

---

This article (Lucy Connolly Warned Over Joke on X) was created and published by Reclaim the Netand is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Cindy Harper

Featured image: Modernity News