Under section 17 of the Public Order Act 1986, “racial hatred”, for the purpose of our stirring up racial hatred laws, is defined as “hatred against a group of persons defined by reference to colour, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins”. The phrase “in Great Britain” after “persons” was removed by the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001. Thus, it is irrelevant whether the alleged racial hatred in question referred to people or groups in this country or elsewhere in the world.

If the statement “set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards for all I care” constitutes stirring up racial hatred, then the statement “Death to the IDF” should also constitute the same. It was alleged by the CPS that the former statement stirred up racial hatred on the basis of national origin. In reality, the national origin of these individuals was tangential to Lucy Connolly. The word “bastards” was used to refer to individuals who have illegally entered our nation, whom, due to their unvetted status, Lucy regarded as a potential danger, especially to women and girls. A danger she believed had been realized when the three girls in Southport were butchered. The fact the perpetrator was a Rwandan born in Wales has no bearing on whether this belief was genuine at the time Lucy made her statement. An Iraqi here legally was not a target of her ire, whereas one who entered illegally was. It is thus arguable that the essential element of the offence she was charged with was never made out. However, if it was, then by extension “Death to the IDF” should also fall foul of these laws. Lucy's statement referred to a subset of foreign nationals, and “IDF” here refers to a subset of Israeli citizens (national origin) and to Jews (a group UK law regards as a race). Neither should constitute a crime, but if you prosecute one, you better prosecute the other.