Lucy Connolly has announced she is considering legal action against the police just one day after being released from prison, claiming officers were “dishonest” in what they said about her.
The 42-year-old former childminder, who served nine months of a 31-month sentence for inciting racial hatred, left HMP Peterborough on Thursday morning and immediately signalled her intention to challenge authorities.
“That’s something that I will be looking into,” Mrs Connolly told The Telegraph about potential legal action, adding: “I don’t want to say too much because I need to seek legal advice on that.”
I do think the police were dishonest in what they released and what they said about me, and I will be holding them to account for that,” she stated in her first interview since release.
In a remarkable development, Mrs Connolly also revealed she is due to meet with the Donald Trump administration over what she described as a “free speech crackdown” in Britain.
The wife of Conservative councillor Raymond Connolly was driven from prison in a white taxi shortly after 10.30am on Thursday, avoiding assembled reporters waiting at the gates.
She had been jailed in October after posting on X: “Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the bastards for all I care … if that makes me racist so be it.”
The post, made on the day of the Southport attack in which three young girls were murdered, was viewed 310,000 times in three-and-a-half hours before Connolly deleted it.
She pleaded guilty to inciting racial hatred by publishing and distributing “threatening or abusive” written material and was sentenced at Birmingham Crown Court to 31 months imprisonment.
The former childminder from Northampton was ordered to serve 40 per cent of her sentence before being released on licence, making her eligible for release after approximately one year.
Mrs Connolly was arrested on 6 August, by which point she had deleted her social media account, but officers who seized her phone uncovered other messages containing further racist remarks.
During police interview, Connolly stated she had “strong views on immigration,” told officers she “did not like illegal immigrants” and claimed that “children were not safe from them.
The Crown Prosecution Service revealed that racist tweets had been sent from Mrs Connolly’s account “both in the weeks and months before the Southport attacks – as well as in the days after.”
Her case has attracted significant international attention, with the US State Department confirming it is “monitoring this matter” and expressing concern about “infringements on freedom of expression.
American political commentator Charlie Kirk pledged to raise Connolly’s case with the Trump administration, describing Britain as becoming a “totalitarian country” over speech restrictions.
What she said would not be worth any prison time in America,” Kirk told GB News, adding he would try to get the US State Department involved in the case.
The Telegraph reported that diplomats from the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor travelled to London in March to “affirm the importance of freedom of expression in the UK.
Vice President JD Vance had previously warned at the Munich Security Conference that “free speech in Britain and across Europe was in retreat.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer defended the sentencing earlier this year when questioned whether her imprisonment was an “efficient or fair use” of prison space.
Sentencing is a matter for our courts, and I celebrate the fact that we have independent courts in this country,” Starmer said during Prime Minister’s Questions.
“I am strongly in favour of free speech; we’ve had free speech in this country for a very long time, and we protect it fiercely,” he added.
Lord Young of Acton, founder of the Free Speech Union, called Connolly’s imprisonment “a national scandal,” particularly when compared to others who “said and done much worse” but avoided jail.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said the sentence was “harsher than the sentences handed down for bricks thrown at police or actual rioting.
“Protecting people from words should not be given greater weight in law than public safety. If the law does this, then the law itself is broken,” Badenoch stated.
During her imprisonment, Reform UK deputy leader Richard Tice visited Connolly and claimed she had been “manhandled without provocation” and left with bruises.
Tice alleged the treatment was “politically motivated” after she was unexpectedly moved to a wing housing violent inmates with 23-hour lockdowns.
An unsuccessful Court of Appeal bid to reduce her sentence was dismissed in May, with judges ruling the 31-month term was not “manifestly excessive.”
Her husband Raymond said at the time: “I think the law needs looking at. My wife has paid a very high price for making a mistake.”
Mrs Connolly has been invited to attend a Westminster debate as a guest of honour on a landmark petition reviewing penalties for social media posts.
The petition, initiated by former Reform UK MP Rupert Lowe, has secured nearly 200,000 signatures and argues that imprisoning individuals for social media posts “sets a dangerous precedent.
Ministry of Justice figures show prosecutions for posts causing racial hatred increased from just one conviction in 2015 to 44 in 2024.
The dramatic rise has prompted calls for a review of the Public Order Act, with campaigners suggesting the law is being enforced too strictly.
Mrs Connolly will remain on licence until the end of her full sentence, meaning any further offences or breach of release conditions could see her returned to prison.
She returns home to her husband and 12-year-old daughter on the outskirts of Northampton, having served what is believed to be the longest prison sentence for a single social media post.
The case has become a flashpoint in debates over free speech, with supporters arguing she was made an example of whilst critics maintain the sentence was justified.
As international scrutiny intensifies over Britain’s approach to online speech, Connolly’s threatened legal action against police could reignite controversy over her high-profile case.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
