"Labour Councillor Caught on Video Calling for Blood! Ricky Jones Pleads Not Guilty Despite Shocking 'Cut Their Throats' Speech at Anti-Fascist Riots – Will He Escape Justice?"

Hi and welcome to this Video Production Court Report/Update.

Ricky Jones, a former Labour Councillor, has pleaded not guilty to charges of encouraging violent disorder, following his incendiary speech during anti-fascist protests in Walthamstow earlier this year. The 57-year-old was caught on video stating:

"They are disgusting fascists and we need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all."

As a result, Jones was swiftly suspended by the Labour Party and arrested shortly thereafter. He has remained in custody since his arrest, awaiting trial.

The protest, sparked in response to days of rioting and violent disorder by far-right groups, saw Jones deliver the controversial speech on August 7. His plea of not guilty, made during a court appearance via videolink from HMP Wormwood Scrubs, has set the stage for a high-profile trial, slated for January 20, 2024, at Snaresbrook Crown Court. He faces charges under British law for encouraging violent disorder while "believing it would be committed" due to his words.

Video Evidence and its Legal Implications

The key challenge for Jones lies in the damning video evidence that clearly captures his inflammatory rhetoric. Under UK law, statements made publicly, particularly those calling for violence, can carry significant weight in court. While Jones’ defence may argue that his threats were not intended to be taken literally or directed at any one individual, the general nature of his violent language could undermine his plea. Moreover, British courts tend to treat video evidence with particular gravity, especially when it clearly demonstrates intent or encouragement of illegal activities. This makes a not-guilty verdict unlikely in his case, given how the footage can be used as compelling evidence against him.

Why Plead Not Guilty?

Jones’ legal team has potentially strategized that pleading not guilty could yield certain advantages. Speculative reasons for his plea could include:

1. Reduction of Charges: By pleading not guilty, Jones may hope that the more serious charge of encouraging violent disorder could be lessened to a public order offence, which would carry a lighter sentence.

2. Fading Public Memory: The timing of the trial, set for January next year, suggests his defence may be betting that public outrage will have diminished by then, possibly influencing the court's decision.

3. Time Served Strategy: Jones may be counting on the fact that his time spent in custody since August could lead to a more lenient sentence—possibly even time served—if he is convicted.

The Risk of a Guilty Verdict

Despite these speculative defence strategies, Jones’ not-guilty plea leaves him vulnerable to harsher consequences. If convicted of encouraging violent disorder, the sentencing can be severe, given the public nature of his offence and the current climate surrounding hate speech and violent incitement in the UK. While sentences vary, Jones could be looking at a range of penalties, including imprisonment for several years, depending on the court's assessment of the severity of his actions.

His decision to plead not guilty, given the strength of the video evidence, could backfire, resulting in a harsher sentence than if he had pled guilty and sought leniency from the court.

Broader Implications

This case counters a prevailing argument in some circles that right-wing rioters and inciters have been treated more harshly by the legal system than other groups. Jones' prolonged custody and the severity of the charges against him highlight that those accused of incitement and disorder, irrespective of their political alignment, are facing serious consequences. The legal system, at least in this case, is sending a clear message that incitement to violence will not be tolerated, regardless of the ideological context.

In sum, Ricky Jones' case will serve as a litmus test for how the UK judiciary handles politically charged cases of violent incitement, and his legal fate now hangs in the balance as the trial approaches.

Well, that’s all for now. But until our next article, please stay tuned, stay informed, but most of all stay safe, and I’ll see you then.

Bénédict Tarot Freeman

Editor-at-Large

VPN City-Desk

citydesk@vpnldn.co.uk