Boiler wrote: ↑Sat May 02, 2026 5:11 pm I didn't think she was anything more than a gob on a stick?She isn't, but that should be enough to get her sent back,.
davidjay wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 8:56 am And again - how has she avoided a recall?You probably know the way it works- there are a list of conditions, and they're fairly usually fairly straightforward. Not to miss meetings with the Probation officer, that sort of thing- lots of prisoners with drug habits immediately do that, and go back in. Then there's "don't visit this place where the person you attacked lives". And obviously criminal offences.
Killer Whale wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 9:47 am How the fuck does she get a blue tick? Did she pay for it? Who is financing her?I assume for a grifter like her £11 a month isn't that much.
Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 10:09 amI haven't got much knowledge of the conditions but I would have thought they include something along the lines of admitting you were guilty and promising not to do it, or anything like it, again. Abusing all and sundry would surely be doing just that.davidjay wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 8:56 am And again - how has she avoided a recall?You probably know the way it works- there are a list of conditions, and they're fairly usually fairly straightforward. Not to miss meetings with the Probation officer, that sort of thing- lots of prisoners with drug habits immediately do that, and go back in. Then there's "don't visit this place where the person you attacked lives". And obviously criminal offences.
I'd have thought she should have had a condition not to post at all on social media, but seems like she doesn't. I don't know what condition this would break. It's obviously libelous, but that's a different point.
Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 7:14 pm She's not committing another criminal offence though. Unless there's some sort of social media ban, which there should have been, I don't see what they recall her on.Her libellous claim that Starmer is a paedophile could be incitement.
Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 10:11 pmA child rapist is the very definition of a paedophile, a very different statement to the bogus claims about failing to prosecute Savile or grooming gangs.Oboogie wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2026 9:49 pmShe doesn't say that.
Her libellous claim that Starmer is a paedophile could be incitement.
That's not much different to stuff routinely said about Starmer, re the CPS early in his time not prosecuting grooming gangs or Jimmy Savile.