Beyond Prison: How Restorative Justice can heal the harm of online hate
This is a blog by Why me? Volunteer, Faye Sellers.
Last summer’s riots showed just how fragile Britain’s social fabric has become. In the wake of the Southport child murders, false rumours spread online, blaming asylum seekers. Within hours, hotels were attacked, streets filled with anger, and communities were left reeling.
Into this chaos stepped Lucy Connolly, a childminder and councillor’s wife, who tweeted that migrants should face “mass deportation” and even suggested arson against hotels. Her post went viral, fuelling the tension. Days later she was arrested, prosecuted for inciting racial hatred, and sentenced to 31 months in prison. For some, her sentence was justice. Others argued that Britain now has a “two-tier justice system” where some voices are punished harshly, while others’ inflammatory speech slips through the cracks. But there’s a bigger question we should be asking – does locking people up for a tweet actually solve anything?
Prison promises deterrence, punishment, and removal from society. In Connolly’s case, it made a clear statement that online incitement won’t be tolerated.
But beyond symbolism, does it work?
Connolly was grieving the loss of her own child and lashed out online, fuelled by anger and misinformation. Jail doesn’t fix grief or false beliefs. Her supporters quickly reframed her as a political prisoner, raising money and stoking division. And the asylum-seeker communities who were the ones most harmed by her words, were never really part of the process. Their fear was acknowledged in court, but not addressed. Prison punishes, but it doesn’t repair the harm.
Restorative Justice offers a different path. Instead of asking what law was broken, it asks who was harmed, what they need, and how the harm can be repaired.
Imagine if Connolly had been required to sit down with asylum-seeker representatives and hear how her words intensified fear during the riots. Imagine her making a genuine, facilitated apology, or contributing to refugee support groups and anti-hate initiatives. Wouldn’t that have had a bigger impact for all parties involved, including on those who supported Connolly?
It’s not “soft justice.” It’s harder. It forces perpetrators to confront the human cost of their actions, not just count the days in a cell. Where prison isolates, Restorative Justice connects victim to perpetrator, promoting harm and repair.
The unrest of 2024 wasn’t just about one woman’s tweet. It was about what happens when rumours spread unchecked, when communities lack dialogue, and when fear fills the silence. Prison can remove offenders from the scene, but it won’t stop the next wave of misinformation or division. What might help are community forums where rumours are confronted before they ignite, digital restorative schemes to deal with online abuse quickly and directly, and education-based outcomes requiring perpetrators to counter the misinformation they once spread.
The Connolly case is a turning point. Yes, prison punished her but it also deepened divides, left victims sidelined, and fuelled claims of bias. Restorative Justice offers a way forward. It delivers accountability without martyrdom, repair without bias, and dialogue where silence currently festers. If last summer taught us anything, it’s that we can’t jail our way out of division. What we need is justice that doesn’t just punish, but justice that heals.
Read more about Restorative Justice following the riots
