The Lucy Connelly case is complicated as there's the context of the riots at the time. This was the case with excessive sentencing in 2011. That said I broadly agree with your points, it's the result of well intentioned but stupid hate speech laws which need to go.
Incitement to violence has been an offence for a very long time, and rightly so.
I'm aware but 'Incitement to violence' is a bit abstract. If every hypothetical reference to violence was prosecuted courts wouldn't be able to deal with anything else.
As with the Lucy Connolly case, context and reach will be considerations in this case. We’re not talking about some bloke mouthing off to his mates.
So as per Helen's example, those with 'Decapitate TERFS' banners that received no censure should be sent to prison?
Should a racist that says 'kick them out' be prosecuted because he used the word 'kick' implying violence which might be carried out by a listener?
(Actually I think this is the problem with social media - it very much is the same as a bloke sounding of to his mates. It's just it has the potential to reach far more people.)
He’s aware of his reach, so he did this knowing the potential effect and has to be held responsible.
Sure but I doubt Lucy Connelly thought much about that.
Perhaps, but not thinking through the consequences of your actions is rarely much of a defence in law.