Author: Tanveer Mann
Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2018/10/05/racist-woman-79-jailed-for-calling-for-new-and-better-death-camps-8009163/?ito=cbshare
Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/
Barbara Fielding-Morriss, whose manifesto praised Adolf Hitler, was given a 12-month prison sentence after a judge condemned her lack of remorse for the ‘vile’ offences. Fielding-Morriss, who stood as a candidate in Stoke-on-Trent Central during last year’s by-election and general election, was convicted in June of three offences of stirring up racial hatred between September 2016 and February last year at Stafford Crown Court.
Passing sentence, Recorder Julian Taylor said Fielding-Morriss, who represented herself in court, had ‘not helped her cause’ by offering anti-Semitic mitigation.
The pensioner, who accused the judge of curtailing her freedom of speech, submitted three written statements to the court and in the witness box claimed she was protecting ‘my white nation’ from ‘annihilation’ by immigrants. After saying she believed an ‘infestation’ of Jews had invaded Britain, Fielding-Morriss returned to the dock and was told she would serve six months of her one-year prison term in custody, and the remainder on licence. Recorder Taylor told Fielding-Morriss: ‘The background to this case is that you stood as a parliamentary candidate. ‘Your manifesto, which was published on a website and in a blog, contained material that formed the subject of the three counts on the indictment.
What I found particularly sinister during the trial was your attitude. You showed no remorse whatsoever. ‘Indeed even today, when I gave you a final opportunity to address me, you started to repeat some of the matters you put forward to the jury during your trial.’ The judge added: ‘The fact of the matter is you intended to stir up racial hatred. ‘The fact you were standing in a general election as a parliamentary candidate aggravates this case, because you were putting views forward to an electorate.’ The judge said the defendant’s age was not of itself a barrier to imprisonment, adding: ‘This mater is so serious that it crosses the custody threshold – an immediate sentence of custody is appropriate.’