...though I wonder if she was obliged to say she doesn't support Hamas, as in:

'During a speech she gave outside the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London at the time, she expressed “unconditional solidarity” with the Palestinian resistance, the court was told. Prosecutors claimed this was a “thinly veiled reference” to Hamas.

Cotte repeatedly rejected attempts to equate the two, telling the court: “I don’t support Hamas and I have never supported Hamas. I was supporting the right to resist.”'

Speaking this way seems to legitimise the proscription of that group and endorse their demonisation in the media & political class. If that's what she really thinks, I guess fair enough, but it's still a tactical error IMHO. If Hamas was a militant group in Syria or Ukraine there's no way they would have been proscribed on the basis of the same actions, and in fact presstitutes and politicians would be falling over themselves to praise their bravery and selfless devotion to the cause of national liberation etc etc. In fact behind the scenes, intel services would be encouraging them to increase their militancy to the point of outright terrorism, as we have seen in Syria, Ukraine and other proxy conflicts.

Anyway, good that she can now get on with her life. 2 and a half years is a long time to have something like this hanging over you.

cheers,
I