Monty python justice system

[obiter dictum]

"but want to ignore it when it comes to giving names etc."

 

As far as i am aware everyone has the right to remain silent when being questioned by lawful authority. This is not only contained within Article 6 ECHR but also PACE 1984

 

These are rghts to be protected, not steamroller over because they hinder any possible clandestine agenda ouside the rule of law through any adopted internal policy

Edited November 10, 2015 by obiter dictum

[Conniff]

Conniff

I think you really fail to grasp the inadequacies of our electoral system.

The FPTP system effectively disenfranchises many people as following their beliefs makes no difference

 

I definitely don't fail to grasp it, but this is a whole different subject to what this thread is about so if you want to start another thread for this, I will move the relevant posts and part of the posts over.

[tobyjugg2]

Yes I saw them attacking police and police horses, throwing stones bottled and lighted fireworks.

 

Just **** nothing more.

 

Then why didn't the police arrest them for those real offenses, rather than 'failing to give their name?

[Conniff]

Then why didn't the police arrest them for those real offenses, rather than 'failing to give their name?

 

Why ask BarnOwl, ask the police. There was such a lot of noise, that only the police will know what they were arrested for.

[BarnOwl1]

Then why didn't the police arrest them for those real offenses, rather than 'failing to give their name?

I think you've got the arse end of this, get arrested then refuse to give their name possibly 2 offences .

[tobyjugg2]

I think you've got the arse end of this, get arrested then refuse to give their name possibly 2 offences .

 

Well theres a new plan for all criminals.

Just don't give the police your name and you walk away.

 

Off out to execute Cameron and Hunt now.

Just call me Mr Not Telling You, of course I'll turn up in court - when all the parties have finished.

 

Then even if they catch me, I'll only get a fine for not giving my name - what a bargain - can I set up a DD.

[unclebulgaria67]

I believe people have been arrested, charged, convicted and jailed under a name given to them, because they refused to identify themselves and could not be identified by Police.

 

Not sure what happens in regard to criminal records and release from Prison. I guess during their prison term, they are told that as they are not a recognised person in the UK, they will not be entitled to any form of benefits and will be held in secure accommodation awaiting immigration status confirmation. In most cases, the prisoners must mostly confirm their true identity.

 

Interesting issue. There must be foreign criminals held, where the authorities don't know who they are holding in prison.

[tobyjugg2]

I believe people have been arrested, charged, convicted and jailed under a name given to them, because they refused to identify themselves and could not be identified by Police.

 

Not sure what happens in regard to criminal records and release from Prison. I guess during their prison term, they are told that as they are not a recognised person in the UK, they will not be entitled to any form of benefits and will be held in secure accommodation awaiting immigration status confirmation. In most cases, the prisoners must mostly confirm their true identity.

 

Interesting issue. There must be foreign criminals held, where the authorities don't know who they are holding in prison.

 

I think you are taking what these '2' are saying to seriously unclebulgaria.

 

As if the police would let people who attacked anyone, let alone police officers walk away just because they didn't give their name, let alone the cruelty to animals charge (horses not pigs that is).

 

It more likely the whole claim here is rubbish.

What probably happened is that the police grabbed anyone there whether they did anything wrong not (just to intimidate and make others leave), and when those bystanders refused to give their names as they had done nothing wrong, the police charged them with that. Utter stupidity (of 'the law' and the commanders of the Police there - not the officers themselves)

[trebormoinet]

Just some points as I have read through the thread.

 

Why would Anarchists amongst others take to the ballot box to vote for any party, It is a system that is corrupt and evil and out of control, it has enslaved us for far too long and needs destroying

 

Those that oppose to be ruled over by any institution, protesting and civil disobedience is a legitimate tactic which has been employed throughout our history and without which, we would not have the liberties we now enjoy.

 

It is laughable that weapons used by the Police to trample, kick and crush protesters are then used as media propaganda to garner sympathy and prove how cruel and heartless the protesters are, surely taking a horse to a area where there might be this kind of behaviour is equally cruel and heartless if not more so as they could have avoided it.

 

If the news report is correct, then it is common sense that those arrested have not got a criminal record else they would have been identified through fingerprints, taking that into account those arrested were probably by the law of averages, law abiding protesters rounded up and arrested for exercising their legitimate right to withhold personal information.

[andydd]

Then why didn't the police arrest them for those real offenses, rather than 'failing to give their name?

 

Indeed !

[BarnOwl1]

Indeed !

 

Are you sure that these idiots were not arrested " for real offences" and then because they are just masked cowards refused to give their names?

That the way I think it would have happened.

[Conniff]

Where has the 'arrested for not giving their name' come from, was that what was reported ??

[tobyjugg2]

Are you sure that these idiots were not arrested " for real offences" and then because they are just masked cowards refused to give their names?

That the way I think it would have happened.

 

and the police would just let them go?

 

If that were the case, it isn't those 'arrested' who would be the idiots.

Back to my higher post : who needs solicitors, just don't give your name.

ROFL

[fletch70]

Barnowl

I do find the way you call people using their rights to protest , 'Idiots'

I can not condone the use of violence, although I can foresee a time when it may be called for as we lurch even further towards a totalitarian state.

 

In this case however, as far as we know, all they did was protest peacefully against something they thought was wrong.

[Conniff]

It was not pieceful and they deliberately tried to antagonise the police as well as caused criminal damage.

 

[tobyjugg2]

It was not pieceful and they deliberately tried to antagonise the police as well as caused criminal damage.

 

Some perhaps did, and if the police arrested those particular elements in the protest, then the police should have charged them for it and locked them up as they would be not just entitled too, but expected to .

 

They didn't. They apparently charged these allegedly violent criminals with not giving their name and then let them go.

[Conniff]

So we've now gone from it being calm and peaceful to 'well some might have'. You can't have it both ways, it wasn't a peaceful protest.

[SabreSheep]

I think the correct terminology here would be "Mostly Peaceful"

[Conniff]

So why wasn't that said instead of claiming it was a peaceful protest.

[SabreSheep]

For the same reasons some journalists report it as a violent protest or "Decends into violence", simple wordplay designed to scuw what happened to suit the editors personal opinion.

 

As with everything this works both ways and what actually happens, is the first casualty becomes the truth

[tobyjugg2]

So we've now gone from it being calm and peaceful to 'well some might have'. You can't have it both ways, it wasn't a peaceful protest.

 

and odd bad apple doesn't spoil the orchard Conniff, although it sometimes does seem that way.

 

Simple:

If the police let violent criminals go simply for not giving their name - then the police should be prosecuted for criminal negligence.

 

If the police arrested innocent bystanders then trumped up charges, they should be disciplined and apologies made to the affected people.

 

Any violent people should have been properly arrested and charged with proper evidence as is REQUIRED bu a just law system, and even made examples of, quite rightly.

 

 

 

Its rare there is only 2 real options, but that seems to be the case here.

Which do you think it is Conniff?

1. Unreasonable arrests

or

2. Criminally negligent police letting violent criminals walk free?

[Conniff]

I did ask before, where did this 'let go because they wouldn't give their names' come from ?

[tobyjugg2]

I did ask before, where did this 'let go because they wouldn't give their names' come from ?

 

Have you not read the original post of this thread?

or cross referred it yourself?

 

Here you go:

https://www.google.com/search?q=Protesters+who+were+among+almost+50+people+arrested+following+attacks+on+police+and+their+horses+have+been+told+by+magistrates+to+return+to+court+next+year+-+despite+refusing+to+reveal+their+identities+to+police+or+the+courts&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

[Conniff]

That's why I asked. In that case we must also consider;

 

"The Commissioner said he believed protesters had deliberately attacked the animals during the demonstration in central London, organised by Anonymous to hit back at austerity measures and perceived inequality brought about by the Government.

 

"The horses were big enough to see, they knew what they were doing," Sir Bernard said.

 

"They knew it was a possibility these fireworks would frighten the animals, so I think it's pretty despicable behaviour.

 

"They have no right to hurt other people, they have no right to hurt animals, and they have no right to frighten the members of public that are wandering around.

 

"Protest by all means but don't hurt other people in the process."

[tobyjugg2]

That's why I asked. In that case we must also consider;

 

"The Commissioner said he believed protesters had deliberately attacked the animals during the demonstration in central London, organised by Anonymous to hit back at austerity measures and perceived inequality brought about by the Government.

 

"The horses were big enough to see, they knew what they were doing," Sir Bernard said.

 

"They knew it was a possibility these fireworks would frighten the animals, so I think it's pretty despicable behaviour.

 

"They have no right to hurt other people, they have no right to hurt animals, and they have no right to frighten the members of public that are wandering around.

 

"Protest by all means but don't hurt other people in the process."

 

Ok, so the commisioner appears to have clearly stated that in his opinion there were criminal acts there - and I'm not talking about not giving names.

So again

 

Its rare there is only 2 real options, but that seems to be the case here.

Which do you think it is Conniff?

1. Unreasonable arrests (of the wrong people)

or

2. Criminally negligent police letting violent criminals walk free?