London Burning

Then I don't understand jmsprovan's post.

On mainland UK (scotland, wales, england) Water cannons have never been used and no police forces own any. Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK where they have (6) water cannons and are allowed to use them.
 
On mainland UK (scotland, wales, england) Water cannons have never been used and no police forces own any. Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK where they have (6) water cannons and are allowed to use them.

I presume he meant this post because I didn't understand what/who it was aimed at either;

Places with actual freedom where demonstrations are put down with tear gas and water cannon, right.
 
I presume he meant this post because I didn't understand what/who it was aimed at either;

People from mainland European countries seem to like pontificating over how they perceive the UK to be so draconian, yet the UK has significantly less militaristic policing styles when compared to France, Germany, Greece ect who all like to use Water Cannon, Tear Gas, Rubber Bullets ect pretty freely.
 
This photo has been one shown by the BBC News taken from the Met Police Flickr page.

She looked quite pleased with her "shopping trip" at the time, doubt if she is smiling now.


S96 by Metropolitan Police, on Flickr​

Probably a good idea if see turns herself in to the cops, as soon as possible.

Well, it seems like she hasn't given herself up yet.
Out of the dozens of pictures on the Met Police Flickr site, the above woman's face was shown on a "Crimewatch Special" tonight called:

BBC TV - Riots Caught on Camera

BBC TV said:
This special edition of Crimewatch asks viewers for their help to identify the rioters and looters caught on camera in the recent disturbances. Presenter and former policeman Rav Wilding travels to the most affected cities uncovering crucial CCTV and stills images which the police hope will ensure that those responsible are brought to justice.

It is interesting to note of the hundreds of people involved in Peckham, SE London apart from CCTV video, she was one of only four still pictures shown.

It is a very clear picture, but it can't be for that reason alone that this image has beeen featured so much, I suspect the Police see her as a priority.

Makes me wonder what she has done.

* * *

BBC News - Analysis: Are courts acting out of character?

BBC News said:
By Clive Coleman BBC News legal correspondent

Comparing criminal sentences is an uncertain science and it is all too easy to reach a personal judgement based on a headline or an incomplete set of facts.

There really is no substitute for sitting in court and hearing the full story.

However, the riots have given the public an opportunity to see a vast amount of sentencing in a short space of time, and to compare and contrast the way in which different courts sentence seemingly similar crimes.

So, what has emerged?

..

It is something of an irony of our system, and some may say a fault, that in extraordinary times, the Court of Appeal cannot lay down guidance before the courts begin to sentence. There is simply no mechanism to allow this to happen.

Instead, the courts depart from the guidelines, sometimes in different degrees, and a rash of cases go on appeal to the Court of Appeal. It is only then that real guidance is handed down.

Some of those sentences have already indicated their intention to appeal. There will be many more.
more via link

Interesting and probably worth a full read, even if, like myself, you don't understand the legal system too well.

So, in extraordinary circumstances Judges hand out sentences outside of normal guidlines, lots get appealed and only then can the Appeal Court form a new benchmark guidelines.

I think!

:think:
 
Yes, I presume the thinking is, hand out big sentences now to discourage any more misbehaviour from would-be-rioters in the short term, then deal with the inevitable appeals and reduce the sentences after that process when everything has calmed down already.
Bad idea. A justice system is as objective as possible, and it never, ever works in the short term. If it works in the short term, it is no longer a justice system.

We also put people in prison for "writing about, not committing" terrorism. Same legislation. I don't think many people would argue with putting people in jail for egging on terrorist attacks online.
I would. Because being in favor of terrorism, and expressing support for it, is, while stupid and wrong, supposed to be legal. It's not allowed to commit terrorism. But you can't arrest someone for being in favor of it, and if it's legal to be in favor of it, it's stupid, baseless and arrogant to outlaw expression of that opinion.

Freedom of speech is total or it is nothing. Freedom of speech is like a pregnancy. You can't be a little pregnant, either you're pregnant, or you're not. You don't have a little freedom of speech. Either you have freedom of speech, or you don't.

Popular, convensional, straight and normal opinions and expressions does not need legal protection. Because they are left alone. It's the ideas, the opinions and expressions that we don't just dislike, but hate and/or despise, that need such protection against sanction from the state.

It's a quite dismal law. In both cases.

Places with actual freedom where demonstrations are put down with tear gas and water cannon, right.
While there are nations where you have a more militaristic approach to policing (France as one example), Britain does seem to stick out as a nation where the policing of public order situations are getting more and more autoritarian.

I seem to remember someone from Greater Manchester's Police Association on Newsnight some days ago. He was saying "we're damned if we do, damned if we don't, like in the case of Ian Tomlinson [...]" (I'm paraphrasing).

To be completely honest, no, you are not damned if you do. You're damned if you assault an innocent, nonviolent man in a disgusting fashion, and he dies from it. Then you're damned. Other than that, you should have been damned for not stopping the black block at RBS, and you should be damned when you did the hideous kettling operation outside Parliament. Damned for the climate camp, and for a dozen similar situations.

There's a sentiment that the British Police can't act because they get condemned for doing their job. That is not the case, at least not as far as I am concerned, the case is, in fact, that police leadership overreacted completely in a number of ugly cases, and as a result, they made the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland look like a joke.

But hey - I live in Norway. We managed to have a NATO summit without a SINGLE stone being thrown, and without any real violence. We even had Obama visit a couple of years ago, and he wasn't shot, but more importantly, we didn't have anything close to violent protest. The closest was someone falling over and dropping a plackard on someone elses head. And it's not like there weren't 'anarchists' coming, there were. In both cases.

The thing is that you can't approach every situation the same way. For years, we had trouble with an anarchist group occupying houses and fighting the police in Oslo. In that case, it turned out that the only effective measure was to give them the house they wanted. It was a worthless house, and were made into a youth club. They're still renting it for a nominal sum. I have a pint at my local with one of the founders of this group, and he say this was the cruelst thing the town council ever did to them.

Now, that was effective there. But the problems you've seen recently in Britain isn't limited to a small group of anarchists wanting a house to serve vegan food in and drink carrot juice. But there is a clue in it, namely the fact that the solution wasn't about policing, it was about social policy. It was about reasons for actions. I am really fed up with the sentiment that people seeking explanations for the rioting (like myself) are excusing the acts. That's such a load of rubble it's not even funny. Cameron gets to stand in front of your nation and say this is just a matter of criminality. He even gets away with good old conservative dribble about fatherless homes, a traditional conservative nail to hit. Very few of those who have spoken on the issue (and I've probably seen more debates on this than the average brit, funnily enough) have excused criminal activity. But some have tried to explain it, and that's not just entirely legitimate, it's essensial.

I've seen cuts being laughed away. Why? I do not for one moment believe that the majority of rioters think about the cuts when they rob a Tesco's. Very few criminals actually reflect on the reasons why they become criminals (as in the social reasons, employment situation and the likes), but the reasons still play a role. It looks very clever to point at a great number of videos of kids saying they don't care about politics, they're out having fun, but listen, you can get affected by politics even if you're not interested in it. Even if you don't know anything about the budget, your local youth club is still closing, you may not relate it to a specific policy, but you register that it's happening. You may not even reflect over it, it might just be a case of "it's closed, let's do something else". They might not even KNOW it's closed permanently, they might think it's refurbishments or something other random reason for closing temporarily.

Every fascet of society gets affected by cuts and austerity. Only an idiot would say that people who think politics is a cheese don't get affected by it. It's like saying Amish people don't get cancer because they reject modern technology. They still get cancer.
 
^
Epic post Nomix!
(Will let the addressees reply, should they wish to do so.)

* * *

Ah ha!

BBC News - Riots: Ursula Nevin freed after handling stolen shorts

BBC News said:
A woman has been freed from jail after what is understood to be the first successful appeal against a sentence in connection with last week's riots.

Mother-of-two Ursula Nevin was jailed for five months by a district judge in Manchester, on 13 August.

Nevin, 24, had admitted accepting a pair of shorts looted from a city centre shop by a friend.

Judge Andrew Gilbart QC set aside the prison sentence because Nevin had not actually taken part in the riots.

Hearing the appeal at Manchester Crown Court, Judge Gilbart ordered Nevin to do 75 hours of voluntary work instead.

He said the initial sentence was "wrong in principle".

She was asleep at he time of the riot, therefore not involved in the main criminal disorder.

Next day, her lodger gave her the goods, which admitted she had kept. The lodger got 18 months jail time.

First of many appeals, I think.
 
Last edited:
bl0ke Dick Dolby by martin_hickman
"Some idiot set up a Plymouth Riot facebook group, to meet in the city centre. 20 clicked attending, inc. Devon and Cornwall Police"
 
I want someone starting a Facebook groups with "Let's all go to the city center to not riot".
 
I want someone starting a Facebook groups with "Let's all go to the city center to not riot".

I already confirmed my attendance a week ago;
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=261568193854371

Also I agree with everything you said, but I've already done the whole rep for earlier posts. Groups of people aren't smart enough to follow logic, however, and society certainly isn't.
 
Thanks anyway. When I wrote that short line, I was tired as a tired person who had just stayed up for a long time with little coffee. So it's not well formulated.
 
[video=youtube;-CIkakrZl64]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CIkakrZl64&feature=player_profilepage[/video]​

BBC News - West Midlands police release new Birmingham riot images

BBC News said:
New CCTV of the riots in Birmingham shows police officers being shot at, the West Midlands force has said.

The footage, which has been released by the police to encourage members of the public to come forward, shows a group in the Newtown area late on 9 August.

The group, all masked and all wearing black clothing, caused extensive damage at the Barton Arms pub.

Shots were also fired at the police helicopter and petrol bombs thrown at a marked police car, the force said.

Disturbing Video

Officers have started an attempted murder and arson investigation, and appealed for anyone with information about the attacks to contact them.


more via link

Many of the other crimes during the riot like shoplifting, seem quite trivial, but this is very serious.

Shooting at Police and their helicopter, as well as the other activities in the video, look like the work of an organised gang, rather than a sponateous group of individuals.

Hope they catch these people and they get found guilty in Court with long prison sentences handed out.
 
Opening fire on the police can never, ever be tolerated.
 
Opening fire on the police can never, ever be tolerated.

Absolutely, during the week that the riots were happening, this story was not highlighted.

The Police were very low key about mentioning this incident, all I remember is perhaps one snippet of news from a TV reporter saying something like,
" .. a Police source has also informed me of more serious incident at which firearms officers were called in."

There was so much "Breaking News" as well as, shocking live pictures and videos, that some news story lines got lost in the flood.
 
Opening fire on the police can never, ever be tolerated.

No, but I wish there was the same attitude towards the last few instances of the British police killing unarmed civilians when they got away with no convictions.
 
Absolutely, during the week that the riots were happening, this story was not highlighted.

The Police were very low key about mentioning this incident, all I remember is perhaps one snippet of news from a TV reporter saying something like,
" .. a Police source has also informed me of more serious incident at which firearms officers were called in."

There was so much "Breaking News" as well as, shocking live pictures and videos, that some news story lines got lost in the flood.
Yeah, keeping it quiet might help stop copycats to some extent. However, it's a story worth noting anyhow.

No, but I wish there was the same attitude towards the last few instances of the British police killing unarmed civilians when they got away with no convictions.
Yeah, I don't disagree with that. But while I think the situation with that Brazilian on the tube was very sad, wrong and horrible, I can start to understand the armed officers. If he'd been a real terrorist, he could have killed everyone on the train with a bomb or something. How do you act in such a situation? That's a morally and tactically situation that's so difficult I can't even fathom it. But then again, anyone else would go to jail for it. If police shoot an innocent man, that's a mistake (more often than not), and that needs to have concequences. Perhaps even leaving someone without a job.

There are more low-tier offences within the police force that needs to lead to charges, I have to say I believe, but extreme situations are just that, extreme.

I will still say there is a difference for society. Shooting at a police officer is shooting at the government of a nation. And the government of a nation is the nation and it is its people. So shooting at the police is shooting at the nation and shooting at the people. Which is why every nation and every culture, from democracy to dictatorship to theocracy to marxist-leninist, generally speaking punish violence towards the police stricter than violence towards normal citizens. Most times though, it's only when they are in uniform or on the job. It's not the person, it's the role.

I suppose.
 
BBC News - Riot inciter Johnny Melfah loses anonymity after court ruling

BBC News said:
A boy who admitted inciting thefts and criminal damage on a Facebook page during recent riots has been identified after a court lifted an order.

Johnny Melfah, 16, of Thames Avenue, Droitwich, Worcestershire, admitted posting comments that were designed to encourage theft and criminal damage.

Melfah is thought to be the first juvenile to have his anonymity lifted in a riot-related case.

He is due to be sentenced at Worcester Youth court on 14 September.


mmore via link

Legal juveniles under 18, are not normally allowed to be identified in press reports of trials, this guy posted his activities on Facebook already so the restriction was lifted.

How stupid do you have to be, firstly to incite trouble on FB, then secondly to admit that you have stolen stuff.

Do they think that the cops can't read or use Facebook?

West Midlands Police Facebook Page

:rolleyes:
 
"If he is no longer able to get the qualifications that he needs to get into employment, then he will become a burden on society rather than the benefit that he has the potential to become."[/qute]

Become? Ha!
 
"If he is no longer able to get the qualifications that he needs to get into employment, then he will become a burden on society rather than the benefit that he has the potential to become."

Become? Ha!

They do have a point. The vast majority of people who commit a crime tend to do it when they are younger and then quickly grow out of it. By giving a young person a harsh sentence, you can be giving them a reason to commit more crime since they can't find real work.
 
Indeed.
 
Top