Forum menu
The thing that I find weird about all these ideological extreme organisations that hate each other so much is that essentially the fascist far right EDL-a-like organisations, Zionist far right movements and extremist Islamist organisations all share the same set of fundamental beliefs; chauvinism, oppression, xenophobia, theocratic/ violent political authoritarianism, racism, homophobic/transphobic, and reactionary politics.
This. They're cut from the same cloth.
They’re cut from the same cloth.
And boy, is there money to be made endlessly stirring up 'X' vs 'Y'...
<rolls eyes>
The Bath Bomb Patriot is getting the bad news this afternoon.
Nearest the Bull wins.
I'm going 36 months.
●13 year old.
●Girl.
●Violent disorder.
●Kicking and punching a building.
Choose any combination of the above then shake your head at the state of some sections of our society.
If only the Tories had still been in power then the riots would have stopped sooner as rioters would have been met with an overwhelming Police response.
According to Tom Tootenhat talking out of his hat trying to become Tory leader. How on Earth can Southport or Rotherham produce an overwhelming Police response - absolute Muppet.
Judge taking a dim view of 'immigrants costing us millions' line. Brutal.
https://twitter.com/DrRebeccaTidy/status/1823618910102388771
Judge taking a dim view of ‘immigrants costing us millions’ line. Brutal.
Magnificent
The judge should have done the maths. With an average over the 30 years of £25K per year for prison then he has cost over £700K just to keep in prison without adding all the costs of the horrible shit he got up to when not in prison.
Love it. Needs more of it, platformed more loudly.
Judge Linford should be the next PM.
That is a magnificent and comprehensive a take-down as I've seen in a while.
Bravo!
I’ve just seen the pic of the 53yr old woman who was jailed for calling for the mosque to be burned, she looks way older than my 69 yr old mum, I guess hate & bile ages a person beyond their years.
More prison sentences for violently attacking police and refugee hostels. Still none comparable to the sentences on peaceful Just Stop Oil protesters.
Amer Walid, 24 yo counter-protestor with no previous convictions, sentenced to 20 months for throwing 4 cans at the rioters, who were hurling racial abuse his way and who had thrown the four cans at him first.
Judge Linford told him: “You have never been in any trouble in your life and what you should have done was simply rise above their obnoxious racism.”
So actually, f*** judge Linford. That's outrageous.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2dg32jxzx5o
There us a fair bit of "resetting " acceptable behaviour both online and in the street in all of this. I am pretty sure it's a planned/agreed approach as sentences seem "consistent"
It's funny but this is exactly what the "gammonista" wanted... just not on them.
Also a fair bit of "making an example"
Seems like it’s done the trick though. I’d imagine the attitude among the scroterati has changed from “*, yeah! Let’s go and throw some bricks at some coppers” to “* that! I’m not getting sent down for 3 years”
Particularly seeing as they’re now on about charging people with rioting, which carries a much longer sentence, up to 10 years
38 months for inciting racial hatred on X, 14 months for actual assault of a protestor. Seems reasonable...
Edited for accuracy.
Particularly seeing as they’re now on about charging people with rioting, which carries a much longer sentence, up to 10 years
Echoes of Orgreave. Some things never change.
Eh? This has got absolutely nothing to do with something like Orgreave. That was an orchestrated campaign of violence by the state, using a militarised police force to assert its authority over the working class
This is making an example of a bunch of far right, racist nobheads who were out lobbing bricks at the police, torching cars, libraries and hotels full of vulnerable people, just for shits and giggles
What possible similarities are there?
Whilst I don't condone any of their behaviour, the sentences are massively out of proportion compared to what every day offenders receive. People with multiple prior convictions run someone over whilst on drugs and get less time than that old woman got for posting something ignorant online in her local village FB group
It’s context innit? Rioters will always get the book thrown at them if there has been widespread disorder. Remember people getting significant jail time for nicking a bottle of water a few years ago. If there is a danger that law and order will break down then the judicial system goes into overdrive. & rightly so.
That woman sentenced today lives less than ten miles from me.....which is closer than her nearest mosque. I suppose the sentence might seem a bit harsh until you remember the JSO folks who got five years for attending a zoom meeting, and weren't in any way shape or form inciting violence or hate.
It’s context innit? Rioters will always get the book thrown at them if there has been widespread disorder. Remember people getting significant jail time for nicking a bottle of water a few years ago. If there is a danger that law and order will break down then the judicial system goes into overdrive. & rightly so.
Don’t forget they are also being fast tracked as well, if you’d have done this outside of this context you wouldn’t be in court for yonks. So it’s definitely for sending a message that there .
it’s usually only in soaps that the wheels of justice move rapidly,in the real world it’s a slow creaking,over-extended system.
I'd be interested to hear if the Roma guy who torched a bus in Leeds is in prison yet
A simple google would have revealed the answer. Not interested enough to do that, is there an ulterior motive to your post?
FWIW yes. In court 3 days after the event, case transferred to Crown Court, on remand currently with trial at Leeds Crown Court next Monday.
HTH
https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/24468087.iustin-dobre-court-harehills-disturbances/
I take note the tory councilors wife had been remanded till something like the 6th of September, which I think is a bit unusual given others who released bile on social media were charged, tried, convicted and sentenced within a couple of days.
It is also that rioting, if it spreads wildly out of control exposes just how much we are a liberal society in the policing sense. It doesn't take much for this kind of unrest to overstretch police resources and also expose the amount that we are policed by consent.
It is right that these thugs get the book thrown at them before others realise just how thin the blue line can be.
Amer Walid, 24 yo counter-protestor with no previous convictions, sentenced to 20 months for throwing 4 cans at the rioters, who were hurling racial abuse his way and who had thrown the four cans at him first.
Judge Linford told him: “You have never been in any trouble in your life and what you should have done was simply rise above their obnoxious racism.”
So actually, f*** judge Linford. That’s outrageous.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2dg32jxzx5o
/blockquote>Presumably they have done this to avoid any accusations of 'two tier policing' (/judiciary). It's also pretty inarguable that Amer was fanning the flames and escalating tensions between opposing factions. If they're going to make an example of rioters, they have to make an example of these people, too.
There's talk of some of the more hardcore rioters (the ones that tried setting fire to Hotels / Mosques) being charged with terror offences. We'll see how their sentences compare to the JSO ones.
given others who released bile on social media were charged, tried, convicted and sentenced within a couple of days.
As far as I am aware all of the ones convicted and sentenced so far pled guilty. So minimal court time required.
She did appear in court a couple of days back but her lawyers asked for an adjournment so they could get a psychiatric report.
Amer Walid, 24 yo counter-protestor with no previous convictions, sentenced to 20 months for throwing 4 cans at the rioters, who were hurling racial abuse his way and who had thrown the four cans at him first.
Judge Linford told him: “You have never been in any trouble in your life and what you should have done was simply rise above their obnoxious racism.”
So actually, f*** judge Linford. That’s outrageous.
Presumably they have done this to avoid any accusations of ‘two tier policing’ (/judiciary). It’s also pretty inarguable that Amer was fanning the flames and escalating tensions between opposing factions. If they’re going to make an example of rioters, they have to make an example of these people, too.
Yea, I imagine that's the case, but that essentially means they are (potentially) ruining a young muslim's life to appease the false greviances of the islamaphobes. Which I find infuriating.
If they’re going to make an example of rioters, they have to make an example of these people, too
The legislation doesn't differentiate unless there's a defence written in. There was no lawful reason to throw objects at anyone, although mitigation has been used
The judge is applying the law and the sentencing guidelines
We’ll see how their sentences compare to the JSO ones
Different legislation, different sentencing guidelines
Yea, I imagine that’s the case, but that essentially means they are (potentially) ruining a young muslim’s life to appease the false greviances of the islamaphobes. Which I find infuriating.
If he was set upon as an individual randomly by the rioters, and chucked the cans back as he retreated from the mob, I'd be very sympathetic and wondering whether there's a self-defence angle to this. If he chose to attend a riot, with a group of counter-protestors, and commits an act of violent disorder, it doesn't matter who started it, he gets treated the same as the racists on the other side.
There was no lawful reason to throw objects at anyone,
As far as I am aware no one has claimed that throwing 4 cans at the rioters was lawful.
The fact that it was illegal is not necessarily a justification for the sentence.
The sentencing guidelines are justification for the sentence surely?
Yeah, not the fact that throwing cans at people was unlawful
The fact that it was illegal is not necessarily a justification for the sentence.
Sentencing guidelines set out the sentence and the state issues that guidance on our behalf https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/violent-disorder-2/
A custodial sentence is the starting point for all three categories and his case appears to have aggravating factors, but you'd need to read the judge's record to see what his reasoning was.
Suspending the sentence is a possibility, but it's still classed as "custodial" for the purposes of job applications, etc.
Yeah, not the fact that throwing cans at people was unlawful
Ernie, you're avoiding the point.
He committed an offence of violent disorder by throwing cans when there was no lawful reason to throw objects at anyone.
He admitted the offence at an earlier hearing so the only thing that's left is sentencing.
He can't appeal the conviction because he's already pleaded guilty*, he can now appeal the sentence if he feels it to be unjustified
*he can appeal the conviction in extremely rare circumstances if his guilty plea was unsound
She did appear in court a couple of days back but her lawyers asked for an adjournment so they could get a psychiatric report.
I suppose the fact she married a Tory councilor means she has a good case for not of sound mind.
Whilst I feel a bit for the counter protester, that's my personal bias probably.
Stepping back, it is just as important that those attending counter protests get sentenced severely - the racists only possible excuse for causing trouble is provocation and self defence, can't be seen to give them that faint chance.
Ernie, you’re avoiding the point.
With respect I think you are. No one claimed that throwing cans at people was lawful, what was questioned was the severity of the sentence.
It might well be justified because it was within sentencing guidelines but your reference to the fact it was unlawful is irrelevant imo.