I wanna riot, a riot of my own!
Anyway, life’s a riot, with spy versus spy...
chewkw
What are they protesting?
Anyway, life’s a riot, with spy versus spy…
Rape = 5 years in jail
Defacing statue = 10 years in jail
‘Some people might think it’s disproportionate’
I’m usually sceptical about the actions of the police, but at the last two big events in Bristol- the mini riot this week and the statue toppling- they seem to have been admirably restrained. Unlike their Met counterparts.
Rape = maximum sentence of life imprisonment (starting point of 5 years for Cat 3/Culpability B sentencing).
Defacing statue = proposed maximum sentence of 10 years in jail.
The statue one may still be considered disproportionate but it’s a little disingenuous to compare the maximum for one against the minimum for the other.
Not disingenuous at all, due to recent CPS guidance rape has all but been decriminalised. The conviction rates are obscenely low and unlikely to improve. We're fast heading back to the 70's or earlier for the offence, complete with some officers victim blaming/shaming.
Yep the Bristol police have actually been very good.
The protesters have been very naughty but tbh what do you expect the COVID fatigue syndrome is kicking in and some people are going to take advantage of an opportunity to do mischief.
Also as I point out to my OAP mum that her local protest March to save Cosham hospital being sold off to housing developers would likely have been illegal under the new bill.
What guidance is that? I looked for it the other day after a similar comment and couldn’t find it.
The mood music around this is getting steadily nastier.
The leader of the local Police Federation using the term 'animals' to describe rioters is instructive.
He may think that and he may well be right, but he should not say it. There is supposed to be a non-emotional impartiality to policing and that is not it. 'We' as a country used to pride ourselves on decency (no matter how illusory).
The current gang in Downing Street have achieved their position by mobilising indecent urges in people - xenophobia, nationalism etc. The direction that this is taking is never going to be good. They have achieved power by eroding decency.
I read that the van was out of MOT since January and had been left 'as a prop'. I was wrong about the LP standing on the sidelines, Toby Perkins made his position very clear on how appropriate the use of the baton had been. I'm sure he enjoyed it.
I read that the van was out of MOT since January and had been left ‘as a prop’
Was that on tinfoilhelmet.com?
I shouldn't read much into the van presence, the Police station location means that road is basically their car park.
' tinfoilhelmet'. Jeez, can't you come up with an original 'funny' between gardening and slavering at a Griggs? This constant grinding out of the same old carp seems more like a condition than an attitude.
‘ tinfoilhelmet’. Jeez, can’t you come up with an original ‘funny’ between gardening and slavering at a Griggs? This constant grinding out of the same old carp seems more like a condition than an attitude.
And making comments on social media suggesting that the van was some sort of prop left to facilitate the escalation of the violence by the authorities without either a link to some evidence or an indication that you are joking is what, exactly?
The Avon and Somerset Police Federation branded the rioters as “animals” who were “hell bent” on carrying out “politically motivated attacks” on officers who feared for their lives.
Inspector Andy Roebuck, chair of the Avon and Somerset Police Federation, said: "They tried to set fire to a police van with officers inside. To my mind that is attempted murder. I spoke to two officers who said they genuinely feared they would be killed. We should not have to put up with this.”
Insp Roebuck said ultra-left activists had launched a "premeditated" and "orchestrated" attack using the cover of the ‘Kill the Bill’ demonstration that had marched peacefully through the city.
See; using language and rhetoric such as this, is only going to inflame things further. The use of the term 'ultra left' (my bold) definitely politicises his argument. And there we have it. With absolutely no idea as to the individual political affiliations of those involved, he's made an assumption that they were 'ultra left'. They may well have been, but that's irrelevant. He's clearly shown what 'side' he's on. Battle lines drawn.
‘ tinfoilhelmet’. Jeez, can’t you come up with an original ‘funny’ between gardening and slavering at a Griggs? This constant grinding out of the same old carp seems more like a condition than an attitude.
Well I'd be interesting to hear what the correct response should be to what is clearly a load of evidence-free, conspiracy-theory claptrap, dreamt up by somebody with the curtains permanently drawn in their bedroom at their mums house, who subscribes to David Icke's Youtube channel and thinks that we're ruled by lizard overlords?
The police deliberately leaving vehicles to be torched as part of a conspiracy by the Government to 'organise' a riot?
Meanwhile, back in the real world....
Who mentioned 'conspiracy'? I thought it might have been placed there as a prop for a rendition of the Pirates of Penzance.
Protesting being “anti-democratic”...?
Isn’t protest something that is positively democratic?
Having attended 2 BLM protests in lockdown, carefully managed and safely organised - you can protest and maintain focus on public health.
Alternative view on things:
From my limited experience of protests it's all too plausible really.
I would suggest that sir did not search too hard for the rape guidance case!
Here's the case dismissal where the CPS celebrate their victory and details of those that brought it pointing out the flaws. https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/cps-statement-judgment-judicial-review-prosecution-rape-and-serious-sexual-offences
The changes have not been shown to be unlawful but their effect is to further reduce prosecutions from the poor levels currently. See also the requirement to be digitally strip-searched to get any progress when reporting a rape.
Effectively a clear run unless the victim is particularly strong. (Guess what the particularly strong may well be those that don't get raped).
From my limited experience of protests it’s all too plausible really.
I've been present at quite a few protest 'riots' (many moons ago I might add), and all of them were started by police violence against peaceful protesters. I've also been at many protests where riots didn't occur (see my comments previously about the Iraq war march), and that was because the policing was very light touch. The clear conclusion I draw from this is that police commanders, no doubt operating under political influence or instruction, decide when they want a riot to occur. They know what will happen when they wade in with batons, dogs and horses, and they always get what they want.
It was the actual guidance I was after, not just a press release about the judicial review finding that the language changes had not had the effect claimed, but not to worry - I found it eventually.
I fail to see how this guidance amounts to ‘de facto legalisation of rape’, but each to their own.
Isn't the complicating factor here the need for the Police to be seen to not tolerate covid non-compliance?
I read that the van was out of MOT since January and had been left ‘as a prop’
Police vehicles are exempt from MOT's as they have regular checks
Perhaps it was an insurance job?
Isn’t the complicating factor here the need for the Police to be seen to not tolerate covid non-compliance?
I think you'll find that is the elephant shaped object in the room
I fail to see how this guidance amounts to ‘de facto legalisation of rape’, but each to their own.
If the prosecution rate falls to a point where a rape victim is extremely unlikely to see justice, then I suggest the description is fair.
Is the guidance the reason the conviction rate is so low? I would suggest not. The guidance is there to try and ensure that prosecutors consider all the potential evidential difficulties and things the defence will do to put doubt in the minds of the jury, so they can try and determine if the Full Code Test is met. (Whether you agree with the principles of the test is another matter).
Having investigated and reported dozens of rape cases in the last 18 years, I would respectfully suggest that the greatest hurdles are (1) proving to a jury beyond all reasonable doubt that specific aspects of events that are almost never independently witnessed happened, and (2) proving BARD that the perpetrator had a specific mens rea at a specific time.
Is the guidance the reason the conviction rate is so low?
No idea, which is why I didn't say it was. But what I am suggesting is that men can commit rape in the knowledge that they will almost certainly get away with it.
Fair enough, I thought you were agreeing with the new guidance = de facto legalisation of rape claim.
Indeed, the odds are not favour of victims. The reasons for this are unfortunately not straightforward.
Isn’t the complicating factor here the need for the Police to be seen to not tolerate covid non-compliance?
No the complication is the inability of police commanders to realise that public health offences are not public order offences.
There was widespread outrage when the force made the claims in a press release on Monday that “a total of 20 officers were assaulted or injured and two of them were taken to hospital after suffering broken bones. One of them also suffered a punctured lung,” the force had said.
But in an updated press release published on Wednesday, the force clarified this was not true, saying: “Thankfully, following a full medical assessment of the two officers taken to hospital, neither were found to have suffered confirmed broken bones.” Around the same time, a BBC reporter said on Twitter that Andy Marsh, the head of the Avon force, had admitted in a press conference that no officer had suffered a punctured lung.
🤔
So no broken bones, no punctured lung, but the narrative is already in place. Wonder what else they 'got wrong'?
So no broken bones, no punctured lung, but the narrative is already in place. Wonder what else they ‘got wrong’?
Yeah - strange that. Will Priti Vacant come back and correct her statements?
Wonder what else they ‘got wrong’?
That a suspect 'fell down the stairs', perhaps?
Will Priti Vacant come back and correct her statements?
If she follows correct protocol for her ilk she'll have the vacillating coppers 'liquidated'...
Real life Harry Enfield character..
I would like just a tiny bit of what he's on.
Actual LOLed at that. That's the best thing I've seen all week.
And I honestly don't what is, and what isn't real any more. It's all melded into one.
Meanwhile, in Myanmar....
Meanwhile, in Myanmar….
Are you suggesting that failure to protest against draconian new laws will leave us in a similar predicament?