This is why people are losing respect for the police...

Status
Not open for further replies.
BowdonUK said:
It seems the police were arresting people to move them. Then de-arresting them later.

They even arrested GB News presenter Martin Daubney.

I think it's important to recognise being arrested in the UK doesn't have the same implication as it does in the US.
Click to expand...
Why did the Police not do the same for the faux climate protestors in the past 2 years?

Why did they allow roads to remain blocked and people to miss hospital appoints and in some cases die when the emergency services were stopped from doing their job?
 
plasmahal said:
Why did the Police not do the same for the faux climate protestors in the past 2 years?

Why did they allow roads to remain blocked and people to miss hospital appoints and in some cases die when the emergency services were stopped from doing their job?
Click to expand...
Because they wanted to push the faux climate change agenda and keep it on the front pages. Mass arresting the climate wombles would have ended the protests far quicker and and the publicity would have faded away.
 
plasmahal said:
Why did the Police not do the same for the faux climate protestors in the past 2 years?

Why did they allow roads to remain blocked and people to miss hospital appoints and in some cases die when the emergency services were stopped from doing their job?
Click to expand...
Possibly the difference between a protest and a riot?

Haven't they changed the laws since, to make it easier to arrest people who block roads etc?

Edit: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-laws-to-clamp-down-on-disruptive-protesters-come-into-force
 
Last edited:
Dis86 said:
It's known for example that one of the individuals was a news presenter walking home after work. He's smartly dressed in a suit and entirely compliant.
Click to expand...

Which is one view. I mean its also changed to he was attending as a journalist.
You still need to comply with what the police are saying even as a journalist.

I mean getting involved in and being detained is a risk always faced by reporters.
One of LBCs reporters was arrested and held as part of a JSO protest on the M25.
It happens, quite regularly.
 
Haggisman said:
This is literally nonsense.

Arresting/de-arresting is often used for "breach of the peace" situations (e.g. riots/marches etc. or just a drunken heated argument outside a club on a Saturday night)

The purpose is to remove the person from the situation with the aim to de-escalate - once this has been done, that purpose is no longer there, so the need for the arrest is no longer there.

Contrary to the narrative you are trying to push, most* officers don't actually want to arrest and charge everyone - they'd rather it doesn't get to that point in the first place, and an arrest -> de-arrest early in a developing scenario is far preferable (for everyone involved) to waiting until it all kicks off and someone has been hurt...



*obviously there are still going to be the **** power trip officers who do want to do exactly that :(
Click to expand...

Not at all. For an arrest to be lawful there must be a reasonable suspicion that a criminal act has been carried out. You cannot just use arrests to clear an area of people who are entirely entitled to be there legally.
 
Dis86 said:
Not at all. For an arrest to be lawful there must be a reasonable suspicion that a criminal act has been carried out. You cannot just use arrests to clear an area of people who are entirely entitled to be there legally.
Click to expand...
The police clearly have the worst PR guy ever.

Any potential cringe from the violence some might feel will now be completely directed back toward hating the police for being two-tier tracy.
 
GarethSouthgate said:
Possibly the difference between a protest and a riot?

Haven't they changed the laws since, to make it easier to arrest people who block roads etc?

Edit: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-laws-to-clamp-down-on-disruptive-protesters-come-into-force
Click to expand...
Okay, good to know.

I think it's fair to say yesterday in London started off as a protest and descended into a possible riot bur was that because of the heavy handed actions of the police though.

I'm speculating as I was not there.
 
Dis86 said:
Not at all. For an arrest to be lawful there must be a reasonable suspicion that a criminal act has been carried out. You cannot just use arrests to clear an area of people who are entirely entitled to be there legally.
Click to expand...

Public Order Act 1986

An Act to abolish the common law offences of riot, rout, unlawful assembly and affray and certain statutory offences relating to public order; to create new offences relating to public order; to control public processions and assemblies; to control the stirring up of racial hatred; to provide...
www.legislation.gov.uk www.legislation.gov.uk

I'm not going to quote the whole thing as I'm sure you can read it for yourself, but here you go:

If the senior police officer, having regard to the time or place at which and the circumstances in which any public procession is being held or is intended to be held and to its route or proposed route, reasonably believes that—

(a)it may result in serious public disorder, serious damage to property or serious disruption to the life of the community,

[...]

he may give directions imposing on the persons organising or taking part in the procession such conditions as appear to him necessary to prevent such disorder, damage, disruption [F2, impact] or intimidation, including conditions as to the route of the procession or prohibiting it from entering any public place specified in the directions.

[...]

(5)[F8Subject to subsection (5A), a person] who takes part in a public procession and F9... fails to comply with a condition imposed under this section is guilty of an offence, but it is a defence for him to prove that the failure arose from circumstances beyond his control.
Click to expand...

Edit: if you carry on to section 14, it applies the same rules to public assemblies - I'll leave it up to you to decide if we're talking about a procession or assembly :)

Edit 2 to address your specific wording:

"You cannot just use arrests to clear an area of people who are entirely entitled to be there legally."

Your logic is impeccable - doing something legal is legal

However you are missing the point:- that they are not entitled to be there legally, at which point, being there is not legal, ergo a criminal act has been carried out.
 
Last edited:
Demon said:
Why be disingenuous about it..
The BBC article says "Jailing Banks, Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot said: "I accept you were drunk and did not know where you were urinating."" - so he wasn't deliberately defacing it.. just caught short and still got 18 days in prison.

Yet we can contrast that with the Acquittal of the 4 people in Bristol who literally toppled a statue and threw it in the river in the name of BLM..
Click to expand...

The 4 people that were charged and sent to court for trial by jury?
 
Ayahuasca said:
Click to expand...

Arrest Breakdown

1 x Possession of offensive weapons - seven knives, one catapult with ammunition and nunchucks.

27 x Failing to comply with conditions applied to the protest - Section 14 Public Order Act 1986.

16 x Violent disorder - one of which was also wanted for Burglary and another was also arrested for failing to comply with conditions.

2 x Assault on Emergency worker – one of which was also arrested for failing to comply with conditions imposed.

2 x Racially/Religiously aggravated causing fear of violence

1 x Unlawful possession of Class A drugs

2 x Breach of dispersal order

A further 60 people were arrested during the protest for failing to comply with conditions on the protest under Section 14 Public Order Act 1986. They were not taken in to custody but remain under investigation.



Note - this statement was updated at 12:37 1/8/2024 to reflect updated information about officer injuries - five officers were injured (the original statement reflected two officers injured.)
Click to expand...

news.met.police.uk

Update: Whitehall Protest Arrests

111 arrests made after bottles and flares thrown at officers.
news.met.police.uk news.met.police.uk
 
Dis86 said:
What have they been charged with?

Struggling to see anyone supporting the EDL lot for throwing bricks at the police. In fact I've mostly seen people calling them tossers.
Click to expand...

They have been arrested and bailed, one has to assume once the investigation concludes they will be charged. It is the normal process!

Resident said:
Do you think they'd have been bailed if there wasn't a baying mob outside the station threatening to tear the town apart if they weren't released?

I personally think the cops were justified in their actions at the airport. I also don't condone the violence in Southport however let's face facts from very recent history:

Harehills - Roma Community - Violent disorder demanding the return of the rightfully removed kids - Authority capitulates and returns kids

Rochdale - Muslim community threatens mass violence over the Manchester 2's rightful arrest - Authority capitulates and bails the pair, without charge

So in the face of that you'd be forgiven for thinking that the only way to be heard by authorities currently, is to be violent en masse.
Click to expand...
I agree I don’t think they should have been bailed, I have even said exactly that in this thread :)

All I was doing here was correcting more inaccurate nonsense on twitter where the post said they hadn’t been arrested.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom