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

[Caracus2k]

Could you try none?

Well at least your vacous, pointless and or often irrelevant posts usually differ from one another

 

[Dis86]

Someone is using sue sim to back up their opinions? Having personally dealt with her on a number of occasions, whilst a lovely woman, she was feckless.

 

[Caracus2k]

Can @Colonel_Klinck help with locating where the 'straps' are in the photo posted by Dowie

Or in video footage like that below?

 

[Minusorange]

The necessity criteria may have passed because the EVENT had been completed. I would imagine the police retained the 'lock on devices' as evidence!





I don't know how my times I have to repeat myself!

Ignorance of the law isn't a defence.... I have already, repeatedly, explained to you what the neccesity conditions for arrest and how 'to charge' isn't one of them.

They were arrested for being in possession of lock on devices, not for a public order offence or breach of the peace, the lock on devices were the literal neccesity critera for the arrest, like I said, unless they myseriously vanished in that 16 hours, the neccesity criteria will not pass ever, either somebody is in possession or they are not, if they retained the lock on devices as evidence, then evidence of what ? being in possession of lock on devices, which is what they were arrested for

It's not hard, you keep spouting ignorance, yet you're ignorant to the reality of why they were arrested spouting irrelevant conditions

 

[Minusorange]

Can @Colonel_Klinck help with locating where the 'straps' are in the photo posted by Dowie

They were strapped up in the van, you know to keep them secure in transit

 

[Caracus2k]

They were strapped up in the van, you know to keep them secure in transit

Where are the 'straps' that the Republic protestor said were 'misconstrued' by the police?

Come on try and engage the old grey matter for a bit....

 

[Minusorange]

Where are the 'straps' that the Republic protestor were 'misconstrued' by the police?

Come on try and engage the old grey matter for a bit....

You're asking the wrong person, you should be asking the police, they're the ones who decided there were straps for being locked on

Who knows, maybe there wasn't any straps and they made it up

But they would never do that would they

 

[Caracus2k]

the lock on devices were the literal neccesity critera for the arrest

Lets remind ourselves what the actual 'necessity' grounds for arrest are and how they don't include 'to charge' or just to 'seize items'

The reasons are—

(a)to enable the name of the person in question to be ascertained (in the case where the constable does not know, and cannot readily ascertain, the person's name, or has reasonable grounds for doubting whether a name given by the person as his name is his real name);

(b)correspondingly as regards the person's address;

(c)to prevent the person in question—

(i)causing physical injury to himself or any other person;

(ii)suffering physical injury;

(iii)causing loss of or damage to property;

(iv)committing an offence against public decency (subject to subsection (6)); or

(v)causing an unlawful obstruction of the highway;

(d)to protect a child or other vulnerable person from the person in question;

(e)to allow the prompt and effective investigation of the offence or of the conduct of the person in question;

(f)to prevent any prosecution for the offence from being hindered by the disappearance of the person in question.

I think item 5:

causing an unlawful obstruction of the highway

Is likely to have been pretty relevant to the action taken re suspected 'lock on devices / straps'. And of course this is contextual to the coronation occurring. So one the coronation parade has passed this necessity criteria no longer applies and so if the police have also progressed their investigation as far as they can in a detention period they will likely be considering releasing that person 'NFA', on bail or 'under investigation; depending on the information to hand and what if any further investigations are being undertaken

like I said, unless they myseriously vanished in that 16 hours, the neccesity criteria will not pass ever, either somebody is in possession or they are not, if they retained the lock on devices as evidence, then evidence of what ?

The idea that police retain exhibits whilst investigting offences is a novel concept for you?

Asked what further action he and other members of Republic face, Mr Smith told PA: “We don’t know. We’ve all been bailed, that’s all we know. So, we will hear about whatever happens later.”

Head of anti-monarchy protesters says arrests ‘direct attack on our democracy’

Dozens of people were arrested by the Metropolitan Police on coronation day for conspiracy to cause a public nuisance, affray and other offences.

www.independent.co.uk

being in possession of lock on devices, which is what they were arrested for

It's not hard, you keep spouting ignorance, yet you're ignorant to the reality of why they were arrested spouting irrelevant conditions

No 'spouting irrelevant conditions' but referring to the actual law!

Something you have repeatedly showed your ignorance of!

 

[Caracus2k]

You're asking the wrong person, you should be asking the police, they're the ones who decided there were straps for being locked on

Who knows, maybe there wasn't any straps and they made it up

But they would never do that would they

The police made up the 'straps' that the protest group said were 'misconstrued'?

But Republic said officers had "misconstrued" straps meant to secure their signs in place.

Are you a parody account?

Like come on do people really believe this sort of nonsense?

A Just Stop Oil spokeswoman said their plan was "only to display T-shirts and flags", adding: "This is a dystopian nightmare."

Because of course that sort of level of protest is what they are known for!

This was they said about the London Marathon and other 'sporting and cultural events'...

Just Stop Oil has confirmed to The Independent that it is one of the organisations attending, and remains “committed to disrupting sporting and cultural events”.

 

[dowie]

They were arrested for being in possession of lock on devices, not for a public order offence or breach of the peace

Finally, you seem to have grasped why they were arrested. FYI that is a public order offence, or rather an offence under the public order bill.

unless they myseriously vanished in that 16 hours, the neccesity criteria will not pass ever, either somebody is in possession or they are not, if they retained the lock on devices as evidence, then evidence of what ? being in possession of lock on devices, which is what they were arrested for

You're just rambling now, AFAIK the police can hold people for up to 24 hours initially before they need to either be released or charged.

Previously you seemed very confused re: why they were arrested so I guess there is some progress here at least:

They were arrested for protesting in an area not designated for protesting, or at least, planning to protest in an area not designated for protesting, despite there being no law that sets out where an area is designated for protesting

 

[Minusorange]

The police made up the 'straps' that the protest group said were 'misconstrued'?

If the straps were real, then why are you asking me where they are ? You need to ask the police were they are as they are ones who confiscated them, that picture was taken when they made the arrests

 

[Minusorange]

You're just rambling now, AFAIK the police can hold people for up to 24 hours initially before they need to either be released or charged.

Previously you seemed very confused re: why they were arrested so I guess there is some progress here at least:

There's no confusion, they were arrested for a ******** reason, the real reason is they were arrested for wanting to protest, it's not that difficult

 

[Caracus2k]

If the straps were real, then why are you asking me where they are ?

Lets go through this slowly

1) I present pictures of placards used both at the Coronation and other events
2) the placards don't appear to need or have any 'straps' hence me (rhetorically*) asking "where are the straps?"
3) the police said they arrested some 'Republic' protestors for having suspected 'lock on devices'
4) Republic told the press the items the police were referring to were actually 'straps' to 'secure their signs in place' that had been 'misconstrued' by the police

so the point is why did the Republic protestors require 'straps' to 'secure their signs in place' (secure to what?)

Is Republics answer one that should satisfy someone with even an iota of critical thinking skills?

After all we know that plenty of other people with 'not my king' placards were not arrested in London on Saturday.


*

rhetorically

adverb

(with reference to a question) with the aim of producing an effect or making a statement rather than eliciting information.
"‘Did you really think I would just go away?’ he asked rhetorically"

 

[dowie]

There's no confusion, they were arrested for a ******** reason, the real reason is they were arrested for wanting to protest, it's not that difficult

There clearly was, you didn't grasp that for several posts as can easily be seen + there clearly were protestors... these guys seemingly didn't have locking on devices, or rape alarms or suspicion of handling stolen goods:

 

[Minusorange]

so the point is why did the Republic protestors require 'straps' to 'secure their signs in place' (secure to what?)

They were secured in transit obviously, you can see the van full of placards no ? It would be unsafe to transport them all loose in a van and you can also see they had way more signs than they needed so it's pretty obvious they were going to secure those signs onto some things, it's honestly not difficult to understand

There clearly was, you didn't grasp that for several posts as can easily be seen + there clearly were protestors... these guys seemingly didn't have locking on devices, or rape alarms or suspicion of handling stolen goods:

Yes you show a picture of protestors in the "authorised" protesting area, there's no law designating where one can or can't protest

 

[Sythe79]

I love when people part quote "laws" you missed this you know the important first bit's

1.2 The exercise of the power of arrest represents an obvious and significant interference with the Right to Liberty and Security under Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, set out in Part I of Schedule 1 to the Human Rights Act 1998.

1.3 The use of the power must be fully justified and officers exercising the power should consider if the necessary objectives can be met by other, less intrusive means. Absence of justification for exercising the power of arrest may lead to challenges should the case proceed to court. It could also lead to civil claims against police for unlawful arrest and false imprisonment. When the power of arrest is exercised, it is essential that it is exercised in a non-discriminatory and proportionate manner which is compatible with the Right to Liberty under Article 5. See Note 1B.

All these magical rape alarms and super straps Could have just been subject to surrender at most if the Police really did think they could possibly be used, But no it's pretty clear the Untouchable militia were sent out to send a message a round up the scum.

Like I said before if you are OK with that, then fine but don't complain when the rainbow TikTok division also comes to check your thinking too, you can't have it both ways.

 

[Caracus2k]

All these magical rape alarms and super straps Could have just been subject to surrender at most if the Police really did think they could possibly be used, But no it's pretty clear the Untouchable militia were sent out to send a message a round up the scum.

What (magical?) power to police have to force people, not under arrest, to 'surrender' such items in the streets, parks, roads etc of London?

Be specific

And by this reason why don't police when they find a knife on a person in the street just seize the knife and arrange for matters to be progressed at a later date if they can verify the ID of the person in question?

Could it be because the police might just look like idiots if the exact same person was just to quickly acquire another similar item and go on to use it in quick order?

 

[Minusorange]

I love when people part quote "laws" you missed this you know the important first bit's

1.2 The exercise of the power of arrest represents an obvious and significant interference with the Right to Liberty and Security under Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, set out in Part I of Schedule 1 to the Human Rights Act 1998.

1.3 The use of the power must be fully justified and officers exercising the power should consider if the necessary objectives can be met by other, less intrusive means. Absence of justification for exercising the power of arrest may lead to challenges should the case proceed to court. It could also lead to civil claims against police for unlawful arrest and false imprisonment. When the power of arrest is exercised, it is essential that it is exercised in a non-discriminatory and proportionate manner which is compatible with the Right to Liberty under Article 5. See Note 1B.

All these magical rape alarms and super straps Could have just been subject to surrender at most if the Police really did think they could possibly be used, But no it's pretty clear the Untouchable militia were sent out to send a message a round up the scum.

Like I said before if you are OK with that, then fine but don't complain when the rainbow TikTok division also comes to check your thinking too, you can't have it both ways.

Pretty sure the boot lickers will be moaning if the police are successfully sued and have to pay out of their tax money the very people they are enjoying having their free speech suppressed

 

[dowie]

Yes you show a picture of protestors in the "authorised" protesting area, there's no law designating where one can or can't protest

You're again arguing against some point you've made up yourself.

 

[Sythe79]

The same power they would use if they caught you drinking on the street, pour it away or risk being arrested for drunk and disorderly. You know, proper sane proportional policing.