Weds 1st April: G20 protests - discussion, reaction and chat
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
The legal aspects will be interesting. Doubtless the officers will state that they shouted, "get back" or "move" and used such force as was necesary to clear obstruction of the highway which "peaceful" or not the claimate camp was. Then you would have legal argument about the nature of the obstruction itself, i.e was it lawful.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
yep.
reasonable force needs to be just that... ie reasonable and appropriate to the situation, and telling a peaceful protestor to move, then smacking him in the head with the edge of your riot shield when he doesn't is not reasonable force in this situation IMO.
that copper would be done for assault if english police had to have their numbers shown while in riot gear IMO (on top of the duty of care thing).
that video doesnt show them clearing the climate camp which didnt happen until after midnight as the photos i posted prove
Corax
Luke 5:16
No need, I have it.
I don't dispute that the chapter's good. I just hope that referring to a standard introductory law text isn't meant to make you look informed at all, or anything like that, because it doesn't. People often have that kind of agenda when referencing academia y'know. I'm sure you had no subtext of that nature in mind though.
editor
hiraethified
I'm getting fed up wth you repeating this bullshit. I was there. The vast majority of people were NOT drinking, neither were they drunk. Feel free to peruse my photos and see how many cans of beer you can spot (not that that's got anything to do with the real issues here).
However, there were many, many peaceful, law abiding protesters who were prevented from leaving or gaining access to food or water during their lengthy and aggressively enforced incarceration.
Garcia Lorca
Anger can be power
One of the most disturbing acts of violence and over reaction that I have seen from any officer and very, VERY fucking dangerous. That could have resulted in very serious injury or worse.
You have got a good point Freespirit, it will be difficult to win any case against these cunts. The Cunt that lashed out with that shield should be held to account and explain why that was proportianate action.
Is it in some police guidlines to use the edge of the shield as a weapon? Its a image that has stuck in my head and no doubt many others.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
That's an avenue to go down, although as it's a tort at common law, there is (I believe) no trial by jury. Still, a judge could well rule against the police.
But I wouldn't want to go down the road of making "kettling" bearable. My comparison with conditions in mass-detention and those enjoyed by a murderer in police lock-up was largely a reductio ad absurdum. (Although the comparison is valid.) "Kettling" is wrong for all the reasons listed earlier in the thread (lack of individualised suspicion being the biggest). Mass-detention might be better if food, drink, and piss-pots are provided, but it still has no place in a common law country under the rule of law.
Civil cases against the police are heard with a jury. At least, Gillan & Quinton -v- Commissioner was, when it got back down from the House of Lords (argument over what was admissable) to Central London County Court (where not a lot was).
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Doesn't it depend on what's being claimed? I know claims of false imprisonment is usually heard by a jury because of the obvious liberty issues involved, but so far as I know, civil cases are only heard before a jury if they fall within the criteria listed in the Supreme Court Act, 1981, which I posted up several pages back.
Happy to be corrected here, as civil law confuses many lawyers, and I'm no lawyer.
Happy to be corrected here, as civil law confuses many lawyers, and I'm no lawyer.
FabricLiveBaby!
Live Baby Fabric!
free spirit
more tea vicar?
I hear what you're saying, but I think we maybe need to think a bit more laterally about the problem in order to make the solution we would like become a reality.
ie. at the moment the police are using kettling as their preferred method of dealing with any demonstration where they have even the slightest inkling there might be a bit of argy bargy at some point.
they are doing this because for them it's become the tried and tested easy option - all they need to do is wait til everyone's gathered in one space, leave an obvious target unguarded to tempt a few younguns to break a window to provide justification, have reinforcements in full riot gear in the surrounding streets on standby, send them all in on mass to surround the crowd and contain them til they get bored... job done.
if the rules of the game change so that they need to have in place the ability to provide food, water, shelter and toilet facilities for everyone inside any kettle they form, or let everyone go... well I'm thinking they might be much less inclined to use the tactic, and may well only be able to use it for very short periods if they've not got those facilties in place.
also, if I'm right and the police did have to properly look after people in a kettle, then it'd at least make it a lot more bearable for people, which would help with the problem of people being put off from protesting by this tactic.
It'd also mean that the kettles should be much safer if the rules on when the use of batons and shields is appropriate were updated as a result, and hopefully coppers would have to display their numbers as well.
not to mention the potential for any payout to fund the next demo
worth a try IMO
david dissadent
New Member
From Tom Brake... Liberal Democrat MP.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
i'd much rather see our people seize the initiative and find imaginative ways of preventing this abhorrent method of people management becoming a possibility in the first place tbh.I hear what you're saying, but I think we maybe need to think a bit more laterally about the problem in order to make the solution we would like become a reality.
ie. at the moment the police are using kettling as their preferred method of dealing with any demonstration where they have even the slightest inkling there might be a bit of argy bargy at some point.
they are doing this because for them it's become the tried and tested easy option - all they need to do is wait til everyone's gathered in one space, leave an obvious target unguarded to tempt a few younguns to break a window to provide justification, have reinforcements in full riot gear in the surrounding streets on standby, send them all in on mass to surround the crowd and contain them til they get bored... job done.
if the rules of the game change so that they need to have in place the ability to provide food, water, shelter and toilet facilities for everyone inside any kettle they form, or let everyone go... well I'm thinking they might be much less inclined to use the tactic, and may well only be able to use it for very short periods if they've not got those facilties in place.
also, if I'm right and the police did have to properly look after people in a kettle, then it'd at least make it a lot more bearable for people, which would help with the problem of people being put off from protesting by this tactic.
It'd also mean that the kettles should be much safer if the rules on when the use of batons and shields is appropriate were updated as a result, and hopefully coppers would have to display their numbers as well.
not to mention the potential for any payout to fund the next demo
worth a try IMO
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
I'd forgotten his name, yes that was the MP I mentioned earlier.
Free Spirit, I won't quote your posts to save space, but yes I think that would be the most pragmatic way to formally pursue it.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Don't all gather in london and wait for it, and if it happens learn to fight?
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
sorry but that's utter nonsense. accept the fact of complete containment of the majority of protestors, on the buy-off that toilets and refreshments are provided. not a fucking chance.
eta: @cesare obv.
eta: @cesare obv.
david dissadent
New Member
Again I will emphisise, we were informed MPs who were acting as legal observers were being denied the right to enter the camp once the kettle was in place. Who the fuck do these police think they are bossing around the elected representatives of the people of the UK in their activities to observe that citizens right to demonstrate is being observed without threats and violence.
Who exactly are the servants of the public and who is the masters? Parliment or the police?
Who exactly are the servants of the public and who is the masters? Parliment or the police?
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
i don't think that there is any point relying on your mp to safeguard your human rights in such a situation, its incumbent upon each individual to keep on their toes and try to ensure that you don't get caught "lying down" as it were. that said, it would be good to see our elected representatives seeing how the judiciary acting in their name are behaving, because i think the behaviour of the police last week was utterly shameful.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
Perhaps I wasn't clear there (she said, refusing to rise to the 'utter nonsense' comment). I'm not suggesting that as the only course of action. But if anyone on an individual or collective basis is going to pursue this through the legal system it needs to be done on a Human Rights basis.
And in the meantime, there are far more effective counter measures.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
i've been angry about all this since wednesday, so forgive me if my comments carry vitriol. i'm still arguing and falling out with friends about what went on. but if we're going to have any chance of fighting back and winning popular support, it won't be through hr legislation tbf. the fucking tories want to repeal it all anyway and they're more likely to win the next election, half the ehrc want to leave or have resigned, i have no confidence in our legislators currently.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Equally, if mass-detention becomes bearable, it becomes more easily accepted. But I'm pragmatic: if demonstrators want to campaign for an obligation to provide necessities when "kettled", fine by me. Just so long as it's accompanied with a campaign to get the tactic declared illegal. As for those MP observers, I trust they'll be putting forward a bill to this effect?
The biggest problem is over-reliance on the Human Rights Act and ECHR. The sooner people recognise that these feeble collections of idealistic waffle are inadequate to the task in hand, the better. But right now the likes of Liberty, Amnesty International and the Lib Dems fawn over them.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
I'm angry too. I also share your pessmism about getting any results by way of the legal system. I skim-read the IPCC report on the Countryside Alliance earlier today. I read the Austin HoL judgment a few days ago. I have no confidence that the IPCC/politicians/judiciary are going to do anything more than repeat the stance on proportionality and appropriateness without drawing any clear lines in the sand.
So that's why I think that force of public opinion (which relies on everyone bypassing the fucking media where they don't report accurately/in full) will gradually snowball. No-one in their right minds thought that these protests were going to be anything akin to the Poll Tax riots. Things (a) haven't got bad enough yet; and (b) it's not one single issue to concentrate on.
Re the police - ach. One day they'll wake up and realise that they too have been shafted, by their superiors and by the state. They're not immune to the effects either in the Job, or at home.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
I was specifically not talking about human rights legislation, I was talking about 'duty of care'.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
see, this is where i'm unconvinced, its turkeys voting for xmaS again, i had a cousin who was a cop and they love to toe the party line, no matter what that line is. am also very tired and so am off to bed. good night, we live to fight another day eh?
free spirit
more tea vicar?
I wasn't aware this was an either / or type situation, please explain why it's not possible to do both?
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
Which is fine as an additional angle I s'pose, but it's principally H&S driven? Which is fine within the UK but I'm not sure how it links into European legislation and any springboard into the European courts if it fails here. Not sure really though. Not my area.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
cos i'm feeling grouchy and its sunday night maybe
Similar threads
