Current Affairs Race wars, neo-nazis and other unpleasantness

[Damo_1878]

I have been "invited" to a counter protest in Bristol tonight. I initially thought it would be a good idea - then remembered what happened last time I went on a similar thing many years ago
I am assuming if a counter protester gets involved in a kick off with a right-wing demonstrator he/she is just as likely to end up in court tomorrow.

My advice is to stay at home. Put a movie on or something.

It's simply not worth the risk of even inadvertently getting caught up in any of this. Even as a bystander

The best thing you can do is simply continue going about your daily peaceful business

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Well was the bloke who smashed your car part of a riot /violent disorder ? If so there two different crimes unless you’re suggesting if a murderer who smashes a car during the crime means everyone gets life ?

The bloke was charged and pleaded guilty to violence disorder not to criminal damage , it’s a different offence . Same as the people looting shops won’t I imagine get a ticket for shoplifting, doesn’t feel like the things are at odds .

Smashes property during a "riot" = 30 months
Smashes property for a laugh a week earlier = not even looked at.

Got you

 

[Harryflashman]

You'll always find inconsistencies with sentencing - if you look hard enough.

But nobody should feel comfortable with the state saying "right, we're going to hammer these with harsher sentences because it's in our own interest" - weeks after releasing violent criminals early.

They'll all end up out "early" because their appeal will highlight that IMO.

How many of the 2011 rioters got out on appeal over their equally heavy sentences? Or do you feel these are different . Maybe they’ll club together and get a brief with that poor rioter savaged by the police dog and do a group action .

 

[GrandOldTeam]

How many of the 2011 rioters got out on appeal over their equally heavy sentences? Or do you feel these are different . Maybe they’ll club together and get a brief with that poor rioter savaged by the police dog and do a group action .

I feel all crime is crime, and custodial sentences should be consistent and not expedited/treated differently because it's in Kier Starmer's interest.

 

[PhilM]

I`d say there`s a very good chance mate, especially with all the allegations of two tier policing flying around.

Any one kicking off, on either side, is going to be dealt with robustly: it’s now a, get back in your shell situation until it all calms down.

 

[ChesterBlue]

It is indeed.

And we don't know the specific incidents.

You're saying it's for attempted murder/attempting to set fire to a building. Evidently, it's not.

I'm comparing to incidents I can recall of violent or criminal damage. The details will come out I'm sure.

That isn’t what I was saying, apologies if I didn’t explain myself clearly enough.

What I’m saying is that those crimes were part of the riots that the people getting harsh sentences were part of. The context that even people just doing property damage etc were part of riots which were largely targeting mosques, foreign businesses, Muslim neighbourhoods and refugee hotels. There’s a clear nefarious agenda and I would expect to see them getting harsher sentences as a result.

 

[TrachyBlue]

You'll always find inconsistencies with sentencing - if you look hard enough.

But nobody should feel comfortable with the state saying "right, we're going to hammer these with harsher sentences because it's in our own interest" - weeks after releasing violent criminals early.

They'll all end up out "early" because their appeal will highlight that IMO.

It's in everyone's interests to punish racists and fascists.

 

[Damo_1878]

You'll always find inconsistencies with sentencing - if you look hard enough.

But nobody should feel comfortable with the state saying "right, we're going to hammer these with harsher sentences because it's in our own interest" - weeks after releasing violent criminals early.

They'll all end up out "early" because their appeal will highlight that IMO.

Mitigation goes out the window at this point.

Everyone knows the police are trying to restore order. The courts are saying basically if you go out and start disrupting people's lives and the peace, there's no excuse or mitigation. You will face the consequences

The courts basically lose a willingness to hear any excuses. That's the difference now

 

[Harryflashman]

Smashes property during a "riot" = 30 months
Smashes property for a laugh a week earlier = not even looked at.

Got you

Are you being deliberately obtuse , yeah exactly that . You think riots in which police vehicles were set on fire , dozens of plod assaulted , shops looted and smashed by the dozen whilst shoppers cower in fear merits the same investigation as a window being smashed which nobody witnesses ? They said there are 55 on the investigation into the riots on Merseyside , I’m guessing and I’m only speculating that that wasn’t the response to the broken window . If we increase police numbers by 900% though maybe we could do that .

 

[COYBL25]

Any one kicking off, on either side, is going to be dealt with robustly: it’s now a, get back in your shell situation until it all calms down.

Plus, it always seems to be the innocents who end up with a high percentage of injuries from stuff that gets thrown by both sides.

 

[Harryflashman]

I feel all crime is crime, and custodial sentences should be consistent and not expedited/treated differently because it's in Kier Starmer's interest.

You are aware that pretty much riot in history gets heavy sentences , I mean it’s not like this is a new thing.

Probably should just stamp on the rioters heads and you’d be made up with it

 

[GrandOldTeam]

It's in everyone's interests to punish racists and fascists.

And criminals.

Violent conduct is violent conduct.

Mitigation goes out the window at this point.

Everyone knows the police are trying to restore order. The courts are saying basically if you go out and start disrupting people's lives and the peace, there's no excuse or mitigation. You will face the consequences

The courts basically lose a willingness to hear any excuses. That's the difference now

It's not about mitigation.

The law should be consistent.

Everyone knowing they're trying to set a precedent/make a point doesn't make it right.

They're rushing it through and want headline sentences to prevent more. Understandable. But it's inconsistent.

 

[FrenchDarrenBent]

I feel all crime is crime, and custodial sentences should be consistent and not expedited/treated differently because it's in Kier Starmer's interest.

LONDON, Aug 7 (Reuters) - A British man was on Wednesday jailed for three years for violent disorder during anti-Muslim riots last week, as the first sentences from a wave of violence after the killing of three girls in northwest England were handed down.
Derek Drummond, 58, was sentenced at Liverpool Crown Court having pleaded guilty to violent disorder and assaulting an emergency worker by punching a police officer.

That's not smashing in a window. That's a personal attact.

All crime is crime. That's why we, as a western civilization, have justice system that judges on a case by case basis, taking into account all the facts.
The police, as the arm of justice, should react an start an investigation if the victim ask them to and there's a reasonable cause.

If we allow generalized punishing, we're losing all we hold dear.

 

[Damo_1878]

And criminals.

Violent conduct is violent conduct.



It's not about mitigation.

The law should be consistent.

Everyone knowing they're trying to set a precedent/make a point doesn't make it right.

They're rushing it through and want headline sentences to prevent more. Understandable. But it's inconsistent.

You've gone full Davek

Mitigation is used during sentencing

The difference here to what you're quoting is this is violent disorder and/or rioting involving 3 or 12 or more people

They are rushing things through. Swift . The legal system is there to restore order and peace

That's how the law works

 

[TrachyBlue]

And criminals.

Violent conduct is violent conduct.



It's not about mitigation.

The law should be consistent.

Everyone knowing they're trying to set a precedent/make a point doesn't make it right.

They're rushing it through and want headline sentences to prevent more. Understandable. But it's inconsistent.

Bu the law can't do that because of years of cuts to policing, so, unfortunately choices have to be made and the fascists need the severest of punishments.