Bloody hell. Six months for crass stupidity from someone who clearly has mental health issues. And yet it is only today that the police have announced that they will now attend burglaries. Something isn't right.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[TV] Captain Sir Tom Moore - *Died 2 Feb 2021*
- Thread starter Mr Bridger
- Start date
Bloody hell. Six months for crass stupidity from someone who clearly has mental health issues. And yet it is only today that the police have announced that they will now attend burglaries. Something isn't right.
chip
Well-known member
I agree with your sentiment but don't think it's fair to say she clearly has mental health issues. It was misguided and bound to cause upset but ultimately caused no real damage. To lock her up is absurd and OTT. She is clearly passionate in her beliefs and concerns, and had genuinely good intentions, it's a shame that she wasn't able to channel this more constructively. I'm not convinced of the benefit of branding such people criminals with all of the implications that carries. A caution would have been more appropriate and guidance of how to conduct protests in a generally legal way. Of course, I know nothing more than I have seen in the news so may have this completely wrong.
- Feb 22, 2014
- 2,808
As she has been refused bail I wonder if they are preparing to Section her? That's the only reason I can see for banging her up apart from it being the Tory party conference week of course.
Good news
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,500
The judge also cited her displaying signs of an intention to reoffend and a lack of remorse for her crime.
A custodial sentence seems appropriate, subject to her mental competence assessment and the pre-sentencing report.
What I'm saying is, they'll, like, if they had themselves proper jobs, y'know, for t' gan to, then they wouldn't dee it. Y'know, a lot a' them's from broken homes.
A custodial sentence seems appropriate, subject to her mental competence assessment and the pre-sentencing report.
What I'm saying is, they'll, like, if they had themselves proper jobs, y'know, for t' gan to, then they wouldn't dee it. Y'know, a lot a' them's from broken homes.
- May 8, 2018
- 10,623
Was she throwing shit around in court?
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,500
Nah, she likely was asked several times why she committed the offence and if she sees it was wrong in the eyes of the law. Given an opportunity to show remorse. She probably answered “wrong” in line with her principles, which she no doubt still believes in, so would be considered at a high risk of reoffending.
In cases like that, unless the person is demonstrably mentally ill and requiring hospitalisation, a custodial sentence is the only option to prevent them immediately reoffending.
Preposterous sentence.
Good old prison dirty protest should get her out
herecomesaregular
We're in the pipe, 5 by 5
Agree with this. Stupid sentence, just to make an example. Prison should be for those who are a danger to the public. Did she damage the statue? just poured on human manure, easily washed off.
If this was the second or third time she'd done it and that she has ignored the deterrent of fines and community service from previous convictions then yes, maybe custodial.
If you are sectioned, it is done so with immediate effect. I suspect this is a case of a judge playing to the gallery and giving the harshest treatment they can. It's a dangerous route to go down and makes me think of the governments' crackdown on protest and recent reports of the influence government is having on judges.
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
This way of thinking, I suspect, is exactly why someone has been made an example of.
Far too many people seem to believe they can commit criminal damage in the name of a good cause. Every time one of them gets off with a caution it'll just encourage 10 more. You've got to draw the line somewhere, this is it.
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,500
Let’s consider if this was your late grandfather, who raised tens and millions of pounds for charity after a lifetime of serving his country, then had the honour of having a statue erected. How would you feel if someone arguing a completely unrelated cause carried a container of their own shit and poured it over the statue?
What about if the protest was for a pro-paedophile or pro-fascist movement, or another cause you aren’t sympathetic to?
Pouring shit on public statues is not good behaviour. Do you understand this?
What about if the protest was for a pro-paedophile or pro-fascist movement, or another cause you aren’t sympathetic to?
Pouring shit on public statues is not good behaviour. Do you understand this?
What? Bizarre argument.
I'm more outraged at the Tory treatment of NHS workers (which is what the protest was highlighting) than some faeces on a bit of metal.
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,500
No it’s not. I’ll explain to you why it’s not.
Society at the moment, especially on the internet, is about contrarianism. Whatever the official rule/policy is, it’s wrong. Even if it goes against one’s own “truths”, many will argue it because it’s something to do. It’s fun being a dangerous pseudo-anarchist when you’re living in one of the richest countries in the world. It doesn’t work in the real world and never, ever has outside of fiction.
We can’t just do whatever we want in life without consequences. It would be chaos if we just went out and broke every law protesting XYZ issue we don’t like. This is why we have organised, peaceful protests. This is why blowing up hotels, murdering people and yes - to a much lesser extent vandalism - can’t just be ignored because the person “may have a point” with their protest.
Did throwing their own poo on a statue of someone completely unrelated to their particular beef help? Is throwing one’s own poo on statues okay? Did that person know right from wrong? Or did they think it was perfectly normal to shit in a bottle and throw it on the statue commemorating the life of a completely unrelated charity fundraiser?
What the cause was, was irrelevant. It was vandalism and gross indecency.
Let me make my position crystal clear; I think her protest was misguided and stupid. I understand why she chose that statue. But I do not agree with it.
Nevertheless;
Protest can sometimes be controversial.
It was related to her "beef".
Justice should never be based on perception or symbolism. The sentence handed down was clearly based on opinion. That is not how our judicial system should operate.
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,500
And I think that if her protest were supporting something you strongly disagreed with then you would feel completely different, because you are astonishingly partisan and unable to understand anyone’s views which don’t perfectly align with yours. If that protesters dumped their own faeces on a statue protesting high tax for top earners, I’m sure you wouldn’t be implying the courts are being swayed in their verdict. That’s because you agree with the verdict. And that’s because it would align with your views.
This is also why the judiciary have to comply with sentencing guidelines and/or precedent and shouldn't give more or less serious sentences because a particular crime offends their or the public's sensibilities.
For what it's worth, I think her protest was needlessly offensive, totally misdirected and I can't even remember what it was in aid of. But pouring shit on other people's property either carries a custodial sentence or it doesn't.
You are completely incorrect.
I don’t agree with her protest. I understand it but I don’t condone it.
I don’t think think legal judgements should be based on outrage or opinion.
That goes for any crime from shoplifting to murder.
Your other opinions of me? There’s not a lot I can do about those. They are way off the mark but those are on you .