[News] Do What You Likies

[WATFORD zero]

Obviously I understand why the police don’t follow the letter of the law. You’d have to take 50+ adults into custody. Interview them. Search caravans and investigate. Find a place for all the children and dogs to go. Impound dozens of vehicles.

They know this and they know the police can’t do it.

It’s an unsolvable problem.

As I pointed out earlier, Ireland seemed to have solved it

Law to stop Travellers occupying land without consent is enacted

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/law-to-stop-travellers-occupying-land-without-consent-is-enacted-1.1087107

which seemed to coincide with a significant increase in issues over here in the summer months.

But it seems it would take a bit of sensible competent Government legislation, so I agree, unsolvable

 

[Bodian]

Did you not understand the bit about trespass not being a criminall offence unless damage was caused?. People walking does not cause damage, traveller camps do.

Yes, of course - I deal with it on a weekly basis. My response was to HWT, who said that trespass should be a criminal offence. Hi comment wasn't qualified by 'trespass with damage'. And in any case, strong arguments were put forward when this was last proposed that 'damage' would have to be very carefully defined - because 'damage' in law can be minor (trampling grass - all grass is feed on farmland, or damage to enjoyment of your own land, and so on). The issue is criminalisation creep - where something is proposed for one thing and all the guidance says 'should only be used for....', then it starts getting used for other issues as well.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

Just make trespass a criminal offence, like it is in Ireland.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Just make trespass a criminal offence, like it is in Ireland.

Another law for the underfunded and understaffed police force to administer? Right oh.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

Another law for the underfunded and understaffed police force to administer? Right oh.

Well, it made them leave Ireland, so maybe they’ll move to Germany as they’re EU citizens.

 

[sydney]

You rarely hear of arrests and punishment. Appears that the Councils have forced the Police and CPS to compromise with them “if they move on after a few days”; yet the law abiding Council Tax payers have to pick up the mess and pay for it.

isn't that the mantra for just about everything these days .....don't put yourselves in danger , go for the easy target , maximise revenue. Makes me ****ing sick.

 

[Bodian]

I am not sure I follow your objection. The last point is an unintended benefit of a law change surely?

Your first point, are you saying that nobody has ever established a right through a criminal act? If true, and you mean that someone cannot establish a right to walk through my garden by breaking into my garden, then.....good.

The right to roam act of 2000 has given access to all sorts of places. I don't see why we need to keep trespass as a non-criminal act just in case someone wants to trespass somewhere that got missed in the right to roam map redrawing. I don't see that using trespass to establish a right is necessary to defend, going forward. Give me an example of where this would be a good thing? And show me how that trumps using trespass as a means to stop once and forever the 'traveller menace' of nuisance trespass?

Finally - lots of laws have been changed after illegal acts (of protest or civil disobedience). Even the poll tax was changed because of rioting. New laws may make it harder to protest, but this won't stop laws being changed as a result of protest, if the cause is just and the support for change is widespread.

Yes, my last point was an unintended benefit - I was just using it as an example of where a piece of legislation meant for one thing, then extended to another (the law of unintended consequences).

The right to roam only applies to certain areas of land (moorland, open country, common land), where, in many cases, there was a de facto right previously anyway. That's about 8% of land in England. It doesn't apply to 'all land' by any means. You ask about someone wanting to 'trespass' somewhere that got missed in right to roam - that's still pretty much relevant to 90% of the countryside. In the Lake District, 50% of land has open access rights (a very high proportion), yet even here there are currently >30 live cases to deal with where the public's ability to continue walking/riding along a lane, across land, and so on has [recently] been challenged by landowners - and the relevant councils will have to decide whether the usage is such that a public path has become established*. I'm talking about things like continued usage by the public over 20/30/50 years over land owned by someone else (all land is owned by someone). That's basically trespass. If you trespass long enough and often enough on one route, and the landowner doesn't do anything to stop you, that trespass becomes a right. (if you're really interested and have the time - here's a recent example https://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/434255/2022_08_02-Claimed-Mod-of-Def-Map-and-Statement,-Occupation-Lane,-Broughton-in-Furness,-Broughton-West-PC.pdf)

That will still be important in the future. I'm not just talking about the countryside either - lots of little alleys and twittens exist in towns that are heavily used, but are not recorded as public paths. If trespass was criminalised, you would not be able to use them in future without committing an offence.

*In East Sussex there are currently 100 live cases of a similar nature; Kent has well over 100, Surrey around 50, and Hampshire almost 250.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Yes, my last point was an unintended benefit - I was just using it as an example of where a piece of legislation meant for one thing, then extended to another (the law of unintended consequences).

The right to roam only applies to certain areas of land (moorland, open country, common land), where, in many cases, there was a de facto right previously anyway. That's about 8% of land in England. It doesn't apply to 'all land' by any means. You ask about someone wanting to 'trespass' somewhere that got missed in right to roam - that's still pretty much relevant to 90% of the countryside. In the Lake District, 50% of land has open access rights (a very high proportion), yet even here there are currently >30 live cases to deal with where the public's ability to continue walking/riding along a lane, across land, and so on has [recently] been challenged by landowners - and the relevant councils will have to decide whether the usage is such that a public path has become established*. I'm talking about things like continued usage by the public over 20/30/50 years over land owned by someone else (all land is owned by someone). That's basically trespass. If you trespass long enough and often enough on one route, and the landowner doesn't do anything to stop you, that trespass becomes a right. (if you're really interested and have the time - here's a recent example https://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/434255/2022_08_02-Claimed-Mod-of-Def-Map-and-Statement,-Occupation-Lane,-Broughton-in-Furness,-Broughton-West-PC.pdf)

That will still be important in the future. I'm not just talking about the countryside either - lots of little alleys and twittens exist in towns that are heavily used, but are not recorded as public paths. If trespass was criminalised, you would not be able to use them in future without committing an offence.

*In East Sussex there are currently 100 live cases of a similar nature; Kent has well over 100, Surrey around 50, and Hampshire almost 250.

I'm sure this isn't an impossible obstacle. How long would it take to reclassify all this?

Most change has knock on effects. But like a Rubic cube the movements can be organized to obtain a pleasing outcome.

Better to try than just give up. Humans didn't get where they are today by giving up.

 

[Bodian]

I'm sure this isn't an impossible obstacle. How long would it take to reclassify all this?

Lake District rate of resolving them at present = 2 per year. Outstanding = 30. 15 years, that's without any new ones. As soon as trespass was criminalised, we'd be flooded with hundreds more - let alone the ones that come in anyway.

 

[timbha]

I wonder if the authorities would find enough resources if people started to take things into their own hands

 

[Gabbafella]

Sounds like a standard evening in Worthing.

 

[GT49er]

Yes, of course - I deal with it on a weekly basis. My response was to HWT, who said that trespass should be a criminal offence. Hi comment wasn't qualified by 'trespass with damage'. And in any case, strong arguments were put forward when this was last proposed that 'damage' would have to be very carefully defined - because 'damage' in law can be minor (trampling grass - all grass is feed on farmland, or damage to enjoyment of your own land, and so on). The issue is criminalisation creep - where something is proposed for one thing and all the guidance says 'should only be used for....', then it starts getting used for other issues as well.

Fairy nuff - although even the blind can distinguish between a few broken blades of grass and the carnage left by these low-life, can't they?


Oh well, we are having to deal with English magistrates and Judges - not to mention fancy - but very NIMBY! - lawyers, I suppose.

 

[Bodian]

Fairy nuff - although even the blind cn distinguish between a few broken blades of grass and the carnage left by these low-life, can't they?


Oh well, we are having to deal with English magistrates and Judges - not to mention fancy - but very NIMBY! - lawyers, I suppose.

Indeed. There is a lot of truth in the old adage that the law is an ass.....

In my area of work there was a 20-year legal argument over whether 'may' in the legislation meant 'can do' or 'must do'!

 

[GT49er]

Indeed. There is a lot of truth in the old adage that the law is an ass.....

In my area of work there was a 20-year legal argument over whether 'may' in the legislation meant 'can do' or 'must do'!

Lucrative for someone anyway!

 

[Lenny Rider]

Predominantly from the ROI, where most are wanted by the Garda for various crimes and misdemeanours.

Their behaviour then makes people tar all Gypsies/Romanies/Travellers with the same brush.

There are many hardworking, law abiding people of travelling descent who live right across Sussex and beyond, and whilst they all live in houses are still proud of their heritage.

I'm currently looking after the service of Mrs Julie Jones (nee Ayres) aged 95, one of Worthing's legendary flower sellers, a proud travelling lady all her life, but light years away from the lot pitched up in Morrisons.

 

[SeagullinExile]

Really?!

Humble apologies for offending you Mr T.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Really?!

Humble apologies for offending you Mr T.

 

[carlzeiss]

https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/20907728.police-waited-outside-worthing-pubs-trashed/

Police waited outside Worthing pubs as they were trashed

Sussex Police put a “containment” on venues that were trashed with food packaging, cans of beer not bought in the pubs and tables vandalised with permanent marker in Worthing town centre.

The force faced an “unprecedented” level of antisocial behaviour that it had not seen “on such a scale as this in Worthing”.

Officers responded just before 8pm on Thursday and remained until the group wreaking havoc in pubs left just after midnight.

One man, who wanted to remain anonymous, said: “Publicans are absolutely shocked and appalled, they felt like they had no assistance.

"Nothing was mentioned to them, they stood outside and waited for them to go while these people were inside trashing the place. They bought their own alcohol while the bar stopped serving.

“There was drawing on tables, urinating on floors in the bar area, excrement was in the sinks, rubbish all over the floor.

“People are saddened by this. They did not have the support, nothing has been said that I’m aware of.”

Sussex Police said it has to consider the safety of everyone, including its officers, when responding to incidents.

 

[Easy 10]

"Cans of Fosters and Carlsberg were littered across the floor, as well a can of deodorant, crisp packets and Dairylea Dunker packets.

Thats the bit that surprised me most.

 

[herecomesaregular]

"Cans of Fosters and Carlsberg were littered across the floor, as well a can of deodorant, crisp packets and Dairylea Dunker packets.

Thats the bit that surprised me most.

Sounds like a normal Glastonbury to me.