Crime - part deux.
- Thread starter Sucky
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I was having a read through stuff on twitter and also had a look at some video footage of an interview...
It appears a very young child was injured, either a baby or a toddler. This resulted eventually in that child having to go to hospital. Claims other children in the house did it, accidently, claims it was dropped on it's head, other claims the kids were home alone. Claims a swelling appeared a day later.
Either way regardless of who did what and how it came about a child needed medical attention.
So naturally that sparks a safe guarding investigation, it's procedure - again regardless of who said and did what, it does not give a community the ok to go on a riot. They may not like the authorities questions and actions, but that's the law, if they did nothing and that child died, everyone would want to blame the authorities for doing nothing and riot for that as well.
Let them get on with their job and keep your noses out, the childs safety comes first, even if it was an accident.
What the actual **** was that security guard/pretend policeman doing while that was going on
Riots in Leeds, eh?
Well, I say, open fire.
Make Britain Great Again.
Well, I say, open fire.
Make Britain Great Again.
You must log in or register to see images
One of my favourite not good films just watch and switch off from the world
@RANDY Be careful where you ride your bike bro
https://x.com/Bobbybollocks2/status/1813980315863654874
https://x.com/Bobbybollocks2/status/1813980315863654874
I find it interesting that all the sites i have read reports of this only use the word "dissorder".
No hint of riot or violence .
Cant have the word riot used while Starmer is PM he has a reputation to preserve
Bit of a read but quite interesting on the JSO case.https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/R-v-Hallam-and-others.pdf
Quite a lot more than some well-intentioned hippies trying to save the forest.
Quite a lot more than some well-intentioned hippies trying to save the forest.
I'm still not totally convinced that a prison sentence is the right form of punishment/rehabilitation - yes, it maybe for now, but I think we seriously need to search for an alternative rather than the cost at the taxpayers expense that they are locked up for x amount of years.
My view on the protest as such and the actions of the police are this, it wasn't the protestors that stopped the traffic it was the cops, it wasn't the protestors that made people late for funerals, hospitals, food delivery it was the police...
Why do we insist on shutting the fooking road everytime these ****ers climb a gantry and yes I get the risks, but for everyone who was affected by the actions on those days, how many people would have been happy to take that risk?
Instead of using old army barracks for migrants, remodernise them to hold people such as this, who can be trusted not to kill one another in their sleep, and live, sleep and eat altogether, just deprived of their liberty. If we can find work for them to do, chain gangs, even better. If we can't find them work, then we charge them for their stay out of their own savings or home they may have to sell.
I'm sure there is a better way of dealing with these protestors than cops holding up roads and banging protestors up in cells, we just need a bit of ingenuity for a change, rather than same old, same old.
Last edited:
I mean I’d be all for shooting them down but you’re still going to have the issue of closing things down to scrape them off the tarmac and then you’re making martyrs for the next Hyacinth and Rupert to follow. It probably wasn’t handled perfectly but then it was a very complicated situation.
It was complicated, the cops made it complicated, the risks looking at that document were far greater by shutting the road. Shooting them would be a good option, during the very early hours of a Saturday morning should be the quietest time to do it, along with a powerful jet wash into the central reservation, the crows can pick at what's left.
In more enlightened times they would be put in stocks and stoned to death
The reason the Police had no choice in their action was the insidious Health and Safety laws passed and increased by successive Governments and the even more insidious increase in Litigation prosecution
It is no longer rules to safe guard the public etc but a means to ensure that someone has to take the blame and pay compensation, God Bless America for that as well
Good to see the cops have got him...
Iustin Dobre, aged 37, of Clifton Mount, Harehills, Leeds, has been charged with violent disorder and arson reckless as to endanger life.
He has been remanded to appear at Leeds Magistrates’ Court on Monday (July 22).
https://www.westyorkshire.police.uk...sorder-man-charged-arson-and-violent-disorder
Iustin Dobre, aged 37, of Clifton Mount, Harehills, Leeds, has been charged with violent disorder and arson reckless as to endanger life.
He has been remanded to appear at Leeds Magistrates’ Court on Monday (July 22).
https://www.westyorkshire.police.uk...sorder-man-charged-arson-and-violent-disorder
With the wording of the charges it seems like they are chucking the book at him, which can carry a life sentence.
https://www.oblaw.co.uk/arson/#:~:text=The range of sentences for,the most exceptional of cases.
Scroll back to the sentence above, the link takes you a step too far down.
This is the bit I'm prefering to...
There is also an aggravated offence of arson, where a person intends or is reckless as to whether life would be endangered by their actions.
For a charge to be forthcoming for Arson with Intent to Endanger life, the suspect has to either intend – want to endanger life, or be reckless as to endangering life – realising the risk of burning a house with occupants at night time, for example.
Compared to the basic offence, the aggravated offence is treated much more seriously by the courts, and sentence for these offences, is equally higher.
There is also an aggravated offence of arson, where a person intends or is reckless as to whether life would be endangered by their actions.
For a charge to be forthcoming for Arson with Intent to Endanger life, the suspect has to either intend – want to endanger life, or be reckless as to endangering life – realising the risk of burning a house with occupants at night time, for example.
Compared to the basic offence, the aggravated offence is treated much more seriously by the courts, and sentence for these offences, is equally higher.