Wyp can kiss my arse.

It cannot be a good idea to force underage people into a pub for an extended period of time, but it happens on police instruction quite often up and down the country. Sometimes this can lead to a bad outcome. I would not be happy for a sixteen year old child of mine to be locked in a pub. I also wonder about the legality of this "tactic".

 

Are you suggesting that the police might break the law?

Whatever next? The media not printing the entire truth? Politicians shying away from manifesto pledges?

It's unthinkable.

(sorry for deviating again, but we are talking about the morality and legality of a police decision involving football...)

 

Police normally have the right to detain you if they have reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed. I dont know why they locked them up but you probably do. Did they have reasonable suspicion that a crime had been committed? If they did not have reasonable suspicion that a crime had been committed than that is False Imprisonment which happens to also be an Intentional Tort besides also being a crime. Here we have Tort Lawyers who deal in these types of civil cases and bring them to court in order to sue for damages.

False Imprisonment: Plantif must show 1) an act or omission by defendant that confines or restrains the plantif; 2)to a bounded area; 3) Defendant had intent; and 4)causation; Note: Plantif must be aware or harmed by the confinement

That is California law (the lady in the other room is a lawyer). One has to imagine something as simple as that concept is also found in your law.

 

I forget the specific legislation, there's so many that only apply to football fans, but there's something like a Section 60 order, which when in place effectively removes the rights of all affected. You'd need to be a millionaire to challenge it to alter the law.

 

Do you all have a version of the ACLU there? The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) is a group dedicated to protecting peoples rights by taking the government, police etc to court. This is the type of thing they would do on your behalf. Without groups like that it would take a millionaire for sure.

This like the stupid law allowing them to force you onto a bus to the game is also a clear violation of your rights. You don't get to pass laws that infringe on your citizens rights simply because they are football fans or because there is a history of football related violence. You have the right to go where every you want in a free country and no one gets to round you up like cattle and force you into a building and lock you up.

 

We have Liberty who look after the rights of minority groups, unfortunately that tends to be based on race or sexual preference. There's no votes or public support in looking after the rights of football fans. A call for more realistic Policing methods is generally met with claims that we must all be hooligans because of all the Police that have to attend when we're around.

The police are quite well versed in provoking trouble to justify the need for the legislation. Few politicians or judges will argue against the Police, because they'd then be responsible should any trouble occur, even if it was Police provoked.

It's good that you keep offering your view and i hope you keep doing it, what I'd say though is that so far, you're preaching to the converted, but "the system" has pretty much already closed off the avenues you've raised so far.

just as an example of how little the facts matter when it comes to football fans. All seater stadiums were brought in on the strength of a report that didn't recommend all seater stadiums.

 

Is there any way we could make this 15-year-old kid black and gay before the day of the game?

We all know that WYP are a bunch of ******s and tapeworms

 

Thanks I am trying not to be annoying knowing that I dont live with that stuff every day like you all do. Our government violates our rights to but they do it in a way that you dont notice, like reading our emails, or wiretaps without warrants stuff like that.

It would be interesting to have gone to a game in which you could stand up. I would think that would change the game day experience by quite a bit. It would probably make it more of a community event I would think if you could wander around and chat with different people. All our sporting events have seats to my knowledge but that may be a function of our sports like Baseball which can last for 4 hours. Not to say that people dont stand up and cheer and in certain situations dont stand up the whole game once in a while.

Maybe Liberty is being constrained by the size of your population? Perhaps they do not have the resources to bring every type of case to court and they chose the easy ones like racial or sexual preference cases?

Here the majority of the ACLUs lawyers work for them pro bono. Each state has a chapter of the ACLU because to be a lawyer in a state you must have passed the bar in that state. So each chapter of the ACLU will recruit lawyers for different types of cases, they will get civil rights lawyers, labor lawyers, criminal lawyers etc so that they can tackle any issue that arises. That expands their reach far beyond the lawyers that they can afford to have on staff.

For example a few years back I was planning on attending a May Day protest in Richmond VA and the police denied our petition for a permit. We contacted the ACLUs Virginia Chapter and they called up the police and got our permit accepted. The Police then changed our planned route and said that we could not march down the streets we had chosen. They claimed that violence sometimes happens at anarchist protests and that they did not have enough police to cover our route. We then contacted the ACLU again and they took the police to court and won because the police could not show that violence was going to occur nor was it our fault that they were understaffed. It was our first amendment right to protest as we saw fit and in the end we got to march where we wanted. We used the system instead of just doing it because we did not want the police and media to portray us as the bad guys.

So basically here the ACLU uses these lawyers who do the work pro bono in order to expand they resources to the point where they even protect anarchists rights to march down X number of streets instead of Y number of streets. Without a strong civil rights group we would probably be in a situation much like yours where it seems that no one has challenged laws that seem to be obviously illegal.

 

The laws do get challenged, but it tends to be on a case by case basis rather than having the whole legislation challenged. Most of the time, the 'victims' of the abuse of power find it easier to just swallow it and move on.

Eight years ago, a group from Huddersfield, all on banning orders, came to the City v Huddersfield game and just sat in a nearby pub during the game. The Police knew they were there and did nothing. After the game, the Huddersfield fans came out of the Pub and assaulted women and kids. The Police were nowhere in sight. Some City fans went to the defence of the women and kids and the Huddersfield fans ran off. The Police arrived and penned in the Huddersfield fans.

I'm not aware of any of the Huddersfield fans being arrested despite the assault and breach of the banning orders. The City fans got about two years in prison and banned.

That shows how the law is abused by Police manipulating the situation. Unfortunately, it also shows the 'problem' as the Police define it, has a basis in reality as the Huddersfield fans were there for one reason only.

 

Here one would probably only be able to stop the assault from happening and then defend themselves if necessary. Once the assault had been stopped any further action would probably be an arrest-able offense.

I assume your banning orders are similar to what we might call a stipulation of your probation or parole. So those that violated it would be in a position to be arrested just like here. It only shows that people violate their probation or parole, that happens all the time. It shouldnt be used to impose restrictions on people who do not have banning orders.

How did you all get to a place where your police and judicial system were willing violate your rights so casually? Is there a good book on your police/judicial system that I could read?

 

They really are the biggest bunch of cretins the West Yorkshire plod!

 

Ellewoods


Police normally have the right to detain you if they have reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed. I dont know why they locked them up but you probably do. Did they have reasonable suspicion that a crime had been committed?


That is not the case in relation to football supporters, for many a long year the police have rounded them up and placed them in public houses for convenience. Often no choice is given in the matter and neither your moral or religious objections to alcohol are taken into consideration. You will only be allowed to leave these pubs when they say so. It is likely you may then be escorted by numerous officers of the law, including dog handlers, mounted officers etc. You will then be marched prisoner of war style to the game. This has been standard policing policy on a national level for a many a long year. They now wish to push the argument that we occupy town centres.

Occupy has a totally different meaning over on this side of the pond and they are not suggesting that people will turn up wearing Johnny Whitely masks or guy fawkes masks etc.

I think it is very unlikely the WYP will back down in any meaningful way over this. Citing alcohol as part of the reason seems odd when you can buy alcohol inside the stadiums (for extortionate prices). The WYP may yet present more reasons to carry this through. We shall have to see how it goes between now and matchday.

This will have its own momentum and where it will all lead only time will tell.

 

Its just shocking that it happens there is all. It is just something that wouldnt occur here.

It is funny in a way as we here in the US are the most incarcerated nation on earth as a percentage of our population and as a total. You all are the 92nd most incarcerated nation on earth. Yet as bad as our police and laws can be we would certainly never have laws such as this nor police that acted like this. I have a hard time thinking of systematic oppression by police with dogs and mounted officers since the 1960's during our anti war and civil rights movements. Perhaps during the battle of seatle, the la riots or katrina but those are really situations where the police were taken off guard and it wasnt something they planned on doing. Even then massive lawsuits occurred, police ended up in jail and laws were changed to stop that type of thing from happening again.

I dont know perhaps it is cultural or something. Much like us having guns seems insane to you all perhaps I wont ever be able to understand how you guys are treated like that.

 

But it doesn't come out of the ****ing police budget. The football club has been charged for the policing of the game so it comes out of that. Go ahead with the legal action and show them up for what they really are. Wish I had the readies as I would do it.

 

We all know this, but to quote directly from the summary link at the beginning of this thread:
"As it stands today, nothing has changed. WYP claim they cannot afford to “facilitate” this fixture unless these restrictions are in place. It is obvious to HTSA & many supporters that the whole set-up is very political in that WYP’s view of budget restrictions is more draconian than anywhere else in the country".

This all boils down to politics!
It has nothing whatsoever to do with rampaging, drunken football hooligans.
This is all about WYP making a statement of intent to the Government, that if they continue with the current or further cutbacks to Police budgets, then this is what you can expect in response.
Football fans have always been an easy target, as any resistance to 'the system' will lead to bans, fines etc and not many fans are willing to risk that.
The only way to effectively challenge that is through the court system, by judicial review.
If every football fan in the country donated £1 to such causes, through the FSF then there would be the millions £'s required to challenge such methods and hopefully the law might change, but until we all unite and stand together we will all continue to be the losers in the long term!

UTT

 

They're hypocrites anyway. They seem to forget they charge a fortune or most games and aren't needed. They should have used the profit wisely and they'd have more than enough to cover any extra that moving the game forward two hours and twenty minutes would cost.

 

I dont agree with Nick Thompsons view that the team needs our support as things stand.

I would like Steve Bruce or the capt to come out and say if the players Can cope without any support for this game ? Ok, i know that some fans who have not missed a game for a 1000 years or more will want to keep that record going but there wont by many. Ring fencing those fans, the rest of us should boycott the game the more i think about it.

But still plenty of time for common sense to be applied.

 

True that. I would say no one I have ever met thinks we should be doing that. Only the most die hard conservatives are ok with that place (and obama apparently). People have tried to take that to court the problem being that it isnt located in the US even more so than it being non americans. Clearly we have a standard that we are fine with only applying to ourselves and could care less about that same standard being applied outside our borders. The patriot act would probably be a better comparison since that has infringed upon the rights of people within the US.

Governments do tend to overreact. Yours has over reacted when it comes to football violence and ours has over reacted when it comes to terrorism. So it is a valid point.