Finally a judge has decided to get tough with the absolute roasters of JSO and this is Peston's take:
Robert Peston @Peston Is conspiring to stop the traffic, in the cause of raising alarm about climate change, deserving of custodial sentences of five and four years - when so many crimes of violence and thefts go unprosecuted and our prisons have run out of capacity? Does anyone think these sentences do credit to our judicial system? I am bemused
Finally a judge has decided to get tough with the absolute roasters of JSO and this is Peston's take:
Robert Peston @Peston Is conspiring to stop the traffic, in the cause of raising alarm about climate change, deserving of custodial sentences of five and four years - when so many crimes of violence and thefts go unprosecuted and our prisons have run out of capacity? Does anyone think these sentences do credit to our judicial system? I am bemused
I am even more sure the judge got it right now...the man should stick to debunking "fake" photos.
The coverage of the RNC this week appears to be hiding a proper civil war among the Democrats.
It's actually quite a civil civil war.
The problem is: how do you tell a demented person that they’re demented? They won’t believe you or maybe even understand you - because they’re demented
SENIOR MEMBERS OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY CONFIRM THAT PRESSURE FROM PARTY LEADERS WILL CONVINCE BIDEN TO WITHDRAW FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE BY THE END OF THIS WEEK - AXIOS
@michaelkeohan The Home Office tell me this is not a change of Government policy.
In their latest statement
"There has been no policy change. Rescue missions, such as that occurring last night, might mean UK assets are used to disembark migrants in French ports."
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
The coverage of the RNC this week appears to be hiding a proper civil war among the Democrats.
It's actually quite a civil civil war.
The civil war in the GOP is also there, Haley Republicans clearly vehemently dislike Trump's character and Ukraine policy and are no fans of Vance either. There are also ideological differences over abortion.
The Democrats however are largely on the same page ideologically, with a few differences over Gaza. The main arguments are over whether a Biden with dementia is more electable than another Democrat in the rustbelt over Trump, which the polls are still not definitive on
California is Harris' home state and filled with elite liberals with no clue about what working class voters in the rustbelt want so yes there may be some anti Biden feeling there but that doesn't tell you much beyond that
Finally a judge has decided to get tough with the absolute roasters of JSO and this is Peston's take:
Robert Peston @Peston Is conspiring to stop the traffic, in the cause of raising alarm about climate change, deserving of custodial sentences of five and four years - when so many crimes of violence and thefts go unprosecuted and our prisons have run out of capacity? Does anyone think these sentences do credit to our judicial system? I am bemused
Thousands or tens of thousands of victims affected.
A little late but there are 4 local by-elections today. A Lib Dem defence in Argyll and Bute, 2 Lab defences in Newham, and Green defence in Oxford. Almost certainly a Lib Dem loss in A and B, and there could be changes in the others.
Interesting. I wonder if TRUSS might be an interesting outside bet for Tory leader? High profile, innovative and experienced - perhaps the solution has been hidden in plain sight, William?
Given she lost her seat by the biggest swing in a Tory seat in GE history I would suggest not, for starters no longer being an MP makes her ineligible
The coverage of the RNC this week appears to be hiding a proper civil war among the Democrats.
It's actually quite a civil civil war.
The problem is: how do you tell a demented person that they’re demented? They won’t believe you or maybe even understand you - because they’re demented
No, that's not true. Often they have very good insight into their failing short term memory.
Finally a judge has decided to get tough with the absolute roasters of JSO and this is Peston's take:
Robert Peston @Peston Is conspiring to stop the traffic, in the cause of raising alarm about climate change, deserving of custodial sentences of five and four years - when so many crimes of violence and thefts go unprosecuted and our prisons have run out of capacity? Does anyone think these sentences do credit to our judicial system? I am bemused
Thousands or tens of thousands of victims affected.
Millions of pounds of damage.
Yes it is absolutely a good use of our prisons.
Are you talking about the damage Peston has done over the years? Absolutely agree, lock him up.
Several top Democrats privately tell us the rising pressure of party congressional leaders and close friends will persuade President Biden to decide to drop out of the presidential race, as soon as this weekend.
Biden won't drop out unless for a more electable alternative, he controls almost all the delegates at the DNC convention and will only direct them to back such a candidate if he finds one with clear poll evidence for them
How do you know that?
As he has said so and almost all delegates were elected pledged to him
Reninder: Candidates for high offices in the US can make it easier for protectors in two ways. They can keep their rhetoric cool, and they can campaign at easily protected events.
The Loser has chosen to do neither.
This is one of my thoughts.
That rally was absolutely bloody ridiculous. It was basically little more than a couple of stands, set at very open angles, in a field, with a whole overlooking, and in use, industrial estate. More the sort of place you'd judge the local (Craggy Island) sheep contest than hold a presidential rally. Absolute bloody mare for the security team.
At least decent stadia and venues are enclosed. Think of Labour's campaign - MKDons, stadia, forum areas within buildings. More than once they occupied the roof spaces themselves. I can't recall a UK rally ever with this kind of feel - Major's soap box maybe?
The coverage of the RNC this week appears to be hiding a proper civil war among the Democrats.
It's actually quite a civil civil war.
The problem is: how do you tell a demented person that they’re demented? They won’t believe you or maybe even understand you - because they’re demented
No, that's not true. Often they have very good insight into their failing short term memory.
Sometimes they do and sometimes they don’t. As I know from close relatives officially diagnosed with dementia
Several top Democrats privately tell us the rising pressure of party congressional leaders and close friends will persuade President Biden to decide to drop out of the presidential race, as soon as this weekend.
Biden won't drop out unless for a more electable alternative, he controls almost all the delegates at the DNC convention and will only direct them to back such a candidate if he finds one with clear poll evidence for them
How do you know that?
As he has said so and almost all delegates were elected pledged to him
I think he could drop out if and when he realises how many of his former supporters no longer do so.
Finally a judge has decided to get tough with the absolute roasters of JSO and this is Peston's take:
Robert Peston @Peston Is conspiring to stop the traffic, in the cause of raising alarm about climate change, deserving of custodial sentences of five and four years - when so many crimes of violence and thefts go unprosecuted and our prisons have run out of capacity? Does anyone think these sentences do credit to our judicial system? I am bemused
Thousands or tens of thousands of victims affected.
Millions of pounds of damage.
Yes it is absolutely a good use of our prisons.
Are you talking about the damage Peston has done over the years? Absolutely agree, lock him up.
Was about we lock up Pesto and ban the climate changers from using anything involving internal combustion for life?
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
Finally a judge has decided to get tough with the absolute roasters of JSO and this is Peston's take:
Robert Peston @Peston Is conspiring to stop the traffic, in the cause of raising alarm about climate change, deserving of custodial sentences of five and four years - when so many crimes of violence and thefts go unprosecuted and our prisons have run out of capacity? Does anyone think these sentences do credit to our judicial system? I am bemused
Then don't waste police time with these silly stunts. Stand for election and try and get public consent for your agenda ( but of course you won't!)
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
They weren't charged under the Terrorism Act. They were charged under the 'Conspiracy to Cause a Public Nuisance' Act. The maximum possible sentence for that is 10 years so they got significantly below the maximum possible allowed.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
I wonder which violent offenders the government will let free to make space for this lot?
What an absurd sentence. Give them 24 months community service filing potholes on the M25 instead.
A life ban from driving would be more appropriate.
Honestly it's so OTT I can see some of my crazier friends blocking a road in solidarity. What are they going to do - jail thousands of climate activists and free all the murderers and rapists?
The government is debating whether people who do £200 of damage should be in jail and you think its OTT that those who do millions of pounds of damage are jailed?
The coverage of the RNC this week appears to be hiding a proper civil war among the Democrats.
It's actually quite a civil civil war.
The civil war in the GOP is also there, Haley Republicans clearly vehemently dislike Trump's character and Ukraine policy and are no fans of Vance either. There are also ideological differences over abortion.
The Democrats however are largely on the same page ideologically, with a few differences over Gaza. The main arguments are over whether a Biden with dementia is more electable than another Democrat in the rustbelt over Trump, which the polls are still not definitive on
Winning the Presidential election will be very tough so it’s about damage limitation . Biden could not only hand the House and the Senate to the GOP but countless state legislatures and governorships .
Kamala Harris is now 7/2 to win the Presidency & 8/11 fav to win the Democratic nomination.
Donald Trump is also now out to 4/9 (from 1/3). Quite obvious at this point that betting markets believe Harris has a better chance of beating Trump than Biden.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
If the organisers proposed a new route for the London Marathon that involved closing the M25, I doubt the authorities would be receptive.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
Or to jail reckless drivers that swerve across 4 lanes of traffic from the fast lane to the slip road at 90mph resulting in RTCs and traffic jams.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
I wonder which violent offenders the government will let free to make space for this lot?
What an absurd sentence. Give them 24 months community service filing potholes on the M25 instead.
If I’d had to sit in court and listen to their dreary, long, speeches I’d have probably done the same. Jail is deserved. Sentence May be a little long but they will be out in half the time.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
If the Highways Authority agreed to a planned closure for their event - yes.
You are aware that the Marathon doesn't work as a bunch of people rocking up and start running down the road?
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
If the Highways Authority agreed to a planned closure for their event - yes.
You are aware that the Marathon doesn't work as a bunch of people rocking up and start running down the road?
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
No. The Marathon isn't just advertised in advance, its legal, and arranged in the past with the Police etc making arrangements as well as everyone else.
JSO has no authority to do any of that. If they break the law they're criminals and should be treated like any other criminal.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
If the Highways Authority agreed to a planned closure for their event - yes.
You are aware that the Marathon doesn't work as a bunch of people rocking up and start running down the road?
So government approved protest is fine?
You can (and do) get road closures for approved protests, yes. That's every bit as legal as the Marathon.
Anyway. I've always felt that a Labour government was at more risk from the left in the short term. They've made very few noises on climate change and other environmental issues, and relatively cheap crowd pleasers like the two-child limit have been ignored. Gaza is a red herring imo - much bigger issues to come.
This is an example where it could get very messy. Jailing peaceful protestors (I know, I know) while releasing domestic abusers... eeeek.
Finally a judge has decided to get tough with the absolute roasters of JSO and this is Peston's take:
Robert Peston @Peston Is conspiring to stop the traffic, in the cause of raising alarm about climate change, deserving of custodial sentences of five and four years - when so many crimes of violence and thefts go unprosecuted and our prisons have run out of capacity? Does anyone think these sentences do credit to our judicial system? I am bemused
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
If the Highways Authority agreed to a planned closure for their event - yes.
You are aware that the Marathon doesn't work as a bunch of people rocking up and start running down the road?
So government approved protest is fine?
That's not the issue. Some people seem to believe that the "right to protest" is actually the "right to do whatever we want as a protest, and bugger the effect on other people".
One of the things about living in a society is that you are constrained in your actions by the effects of your actions on others.
Which is why, say, getting out of your car and punching a protestor is illegal.
The recent slight lengthening in Trump's odds coincides with Biden's odds lengthening sharply. This indicates that it's driven by the belief that there's increased chance that the Democrats will nominate a more viable candidate (probably because of Biden's comments that he would consider withdrawing if he had a health issue).
I doubt that there's been any "slow realisation" that the assassination attempt won't help Trump at all. It clearly has helped him so far, and it will make it harder to land the "threat to democracy" attack for the rest of the campaign (even though that's obviously what he is).
That single sentence sums up almost everything that is wrong with our primitive penal system, and why we have such vastly overflowing prisons which are schools for crime, unlike any of our neighbours, or peer countries, in Western Europe. The model is the crime factory of the U.S.penal system, mixed with Neo-Victorian populism.
It's all simply medieval, there, but I have the feeling that Starmer and Timpson may finally be the people brave enough to deal with this continuous Victorian disaster.
Mrs J is of the (semi-joking) belief that JSO are actually a group created and paid for by Big Oil - as they do the reputation of the environmental causes they pretend to like so much harm.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
If the Highways Authority agreed to a planned closure for their event - yes.
You are aware that the Marathon doesn't work as a bunch of people rocking up and start running down the road?
So government approved protest is fine?
That's not the issue. Some people seem to believe that the "right to protest" is actually the "right to do whatever we want as a protest, and bugger the effect on other people".
One of the things about living in a society is that you are constrained in your actions by the effects of your actions on others.
Which is why, say, getting out of your car and punching a protestor is illegal.
It's a balance, surely. Your standard march through Westminster is going to cause serious issues for government, St Thomas' Hospital and so on. The Tractor protests have held up traffic, made people miss appointments and so on.
In Scotland we have another group dressed in orange that like to close down streets...
Washington Post reporting Obama has said Biden should stand aside. Other reports say Biden may announce he is doing so at the weekend.
Strangely enough it might be the assassination attempt on Trump that has been the final straw that means Biden has to go.
Biden and Trump are roughly the same age, and Trump is madder than Biden, but as despicable as he is the imagery of him with blood on his face fist raised contrasted with doddery, frail Biden . . . its not a good look for Biden.
George Osborne mentioned this a couple of weeks ago. He suggested James Cleverly might be interim leader, which of course would rule him out of the main gig. Jeremy Hunt was mentioned yesterday. We can dismiss fantasies about Cameron or Hague or anyone else from outside the Commons because the LotO's main duty in October will be responding to the budget, which of course means an actual MP.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
If the Highways Authority agreed to a planned closure for their event - yes.
You are aware that the Marathon doesn't work as a bunch of people rocking up and start running down the road?
So government approved protest is fine?
That's not the issue. Some people seem to believe that the "right to protest" is actually the "right to do whatever we want as a protest, and bugger the effect on other people".
One of the things about living in a society is that you are constrained in your actions by the effects of your actions on others.
Which is why, say, getting out of your car and punching a protestor is illegal.
It's a balance, surely. Your standard march through Westminster is going to cause serious issues for government, St Thomas' Hospital and so on. The Tractor protests have held up traffic, made people miss appointments and so on.
In Scotland we have another group dressed in orange that like to close down streets...
Again if a protest stays within the law, then it is not illegal, pretty much by definition.
Cyclists hold up traffic, by virtue of being so bloody slow and needing extra space to be overtaken, but they're not illegal either.
Blocking the road is different to being legally below the speed limit.
AFAIK the orange walks are legally arranged. If JSO want to do that, they're allowed to too, but need to stay within the confines of the law.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
If the Highways Authority agreed to a planned closure for their event - yes.
You are aware that the Marathon doesn't work as a bunch of people rocking up and start running down the road?
So government approved protest is fine?
That's not the issue. Some people seem to believe that the "right to protest" is actually the "right to do whatever we want as a protest, and bugger the effect on other people".
One of the things about living in a society is that you are constrained in your actions by the effects of your actions on others.
Which is why, say, getting out of your car and punching a protestor is illegal.
It's a balance, surely. Your standard march through Westminster is going to cause serious issues for government, St Thomas' Hospital and so on. The Tractor protests have held up traffic, made people miss appointments and so on.
In Scotland we have another group dressed in orange that like to close down streets...
The standard marches are carefully organised together with the police and the traffic people.
EDIT: wearing an orange sash counts as Hi Viz. Which is the Sacred Regalia of the Process State. They are actually marching in honour of 10,000 page regulations.
Washington Post reporting Obama has said Biden should stand aside. Other reports say Biden may announce he is doing so at the weekend.
Strangely enough it might be the assassination attempt on Trump that has been the final straw that means Biden has to go.
Biden and Trump are roughly the same age, and Trump is madder than Biden, but as despicable as he is the imagery of him with blood on his face fist raised contrasted with doddery, frail Biden . . . its not a good look for Biden.
Totally agree.
The current US media narrative is all about what a second Trump presidency will bring not whether he will win the election. That is now a given. The only way to change the narrative is to change the facts on the ground - and that means a new Democratic candidate. I also think that the triumphalism at the GOP Convention, the cultism and the unequivocal embrace of MAGA will worry a lot of Independents, women especially. There are things to exploit for a Trump opponent who is not Biden.
If the purpose of a system is what it does, then the purpose of the Conservative Party is to endlessly choose a new leader. Cameron begat May begat Boris begat Truss begat Sunak begat X. I'm not a fan of the Labour Government but by all the angels in Heaven the Conservative Party deserved its defeat. It really needs to pull its finger out and stop this endless picking at its scabs.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
No. The Marathon isn't just advertised in advance, its legal, and arranged in the past with the Police etc making arrangements as well as everyone else.
JSO has no authority to do any of that. If they break the law they're criminals and should be treated like any other criminal.
Yes but any other criminal does not get five years for non-violent and almost victimless crimes. Ordinary people will see these sentences and wonder why police did nothing when their car was stolen, or their phone; why shop-lifting has been decriminalised. Other protestors will see these sentences and, yes, some will be deterred and others will attack paintings and statues instead.
IF J.D. Vance, who once said that Donald Trump was "America's Hitler", is now America's Rudolph Hess, then seems that DJT has traded one Rudy for another; first Giuliani and now Vance.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
No. The Marathon isn't just advertised in advance, its legal, and arranged in the past with the Police etc making arrangements as well as everyone else.
JSO has no authority to do any of that. If they break the law they're criminals and should be treated like any other criminal.
Yes but any other criminal does not get five years for non-violent and almost victimless crimes. Ordinary people will see these sentences and wonder why police did nothing when their car was stolen, or their phone; why shop-lifting has been decriminalised. Other protestors will see these sentences and, yes, some will be deterred and others will attack paintings and statues instead.
Tens of thousands of victims.
Millions of pounds of damage.
People's lives put at risk.
People blocked from medical appointments.
Under what definition is this "non-violent and almost victimless"?
These people have caused more damage than most criminals will in a lifetime.
Kamala Harris is now 7/2 to win the Presidency & 8/11 fav to win the Democratic nomination.
Donald Trump is also now out to 4/9 (from 1/3). Quite obvious at this point that betting markets believe Harris has a better chance of beating Trump than Biden.
Yes I believe betting markets also had Hillary Clinton favoured over Trump in 2016 too
And she did in the popular vote.
So what? The popular vote is utterly irrelevant. It is only the Electoral College that matters and Hillary lost that in 2016 while Biden won it in 2020
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
If the Highways Authority agreed to a planned closure for their event - yes.
You are aware that the Marathon doesn't work as a bunch of people rocking up and start running down the road?
So government approved protest is fine?
That's not the issue. Some people seem to believe that the "right to protest" is actually the "right to do whatever we want as a protest, and bugger the effect on other people".
One of the things about living in a society is that you are constrained in your actions by the effects of your actions on others.
Which is why, say, getting out of your car and punching a protestor is illegal.
It's a balance, surely. Your standard march through Westminster is going to cause serious issues for government, St Thomas' Hospital and so on. The Tractor protests have held up traffic, made people miss appointments and so on.
In Scotland we have another group dressed in orange that like to close down streets...
The standard marches are carefully organised together with the police and the traffic people.
EDIT: wearing an orange sash counts as Hi Viz. Which is the Sacred Regalia of the Process State. They are actually marching in honour of 10,000 page regulations.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
If the Highways Authority agreed to a planned closure for their event - yes.
You are aware that the Marathon doesn't work as a bunch of people rocking up and start running down the road?
So government approved protest is fine?
That's not the issue. Some people seem to believe that the "right to protest" is actually the "right to do whatever we want as a protest, and bugger the effect on other people".
.
Yeah, as long as it is ‘peaceful’ or ‘non violent’ some people think protesters should be able to do what they want and damn the consequences.
These protesters found out the hard way they can’t.
There's no reason Rishi can't stay as leader until December (as Micheal Howard did after losing the 2005 election) unless he is planning to depart for a new life if California after all?
If so, he should leave now so Penny can be parachuted into his seat!
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
If the Highways Authority agreed to a planned closure for their event - yes.
You are aware that the Marathon doesn't work as a bunch of people rocking up and start running down the road?
So government approved protest is fine?
That's not the issue. Some people seem to believe that the "right to protest" is actually the "right to do whatever we want as a protest, and bugger the effect on other people".
One of the things about living in a society is that you are constrained in your actions by the effects of your actions on others.
Which is why, say, getting out of your car and punching a protestor is illegal.
It's a balance, surely. Your standard march through Westminster is going to cause serious issues for government, St Thomas' Hospital and so on. The Tractor protests have held up traffic, made people miss appointments and so on.
In Scotland we have another group dressed in orange that like to close down streets...
The standard marches are carefully organised together with the police and the traffic people.
EDIT: wearing an orange sash counts as Hi Viz. Which is the Sacred Regalia of the Process State. They are actually marching in honour of 10,000 page regulations.
TIL
Makes perfect sense - think of all the safety hazards of having Roman Catholics about...
I mean, have you ever seen a study of the impact on equality of having an RC church at the end of your road? Yes, that's right - operating without dozens of reports being provided.
Washington Post reporting Obama has said Biden should stand aside. Other reports say Biden may announce he is doing so at the weekend.
Strangely enough it might be the assassination attempt on Trump that has been the final straw that means Biden has to go.
Biden and Trump are roughly the same age, and Trump is madder than Biden, but as despicable as he is the imagery of him with blood on his face fist raised contrasted with doddery, frail Biden . . . its not a good look for Biden.
Totally agree.
The current US media narrative is all about what a second Trump presidency will bring not whether he will win the election. That is now a given. The only way to change the narrative is to change the facts on the ground - and that means a new Democratic candidate. I also think that the triumphalism at the GOP Convention, the cultism and the unequivocal embrace of MAGA will worry a lot of Independents, women especially. There are things to exploit for a Trump opponent who is not Biden.
If the Democrats replace Biden with Harris that is it, Trump will win comfortably and the GOP will win Congress too. There might be a case to replace Biden with a rust belt governor like Shapiro but Harris would be political suicide.
She is an elitist coastal liberal who combines the ideology of Dukakis and Kerry with the common touch of Hillary Clinton and entitlement of Al Gore. She encapsulates all the losers who were Democratic presidential candidates in the last few decades in one
Punters need to be careful with different markets in these circumstances. If there is a long gap between Rishi going and a permanent replacement being chosen, with an interim leader serving for weeks or even months, then what precisely will each market be settled on? Has your bookmaker even given the matter any thought?
Washington Post reporting Obama has said Biden should stand aside. Other reports say Biden may announce he is doing so at the weekend.
Strangely enough it might be the assassination attempt on Trump that has been the final straw that means Biden has to go.
Biden and Trump are roughly the same age, and Trump is madder than Biden, but as despicable as he is the imagery of him with blood on his face fist raised contrasted with doddery, frail Biden . . . its not a good look for Biden.
Totally agree.
The current US media narrative is all about what a second Trump presidency will bring not whether he will win the election. That is now a given. The only way to change the narrative is to change the facts on the ground - and that means a new Democratic candidate. I also think that the triumphalism at the GOP Convention, the cultism and the unequivocal embrace of MAGA will worry a lot of Independents, women especially. There are things to exploit for a Trump opponent who is not Biden.
If the Democrats replace Biden with Harris that is it, Trump will win comfortably and the GOP will win Congress too. There might be a case to replace Biden with a rust belt governor like Shapiro but Harris would be political suicide.
She is an elitist coastal liberal who combines the ideology of Dukakis and Kerry with the common touch of Hillary Clinton. She encapsulates all the losers who were Democratic presidential candidates in the last few decades in one
Harris has a much better chance of beating Trump than Biden.
Washington Post reporting Obama has said Biden should stand aside. Other reports say Biden may announce he is doing so at the weekend.
Strangely enough it might be the assassination attempt on Trump that has been the final straw that means Biden has to go.
Biden and Trump are roughly the same age, and Trump is madder than Biden, but as despicable as he is the imagery of him with blood on his face fist raised contrasted with doddery, frail Biden . . . its not a good look for Biden.
Totally agree.
The current US media narrative is all about what a second Trump presidency will bring not whether he will win the election. That is now a given. The only way to change the narrative is to change the facts on the ground - and that means a new Democratic candidate. I also think that the triumphalism at the GOP Convention, the cultism and the unequivocal embrace of MAGA will worry a lot of Independents, women especially. There are things to exploit for a Trump opponent who is not Biden.
If the Democrats replace Biden with Harris that is it, Trump will win comfortably and the GOP will win Congress too. There might be a case to replace Biden with a rust belt governor like Shapiro but Harris would be political suicide.
She is an elitist coastal liberal who combines the ideology of Dukakis and Kerry with the common touch of Hillary Clinton and entitlement of Al Gore. She encapsulates all the losers who were Democratic presidential candidates in the last few decades in one
Even if that's true, replacing Biden with anyone else than Harris will surely infuriate the identity-obsessed Democrat base. Unless they have another black woman handy?
Washington Post reporting Obama has said Biden should stand aside. Other reports say Biden may announce he is doing so at the weekend.
Strangely enough it might be the assassination attempt on Trump that has been the final straw that means Biden has to go.
Biden and Trump are roughly the same age, and Trump is madder than Biden, but as despicable as he is the imagery of him with blood on his face fist raised contrasted with doddery, frail Biden . . . its not a good look for Biden.
Totally agree.
The current US media narrative is all about what a second Trump presidency will bring not whether he will win the election. That is now a given. The only way to change the narrative is to change the facts on the ground - and that means a new Democratic candidate. I also think that the triumphalism at the GOP Convention, the cultism and the unequivocal embrace of MAGA will worry a lot of Independents, women especially. There are things to exploit for a Trump opponent who is not Biden.
If the Democrats replace Biden with Harris that is it, Trump will win comfortably and the GOP will win Congress too. There might be a case to replace Biden with a rust belt governor like Shapiro but Harris would be political suicide.
She is an elitist coastal liberal who combines the ideology of Dukakis and Kerry with the common touch of Hillary Clinton and entitlement of Al Gore. She encapsulates all the losers who were Democratic presidential candidates in the last few decades in one
Yes, *but* she's a "clean skin" and she can bring African-Americans with her. Plus she'll pick up the Biden guilt-vote, as some people will feel guilty about being nasty to that nice old man with the big plane.
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms. .
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
The sentences are thought to be the longest sentences even given in the UK for non-violent protest, beating those given to Just Stop Oil protesters Morgan Trowland (three years) and Marcus Decker (two years and seven months) for scaling the Dartford Crossing.
Wow, that is surprisingly long. Deserved but surprising.
I am absolutely opposed to them but my first feeling is it is too long.
I think this is taking into past convictions/suspended sentences these eco terrorists have had in the past.
Where was the violence or threat of violence? Without that, they were just protestors.
They’ve ruined sporting events and the wedding of somebody I like, that’s the implicit threat of violence.
Terrorism Act 2000
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
Not the Act they were prosecuted under is it? So these provisions aren't relevant are they?
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
You could use that logic to ban all peaceful protest. And the London Marathon.
No you can't.
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
So if JSO advertised a motorway closure in advance that would be fine?
If the Highways Authority agreed to a planned closure for their event - yes.
You are aware that the Marathon doesn't work as a bunch of people rocking up and start running down the road?
So government approved protest is fine?
That's not the issue. Some people seem to believe that the "right to protest" is actually the "right to do whatever we want as a protest, and bugger the effect on other people".
One of the things about living in a society is that you are constrained in your actions by the effects of your actions on others.
Which is why, say, getting out of your car and punching a protestor is illegal.
It's a balance, surely. Your standard march through Westminster is going to cause serious issues for government, St Thomas' Hospital and so on. The Tractor protests have held up traffic, made people miss appointments and so on.
In Scotland we have another group dressed in orange that like to close down streets...
The standard marches are carefully organised together with the police and the traffic people.
EDIT: wearing an orange sash counts as Hi Viz. Which is the Sacred Regalia of the Process State. They are actually marching in honour of 10,000 page regulations.
TIL
Makes perfect sense - think of all the safety hazards of having Roman Catholics about...
I mean, have you ever seen a study of the impact on equality of having an RC church at the end of your road? Yes, that's right - operating without dozens of reports being provided.
I'm going to have to get my Scottish denomination flow chart out again.
Comments
Robert Peston
@Peston
Is conspiring to stop the traffic, in the cause of raising alarm about climate change, deserving of custodial sentences of five and four years - when so many crimes of violence and thefts go unprosecuted and our prisons have run out of capacity? Does anyone think these sentences do credit to our judicial system? I am bemused
The Home Office tell me this is not a change of Government policy.
In their latest statement
"There has been no policy change. Rescue missions, such as that occurring last night, might mean UK assets are used to disembark migrants in French ports."
(1)In this Act “terrorism” means the use or threat of action where—
(a)the action falls within subsection (2),
(b)the use or threat is designed to influence the government [F1or an international governmental organisation] or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and
(c)the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious [F2, racial] or ideological cause.
(2)Action falls within this subsection if it—
(a)involves serious violence against a person,
(b)involves serious damage to property,
(c)endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action,
(d)creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or
(e)is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
(d) hardly qualifies and none of the rest apply.
The Democrats however are largely on the same page ideologically, with a few differences over Gaza. The main arguments are over whether a Biden with dementia is more electable than another Democrat in the rustbelt over Trump, which the polls are still not definitive on
No decision was reached...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/18/sunshine-uk-worst-summer-jet-stream
Millions of pounds of damage.
Yes it is absolutely a good use of our prisons.
They can't even run their own leadership election never mind a whole country.
That rally was absolutely bloody ridiculous. It was basically little more than a couple of stands, set at very open angles, in a field, with a whole overlooking, and in use, industrial estate. More the sort of place you'd judge the local (Craggy Island) sheep contest than hold a presidential rally. Absolute bloody mare for the security team.
At least decent stadia and venues are enclosed. Think of Labour's campaign -
MKDons, stadia, forum areas within buildings. More than once they occupied the roof spaces themselves. I can't recall a UK rally ever with this kind of feel - Major's soap box maybe?
And Biden looks like the kind that’s in denial
But (b), (c) and (d) all apply. They caused millions of pounds of damage to the economy (b). They blocked the path of ambulances and stopped people making trips to doctors appointments, hospital etc (c). Plus of course (d) absolutely applies which is why the Police had to act in the first place as you know.
That would be a disaster for the Dems .
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-68655661
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.178163685
Peaceful protest that is legal and not causing harm to others isn't banned.
When protests turn criminal then you can face going to jail for that. And there's an honourable tradition of people deliberately breaking laws and facing the consequences for doing so to raise more publicity for their cause.
The idea that any law can be broken so long as its for a protest has never been right.
As for the Marathon, that's organised well in advance and as a result people can make arrangements. That's not comparable at all.
You are aware that the Marathon doesn't work as a bunch of people rocking up and start running down the road?
JSO has no authority to do any of that. If they break the law they're criminals and should be treated like any other criminal.
@benrileysmith
EXC: A plan to replace Rishi Sunak with an interim Tory leader is increasingly being discussed at senior party levels
If party goes long and decides to pick a permanent leader after Tory conference (so Oct/Nov/Dec) then Sunak could go within weeks. Story:
https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1813972566849290252
That's not what JSO did.
This is an example where it could get very messy. Jailing peaceful protestors (I know, I know) while releasing domestic abusers... eeeek.
Could be Yousaf Mk 2.
One of the things about living in a society is that you are constrained in your actions by the effects of your actions on others.
Which is why, say, getting out of your car and punching a protestor is illegal.
I doubt that there's been any "slow realisation" that the assassination attempt won't help Trump at all. It clearly has helped him so far, and it will make it harder to land the "threat to democracy" attack for the rest of the campaign (even though that's obviously what he is).
It's all simply medieval, there, but I have the feeling that Starmer and Timpson may finally be the people brave enough to deal with this continuous Victorian disaster.
Mrs J is of the (semi-joking) belief that JSO are actually a group created and paid for by Big Oil - as they do the reputation of the environmental causes they pretend to like so much harm.
In Scotland we have another group dressed in orange that like to close down streets...
Biden and Trump are roughly the same age, and Trump is madder than Biden, but as despicable as he is the imagery of him with blood on his face fist raised contrasted with doddery, frail Biden . . . its not a good look for Biden.
I have £3 on that at about 35s.
Cyclists hold up traffic, by virtue of being so bloody slow and needing extra space to be overtaken, but they're not illegal either.
Blocking the road is different to being legally below the speed limit.
AFAIK the orange walks are legally arranged. If JSO want to do that, they're allowed to too, but need to stay within the confines of the law.
EDIT: wearing an orange sash counts as Hi Viz. Which is the Sacred Regalia of the Process State. They are actually marching in honour of 10,000 page regulations.
He defeated (1888) AND lost to (1892) the last Democratic POTUS with facial hair (a mustache) = Grover Cleveland.
The current US media narrative is all about what a second Trump presidency will bring not whether he will win the election. That is now a given. The only way to change the narrative is to change the facts on the ground - and that means a new Democratic candidate. I also think that the triumphalism at the GOP Convention, the cultism and the unequivocal embrace of MAGA will worry a lot of Independents, women especially. There are things to exploit for a Trump opponent who is not Biden.
https://tickets.trentbridge.co.uk/selection/event/date?productId=10228575213523
Millions of pounds of damage.
People's lives put at risk.
People blocked from medical appointments.
Under what definition is this "non-violent and almost victimless"?
These people have caused more damage than most criminals will in a lifetime.
These protesters found out the hard way they can’t.
https://x.com/SpaceOffshore/status/1813945279957365053
Bob has left the harbour.
If so, he should leave now so Penny can be parachuted into his seat!
Many Dems have enormous respect and love for Biden given his long service and of course defeating Trump in 2020.
But he must surely understand his legacy will be trashed if he refuses to stand down .
Trump 1.55
Harris 5
Biden 18.5
M Obama 36
Newsom 48
Whitmer 55
Kennedy 100
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.176878927
I mean, have you ever seen a study of the impact on equality of having an RC church at the end of your road? Yes, that's right - operating without dozens of reports being provided.
She is an elitist coastal liberal who combines the ideology of Dukakis and Kerry with the common touch of Hillary Clinton and entitlement of Al Gore. She encapsulates all the losers who were Democratic presidential candidates in the last few decades in one
Harris, reset, game on.
400-450 looking like the score now, rather than the 600 or 700 we were thinking after the first hour this morning.