| Met Police actions ruled unlawful 14:58 - Mar 11 with 912 views | bluelagos |
Relates to their refusal to facilitate the vigil for Sarah Everard last year, a decision widely criticised at the time and now ruled to be unlawful.
|  |
| |  |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 15:00 - Mar 11 with 899 views | Swansea_Blue |
Good. That was a disgusting effort by the (increasingly evident) unfit for purpose Met. |  |
| |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 00:48 - Mar 12 with 777 views | ClareBlue |
The problem is that the legal basis is very questionable and, if correct, makes every action taken against people breaking restrictions on assembling and traveling illegal.
This looks to me an emotive judgement based on a public feeling.
Take out why the assembly was taking place, what you have is the judges saying your right to assemble under the Conventions of Human Rights supersedes the emergency statutory provisions put in place to prevent you assembling.
I think there is good argument to say this should be the case - Govs should not have power to stop you visiting your dying child under any circumstances, for example. But it can not apply to just one event because of public feeling about that event. And if it applies right across Europe - all those lockdowns are now looking to have been enforced illegally.
more interested if higher Courts than the High Court agree with this - my prediction is not [Post edited 12 Mar 2022 0:50]
|  | | |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 09:24 - Mar 12 with 688 views | Crawfordsboot |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 00:48 - Mar 12 by ClareBlue |
The problem is that the legal basis is very questionable and, if correct, makes every action taken against people breaking restrictions on assembling and traveling illegal.
This looks to me an emotive judgement based on a public feeling.
Take out why the assembly was taking place, what you have is the judges saying your right to assemble under the Conventions of Human Rights supersedes the emergency statutory provisions put in place to prevent you assembling.
I think there is good argument to say this should be the case - Govs should not have power to stop you visiting your dying child under any circumstances, for example. But it can not apply to just one event because of public feeling about that event. And if it applies right across Europe - all those lockdowns are now looking to have been enforced illegally.
more interested if higher Courts than the High Court agree with this - my prediction is not [Post edited 12 Mar 2022 0:50]
|
Interesting observations.
I think the police were placed in an impossible situation by a Government that issued badly thought through legislation and made loud public pronouncements putting pressure on the police. It all ended badly. |  | | |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 12:40 - Mar 12 with 614 views | Radlett_blue |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 09:24 - Mar 12 by Crawfordsboot |
Interesting observations.
I think the police were placed in an impossible situation by a Government that issued badly thought through legislation and made loud public pronouncements putting pressure on the police. It all ended badly. |
Indeed, plenty of sticks with which to beat the Met, but this is not one of them. |  |
| |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 13:20 - Mar 12 with 595 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 12:40 - Mar 12 by Radlett_blue |
Indeed, plenty of sticks with which to beat the Met, but this is not one of them. |
Including the reason for the assembly in the first place, which is quite the paradox.
Given the overarching reason for the assembly, the Met made a huge mistake to police it in such a heavy handed manner, when, given the circumstances some empathy wouldn't have gone amiss. [Post edited 12 Mar 2022 13:30]
|  |
| |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 13:36 - Mar 12 with 568 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
Of course, the law against the right to protest is now changing to be more draconian and with longer sentences than that in Russia. Let that sink in too. |  |
| |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 15:48 - Mar 12 with 517 views | istanblue |
ACAB |  | | |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 17:50 - Mar 12 with 447 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 00:48 - Mar 12 by ClareBlue |
The problem is that the legal basis is very questionable and, if correct, makes every action taken against people breaking restrictions on assembling and traveling illegal.
This looks to me an emotive judgement based on a public feeling.
Take out why the assembly was taking place, what you have is the judges saying your right to assemble under the Conventions of Human Rights supersedes the emergency statutory provisions put in place to prevent you assembling.
I think there is good argument to say this should be the case - Govs should not have power to stop you visiting your dying child under any circumstances, for example. But it can not apply to just one event because of public feeling about that event. And if it applies right across Europe - all those lockdowns are now looking to have been enforced illegally.
more interested if higher Courts than the High Court agree with this - my prediction is not [Post edited 12 Mar 2022 0:50]
|
No. You have missed the point of the ruling. The Met Police breached the rights of the organisers to protest when they failed to engage meaningfully with them in advance to agree sensible precautions and mitigations.
Arrogance from the Met at a time when they should have backed the fck off and bent over backwards to find a sensible solution.
What followed was a non-organised "spontaneous" demonstration, which was bound to breach Covid regulations. But that was a situation of the Met's making. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 17:59 - Mar 12 with 430 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| Met Police actions ruled unlawful on 09:24 - Mar 12 by Crawfordsboot |
Interesting observations.
I think the police were placed in an impossible situation by a Government that issued badly thought through legislation and made loud public pronouncements putting pressure on the police. It all ended badly. |
This judgement wasn't about the demo that happened, and how the Police responded to it, but about one that was planned and permission applied for, but the Met refused to engage with the organisers, AND SO IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
It was those four organisers who brought this case (and won) having been denied, by the failure of the Met to discuss and agree mitigations, the opportunity to peacefully, and safely in a Covid context, protest the death of a young woman who was abducted by a serving Police officer, subject to enhanced clearance and psychological testing because he used firearms, who still had a warrant card to abuse in "arresting" Sarah Everard because the Met covered up the fact that he had committed sexual offences in the weeks before his attack.
Details really matter. So I have provided as many as possible to illuminate your "Poor Met, they're damned if they do, damned if they don't" narrative.
They're damned if they employ sexual predators, and cover things up when that becomes apparent. If that hadn't happened then Sarah Everard would probably still be alive. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
