# Man jailed for four years for setting up Facebook riot page



## Fedayn (Aug 16, 2011)

http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/9198608.UPDATED__Facebook_riot_man_jailed_for_four_years/


----------



## shaman75 (Aug 16, 2011)

Whereas this woman who was caught speeding numerous times, admitted causing death by dangerous driving and was given a 6 month suspended sentence...

http://www.sheffieldtelegraph.co.uk/news/local/death_crash_driver_is_spared_jail_1_3622778


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 16, 2011)

Fedayn said:


> http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/9198608.UPDATED__Facebook_riot_man_jailed_for_four_years/



One too fuckin' far that.


----------



## Maggot (Aug 16, 2011)

Does anyone know what he actually posted?


----------



## OneStrike (Aug 16, 2011)

I'd like to know but can't seem to find out. Unbelievable sentances regardless though.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 16, 2011)

four years is beyond a magistrates sentence- how the hell did he manage to land that stretch


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 16, 2011)

Maggot said:


> Does anyone know what he actually posted?



Not even Cheshire plod are saying in their press release -

http://www.cheshire.police.uk/news--appeals/latest-news/2011/08/two-jailed-inciting-disorder.aspx


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 16, 2011)

Maggot said:


> Does anyone know what he actually posted?


Yeah, like I'd post it here and get four years for my pains!


----------



## weepiper (Aug 16, 2011)

what the hell did he say??


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 16, 2011)

> Two men have been jailed for four years for using Facebook to incite disorder.
> 
> Jordan Blackshaw, 20, from Marston near Northwich, and Perry Sutcliffe-Keenan, 22, from Warrington, appeared at Chester crown court on Tuesday. They were arrested last week following incidents of violent disorder in London and other cities across the UK.
> 
> Neither of their Facebook posts resulted in a riot-related event.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/16/uk-riots-four-years-disorder-facebook


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 16, 2011)

The backlash is in danger of digging it's own grave.


----------



## DarthSydodyas (Aug 16, 2011)

weepiper said:


> what the hell did he say??


 at the very least he created a page and setup times and dates for people to meet up for a "riot".

 @ speeding woman sentence, tho


----------



## maldwyn (Aug 16, 2011)

Judiciary cow towing to politicians rabid over reaction, who'd of thought it.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 16, 2011)

Cameron STFU (please send this viral)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v​=7iWKulQzeYw​


----------



## teqniq (Aug 16, 2011)

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of this, the authorities are sending a very clear message. Do nothing to challenge said authority or expect the iron fist. Now about those M.P's expenses and and those dodgy coppers and journos etc etc....


----------



## southside (Aug 16, 2011)

The one with the huge nose wont last long inside, it is a dead cert it will get picked on.


----------



## treelover (Aug 16, 2011)

'Cameron STFU (please send this viral)'

Its on RT, I won't take any lessons from the Russians though, their prisons are horrendous...


----------



## southside (Aug 16, 2011)

teqniq said:


> Regardless of the rights or wrongs of this, the authorities are sending a very clear message. Do nothing to challenge said authority or expect the iron fist. Now about those M.P's expenses and and those dodgy coppers and journos etc etc....



Are you for real, say that to people who have been terrorised you stupid cunt.  This is not challenging authority, it's fucking urban terrorism.


----------



## treelover (Aug 16, 2011)

I wonder what would happen to someone who organised a Reclaim The Streets in this atmosphere..


----------



## mrsfran (Aug 16, 2011)

maldwyn said:


> Judiciary cow towing to politicians rabid over reaction, who'd of thought it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

southside said:


> Are you for real, say that to people who have been terrorised you stupid cunt. This is not challenging authority, it's fucking urban terrorism.


no it isn't.


----------



## peterkro (Aug 16, 2011)

treelover said:


> 'Cameron STFU (please send this viral)'
> 
> Its on RT, I won't take any lessons from the Russians though, their prisons are horrendous...



You fucking tool,whether someone is on RT or Fox doesn't matter one jot, the truth of what they're saying is the important thing.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 16, 2011)

southside said:


> Are you for real, say that to people who have been terrorised you stupid cunt. This is not challenging authority, it's fucking urban terrorism.


Nice. I am not condoning the terrorising of anyone, merely making comparisons between the justice handed down to rioters or people allegedly inciting rioting and the 'entitlement' of those who regard themselves as part of the establishment.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 16, 2011)

> _ ..pleading guilty to intentionally encouraging another to assist the commission of an indictable offence under sections 44 and 46 of the Serious Crime Act 2007._



http://blog.cps.gov.uk/2011/08/cps-...for-inciting-disorder-using-social-media.html


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 16, 2011)

Nice that the CPS was able to put together such a nuanced legal case so swiftly in contrast to the inertia with which it responded to the death of Ian Tomlinson.


----------



## gawkrodger (Aug 16, 2011)

this will surely drop right down on appeal


----------



## Boppity (Aug 16, 2011)

Four years?!?! I went to school with him, I knew he'd been arrested.

What a strange way to find out...

ETA: Well, I went to school with Perry, I don't know the other one.


----------



## TopCat (Aug 16, 2011)

southside said:


> Are you for real, say that to people who have been terrorised you stupid cunt. This is not challenging authority, it's fucking urban terrorism.


Pure bullshit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

treelover said:


> I wonder what would happen to someone who organised a Reclaim The Streets in this atmosphere..


Indeed


----------



## Andrew Hertford (Aug 16, 2011)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> The backlash is in danger of digging it's own grave.



Agreed, sentencing has got to at least appear fair and logical in comparison to other crimes, this looks purely vengeful. Reading the CPS statement does suggest that some kind of custodial sentence would be in order though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

Andrew Hertford said:


> Agreed, sentencing has got to at least appear fair and logical in comparison to other crimes, this looks purely vengeful. Reading the CPS statement does suggest that some kind of custodial sentence would be in order though.


you do know cps stands for 'crown prosecution service' and not for eg court publicity service or cheery publicans say? of course they're going to make out he deserved a spell of porridge.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 16, 2011)

DotCommunist said:


> four years is beyond a magistrates sentence- how the hell did he manage to land that stretch


That was a Recorder i.e. a proper, professional judge, not a JP.
still, the moment those blokes appeal, their victory is guaranteed.
This is an OUTRAGEOUS sentence


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 16, 2011)

southside said:


> Are you for real, say that to people who have been terrorised you stupid cunt. This is not challenging authority, it's fucking urban terrorism.


If you can't see the implicitly political aspects or societal causes with these riots, then you must be blind, demented or a _Daily Mail_ reader.
This is - all of it - not just about some people being scumbags


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 16, 2011)

southside said:


> Are you for real, say that to people who have been terrorised you stupid cunt. This is not challenging authority, it's fucking urban terrorism.


and _of course_ we weren't terrorised by the bankers.... x 100000000


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2011)

Who are the jeffries handing out these sentences - NAME THEM HERE


----------



## paolo (Aug 16, 2011)

TopCat said:


> Pure bullshit.



You described it as insurgency.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

paolo999 said:


> You described it as insurgency.


you know there's a difference between insurgency and terrorism, don't you?


----------



## paolo (Aug 16, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> you know there's a difference between insurgency and terrorism, don't you?



Yep.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Who are the jeffries handing out these sentences - NAME THEM HERE


Their addresses too. Footpaths are public.


----------



## paolo (Aug 16, 2011)

(And no, I wouldn't describe it as either terrorism or - for the most part - insurgency)


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Their addresses too. Footpaths are public.


as are dark alleys


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2011)

4 months for using your fingers wrongly


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 16, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> no it isn't.


Yes, it is.

Oh yes.


----------



## Tankus (Aug 16, 2011)

How long do mobile phone companies keep handover logs between phone cells ?


----------



## OneStrike (Aug 16, 2011)

They posted the Disorder encouragement from their real FB profiles, what a weird case.
More details, including some of the page contents here.

http://j.mp/prVAxP


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> 4 months for using your fingers wrongly


yeh should have had a piece of metal between them.


----------



## TopCat (Aug 16, 2011)

paolo999 said:


> You described it as insurgency.


I did.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

krtek a houby said:


> Yes, it is.
> 
> Oh yes.


ok. what is terrorism?


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 16, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh should have had a piece of metal between them.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 16, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> ok. what is terrorism?



Something that causes terror, duh


----------



## paolo (Aug 16, 2011)

TopCat said:


> I did.



Would you use that description for the killing of the five people, the homes or small businesses lost?

It's this that I have issue with. My perception - possibly wrong - that your viewpoint is: "It's all good".


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

krtek a houby said:


> Something that causes terror, duh


that's a fucking stupid definition. just the sort of thing i'd expect you to come out with.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2011)

krtek a houby said:


> Something that causes terror, duh


You'd be wrong then.


----------



## Struwwelpeter (Aug 16, 2011)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> The backlash is in danger of digging it's own grave.



But it'll be a slow death I fear.  It might take so long to materialise that it they won't know that they caused the effect.  For example, parents who are grassing up their children will stop doing that when they realise that the accused are getting vengeance instead of justice, but all that will do is increase distrust in the authorities and a lower clear up rate for crime.  The psychotic or spineless judges and their politcal masters* will not make the link back to their actions.

* The current spate of sentences proves that the judiciary is not separate from the executive.


----------



## manny-p (Aug 16, 2011)

Struwwelpeter said:


> * The current spate of sentences proves that the judiciary is not separate from the executive.



This.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 16, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> that's a fucking stupid definition. just the sort of thing i'd expect you to come out with.



You probably expect the tooth fairy to deliver revolution, stalker boy


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 16, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> You'd be wrong then.


 I know terror, first hand and it ain't from your tragic alcohol induced posts, fuckwit


----------



## agricola (Aug 16, 2011)

A heavy sentence, but there is a lot of that around at the moment.  They will still only do about 16 months inside though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

krtek a houby said:


> You probably expect the tooth fairy to deliver revolution, stalker boy


carry on, you're reinforcing everyone's poor opinion of you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

krtek a houby said:


> I know terror, first hand and it ain't from your tragic alcohol induced posts, fuckwit


yes. but what about terrorism?


----------



## TopCat (Aug 16, 2011)

paolo999 said:


> Would you use that description for the killing of the five people, the homes or small businesses lost?
> 
> It's this that I have issue with. My perception - possibly wrong - that your viewpoint is: "It's all good".


It was not all good. Not at all.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> A heavy sentence, but there is a lot of that around at the moment. They will still only do about 16 months inside though.


For this? Come on. Openly say that it's show trial madness.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2011)

krtek a houby said:


> I know terror, first hand and it ain't from your tragic alcohol induced posts, fuckwit



You might well do. Terrorism is something else.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

Only??

ffs. butchers is right. This is show trial madness.


----------



## newbie (Aug 16, 2011)

12 years that bloke got. 12 years. for posturing crap threats on the internet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

newbie said:


> 12 years that bloke got. 12 years. for posturing crap threats on the internet.


we're fucked now you've quoted us


----------



## paolo (Aug 16, 2011)

TopCat said:


> It was not all good. Not at all.



In which case, apologies. I misjudged.


----------



## manny-p (Aug 16, 2011)

newbie said:


> 12 years that bloke got. 12 years. for posturing crap threats on the internet.


Who got 12 years?


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> A heavy sentence, but there is a lot of that around at the moment.


surely the whole pointis that there shouldn't be 'a lot of that around', especially as 'that' seems to be soviet-purge-style justice, to appease a knickerwetting Middle England


----------



## newbie (Aug 16, 2011)

a muslim chap who posted wild threats against MPs.  There's a recent thread about it.


----------



## agricola (Aug 16, 2011)

Struwwelpeter said:


> * The current spate of sentences proves that the judiciary is not separate from the executive.



It doesnt - all it shows is that the judiciary is following their sentencing instructions (specifically the one relating to setting sentences with a deterrent effect), and that they have taken note of the events of the last week or so.  People who got done for bomb hoaxes after 7/7 got heftier sentences than they were getting before it, for example.


----------



## manny-p (Aug 16, 2011)

newbie said:


> a muslim chap who posted wild threats against MPs. There's a recent thread about it.


Aye I remember. I thought you meant a rioter. The court houses need set alight.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

newbie said:


> a muslim chap who posted wild threats against MPs. There's a recent thread about it.


he was saying something about stabbing mps whereas i'm just saying that dark alleys are public places.


----------



## manny-p (Aug 16, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> he was saying something about stabbing mps whereas i'm just saying that dark alleys are public places.


Not you with your threats again pickman's


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

allybaba said:


> Not you with your threats again pickman's


yeh? remind me which threats i've posted before.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

Streathamite said:


> surely the whole pointis that there shouldn't be 'a lot of that around', especially as 'that' seems to be soviet-purge-style justice, to appease a knickerwetting Middle England


I don't think this is being done to appease a knickerwetting Middle England. Their knickers will dry off soon enough, and these sentences if anything risk making such people question their support for the retribution.

The way I read it, it's being done as a direct message to those who might ever think of doing anything like this again.


----------



## manny-p (Aug 16, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh? remind me which threats i've posted before.


Don't know I might have got you mixed up with some other poster. So I apologise if that's the case.


----------



## newbie (Aug 16, 2011)

good luck with that one.  I'll edit.

this thread btw


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

allybaba said:


> Don't know I might have got you mixed up with some other poster. So I apologise if that's the case.


that's better.


----------



## paolo (Aug 16, 2011)

I'm not sure that the brutal sentencing is automatically a result of political interference.

Given the reactionary stance of vast swathes of society, I'd say it's certainly possible that magistrates at least (who aren't particularly schooled in judiciary terms) are meting out punishment based on their own personal emotions and/or those they read in the media or hear from people they know.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2011)

newbie said:


> 12 years that bloke got. 12 years. for posturing crap threats on the internet.


Trying to get me nicked?

NAME THEM -name the people handing out these sentences, Hold them to public scrutiny. See how they scrub up.


----------



## Boppity (Aug 16, 2011)

The sentence is ridiculous and I have no doubt that it will be shortened on appeal. But the guy was a massive tool.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

paolo999 said:


> I'm not sure that the brutal sentencing is automatically a result of political interference.
> 
> Given the reactionary stance of vast swathes of society, I'd say it's certainly possible that magistrates at least (who aren't particularly schooled in judiciary terms) are meting out punishment based on their own personal emotions and/or those they read in the media or hear from people they know.



I would expect more inconsistency in the sentences if that were the case. There is a uniformity to the disproportion that suggests to me that this cannot possibly be the case.


----------



## agricola (Aug 16, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> For this? Come on. Openly say that it's show trial madness.



Its clearly not a show trial - there wasnt after all a trial as they pled guilty - but as I have said above the riots have bumped the sentences up for everyone who the courts think were involved with them, deterrent sentencing is back in vogue. That muslim bloke is a good example - had that woman not stabbed Timms then he wouldnt have got anything like the sentence he did get, but she did, he made it obvious he was writing in that context, and so he ended up getting hammered.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Aug 16, 2011)

Boppity said:


> The sentence is ridiculous and I have no doubt that it will be shortened on appeal. But the guy was a massive tool.



Quite frankly, so are most of you. But that has no relevance here.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2011)

Boppity said:


> The sentence is ridiculous and I have no doubt that it will be shortened on appeal. But the guy was a massive tool.


 So what. Don't you like your civil liberties?


----------



## Fedayn (Aug 16, 2011)

Refused as fuck said:


> Quite frankly, so are most of you. But that has no relevance here.



Most of who?


----------



## paolo (Aug 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't think this is being done to appease a knickerwetting Middle England. Their knickers will dry off soon enough, and these sentences if anything risk making such people question their support for the retribution.
> 
> The way I read it, it's being done as a direct message to those who might ever think of doing anything like this again.



I'm sure there's an element of that.

There's two factors (or three, in the case of some custodial/tagging curfew sentences)

- Retribution
- Dissuasion (splits into dissuading the convicted, and the potential future criminal)
- Public Protection


----------



## Refused as fuck (Aug 16, 2011)

Fedayn said:


> Most of who?



urban75


----------



## manny-p (Aug 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I would expect more inconsistency in the sentences if that were the case. There is a uniformity to the disproportion that suggests to me that this cannot possibly be the case.


I feel this is defo the case. The government are seeing political capital with being seen to be going in tough on low level crime.


----------



## Fedayn (Aug 16, 2011)

Refused as fuck said:


> urban75



Oh.


----------



## Boppity (Aug 16, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> So what. Don't you like your civil liberties?


I've made my opinion known on the sentence, and on the man being jailed. Just because I don't like the guy, doesn't mean I like his punishment. I would have thought I'd made that clear. I have nothing more to say.



Refused as fuck said:


> Quite frankly, so are most of you. But that has no relevance here.


What is 'most of you' supposed to mean?

ETA: I've seen your response above.


----------



## manny-p (Aug 16, 2011)

Refused as fuck said:


> urban75


slaphead


----------



## Refused as fuck (Aug 16, 2011)

Boppity said:


> What is 'most of you' supposed to mean?



All of you fucking tools.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> Its clearly not a show trial - there wasnt after all a trial as they pled guilty - but as I have said above the riots have bumped the sentences up for everyone who the courts think were involved with them, deterrent sentencing is back in vogue. That muslim bloke is a good example - had that woman not stabbed Timms then he wouldnt have got anything like the sentence he did get, but she did, he made it obvious he was writing in that context, and so he ended up getting hammered.


I think that is naive. Show me the magistrate who has said 'you're of previous good character, were clearly caught up in a spur of the moment madness that led you to steal that pair of trainers, so I am giving you a suspended sentence'.

Show me one judge who has done this, and I'll believe that judges are not acting under instruction.


----------



## scifisam (Aug 16, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> 4 months for using your fingers wrongly



That one's even weirder:




> "You knew who they were and what effect shouting 'police, police' would have on them."



The cops were terrified by being told they were cops? Sensitive ickle souls, aren't they?


----------



## Boppity (Aug 16, 2011)

Refused as fuck said:


> All of you fucking tools.



Indeed. Thanks for that, illuminating.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> Its clearly not a show trial - there wasnt after all a trial as they pled guilty - but as I have said above the riots have bumped the sentences up for everyone who the courts think were involved with them, deterrent sentencing is back in vogue. That muslim bloke is a good example - had that woman not stabbed Timms then he wouldnt have got anything like the sentence he did get, but she did, ,he made it obvious he was writing in that context, and so he ended up getting hammered.


Everyone confessed in the show trials. That's the point. There were no trials. ' deterrent sentencing'', yes, back on the agenda. It can't work. The next riot will be in a prison (not becaus of this but becaue it's been there bubbling for a few years).


----------



## agricola (Aug 16, 2011)

Refused as fuck said:


> All of you fucking tools.


----------



## Fedayn (Aug 16, 2011)

Refused as fuck said:


> All of you fucking tools.



Has someone stole your tea and cakes? You seem awfully harsh tonight.


----------



## manny-p (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola-


----------



## agricola (Aug 16, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Everyone confessed in the show trials. That's the point. There were no trials. ' deterrent sentencing'', yes, back on the agenda. It can't work. The next riot will be in a prison (not becaus of this but becaue it's been there bubbling for a few years).



Actually it probably will work - at least in ensuring that noone is idiotic enough to try and organize a riot using their own name and in a place where the police can read it to their hearts content.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Aug 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> That one's even weirder:
> 
> The cops were terrified by being told they were cops? Sensitive ickle souls, aren't they?



"Public servants" jajajajaja


----------



## manny-p (Aug 16, 2011)

Refused as fuck said:


> "Public servants" jajajajaja


You had a few cans?


----------



## newbie (Aug 16, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Trying to get me nicked?
> .


just the opposite, I think it's a bad idea.

in the current climate is there any point, other than posturing, for sailing close to the wind?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> Actually it probably will work - at least in ensuring that noone is idiotic enough to try and organize a riot using their own name and in a place where the police can read it to their hearts content.


I'll lower the barrier. Can you show me one judge who has been passing what might be considered rather harsh sentences? Or even just 'wow, that's a bit steep'?

They are acting under instruction. You would not get this amount of uniformity of un-fucking-believable disproportion otherwise.


----------



## agricola (Aug 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> The cops were terrified by being told they were cops? Sensitive ickle souls, aren't they?



They were (at least according to the article) actually PCSOs, most of them were female and they were off duty walking back to their cars which were presumably parked on sidestreets.


----------



## paolo (Aug 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I would expect more inconsistency in the sentences if that were the case. There is a uniformity to the disproportion that suggests to me that this cannot possibly be the case.



It's an interesting point, but I think we'll need more time on that.

The magistrates max is six months, after that it's referred up. That means we *may* currently simply be seeing a 'peak' of magistrates anger - with alot more to come out in the wash.

The Graun has started doing data analysis of all the cases. It'll be interesting to see if they cover this aspect (They've already, methodically, shown that Cameron's "this isn't about poverty" has little basis in data. The convicted are predominantly from poor areas).


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> Actually it probably will work - at least in ensuring that noone is idiotic enough to try and organize a riot using their own name and in a place where the police can read it to their hearts content.


Not sure that means it'll work, Daft gits posting shit will always happen. They mean nothing as regards the wider stuff. These idiots are now the PR face of the fight back. You know as well as i do that in regards to trouble these people were a fucking joke. Irrelevant.


----------



## agricola (Aug 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'll lower the barrier. Can you show me one judge who has been passing what might be considered rather harsh sentences? Or even just 'wow, that's a bit steep'?



For anything or just these offences?


----------



## Tankus (Aug 16, 2011)

run out of prison space real soon ...its nearly topped out as it is


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> They were (at least according to the article) actually PCSOs, most of them were female and they were off duty walking back to their cars which were presumably parked on sidestreets.


In that case i can see the terror. Terrorism in fact.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> For anything or just these offences?


For anyone convicted of an offence relating to the riots, clearly.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2011)

newbie said:


> just the opposite, I think it's a bad idea.
> 
> in the current climate is there any point, other than posturing, for sailing close to the wind?


Fun.


----------



## editor (Aug 16, 2011)

Fedayn said:


> http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/9198608.UPDATED__Facebook_riot_man_jailed_for_four_years/


Some choice comments on that site too.

I'll be amazed if an appeal doesn't reduce this daft sentence hugely downwards.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

paolo999 said:


> It's an interesting point, but I think we'll need more time on that.
> 
> The magistrates max is six months, after that it's referred up. That means we *may* currently simply be seeing a 'peak' of magistrates anger - with alot more to come out in the wash.
> 
> The Graun has started doing data analysis of all the cases. It'll be interesting to see if they cover this aspect (They've already, methodically, shown that Cameron's "this isn't about poverty" has little basis in data. The convicted are predominantly from poor areas).



Well, yes, I'll reserve final judgement on these trials until I've seen an good analysis of them. I think I know what I'm going to find, though.


----------



## scifisam (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> They were (at least according to the article) actually PCSOs, most of them were female and they were off duty walking back to their cars which were presumably parked on sidestreets.



Oh yes! Silly me. Being in a group of people with the might of the police behind me would really mean that being called 'police' would terrify me, especially if my car was on a side-street, which we all know are never well-lit and easily visible in central London.

You play devil's advocate so much that you should be on a retainer.


----------



## agricola (Aug 16, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Not sure that means it'll work, Daft gits posting shit will always happen. They mean nothing as regards the wider stuff. These idiots are now the PR face of the fight back. You know as well as i do that in regards to trouble these people were a fucking joke. Irrelevant.



TBH if there is a "PR face of the fight back", it is more likely to be those people who were genuinely remorseful, handed themselves in, admitted what they did and who got screwed anyway - there was a report (admittedly in the Mail) of a 17 year old girl, who had no previous convictions and who was accused of nicking a bottle of Lucozade - they remanded her in custody for two weeks for sentencing.

There should be no justification in keeping those people in, not only is it probably illegal (after all how can you argue they are a flight risk?), it is a massive waste of money, but most importantly it sends entirely the wrong message out.


----------



## newbie (Aug 16, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Not sure that means it'll work, Daft gits posting shit will always happen. They mean nothing as regards the wider stuff. These idiots are now the PR face of the fight back. You know as well as i do that in regards to trouble these people were a fucking joke. Irrelevant.


----------



## Part 2 (Aug 16, 2011)

editor said:


> Some choice comments on that site too.



One good one out of six is fucking good going for a local news website.

This story was just on the local news. Some older people interviewed were saying the sentences were too harsh.

edit: it appears to have been national news as the local has just started


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola, you are starting to do your d-b act again. It doesn't suit you, you know.


----------



## agricola (Aug 16, 2011)

scifisam said:


> Oh yes! Silly me. Being in a group of people with the might of the police behind me would really mean that being called 'police' would terrify me, especially if my car was on a side-street, which we all know are never well-lit and easily visible in central London.
> 
> You play devil's advocate so much that you should be on a retainer.



How is it playing devils advocate to point out what the article actually states?


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't think this is being done to appease a knickerwetting Middle England. Their knickers will dry off soon enough, and these sentences if anything risk making such people question their support for the retribution.
> 
> The way I read it, it's being done as a direct message to those who might ever think of doing anything like this again.


There's certainly an element of the second in there, but I see a class thing, "we must be SEEN to crack down on the underclass scum".
not sure excessive sentencing will awake the liberal consciences of the leafy, well-to-do parts of the country, either, I reckon many of 'em will scream with delight


----------



## The39thStep (Aug 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well, yes, I'll reserve final judgement on these trials until I've seen an good analysis of them. I think I know what I'm going to find, though.



said on SKY that 60% were known to the police ( dunno if that is arrested or convicted btw)


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> agricola, you are starting to do your d-b act again. It doesn't suit you, you know.


yeh. and see what it did for d-b


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

Streathamite said:


> not sure excessive sentencing will awake the liberal consciences of the leafy, well-to-do parts of the country, either, I reckon many of 'em will scream with delight



Tiny sample I know, but two people I talked to last week who were outraged by the riots and condemning the rioters as scum have both this week been taken aback by some of the sentences. Really, who wouldn't be? Sassasferato, perhaps, but not your average bod.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> Actually it probably will work - at least in ensuring that noone is idiotic enough to try and organize a riot using their own name and in a place where the police can read it to their hearts content.


Yup, they'll just ascertain more subtle, covert, yet equally effective ways. You think you can remove the root causes of the unrest by a crackdown on PC and beyond-PC technology? that's _mental_.


----------



## TopCat (Aug 16, 2011)

The trials will go on and on..


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

The only sense in which these sentences are aimed at 'Middle England' is the sense that they are intended as a signal to them that they'd fucking well better keep in line too.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 16, 2011)

someone really needs to knock up and distribute some proper online bust cards pointing out to people that if nicked they really need to just sftu and plead not guilty. If they're handing out these sentences to those who've pled guilty, then people really need to stop making it so easy for them.

could the cps really have proved beyond all reasonable doubt that these facebook pages weren't just badly thought out piss take pages without them actually admitting it? I seriously doubt it.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> They were (at least according to the article) actually PCSOs, most of them were female and they were off duty walking back to their cars which were presumably parked on sidestreets.


so what? They're still coppers - they _chose_ to wear that uniform. If yer can't take the heat...


----------



## The39thStep (Aug 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Tiny sample I know, but two people I talked to last week who were outraged by the riots and condemning the rioters as scum have both this week been taken aback by some of the sentences. Really, who wouldn't be? Sassasferato, perhaps, but not your average bod.



 don't think there is much appetite even with this sea change for protests about the sentences given out do you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> They were (at least according to the article) actually PCSOs, most of them were female and they were off duty walking back to their cars which were presumably parked on sidestreets.


yeh? the likes of elaine van orden or cressida dick would take that sort of thing in their stride. and even if they didn't it's not as though he attacked them like it claims in some link somewhere up above


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

free spirit said:


> someone really needs to knock up and distribute some proper online bust cards pointing out to people that if nicked they really need to just sftu and plead not guilty. If they're handing out these sentences to those who've pled guilty, then people really need to stop making it so easy for them.
> 
> could the cps really have proved beyond all reasonable doubt that these facebook pages weren't just badly thought out piss take pages without them actually admitting it? I seriously doubt it.


Absolutely.

Ironically, anyone who's been in trouble with the police before already knows this. It's the poor fuckers who've never been in trouble before who are being caught out.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The only sense in which these sentences are aimed at 'Middle England' is the sense that they are intended as a signal to them that they'd fucking well better keep in line too.


not sure about that; the affluent m/c of the home counties aren't ever gonna step out of line - for them, voting Labour is a dangerously radical initiative.
these are also the first people out of the blocks with 'lock em all up! string 'em up!' frothing - and
virtually all of them are represented by Tory MPs


----------



## editor (Aug 16, 2011)

Not sure if pleading not guilty when you've been caught red handed is going to be of much help.


----------



## scifisam (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> How is it playing devils advocate to point out what the article actually states?



You are such a fucking arsehole. Fuck this - no point arguing with a moron: the best possible outcome is that you win an argument with a moron.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

Streathamite said:


> not sure about that; the affluent m/c of the home counties aren't ever gonna step out of line - for them, voting Labour is a dangerously radical initiative.
> these are also the first people out of the blocks with 'lock em all up! string 'em up!' frothing - and
> virtually all of them are represented by Tory MPs


They might not step out of line. Their kids might, though.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

editor said:


> Not sure if pleading not guilty when you've been caught red handed is going to be of much help.


Caught red handed doing what? Carrying bags in the street? Picking up something off the street? Posting a load of nonsense on the internet? Accepting a stolen t-shirt off your son?

Come on, ed. Engage with what is actually going on, eh?


----------



## southside (Aug 16, 2011)

Streathamite said:


> and _of course_ we weren't terrorised by the bankers.... x 100000000


Let me tell you something, my children have been traumatised by this and I have had to send them to stay with their grand parents.  You can take your psuedo politics and shove them where the sun dont shine.  I understand that living in a shithole where anarchy is the order of the day like some sort of sketch from a mad max film is longed for by some of the weirdos on here.  But for me and my family we do not want to live in fear of having some hooded cunt burn us out of our home for the sake of a lump of consumer techno junk.

I'm glad that the brainless cunts are getting what they deserve.

Fuck them.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 16, 2011)

southside said:


> Are you for real, say that to people who have been terrorised you stupid cunt. This is not challenging authority, it's fucking urban terrorism.



You're a bit of a penis aren't you?


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Tiny sample I know, but two people I talked to last week who were outraged by the riots and condemning the rioters as scum have both this week been taken aback by some of the sentences. Really, who wouldn't be? Sassasferato, perhaps, but not your average bod.


Really? if that's indicative of wider trends, i'm encouraged by that


----------



## southside (Aug 16, 2011)

SpineyNorman said:


> You're a bit of a penis aren't you?


Yes but not as much as the idiots who were watched taking their loot into their houses from 800 feet up in the air and then advertising it on facefuck and twitter.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 16, 2011)

editor said:


> Not sure if pleading not guilty when you've been caught red handed is going to be of much help.


maybe, but given that it's apparently not going to make any odds in terms of your sentence you may as well give it a good try.

chances are fairly good that the police and cps will balls up their evidence chain / not actually have enough evidence to prosecute you anyway in these circumstances if you don't give them a confession. I'd be willing to bet there'll be a good proportion having their prosecutions quietly dropped / being offered cautions in the background once the police/CPS/magistrates have sent enough sacrificial lambs to the slaughter to keep the tabloids happy, so in any case the longer someone can delay making it to court the better.

admit nothing until the very last second was a strategy that worked well for me when I got caught up in the mayday arrests and ended up in court among all the tabloid bullshit. Initial charges of everything from assaulting a copper to incitement to riot and possession with intent (none of which I'd done) got dropped to either obstruction or resisting arrest in the end (can't remember which), which I plead to in exchange for the cps dropping the possession charge, resulting in me getting an 18 month conditional discharge while everyone around me who'd plead guilty was being sent down.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 16, 2011)

krtek a houby said:


> Yes, it is.
> 
> Oh yes.



And you're a gangrene infested donkey's scrotum.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2011)

fs is spot on. And people who've dealt with the law before know this. Admit nothing.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 16, 2011)

Police State
Police State
Police State
Police State
Police State
Police State...


----------



## beatrix (Aug 16, 2011)

Just like to post that I saw yesterdays 'The Sun' page in which they produced photographs of several people under the banner 'SHOP A MORON'
I recognised one of the girls who I'd seen many times throughout the night in Enfield. All I can say is that when I had a conversation with her and her group they were erudite and very friendly people. I can't say if she threw a brick anywhere but I trust my own instincts re character .. would I shop her as a moron ?
I'd rather cut my own bosoms off !!


----------



## Struwwelpeter (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> It doesnt - all it shows is that the judiciary is following their sentencing instructions (specifically the one relating to setting sentences with a deterrent effect), and that they have taken note of the events of the last week or so. People who got done for bomb hoaxes *after* 7/7 got heftier sentences than they were getting before it, for example.





agricola said:


> Its clearly not a show trial - there wasnt after all a trial as they pled guilty - but as I have said above the riots have bumped the sentences up for everyone who the courts think were involved with them, deterrent sentencing is back in vogue. That muslim bloke is a good example - had that woman not stabbed Timms then he wouldnt have got anything like the sentence he did get, but she did, he made it obvious *he was writing in that context*, and so he ended up getting hammered.



My emphasis.  The riots are completely different.  If there were a riot next week and someone encouraged it via FB or whatever, then your analogies would be relevant.


----------



## Struwwelpeter (Aug 16, 2011)

agricola said:


> TBH if there is a "PR face of the fight back", it is more likely to be those people who were genuinely remorseful, handed themselves in, admitted what they did and who got screwed anyway - there was a report (admittedly in the Mail) of a 17 year old girl, who had no previous convictions and who was accused of nicking a bottle of Lucozade - they remanded her in custody for two weeks for sentencing.
> 
> There should be no justification in keeping those people in, not only is it probably illegal (after all how can you argue they are a flight risk?), it is a massive waste of money, but most importantly it sends entirely the wrong message out.



Now, I agree with this, but the other sentences send out the message that we should not trust the judiciary too.


----------



## editor (Aug 16, 2011)

free spirit said:


> Initial charges of everything from assaulting a copper to incitement to riot and possession with intent (none of which I'd done) got dropped to either obstruction or resisting arrest in the end (can't remember which), which I plead to in exchange for the cps dropping the possession charge, resulting in me getting an 18 month conditional discharge while everyone around me who'd plead guilty was being sent down.


I still think it's a bit different when you've been caught red handed and the cops have multiple CCTV footage tracking your every move on the night.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 16, 2011)

Right - Ok, let me tell YOU something.


southside said:


> Let me tell you something, my children have been traumatised by this and I have had to send them to stay with their grand parents.


So, you think i'm NOT traumatised by this? I LIVE in the inner city, in London's East End. But this is about more than just you and I - this is a country of 56 million, including the rioters and the looters. They are the product of a society you and I helped to create, and they will still be there when your kids return home to you. One thing we can do is your frankly braindamaged sub-_Fail _ranting zabout 'brainless cunts', 'hang the scum' and the rest, and that will do ZERO to understand why it happened, the causal factors, and again ZERO, therefore, to prevent a repeat occurrence. The other is to accept they are normal human beings, and to find out why.
I can only assume that the latter is far too mentally exacting for your poor little brain to contemplate.



> You can take your psuedo politics and shove them where the sun dont shine.


Illiterate fool! there is no such thing as 'pseudo politics', only different political views. Mine are that you cannot separate these riots from root causes of police harassment of youth, massive inequality, social exclusion, poverty,deprivation, lack of opportunities, destruction of w/c communities and the values they bring and - above all - the values taught the youth by an amoral, selfish, greedy, decommunalised and rampantly consumerist, individualised society, values of FUJIA, Geed is Good, and all that matters is whether you can get away with it.



> I understand that living in a shithole where anarchy is the order of the day like some sort of sketch from a mad max film is longed for by some of the weirdos on here.


You WHAAT? Seriously, are you on deep meds or something? NO-ONE wants that sort of society, here or IRL - it's simply that thyat is precisely what we WILL have without social and economic remedies.
jesus, youe really are either dense or unhinged


> But for me and my family we do not want to live in fear of having some hooded cunt burn us out of our home for the sake of a lump of consumer techno junk.


who the fuck does, dumbo? so shall we try the smart idea of attacking the causes, hmm?


> I'm glad that the brainless cunts are getting what they deserve.


brilliant, so let's turn teenage kids gone astray into hardened criminals! This astonishingly thought-free comment sums it up- write em off as 'brainless cunts' - like they aren't the product of the society we made for them - and magically, the problem will go away. No need to think about motivations, economic factors, social or generational context, yes let's just pretend they all got beamed down from Mars on Saturday.

You sir, are a cretin of the first water!


----------



## beatrix (Aug 16, 2011)

Furthermore I am so incredibly sad to say that I firmly believe that what is needed now for our children, is that when they get out of prison, that they are supported in whichever way they wish to create the revolution of a system that has destroyed the lives of many of their parents, indoctrinated as they have been all their lives in a false reality.
These children are the future and long may they live !
All of our generations who post here and elsewhere, or who simply graze out their insular lives are obsolete, have little to offer and it's only our children and their children that will quite rightly see us as a very unfortunate footnote in the annals of capitalist history, can make the change.
That is my sincere albeit saddest hope .. we are a fucking joke .. this site is a joke .. the BBC is a joke.
My partner was right x


----------



## agricola (Aug 16, 2011)

Struwwelpeter said:


> My emphasis. The riots are completely different. If there were a riot next week and someone encouraged it via FB or whatever, then your analogies would be relevant.



I disagree - the FB posts were both after the looting had started and were clearly taken (by the judge anyway) in the context of those riots. The bloke in the Timms case posted his comments some time after the attack, but only the day after the attacker of Timms got sentenced, and in response to her attack and conviction. It is an appropriate analogy, I feel.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 16, 2011)

southside said:


> Yes but not as much as the idiots who were watched taking their loot into their houses from 800 feet up in the air and then advertising it on facefuck and twitter.


But that's not what these two did, is it? These two made a facebook page - there was no riot in their area.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 16, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> fs is spot on. And people who've dealt with the law before know this. Admit nothing.


And, even if you're positive you'd be better off pleading guilty, always, _always,_ ask for a solicitor - that's a lesson I learned the hard way!


----------



## Refused as fuck (Aug 16, 2011)

A few careless "tools" will have to be sent down in order for the liberals to feel safe in their conservatories. At least now they're being honest about the kind of society they wanted all along.


----------



## beatrix (Aug 16, 2011)

Indeed .. I despair for the youths who admitted culpability and have abject dislike for the parents who shopped their own children. Maybe I ought to understand but I cannot and will not. Those parents either do not love their children or they will be so sorry for having done so they may just have to wake up and if their souls have not already been destroyed attempt !! to regain any love that ever did exist .. whatever were they thinking .. I may well have to counsel some of these people in the future but right now I wish them nothing but torment and remorse god forgive me!
Good grief and have mercy on their souls !


----------



## Refused as fuck (Aug 16, 2011)

_Shopping their own children_.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 17, 2011)

beatrix said:


> Indeed .. I despair for the youths who admitted culpability and have abject dislike for the parents who shopped their own children. Maybe I ought to understand but I cannot and will not. Those parents either do not love their children or they will be so sorry for having done so they may just have to wake up !
> Good grief and have mercy on their souls !



Next step - kids grassing on their parents for being "subversive" - then it really will be time to worry


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 17, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> They might not step out of line. Their kids might, though.


yes, increasingly likely, notwithstanding the fact that most of those kids will have everything to lose from doing so by the time they are snugly ensconced on the career ladder of privilege by the time they are 30. an entire generation of kids ARE being taught to hate the police - by the police themselves.


----------



## beatrix (Aug 17, 2011)

I ought not to have been but I have been so shocked at the reaction of our political leaders and of course the subsequent action of our police .. when I was out during the riots in Enfield the police were actually as caught up in it as anybody (human beings) .. that is to say they were being human albeit awaiting orders (inevitably).
Exactly the same as I imagine David Cameron etc etc were whilst on holiday (hopeless puppets) .. and next thing you know the BBC are showing clips of a group of police ramming a door down on a council estate and seemingly having to scuffle with a half dressed man until they all fall down rugby scrum like on a person that may have just answered the door and escorted them peacefully to the police station.
This is legalised violence on a par with nothing that I saw in Enfield last week !
See Darcus Howe and the trauma written on his face being interviewed by the BBC !!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biJgILxGK0o


----------



## teqniq (Aug 17, 2011)

Blimey. I went down the pub and six pages lol. One thing I do know for certain current events have engendered lots of lively discussion. This is imo No Bad Thing. We are fucked if we don't sort our act out for lots of different reasons and these events are but a symptom.


----------



## AverageJoe (Aug 17, 2011)

I approve of your pub. It obviously does lock-ins


----------



## teqniq (Aug 17, 2011)

AverageJoe said:


> I approve of your pub. It obviously does lock-ins


 

Not true alas, it just took me all this time to read through it. 

*though I did know plenty of pubs once upon a time in West Wales that used to do lock-ins*


----------



## treelover (Aug 17, 2011)

Bonnie Greer the U.S 60's Liberal who you may remember faced down Griffin on QT has robustly endorsed the sentences for the Facebook 2, though not the ''mama who got jailed for receiving'' etc..


----------



## albionism (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> Let me tell you something, my children have been traumatised by this and I have had to send them to stay with their grand parents. You can take your psuedo politics and shove them where the sun dont shine.
> 
> 
> > I understand that living in a shithole where anarchy is the order of the day like some sort of sketch from a mad max film is longed for by some of the weirdos on here.
> ...


This is what Anarchy looks like.
http://vimeo.com/27543529


----------



## goldenecitrone (Aug 17, 2011)

Fedayn said:


> http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/9198608.UPDATED__Facebook_riot_man_jailed_for_four_years/



On the plus side, David Cameron has offered him the position of Director of Communications for the Tory party when he gets out of prison.


----------



## flutterbye (Aug 17, 2011)

Streathamite said:


> Right - Ok, let me tell YOU something.
> 
> So, you think i'm NOT traumatised by this? I LIVE in the inner city, in London's East End. But this is about more than just you and I - this is a country of 56 million, including the rioters and the looters. They are the product of a society you and I helped to create, and they will still be there when your kids return home to you.



Who let this happen? YOU DID! YOU ARE TO BLAME! YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE!
The British people voted conservative, the British people are to blame for the riots!


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Aug 17, 2011)

For me it's not the length of the sentence that is the problem per se. It is the seemingly arbitrary nature of it all. Politicians and the judiciary should have a dividing line between them, and in this instance that line has been crossed. That is imo dangerous.

If there were clear rules that 'x' behaviour leads to 'y' sentence, then that would be OK. But to have violent non-riot related offenders get lax punishments whilst non-violent riot-related ones get unexpectedly long ones seems bonkers. A mature legal system should be consistent; this disregard for due process is the sort of thing a banana republic would get up to.


----------



## likesfish (Aug 17, 2011)

the idiot with the gun fingers had a few public order offenses under their belt already so telling the police your going to get shot and that's your car is always going to end badly 

 the fb pair of twats deserved some jail time it wasn't an innocent jape having police stand around in riot gear and scaring a lot of the public  similar to making a hoax bomb call 4 years is ridiculous though.


----------



## Plumdaff (Aug 17, 2011)

For me it's the length of the sentence, the arbitrary nature and the sheer short-sighted vengeance. I want solutions which stop this happening to communities again and making ex-cons of and ruining life chances of so many (even when admitted berks) is so clearly a recipe for more disorder in the future. Thank bloody Christ the internet wasn't widely available when I - and many of the "hang 'em" brigade - were very young and daft, god knows what suburban warrior nonsense I'd have written in a similar situation.


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 17, 2011)

flutterbye said:


> Who let this happen? YOU DID! YOU ARE TO BLAME! YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE!
> The British people voted conservative, the British people are to blame for the riots!


Vote Labour!


----------



## Andrew Hertford (Aug 17, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> you do know cps stands for 'crown prosecution service' and not for eg court publicity service or cheery publicans say? of course they're going to make out he deserved a spell of porridge.



Ah, so _that's_ what CPS stands for. I'd always wondered.

I agree that the sentences here and seemingly in plenty of other cases are far too high, they need to work as a deterrent but message we're getting now is that the state is being vengeful. I think they do need to be punished, but a couple of months, tops.


----------



## TopCat (Aug 17, 2011)

This bodes well for those sticking it out for a trial by jury. The jury will be less likely to convict whatever the evidence if they think a sentence of this magnitude may be dished out.


----------



## IC3D (Aug 17, 2011)

Prolly been mentioned but a man gets 2 years for mugging an off duty cop and these guys get 4 how clearer message do we need that money and property is valued more than humanity.


----------



## kmarxs&sparks (Aug 17, 2011)

Mr.Bishie said:


> One too fuckin' far that.



Perhaps but a few google searches makes it look a lot like they were  EDL and trying to make the riots worse for bent political ends.
No actual proof so I could be wrong but a lot of hints.


----------



## Garek (Aug 17, 2011)

Good blog post here: http://www.fleetstreetfox.com/2011/08/43-and-never-been-spanked.html?spref=tw


----------



## A Dashing Blade (Aug 17, 2011)

flutterbye said:


> Who let this happen? YOU DID! YOU ARE TO BLAME! YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE!
> The British people voted conservative, the British people are to blame for the riots!


So all the factors behind this were caused by the policies of a Govt that's been in power since May 2010?


----------



## editor (Aug 17, 2011)

Funnily enough, when I took the NoTW to the Press Complaints Commission it was over their bizarre allegations that I'd gone up to Scotland to 'plan a riot.'

I shudder to think what might have happened if they'd ran than story now (if the rag still existed, of course).


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 17, 2011)

More friends being removed from my Facebook after i compared MP's expenses with the guy stealing £3.50 of water.



> "If you want to compare sentences, try probations and bans instead of jail for death by dangerous driving - there are many examples of that. Comapring things on a monetary value means nothing."
> 
> "Just because they can only prove he stole water, ...doesn't mean he wasn't also chucking rocks at police and smashing up property. You convict on what you can prove."
> 
> Ask someone that was shit scared living in them middle of it all what they think - if it puts people off doing it again then keep it coming.


----------



## dylanredefined (Aug 17, 2011)

The riot didn't happen so 4 years is excessive though what is the legal equivalent of "Stop being stupid or you will get a smack"Which is what they deserve.


----------



## shaman75 (Aug 17, 2011)

dylanredefined said:


> The riot didn't happen so 4 years is excessive though what is the legal equivalent of "Stop being stupid or you will get a smack"Which is what they deserve.



a caution?


----------



## southside (Aug 17, 2011)

Streathamite said:


> Right - Ok, let me tell YOU something.
> 
> So, you think i'm NOT traumatised by this? I LIVE in the inner city, in London's East End. But this is about more than just you and I - this is a country of 56 million, including the rioters and the looters. They are the product of a society you and I helped to create, and they will still be there when your kids return home to you. One thing we can do is your frankly braindamaged sub-_Fail _ranting zabout 'brainless cunts', 'hang the scum' and the rest, and that will do ZERO to understand why it happened, the causal factors, and again ZERO, therefore, to prevent a repeat occurrence. The other is to accept they are normal human beings, and to find out why.
> I can only assume that the latter is far too mentally exacting for your poor little brain to contemplate.
> ...



The bravest words come from the safest places.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> Are you for real, say that to people who have been terrorised you stupid cunt. This is not challenging authority, it's fucking urban terrorism.


Urban terrorism is when I come round yours and beat you shitless every night for a week because you're a div, not posting a facebook page.


----------



## southside (Aug 17, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Urban terrorism is when I come round yours and beat you shitless every night for a week because you're a div, not posting a facebook page.



Your just a weird old cripple who couldn't fight your way out of a wet chip bag, don't be silly VP you haven't got a good fuck in you let alone a fight.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 17, 2011)

Refused as fuck said:


> Quite frankly, so are most of you. But that has no relevance here.



You're such a sweet-talker!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> Your just a weird old cripple who couldn't fight your way out of a wet chip bag, don't be silly VP you haven't got a good fuck in you let alone a fight.



That''s not what your missus said.


----------



## xes (Aug 17, 2011)

badum tish!


----------



## flutterbye (Aug 17, 2011)

A Dashing Blade said:


> So all the factors behind this were caused by the policies of a Govt that's been in power since May 2010?



Its what we told the Germans in 1945, they were responsible, not the Nazis, them. Whats good for the goose,eh.
Actually collective guilt is a load of rubbish IMO, people looted because they could.
Yes people are frustrated, facilities are being closed, bashing the filth is fun, but none of those were the reason for going on a mass rob and burning peoples homes out.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 17, 2011)

@ southside: your tagline is not consonant with your gratuitous abuse. If you seriously cannot see hypocrisy in the current sentencing wankfest then I despair. I'm sorry you and your family were scared. I most likely would have been too, but I feel that you need to acquire some perspective.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 17, 2011)

anyone know how much or little the value of what is stolen has on the length of sentence received?


----------



## southside (Aug 17, 2011)

Barking_Mad said:


> anyone know how much or little the value of what is stolen has on the length of sentence received?



Going by the bloke who got six months for stealing a six pack of water from Lidl the equation is easy.

1 month per bottle.


----------



## 8den (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> Going by the bloke who got six months for stealing a six pack of water from Lidl the equation is easy.
> 
> 1 month per bottle.



You'd want to get to a doctor to see about the RSI injury to your tibioferomal ligaments.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 17, 2011)

Seems a ridiculous sentence in light of the number of MPs who got away with expenses fraud claiming mistakes.

Where have the harsh messages been on expenses?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Aug 17, 2011)

my soon to be removed FB friends are insisiting that burgling a shop of water and stealing £30k in expenses arent in anyway comparable; and that the value of what you steal doesnt matter, it's just that you did it.


----------



## 8den (Aug 17, 2011)

weltweit said:


> Seems a ridiculous sentence in light of the number of MPs who got away with expenses fraud claiming mistakes.
> 
> Where have the harsh messages been on expenses?



Many of them had to actually pay for the nice things they "stole", I mean tried to embezzle on expenses.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 17, 2011)

8den said:


> Many of them had to actually pay for the nice things they "stole", I mean tried to embezzle on expenses.



I can't remember the details anymore but I am pretty sure many got away with it because they paid the money back. It makes a mockery of the mother who was prosecuted for handling stolen good - a pair of shorts IIRC - and was given a custodial sentence.

Where is the proportionality? where ...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 17, 2011)

xes said:


> badum tish!



It was almost too easy. I feel guilty now.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> Going by the bloke who got six months for stealing a six pack of water from Lidl the equation is easy.
> 
> 1 month per bottle.



Or, if you're into the financial side of it, 1 month for each 58p worth of goods taken.

That'd see some of the conning cunts in the Houses of Parliament locked up well beyond their deaths, that would!


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> Going by the bloke who got six months for stealing a six pack of water from Lidl the equation is easy.
> 
> 1 month per bottle.



Yeah, that punishment really 'fits' the crime.


----------



## southside (Aug 17, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Yeah, that punishment really 'fits' the crime.


That isn't the point though is it.


----------



## xes (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> That isn't the point though is it.


um...yes?


----------



## southside (Aug 17, 2011)

No it isn't, under normal circumstances the punishment does not fit the crime, but the terms being administered are a device to stop others joining the zombie looters virus.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> The bravest words come from the safest places.


what on earth is 'safe' about living in inner east London - a mile from Hackney - right now?


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 17, 2011)

flutterbye said:


> Who let this happen? YOU DID! YOU ARE TO BLAME! YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE!
> The British people voted conservative, the British people are to blame for the riots!


I *certainly* think there is a strong connection between these riots, and the way that 30 years of neo-liberalism - and it's erosion of civic values, and it's all-out attack on public services - have effectively trashed society


----------



## 8den (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:
			
		

> The bravest words come from the safest places.



Tell you what, why don't you head down to the gallery at one of london's finest court houses, and start mouthing off this kind of Judge Dredd esque sentencing bollocks to the parents of kids getting custodial sentences for stealing something worth a fiver.

Lets see how brave you are southside.



> That isn't the point though is it.



Punishment is supposed to fit the crime. Michael Gove swindled something like £45k out of expenses and he got to be Minister of Education.

Some daft bugger steals 6 bottles of water and get a criminal conviction that will affect his employment prospects for a decade. How's that make a blind bit of sense to you?


----------



## 8den (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> No it isn't, under normal circumstances the punishment does not fit the crime, but the terms being administered are a device to stop others joining the zombie looters virus.



The hardcore element the kind that drives cars into people protecting businesses, couldnt fucking care, and stomping on the heads of those stupid enough to plea guilt is going to do more harm to people who were committing what was in likelyhood their first offense.


----------



## flutterbye (Aug 17, 2011)

Streathamite said:


> I *certainly* think there is a strong connection between these riots, and the way that 30 years of neo-liberalism - and it's erosion of civic values, and it's all-out attack on public services - have effectively trashed society



The initial quote was just a comment on collective guilt which I think is a nonsense personally, its not fair to be held responsible for the actions of others, actions that you cant personally influence.

But...yes I agree....the attacks on the socialist entities from Thatcher onwards and New Labour's dumping of their core support base leaving them unrepresented electorally are big factors in our society. Last year young people were just killing themselves in Bridgend en-masse, if that wasn't a warning that young people feel powerless in our society I don't know what is. Cameron's cunts have just tipped a increasingly heavier scale. if you look inside conservative ideology there is no answer that hasn't failed before. The only potential way out I can see is if the lib-dems destroy the coalition for the good of the nation.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 17, 2011)

Surely these people will just appeal and their sentences will be reduced no?


----------



## dylans (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> No it isn't, under normal circumstances the punishment does not fit the crime, but the terms being administered are a device to stop others joining the zombie looters virus.



Well yes. Next time there is an opportunity for looting I am sure people will learn the lesson, not bother with the bottle of water and go straight for the playstation 3s.


----------



## 8den (Aug 17, 2011)

weltweit said:


> Surely these people will just appeal and their sentences will be reduced no?


 
How long will the appeal take to be heard? I imagine the appeals courts are going to be clogged with everyone getting a custodial for being in the presence of looting.


----------



## southside (Aug 17, 2011)

8den said:


> The hardcore element the kind that drives cars into people protecting businesses, couldnt fucking care, and stomping on the heads of those stupid enough to plea guilt is going to do more harm to people who were committing what was in likelyhood their first offense.



Well if people want to go around displaying the brains of a rocking horse then fuck em.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 17, 2011)

8den said:


> How long will the appeal take to be heard? I imagine the appeals courts are going to be clogged with everyone getting a custodial for being in the presence of looting.



Ok, but so .. you agree there will be appeals..

I have heard people on the news saying context matters as in people convicted in the context of these riots should get special treatment. But I think the appeal court will / may want to have their say on this.


----------



## 8den (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> Well if people want to go around displaying the brains of a rocking horse then fuck em.



Well you are leading by example then southside.


----------



## agricola (Aug 17, 2011)

weltweit said:


> Ok, but so .. you agree there will be appeals..
> 
> I have heard people on the news saying context matters as in people convicted in the context of these riots should get special treatment. But I think the appeal court will / may want to have their say on this.



TBH I am amazed there hasnt been activity with regards to some of the refusals of bail already - I mentioned it earlier on the thread, but one girl is being kept inside for more than two weeks for the theft of a bottle of lucozade, when she has no previous convictions *and* she handed herself in to police the day after the offence.  It is madness, and must be costing a fortune.


----------



## weltweit (Aug 17, 2011)

agricola said:


> TBH I am amazed there hasnt been activity with regards to some of the refusals of bail already - I mentioned it earlier on the thread, but one girl is being kept inside for more than two weeks for the theft of a bottle of lucozade, when she has no previous convictions *and* she handed herself in to police the day after the offence. It is madness, and must be costing a fortune.



Why on earth did she hand herself in for ?  crazy


----------



## claphamboy (Aug 17, 2011)

editor said:


> Funnily enough, when I took the NoTW to the Press Complaints Commission it was over their bizarre allegations that I'd gone up to Scotland to 'plan a riot.'
> 
> I shudder to think what might have happened if they'd ran than story now (if the rag still existed, of course).



Not heard of this before, did you write it up in an article or blog post?


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> Well if people want to go around displaying the brains of a rocking horse then fuck em.


you really can't see that the answers, explanations and solutions are very much more complicated than that, can you?
I mean, it's just not in you, is it?


----------



## southside (Aug 17, 2011)

Streathamite said:


> you really can't see that the answers, explanations and solutions are very much more complicated than that, can you?
> I mean, it's just not in you, is it?


I know all the wibberal wishy washy bullshit that the lefties have been peddling for years but the reality is britains dumbest criminals can fuck off.  I do understand that it's a bit sad for the A grade student who suffered a major malfunction last week and may have his little life ruined by being imprisoned but I just don't give a flying fuck.

The left are fucking this country along with the PC brigade and they can fuck the fuck off.


----------



## kained&able (Aug 17, 2011)

people seen this?

some 17 year old who posted something fairly innocuous on his facebook page banned from social media for 12months 120hours community service and 7pm-6am curfew for 3 months, ridiculous.

dave


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> I know all the wibberal wishy washy bullshit that the lefties have been peddling for years but the reality is britains dumbest criminals can fuck off. I do understand that it's a bit sad for the A grade student who suffered a major malfunction last week and may have his little life ruined by being imprisoned but I just don't give a flying fuck.
> 
> The left are fucking this country along with the PC brigade and they can fuck the fuck off.


jesus. It really is like watching the least bright _Sun_ reader of all de-evolve before one's very own eyes.
Do yourself a favour - come back when you have a valid, well-informed opinion, or at least the thought processing power to even attempt such a tricky thing.
you're just making yourself look a complete (bigotted) idiot here.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Aug 17, 2011)

Southside, 30 years ago.


----------



## dylans (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> I know all the wibberal wishy washy bullshit that the lefties have been peddling for years but the reality is britains dumbest criminals can fuck off. I do understand that it's a bit sad for the A grade student who suffered a major malfunction last week and may have his little life ruined by being imprisoned but I just don't give a flying fuck.
> 
> The left are fucking this country along with the PC brigade and they can fuck the fuck off.


Against my better judgement I am going to make the massive assumption that you are not as thick as your post suggests. Let's see if that assumption is a mistake or not.

You post an awful lot of fairly incoherent gibberish in your post. "Wibberal wishy washy bullshit" etc, I am curious what precisely you mean by that. At a time when a lot of people are afraid and angry we are witnessing a fairly unprecidented move away from proportionality in sentencing. This concerns some of us. I presume that this is what you mean by liberal bullshit. But you need to ask yourself some serious questions. In a democratic society, principles such as proportionality, judicial independance, due process etc are at the heart of the system of justice. When you dismiss these principles as "wiberal bullshit" what you are really dismissing is democratic governance itself. You are in effect saying that in certain circumstances, such as public disorder,you are prepared to trample over those values.

Now, I am sure you are reading this and shrugging your shoulders and giving it your "I don't give a fuck" speech, but you are really missing the essential point. That is that these principles and values don't just protect "dumb criminals" they protect you too. I don't know how old you are but I am old enough to remember a time of similar hysterics and calls for vengeance by the " I don't give a fuck" brigade during the1970s, the issue wasn't riots it was IRA mainland bombs and it led to the railroading and false convictions of the Birmingham 6 and others by a judicial system that was similarly under knee jerk political interference and pressure to produce results and to ignore due process. Think about that, because without the principles of justice that you are so happy to see being disregarded right now, it could be you in the dock, I bet you would give a fuck then.


----------



## claphamboy (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> The left are fucking this country along with the PC brigade and they can fuck the fuck off.



I wasn't aware 'the left' were running the country.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 17, 2011)

Dylans - wrong assumption. Southside really IS that thick, so much so that he regards Richard Littledick as a fount of enlightened sage wisdom!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> No it isn't, under normal circumstances the punishment does not fit the crime, but the terms being administered are a device to stop others joining the zombie looters virus.



Except, of course, that it ma well induce people think "If I'm going to go down, I might as well get hung for a wolf as hung for a lamb".


----------



## cool herc (Aug 17, 2011)

Four years jail for a joke on Facebook? Keeping a close eye on MP's and police for when they trot out the "kill rioters" nonsense then.

oh and hi


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 17, 2011)

weltweit said:


> Surely these people will just appeal and their sentences will be reduced no?


Highly likely, but that's not really the point. The point is that politics and political demands shouldn't be infiltrating the functions of the criminal justice system.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> Well if people want to go around displaying the brains of a rocking horse then fuck em.


That's you well and truly cunted, then.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 17, 2011)

cool herc said:


> Four years jail for a joke on Facebook? Keeping a close eye on MP's and police for when they trot out the "kill rioters" nonsense then.



Well, you know how it is, when you're a copper or a politician you get "refined tastes" for what gets your dick hard, and being self-righteous hypocrites obviously gets them off.



> oh and hi



Hi. Hows the Bronx?


----------



## dylans (Aug 17, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Highly likely, but that's not really the point. The point is that politics and political demands shouldn't be infiltrating the functions of the criminal justice system.



Yes. This is the most important issue. We are seeing political interference in the judicial system. Interference which undermines the principle of judicial independence and therefore undermines one of the central principles of democratic governance


----------



## cool herc (Aug 17, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Well, you know how it is, when you're a copper or a politician you get "refined tastes" for what gets your dick hard, and being self-righteous hypocrites obviously gets them off.



Looks like the Coulson/Cameron thing is about to completely unravel, so the PM and Scotland Yard should expect zero tolerance.



> Hi. Hows the Bronx?



Real hip hop, my man.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 17, 2011)

editor said:


> Funnily enough, when I took the NoTW to the Press Complaints Commission it was over their bizarre allegations that I'd gone up to Scotland to 'plan a riot.'
> 
> I shudder to think what might have happened if they'd ran than story now (if the rag still existed, of course).


was that glen eagles G8 related? did they get you mixed up with me or something?*

* not that I was in anyway involved in planning a riot in scotland of course, merely a few days camping in the countryside for a few thousand like minded souls that the police seemed to take exception to for some reason.


----------



## smokedout (Aug 17, 2011)

free spirit said:


> someone really needs to knock up and distribute some proper online bust cards pointing out to people that if nicked they really need to just sftu and plead not guilty. If they're handing out these sentences to those who've pled guilty, then people really need to stop making it so easy for them.



apologies if this has been posted.  i suspect whats going on is that briefs are advising a guilty plea based on the fact everyone's getting remanded and the courts will be backed up for months - so for the more trivial shit, its probably worth pleading guilty even if you know you arent, rather than have the case bumped up to crown, or spending longer on remand than you might receive in sentence on conviction


----------



## Struwwelpeter (Aug 17, 2011)

southside said:


> ...but the reality is britains dumbest criminals can fuck off.



I get it, you support the bright criminals.  That'll be the bankers, NOTW, MPs and the ones that are so clever that we've never heard of them.  Obviously, you aren't one of them.


----------



## DRINK? (Aug 17, 2011)

if there is one thing we can all learn from this...... is to use someone elses facebook account when arranging riots


----------



## free spirit (Aug 17, 2011)

DRINK? said:


> if there is one thing we can all learn from this...... is to use someone elses facebook account when arranging riots


or, simply don't use facebook at all ever to post up anything at all to do with anything that has the potential to end up with the police looking for scapegoats. As has been pointed out on here countless times before, yet still every protest simply must have it's own facebook page to give the police an incredibly easy time in arresting either individual protestors, or the protest organisers or both after the event if it's kicked off.

not that this place is so much safer these days now all the protest forums are fully googleable and all that, but at least the police would have to do a little bit of leg work to track someone down.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 17, 2011)

weltweit said:


> Surely these people will just appeal and their sentences will be reduced no?


yep, but the deterrent effect will have worked by then, as the 4 year sentences have got loads of publicity, but the sentence reductions will only merit a couple of lines on page 9 of the broadsheets, and nothing in the tabloids.


----------



## newme (Aug 17, 2011)

DRINK? said:


> if there is one thing we can all learn from this...... is to use someone elses facebook account when arranging riots



Or just dont be fucking stupid and arrange riots.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 17, 2011)

newme said:


> Or just dont be fucking stupid and arrange riots.


leave it to the clever people instead?


----------



## newme (Aug 17, 2011)

free spirit said:


> leave it to the clever people instead?



Mostly they stayed out of it lol.


----------



## xenon (Aug 17, 2011)

Probably been posted but let's not forget. 

Clegg asked about his little spot of arson.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ueBCWaWNcY


A reminder of that riotuss behaviour some of our political leaders allegedly took part in.

http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/201...don-night-of-the-broken-window/#axzz1VJmJXXv4


----------



## shaman75 (Aug 17, 2011)

kained&able said:


> people seen this?
> 
> some 17 year old who posted something fairly innocuous on his facebook page banned from social media for 12months 120hours community service and 7pm-6am curfew for 3 months, ridiculous.
> 
> dave


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 17, 2011)

cool herc said:


> Looks like the Coulson/Cameron thing is about to completely unravel, so the PM and Scotland Yard should expect zero tolerance.



Ain't gonna happen. One hand will wash the other, and most of the N.I. cunts will walk or get time in an open prison. Cameron, although he hasn't protected himself very well with reference to Coulson's vetting, can expect the Cabinet Secretary or some other senior Civil Servant to fall on their sword for him, for an ermine-trimmed robe, nudge nudge, wink wink.

As for the old bill, they're so neck-deep in managerialism, they're never going to escape the fall-out, probably the only people who won't. That's what happens when you get people doing a job who see it as a pathway to senior management in other organisations, rather than as a (whisper the word quietly) vocation.


----------



## DrRingDing (Aug 17, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Cameron, although he hasn't protected himself very well with reference to Coulson's vetting, can expect the Cabinet Secretary or some other senior Civil Servant to fall on their sword for him



The media have totally ignored the fact that the PM is briefed on the people he employs around him by MI5.

His past and involvement must of been mentioned.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 17, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Ain't gonna happen.....



I have to agree, but it would be nice.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 18, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> The media have totally ignored the fact that the PM is briefed on the people he employs around him by MI5.
> 
> His past and involvement must of been mentioned.


are you sure on this?

they specifically didn't put him up for enhanced disclosure clearance, presumably to prevent MI5 having the excuse to go digging into his history, with Cameron apparently accepting coulson and murdoch's word on him being ok and not having anything too major in his closet. Shows how fucking dumb cameron really is IMO.


----------



## DrRingDing (Aug 18, 2011)

free spirit said:


> are you sure on this?
> 
> they specifically didn't put him up for enhanced disclosure clearance, presumably to prevent MI5 having the excuse to go digging into his history.



MI5 would have more than likely been aware of Coulsen and they do brief the PM on his close aides.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 18, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> MI5 would have more than likely been aware of Coulsen and they do brief the PM on his close aides.


usually as part of the process of giving them clearance though. If no clearance is sought, then I can't see how they're going to be able to give him a briefing, which is pretty much why no clearance was sought*.

*initially, I think they eventually got told they had to get him cleared by someone, and I think that this process had just started before he resigned.


----------



## Poo Flakes (Aug 18, 2011)

xenon said:


> Clegg asked about his little spot of arson.



Clegg had reached the point some time ago where the more reasonable members of the Lib Dems stopped listening to him.  It is only a matter of time before he and Alexander get the boot.  We have probably reached the point where Clegg has fucked their base so fucking hard, he and the Lib Dems have become a total irrelevance across Britain.


Conservative press releases just contain the Lib Dem position on any matter of significance, and really most of the crap they come out with is just rehashed 1980s rhetoric.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 18, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> The media have totally ignored the fact that the PM is briefed on the people he employs around him by MI5.
> 
> His past and involvement must of been mentioned.



Of course it was. Any junior civil servant who has to work directly with ministers etc knows the score for vetting, and how deep they go, so there was no chance Cameron *didn't* know, none at all.

My point, though, was that Cameron will escape the consequences of such an egregious security breach because the upper tier of mandarins serving him will produce a sacrificial victim and a plausible reason why Cameron isn't to blame.

Said "victim" will then be looked after with a handful of sinecures at the least.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 18, 2011)

teqniq said:


> I have to agree, but it would be nice.



Fuck, yeah!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 18, 2011)

free spirit said:


> are you sure on this?
> 
> they specifically didn't put him up for enhanced disclosure clearance, presumably to prevent MI5 having the excuse to go digging into his history, with Cameron apparently accepting coulson and murdoch's word on him being ok and not having anything too major in his closet. Shows how fucking dumb cameron really is IMO.



Anyone thinking that MI5, if only for purely instrumental reasons (leverage, for example), don't do fairly deep analysis of anyone that near the seat of power is, at best, way too charitable. MI5 are almost certainly aware of exactly why Coulson wasn't submitted for upper tier vetting. In fact they probably know as much about it as Coulson himself. They may be shitcunts, but their analysts are bloody good and very thorough.


----------



## Streathamite (Aug 18, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Cameron, although he hasn't protected himself very well with reference to Coulson's vetting, can expect the Cabinet Secretary or some other senior Civil Servant to fall on their sword for him, for an ermine-trimmed robe, nudge nudge, wink wink.


in fact, it's probably gonna be Ed LLewellyn, his chief of staff, on the grounds that if Cameron sticks to his storythat he wasn't told about Rusbridger's warning hilton about Coulson's links to Jonathan Rees, then the blame for that will fall on Llewellyn - and he'll be sacked, with - as you so rightly predict - a big compensation somewhere


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 18, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> MI5 would have more than likely been aware of Coulsen and they do brief the PM on his close aides.



In fact they're *obliged* to. Their consideration is the security of the realm, so the feelings or needs of the PM wouldn't and shouldn't be a consideration.
To their way of thinking, Coulson, as someone with such a potential for being blackmailed, would be a *massive* threat to internal security.


----------



## likesfish (Aug 18, 2011)

Mi5 would know coulson was dodgy and would not be impressed that call me dave tried to avoid positive vetting 
I mean whats the fucking point of having a security service if your just going to ignore it 
  police and  mangerlism sometimes hear are local inspector speak its like he's  stolen dilberts pointy eared bosses buzzword book and quotes it.
 seems like a nice bloke and obviously likes the job but boy does he call a spade a manual earth removal implement.
 though for a bloke who likes the odd pie he can't half shift when he needs to


----------



## trevhagl (Aug 18, 2011)

the pen or at least keyboard is mightier than the sword!


----------



## Garek (Aug 18, 2011)

Here is an article for any and all pig shit thick cunts who think this is an acceptable sentence: http://www.newsnetscotland.com/inde...he-streets-we-have-insanity-on-the-bench.html


----------



## free spirit (Aug 19, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Anyone thinking that MI5, if only for purely instrumental reasons (leverage, for example), don't do fairly deep analysis of anyone that near the seat of power is, at best, way too charitable. MI5 are almost certainly aware of exactly why Coulson wasn't submitted for upper tier vetting. In fact they probably know as much about it as Coulson himself. They may be shitcunts, but their analysts are bloody good and very thorough.


that may be true, but did they have the excuse to bring those findings to the attention of the prime minister?

The whole thing seems to have been a charade in which cameron appears to have willingly participated in order to prevent anyone being able to officially raise questions about his decision to appoint someone who obviously had a dodgy past with many secrets in his closet.


----------



## shaman75 (Aug 19, 2011)

> The courts are handing down prison sentences to convicted rioters that are on average 25% longer than normal, according to an exclusive Guardian analysis of 1,000 riot-related cases dealt with so far by magistrates.
> The data proves for the first time that the handful of high-profile individual cases – including a four-year sentence for inciting disorder on Facebook – are indicative of a more punitive general trend.
> This unprecedented access to national court results reveals that 70% of defendants have been remanded in custody to await crown court trial, fuelling a surge in the prison population, which reached a record high of 86,608 in England and Wales. The Guardian's data also shows that 56 defendants of the 80 who have already been sentenced by magistrates were given immediate prison terms. This 70% rate of imprisonment compares with a "normal" rate of just 2% in magistrates courts.
> More than half those imprisoned were charged with theft or handling stolen goods, receiving an average of 5.1 months. This is 25% longer than the average custodial sentence for these crimes of 4.1 months seen in courts during 2010, according to Ministry of Justice statistics. Public order offences are leading to sentences 33% longer than normal and those convicted of assaulting police officers have been jailed for 40% longer than usual.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/18/full-picture-of-riot-sentences


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 19, 2011)

Here's some more facebook stuff:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ded-after-calling-rioters-jungle-bunnies.html
 Tory councillor suspended after calling rioters 'jungle bunnies'


----------



## dylans (Aug 19, 2011)

BBC this morning is reporting that the prisons are nearly full. There are only 150 spaces left. They are talking about packing 3 to a cell. That will endear the rioters to those inside. Ccan we expect unrest to break out inside prisons? Frankly, I hope so, that would be suitable egg on the face of this ridiculous government


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2011)

dylans said:


> BBC this morning is reporting that the prisons are nearly full. There are only 150 spaces left. They are talking about packing 3 to a cell. That will endear the rioters to those inside. Ccan we expect unrest to break out inside prisons? Frankly, I hope so, that would be suitable egg on the face of this ridiculous government


given what happened in ford open prison at the start of the year prison riots have been on the cards across the country for months.


----------



## dylans (Aug 19, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> given what happened in ford open prison at the start of the year prison riots have been on the cards across the country for months.


I like the irony of people held in prison for rioting...............rioting

Or a government crackdown on rioting.........causing a riot.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 19, 2011)

free spirit said:


> that may be true, but did they have the excuse to bring those findings to the attention of the prime minister?



They'd be obligated to, but as they'd have to do it through channels (make appt with cab sec and/or Cameron's _aide de camp_ nd his diary sec), lots of convenient "cut-offs" make plausible deniability....well, plausible, IYSWIM.



> The whole thing seems to have been a charade in which cameron appears to have willingly participated in order to prevent anyone being able to officially raise questions about his decision to appoint someone who obviously had a dodgy past with many secrets in his closet.



There's no "seems" about it. We're getting a glimpse of the way "the game" is played in Whitehall and Downing Street.

Nauseating, isn't it?


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 19, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> given what happened in ford open prison at the start of the year prison riots have been on the cards across the country for months.



This is what I was thinking when magistrates started locking up people for 16 months for wearing a pair of shorts.


----------



## treelover (Aug 19, 2011)

'http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/18/england-rioters-young-poor-unemployed'

I have to say the Guardian is doing some great stuff, first Murdoch , now serious analysis of the backgrounds/demographics/locations of the rioters, poverty seemed to be a significant factor..

but of course, the MSM is focussing on the middle class ones, etc as the G points out...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/18/england-rioters-pillars-of-the-community


----------



## treelover (Aug 19, 2011)

The Panorama programme on the riots was disappointing too, nothing new, revealing, etc..


----------



## treelover (Aug 19, 2011)

''For the cost of sending just 2 young men to jail for 4 years for setting up a facebook group that didn't cause a riot, you could employ 4 youth workers for 4 years working with up to 200 of the most alienated young people per year (800 young people in 4 yrs) or pay for a full time youth advice service in 8 large secondary schools (benefitting around 10,000 young people) for a year or you could employ 24 young people on Â£15,000 for a year at a time when youth unemployment has reached over 20%.'

post on Guardian CIF


----------



## TopCat (Aug 19, 2011)

That woman who got jailed for receiving shorts is out having successfully appealed. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/19/riots-mother-looted-shorts-freed


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 19, 2011)

Excellent!


----------



## _angel_ (Aug 19, 2011)

Bit of common sense at last!


----------



## The Octagon (Aug 19, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Here's some more facebook stuff:
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ded-after-calling-rioters-jungle-bunnies.html
> Tory councillor suspended after calling rioters 'jungle bunnies'






			
				Tory cunt said:
			
		

> I have just had a phone call that accused me of racism for my above posting. Looking at the dictionary it would appear that the term jungle bunnies is pejorative and is a racist slur relating to African-Americans.
> 
> Needless to say I did not mean to use any offensive racist term and was referring to the urban jungle. As for the bunny bit it was originally 'animals', but I thought people might object to me calling fellow humans this so I chose something I thought was innocent and also cuddly.



Chinny fucking reckon.


----------



## TopCat (Aug 19, 2011)

Jimmy Hill...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 19, 2011)

A poll out says 81% find the sentences about right or too soft.

We have to accept that many people want this. But wonder if they are just pleased that their anger can be reflected for once.

Enormous rip offs from every corporation going. Fuck all happens.

Bankers fuck the economy. Ditto.

The political and media kleptocracy get off the hook more often than not.

All around we see naked corruption and greed without consequence.

To meter it out dispropotionally to the untermenchen just because we can is a big mistake.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 19, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> They'd be obligated to, but as they'd have to do it through channels (make appt with cab sec and/or Cameron's _aide de camp_ nd his diary sec), lots of convenient "cut-offs" make plausible deniability....well, plausible, IYSWIM.
> 
> There's no "seems" about it. We're getting a glimpse of the way "the game" is played in Whitehall and Downing Street.
> 
> Nauseating, isn't it?


yep, that's basicalyl what I was getting at.


----------



## stuff_it (Aug 19, 2011)

kained&able said:


> people seen this?
> 
> some 17 year old who posted something fairly innocuous on his facebook page banned from social media for 12months 120hours community service and 7pm-6am curfew for 3 months, ridiculous.
> 
> dave


Thoughtcrime


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 18, 2011)

weltweit said:


> Surely these people will just appeal and their sentences will be reduced no?



Yes - and no.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/18/riots-lengthy-sentences-upheld-appeal-court


----------



## Poo Flakes (Oct 18, 2011)

kained&able said:


> people seen this?
> 
> some 17 year old who posted something fairly innocuous on his facebook page banned from social media for 12months 120hours community service and 7pm-6am curfew for 3 months, ridiculous.
> 
> dave



In China your posts which criticise government are, I believe, just deleted, perhaps repeat offenders being jailed, I am seriously interested in how much more severe a penalty would be for a similar action in an undemocratic country.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2011)

Sentences upheld on appeal for these lads.

I don't have a problem with 4 years, given they'll be out in 2.

Seems about right to me.


----------



## claphamboy (Oct 18, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> Sentences upheld on appeal for these lads.
> 
> I don't have a problem with 4 years, given they'll be out in 2.
> 
> Seems about right to me.



Are you serious? 4 years for posting bollocks on the internet?*

Absolute tops it should have been suspended sentences of 3-6 months, plus 100+ hours community service.

* that didn't come to anything.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2011)

claphamboy said:


> Are you serious? 4 years for posting bollocks on the internet?*
> 
> Absolute tops it should have been suspended sentences of 3-6 months, plus 100+ hours community service.
> 
> * that didn't come to anything.


it should have been a £5 fine, if that


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 18, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> Sentences upheld on appeal for these lads.
> 
> I don't have a problem with 4 years, given they'll be out in 2.
> 
> Seems about right to me.



That's because you're a lackey of the ruling classes, Spy.


----------



## claphamboy (Oct 18, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> it should have been a £5 fine, if that



Per post of bollocks?

If so, that's you fucked which ever way you look at it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> Sentences upheld on appeal for these lads.
> 
> I don't have a problem with 4 years, given they'll be out in 2.
> 
> Seems about right for me.


*corrected for you*


----------



## Poo Flakes (Oct 18, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> Sentences upheld on appeal for these lads.
> 
> I don't have a problem with 4 years, given they'll be out in 2.
> 
> Seems about right to me.



I would give you 5 years for that shite!

LOL ROFL!!)!(!"" WOOT WOOT   !!!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2011)

claphamboy said:


> Per post of bollocks?
> 
> If so, that's you fucked which ever way you like at it.


no, a £5 fine for each of the two lads sent down for the facebook bollocks, as is after all the subject of this thread


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2011)

claphamboy said:


> Are you serious? 4 years for posting bollocks on the internet?*



It's not "posting bollocks", it's inciting violence.

So fuck 'em.


----------



## albionism (Oct 18, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> Sentences upheld on appeal for these lads.
> 
> I don't have a problem with 4 years, given they'll be out in 2.
> 
> Seems about right to me.


what the very fuck! 4 years for chatting bollocks! you are mental.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 18, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> it should have been a £5 fine, if that



The court should have paid the two blokes good cash money for giving them a laugh.


----------



## dylanredefined (Oct 18, 2011)

claphamboy said:


> Are you serious? 4 years for posting bollocks on the internet?*
> 
> Absolute tops it should have been suspended sentences of 3-6 months, plus 100+ hours community service.
> 
> * that didn't come to anything.


 If it had kicked off 4 years is justified as it didn't the I'd agree with the above.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2011)

albionism said:


> what the very fuck! 4 years for chatting bollocks! you are mental.



There's another thread in this forum started by Pilch, about some character called Birrell who's just been nicked for posting sectarian shite on the net.

HE was chatting bollocks.

These chaps actually attempted to kick-off violence and urged others to do so.

Ideally they'd get a good birching, but given that that's no longer an option 4 years, out in 2, works for me!


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 18, 2011)

psycho-sexual pleasure in other peoples punishment lol


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2011)

I only get a proper stiffy out of hangings, Dot.


----------



## claphamboy (Oct 18, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> I only get a proper stiffy out of hangings, Dot.



This is true, Kris has complained about this to me.


----------



## scifisam (Oct 18, 2011)

4 years for posting shite on the internet surely means that the MPs who fiddled their expenses -stealing from the public and causing just as much public disgust as any rioters - will get 15-20 years, no? And every rapist will get sent away for life, and all murderers will have their lives artificially prolonged so they can serve even longer.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 18, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> it should have been a £5 fine, if that


Completely Pickman - lets get this clear, these people have been jailed for thought crime, they are political prisoners. Yes they may have tried to 'incicte violence' but there is a difference between inciting violence in such a way that it has a realistic chance of occuring and, pure fantasy. Their offence comes into the later category. They are fall guys for the organic crisis capitalism is in at the minute, and remember, no justice - no peace.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2011)

scifisam said:


> 4 years for posting shite on the internet surely means that the MPs who fiddled their expenses -stealing from the public and causing just as much public disgust as any rioters - will get 15-20 years, no? And every rapist will get sent away for life, and all murderers will have their lives artificially prolonged so they can serve even longer.


 
All music to my ears, Sam.

Except for murderers having their lives prolonged. The opposite is the solution.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Oct 18, 2011)

4 years is a load of shit.  Never heard of such a sentence for "inciting violence", especially when it's just a couple of people chatting shit online.  It may be that "most people" want this, but surely thats the point of an independent judiciary - that they don't take political and populist viewpoints into consideration, but rather treat each case on its merits?


----------



## ddraig (Oct 18, 2011)

consistantly cunty, simon
well done


----------



## _angel_ (Oct 18, 2011)

It's all the rapists etc that will be getting out early to make room for people posting shit on the internet I am thinking about also.

Locally some bloke who hit his wife so hard she was in a coma had his time reduced by half, and there's tons of cases like that. He got about half what they did.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2011)

There's a simple solution to that.

Build more prisons.


----------



## ddraig (Oct 18, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> There's a simple solution to that.
> 
> Build more prisons.


yay! and make the feckless fuckers produce shite for asda so good citizens can get it even cheaper!
yay! problem solved


----------



## _angel_ (Oct 18, 2011)

They're not though. They're quite happy to let out violent bastards as long as they only half kill their wives or abuse someone else's children. As long as there's jail space for water stealers etc.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 18, 2011)

ddraig said:


> yay! and make the feckless fuckers produce shite for asda so good citizens can get it even cheaper!



Fuck that.

Make them break rocks and clean bogs with toothbrushes.


----------



## claphamboy (Oct 18, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> There's a simple solution to that.
> 
> Build more prisons.



At least that would create some jobs.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 18, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> There's a simple solution to that.
> 
> Build more prisons.



How much does a new prison space cost?

How much does each years use of that space cost?

How do custodial versus non-custodial sentencing options compare in terms of reoffending rates?

How do custodial versus non-custodial sentencing options compare in terms ofcosts?

What life time affect on earnings, and therefore exchequer contributions, does a custodial sentence have?

You post does involve something simple, but it isn't the solution.

Louis MacNeice


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 19, 2011)

Hi Louis,



Louis MacNeice said:


> How much does a new prison space cost?



Quite a bit. However, we don't need anything fancy, just secure. Land on which to build prisons should be appropriated from The Crown Estates. As much of the labour as possible would be drawn from the current prison population under a WfP (Work for Parole) scheme. This of course would go hand in hand with sentencing reform that would see most sentences doubled and early parole scrapped.

Other funding would be provided by the closing of tax loopholes, both personal and corporate, and reduction in defence spending. Those alone would provide enough cash to sort out the NHS, prisons, and get us well on the way to economic recovery.



> How much does each years use of that space cost?



Not as much as it does now, hopefully. Utilities can be kept to a bare minimum, food should be as cheap as possible to meet a minimum safe nutritional requirement, and activities such as courses and classes for anyone serving life would be stopped. They're never getting out anyway so why bother preparing them for society?

Additionally, anyone who owns assets of any kind shall have these seized upon conviction, and the sale of such go to a fund, ringfenced for prison development. The amount of assets seized shall be dependent on the crime, and on the current requirements in the system. Thus, wealthy tax dodgers would be whacked for a billion a time, naughty MP's probably a couple of hundred grand apiece, while those of lesser means would simply be required to join the WfP scheme if they wanted to get out.

If we do this properly the prison system can be a revenue generator rather than a cost!



> How do custodial versus non-custodial sentencing options compare in terms of reoffending rates?



Immaterial, Louis. There will still be non-custodial sentencing options.



> How do custodial versus non-custodial sentencing options compare in terms of costs?



See above.



> What life time affect on earnings, and therefore exchequer contributions, does a custodial sentence have?



This will be covered in spades by the asset stripping of wealthy miscreants described above.

So, after we've got these nicks built, we shift everyone serving 5 years or more in the current prison population, into the new ones. Make no mistake, these will be basic, Soviet style, dour shitholes. Thick walls, lots of barbed wire, ugly dogs and mined perimeters.

Bingo. Prison space.

Or something like that.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 19, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> Hi Louis,
> 
> Quite a bit. However, we don't need anything fancy, just secure. Land on which to build prisons should be appropriated from The Crown Estates. As much of the labour as possible would be drawn from the current prison population under a WfP (Work for Parole) scheme. This of course would go hand in hand with sentencing reform that would see most sentences doubled and early parole scrapped.
> 
> ...



Dissapointingly unfunny.
Predictably ill toughtout.
Worryingly misanthropic.

Well done - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 19, 2011)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Dissapointingly unfunny.



Penal reform is no laughing mater, Louis. Besides, I'm here for my amusement, not yours.



> Predictably ill toughtout.



Well I admit that it's a trifle rough round the edges but it's a step in the right direction. Where's the current system got us? Inconsistent sentencing, expensive incarcerations, and a violent crime rate (though not murder rate) that has skyrocketed since the abolition of capital punishment.



> Worryingly misanthropic.



"Predictably" surely.


----------

