Wow - A five year sentence

Courts work on sentencing guidelines or precedent cases for analogous behaviour when passing sentence not political considerations.

In view of the sentence I’m sure part of the judges thoughts were deterrence on others.

If the Court of Appeal consider it to be excessive it will be reduced and they like the sentencing court will consider all the mitigating and aggravating factors in detail. It was a trial they put the prosecution to proof. The cost to the state has been massive.

The BBC says as follows”The action resulted in chaos on the M25 over four successive days, causing nearly 51,000 hours of driver delays, the court heard. The protests closed parts of the motorway in Kent, Surrey, Essex and Hertfordshire.
People missed flights, medical appointments and exams. Two lorries collided, and a police motorcyclist came off his bike during one of the protests on 9 November 2022 while trying to bring traffic to a halt in a “rolling road block”.
Prosecutors alleged the protests led to an economic cost of at least £765,000, while the cost to the Metropolitan Police was put at more than £1.1m.”

Do posters on this board think they should not have been prosecuted?

Should similar direct action be ignored or supported?

If they agree with the juries decision but not the sentence what should they have got in light of the above?
 
Angus said:
Courts work on sentencing guidelines or precedent cases for analogous behaviour when passing sentence not political considerations.

In view of the sentence I’m sure part of the judges thoughts were deterrence on others.

If the Court of Appeal consider it to be excessive it will be reduced and they like the sentencing court will consider all the mitigating and aggravating factors in detail. It was a trial they put the prosecution to proof. The cost to the state has been massive.

The BBC says as follows”The action resulted in chaos on the M25 over four successive days, causing nearly 51,000 hours of driver delays, the court heard. The protests closed parts of the motorway in Kent, Surrey, Essex and Hertfordshire.
People missed flights, medical appointments and exams. Two lorries collided, and a police motorcyclist came off his bike during one of the protests on 9 November 2022 while trying to bring traffic to a halt in a “rolling road block”.
Prosecutors alleged the protests led to an economic cost of at least £765,000, while the cost to the Metropolitan Police was put at more than £1.1m.”

Do posters on this board think they should not have been prosecuted?

Should similar direct action be ignored or supported?

If they agree with the juries decision but not the sentence what should they have got in light of the above?
Click to expand...
I think if they hadn't pi**ed off the judge they wouldn't have got as long as sentence but guilty as charged and bang to rights.
 
Angus said:
Do posters on this board think they should not have been prosecuted?
Click to expand...
Yes.

But surely that is excessive compared to sentences for violent behaviour? We all read with incredulity as some scrote has been in court for a catalogue of offences gets community service yet here we are. It'll be interesting to see if this isn't reduced. The protests seem to have died off a little more recently even before this Draconian sentence
 
Re farmers arrest I don’t think so. I don’t think any lorry drivers were either over the fuel protest years ago.

The government passed new laws to deal with what they perceived as a developing problem you may not agree with that but Parliament created the new law and judges have to get on and enforce it.

The Court of Appeal may interfere with the sentence but the new government won’t.
 
It's an example of our human rights being eroded. Not sure this could have happened pre-tory legislation.

If you are happy with your human rights being eaten in to to make life more convienient then you agree with the outcome.

If you think the dollar cost and some inconvenience is a price worth paying to maintain All our human rights then you will think this is nonsense.

It's an example of a government using individual events to pass legislation that, if understood in its fullest extent, should horrify everyone.
 
Laughing said:
It's an example of our human rights being eroded. Not sure this could have happened pre-tory legislation.

If you are happy with your human rights being eaten in to to make life more convienient then you agree with the outcome.

If you think the dollar cost and some inconvenience is a price worth paying to maintain All our human rights then you will think this is nonsense.

It's an example of a government using individual events to pass legislation that, if understood in its fullest extent, should horrify everyone.
Click to expand...
Its not just the protesters human rights that have to be considered, its also the people going to hospital, taking a flight or missing an exam.

The last one for example could have a devastating effect on the rest of another’s life.

They made a conscious decision to substantially disrupt the lives of others, it was pre planned and organised. They went to court pleaded not guilty and a jury convicted them.
 
Angus said:
Its not just the protesters human rights that have to be considered, its also the people going to hospital, taking a flight or missing an exam.

The last one for example could have a devastating effect on the rest of another’s life.

They made a conscious decision to substantially disrupt the lives of others, it was pre planned and organised. They went to court pleaded not guilty and a jury convicted them.
Click to expand...
Which probably wouldn't have been possible pre-tory legislation.

I didn't blame the court.

You seem to think that human rights are fine providing they don't impact on anyone else. You would have hated the abolition of slavery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top