No power soon? Police hold 114 in power protest

Mathew

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

No.


I think the point is there were no powers of arrest on either of these charges but yet there are 114 banged up..

Of course there is a power of arrest which would have been under PACE not the terrorism act, the Police suspected the persons had conspired to commit aggravated trespass and criminal damage and arrested them accordingly

They could have been 20 miles away, don't actually have to be trespassing to get lifted for that, all about the intent.

Still has nowt to do with terrorism, all covered by PACE..

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Mathew wrote: »

Of course there is a power of arrest which would have been under PACE not the terrorism act, the Police suspected the persons had conspired to commit aggravated trespass and criminal damage and arrested them accordingly

They could have been 20 miles away, don't actually have to be trespassing to get lifted for that, all about the intent.

Still has nowt to do with terrorism, all covered by PACE..

"70 Trespassory assemblies
In Part II of the [1986 c. 64.] Public Order Act 1986 (processions and assemblies), after section 14, there shall be inserted the following sections—
“14A Prohibiting trespassory assemblies

(1) If at any time the chief officer of police reasonably believes that an assembly is intended to be held in any district at a place on land to which the public has no right of access or only a limited right of access and that the assembly—
(a) is likely to be held without the permission of the occupier of the land or to conduct itself in such a way as to exceed the limits of any permission of his or the limits of the public’s right of access, and
(b) may result—
(i) in serious disruption to the life of the community, or
(ii) where the land, or a building or monument on it, is of historical, architectural, archaeological or scientific importance, in significant damage to the land, building or monument,
he may apply to the council of the district for an order prohibiting for a specified period the holding of all trespassory assemblies in the district or a part of it, as specified.
(2) On receiving such an application, a council may—
(a) in England and Wales, with the consent of the Secretary of State make an order either in the terms of the application or with such modifications as may be approved by the Secretary of State; or
(b) in Scotland, make an order in the terms of the application.
(3) Subsection (1) does not apply in the City of London or the metropolitan police district.
(4) If at any time the Commissioner of Police for the City of London or the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis reasonably believes that an assembly is intended to be held at a place on land to which the public has no right of access or only a limited right of access in his police area and that the assembly—
(a) is likely to be held without the permission of the occupier of the land or to conduct itself in such a way as to exceed the limits of any permission of his or the limits of the public’s right of access, and
(b) may result—
(i) in serious disruption to the life of the community, or
(ii) where the land, or a building or monument on it, is of historical, architectural, archaeological or scientific importance, in significant damage to the land, building or monument,
he may with the consent of the Secretary of State make an order prohibiting for a specified period the holding of all trespassory assemblies in the area or a part of it, as specified.
(5) An order prohibiting the holding of trespassory assemblies operates to prohibit any assembly which—
(a) is held on land to which the public has no right of access or only a limited right of access, and
(b) takes place in the prohibited circumstances, that is to say, without the permission of the occupier of the land or so as to exceed the limits of any permission of his or the limits of the public’s right of access.
(6) No order under this section shall prohibit the holding of assemblies for a period exceeding 4 days or in an area exceeding an area represented by a circle with a radius of 5 miles from a specified centre.
(7) An order made under this section may be revoked or varied by a subsequent order made in the same way, that is, in accordance with subsection (1) and (2) or subsection (4), as the case may be.
(8) Any order under this section shall, if not made in writing, be recorded in writing as soon as practicable after being made.
(9) In this section and sections 14B and 14C—

• “assembly” means an assembly of 20 or more persons;
• “land” means land in the open air;
• “limited”, in relation to a right of access by the public to land, means that their use of it is restricted to use for a particular purpose (as in the case of a highway or road) or is subject to other restrictions;
• “occupier” means—
  (a)
  in England and Wales, the person entitled to possession of the land by virtue of an estate or interest held by him; or
  
  (b)
  in Scotland, the person lawfully entitled to natural possession of the land,
  
  
  
  and in subsections (1) and (4) includes the person reasonably believed by the authority applying for or making the order to be the occupier;
• “public” includes a section of the public; and
• “specified” means specified in an order under this section.

(10) In relation to Scotland, the references in subsection (1) above to a district and to the council of the district shall be construed—
(a) as respects applications before 1st April 1996, as references to the area of a regional or islands authority and to the authority in question; and
(b) as respects applications on and after that date, as references to a local government area and to the council for that area.
(11) In relation to Wales, the references in subsection (1) above to a district and to the council of the district shall be construed, as respects applications on and after 1st April 1996, as references to a county or county borough and to the council for that county or county borough."



NO OFFENCE.

NO HINT OF AN OFFENCE.

PACE doesnt even come in to it.

Either they were ILLEGALLY ARRESTED or they broke into the school where the meeting was happening (in which case the reasons for arrest are untrue & misleading) or they were arrested under terror legislation.


Your call which one.

Mathew

Conspiracy to commit ie.. making plans with others to do such things as criminal damage, and agg trespass. Don't need to have to be there, near there just plan it with others

PACE does come into it, pretty much everything the Police do needs to be in accordance with it

Terrorism leg that you keep referring carrys specific offences, neither of this are covered by it, so it most definitely aint

amcluesent

>Either they were ILLEGALLY ARRESTED or they broke into the school where the meeting was happening (in which case the reasons for arrest are untrue & misleading) or they were arrested under terror legislation.<

Let's hope he Duty Solicitor is equally clued up!

I'd have said they could be arrested for "Preparation of terrorist act" as terrorism as defined as an action resulting in serious damage to property and "the use or threat [of action] is designed to influence the government" or "[action]creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public" or "[action]is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system".

Anyways, they could be going down for life!

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Mathew wrote: »

Conspiracy to commit ie.. making plans with others to do such things as criminal damage, and agg trespass. Don't need to have to be there, near there just plan it with others

PACE does come into it, pretty much everything the Police do needs to be in accordance with it

Terrorism leg that you keep referring carrys specific offences, neither of this are covered by it, so it most definitely aint

Unless they all agreed that criminal damage was to be commited there is no conspiracy.

As for trespass it is still not a criminal offence unless someone has done something listed in Section 61 & to do that they would have to trespass.. & as the act never took place a conspiracy to trespass doesnt even & cannot even exist!! The only exeption is a RAVE!! Are you saying that they were going equipt with SUB WOOFERS??!!!

Therfore you CANNOT consprire to trespass in this instance!!!

Terror laws brought in & those associated with them ARE the only legal laws for arrest.

Mathew

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

Unless they all agreed that criminal damage was to be commited there is no conspiracy.

At court this would need to be proved, but for purposes of arresting them, think the Police has more than enough suspicion to arrest them in this circumstances.

As for trespass it is still not a criminal offence unless someone has done something listed in Section 61 & to do that they would have to trespass.. & as the act never took place a conspiracy to trespass doesnt even & cannot even exist!! The only exeption is a RAVE!! Are you saying that they were going equipt with SUB WOOFERS??!!!

Therfore you CANNOT consprire to trespass in this instance!!!

Yeah you can, you can conspire to commit the majority of criminal offences including s.68, simply planning this with one other and the offence is complete.


Terror laws brought in & those associated with them ARE the only legal laws for arrest.

neither of the offences are covered by terror laws so how can that be?

Amcluesent pointed out a section of the act that may have been better used, but it wasn't

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Originally Posted by 1984ReturnsForReal
Unless they all agreed that criminal damage was to be commited there is no conspiracy.

At court this would need to be proved, but for purposes of arresting them, think the Police has more than enough suspicion to arrest them in this circumstances.

As for trespass it is still not a criminal offence unless someone has done something listed in Section 61 & to do that they would have to trespass.. & as the act never took place a conspiracy to trespass doesnt even & cannot even exist!! The only exeption is a RAVE!! Are you saying that they were going equipt with SUB WOOFERS??!!!

Therfore you CANNOT consprire to trespass in this instance!!!

Yeah you can, you can conspire to commit the majority of criminal offences including s.68, simply planning this with one other and the offence is complete.


Terror laws brought in & those associated with them ARE the only legal laws for arrest.

neither of the offences are covered by terror laws so how can that be?
Amcluesent pointed out a section of the act that may have been better used, but it wasn't

Mathew wrote: »

Amcluesent pointed out a section of the act that may have been better used, but it wasn't

Again, as trespass assemblies are noted in section 70 & allow them to operate lawfully outside a range there is NO offence of conspriacy to commit aggrevated trespass in this instance. The offense doesnt exist.

Its quite simple. Its an illegal arrest or was first done on a terror basis.

mrstinchcombe

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

Again, as trespass assemblies are noted in section 70 & allow them to operate lawfully outside a range there is NO offence of conspriacy to commit aggrevated trespass in this instance. The offense doesnt exist.

Its quite simple. Its an illegal arrest or was first done on a terror basis.

Conspiracy to commit aggravated tresspass is an offence and it does exist. I see why you think it doesn't but to conspire to tresspass and once there disrupt lawful activity completes the offence.

Conspiracy to commit criminal damage also is so I don't see why the arrest is unlawful.

Being arrested doesn't mean these people are guilty beyond all reasonable doubt, thats the courts job, all the Police need is reasonable grounds to suspect an offence has been commited which appears to be the case. Its a lawful arrest, you don't arrest over 100 people without it being lawful!

1984ReturnsForReal_2

mrstinchcombe wrote: »

Conspiracy to commit aggravated tresspass is an offence and it does exist, why do you think it doesn't?

Because Trespass is a CIVIL OFFENCE not a CRIMINAL ONE unless criteria is met to categorise it...

& either way the law allows for trespass assemblies (gathering to discuss trespass) outside of 5 miles.


(6) No order under this section shall prohibit the holding of assemblies for a period exceeding 4 days or in an area exceeding an area represented by a circle with a radius of 5 miles from a specified centre.

Running_Horse

I assume the demonstrators read by candlelight, and possess no electrical gadgets; otherwise they are a bunch of hypocrites.

Forget the legal nicities. No way the government are going to let the lights go out, and hospitals black out, and homes go cold.

And quite right too, unless you have an alternative plan...