Are Activists above the law

Joined
20 Apr 2007
Messages
1,601
Reaction score
139
Location
Cornwall
Country
United Kingdom
Article in the Daily Mail yesterday. Apparently the Malicious Damage Law allows someone to break into a house or other building to rescue someone from a fire or similar without prosecution. It seems that some Judges and activists have twisted this to mean that they can commit malicious damage if it benefits any other group or person. In the case in question activists broke into a factory which made military equipment and sold to Israel. £187,000 worth of damage and the company closed for a week. The activists claimed they were protecting property in Gaza from Israel. The judge directed the jury to find the activists NOT GUILTY as there claims were true. Since when have Judges been allowed to use political reasons to allow this damage. it appears that anarchy is here.
 
Sponsored Links
by that logic I can break into the Judges house and kill him because it's preventing damage to families of the offenders he would have sent to jail?
 
What a stupid interpretation of the law.

Just one minor point, they were tried by jury so it was not really the judge that ruled them not guilty.

The law needs to be changed so that it only applies to imminent danger, not a perceived future danger.
 
Judge-Jury. enough, already . They were innocent :rolleyes:
 
Sponsored Links
What a stupid interpretation of the law.

Just one minor point, they were tried by jury so it was not really the judge that ruled them not guilty.

The law needs to be changed so that it only applies to imminent danger, not a perceived future danger.

so then I have to wait until I can see the train coming before I can trespass onto the line and untie the girl the evil barron has tied to the tracks? ;)
 
What a stupid interpretation of the law.

Just one minor point, they were tried by jury so it was not really the judge that ruled them not guilty.

The law needs to be changed so that it only applies to imminent danger, not a perceived future danger.

so then I have to wait until I can see the train coming before I can trespass onto the line and untie the girl the evil barron has tied to the tracks? ;)

If it's one of Beecham's old lines you will be waiting for a very long time. ;)
 
""Daily Mail"" ho hum! so the recent case of someone breaking into an empty house to silence a constant alarm counts? When they were prosecuted?

Or the recent case of someone removing waste from their neighbours evacuated garden, but prosecuted?

Is newsprint the truth? And you believe it?
 
What a stupid interpretation of the law.

Just one minor point, they were tried by jury so it was not really the judge that ruled them not guilty.

The law needs to be changed so that it only applies to imminent danger, not a perceived future danger.

so then I have to wait until I can see the train coming before I can trespass onto the line and untie the girl the evil barron has tied to the tracks? ;)

you have to wait until you're sure she's in danger... it might be a film set! she might have a fantasy fixation, and paid £3k to get tied to a dissused railway line... and you storm in !!!!!
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top