Daniel Hodges

[carmanmemoranda]

I'm not saying anything of the sort. You are forming an opinion that is a travesty of law and order for them to be pardoned. I am sure that is true for some and not for many. I'm suggesting you educate yourself on the charges and sentences. I'm not going to do this for you. I don't particularly care either way. What I can see is there was an approach of throwing the book at them and then making some new books to throw.

It's wrong to do a blanket pardons like he did.

Either you agree with it, or you dont't. Trump got it badly wrong. Only those with low morals and ethics can support his actions

Every 1 should be assessed individually. You know, the same way they were imprisoned

 

[MNW67]

I'm not saying anything of the sort. You are forming an opinion that is a travesty of law and order for them to be pardoned. I am sure that is true for some and not for many. I'm suggesting you educate yourself on the charges and sentences. I'm not going to do this for you. I don't particularly care either way. What I can see is there was an approach of throwing the book at them and then making some new books to throw.

I did have a further look at the offences. A lot got short sentences of a month or two for something called "Parading" in a federal building. I actually think that is fine. Can people really expect no sanction. What message would that send. That is why we treat rioters harshly in this country.

 

[motorbiking]

And if it is not successful ?

Oh illegal then

I can see you aren't getting the right end of the stick.

There is of course no law that says it's lawful to overthrow the government, though some say that article 61 of the Magna Carter gives such a right. The point I was making (hence the winky face) is that if you successfully overthrow the government you are the new law maker. So you can amend the law accordingly.

The offences are mostly in the Public order act.

It's wrong to do a blanket pardons like he did.

Either you agree with it, or you dont't. Trump got it badly wrong. Only those with low morals and ethics can support his actions

Every 1 should be assessed individually. You know, the same way they were imprisoned

It's not either you agree or don't. Its not A or B.

I agree that many got unduly harsh sentences and that some were fitted up for crimes that didn't fit (evidence already provided).
I do not think all should have been pardoned. But I also don't agree that each case should be re-examined. As I said, those convicted of violence should serve prison. Those who were merely protesting shouldn't. You have to look at the mens rea. People believed that they had been defrauded a victory.

If you look at the post office prosecutions as a vaguely similar parallel. All prosecutions were quashed, that probably meant that some guilty fraudsters got away with it. When Justice is undermined, you have to take action.

 

[motorbiking]

I did have a further look at the offences. A lot got short sentences of a month or two for something called "Parading" in a federal building. I actually think that is fine. Can people really expect no sanction. What message would that send. That is why we treat rioters harshly in this country.

First offence, conditional discharge, bound over, suspended sentence etc. Not 2 months in Jail. Some got 1-2 years on top for the B***S*** charges.

As I've said - it really is a very different system in the US.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

I can see you aren't getting the right end of the stick.

Oh the irony

There is of course no law that says it's lawful to overthrow the government, though some say that article 61 of the Magna Carter gives such a right. The point I was making (hence the winky face) is that if you successfully overthrow the government you are the new law maker. So you can amend the law accordingly.

But if you are not successful it is punishable under our existing laws. Nobody I know of supports overthrowing any UK government. It's the idea behind elections.

The offences are mostly in the Public order act.



It's not either you agree or don't. Its not A or B.

I agree that many got unduly harsh sentences and that some were fitted up for crimes that didn't fit (evidence already provided).
I do not think all should have been pardoned. But I also don't agree that each case should be re-examined. As I said, those convicted of violence should serve prison. Those who were merely protesting shouldn't. You have to look at the mens rea. People believed that they had been defrauded a victory.

If you look at the post office prosecutions as a vaguely similar parallel. All prosecutions were quashed, that probably meant that some guilty fraudsters got away with it. When Justice is undermined, you have to take action.

Each case should be judged in it's own merits.

It IS that simple.

Trump releasing them is a travesty of the legal system, the bedrock of civilised society.

Either you support that, or you don't.

 

[motorbiking]

Oh the irony

But if you are not successful it is punishable under our existing laws. Nobody I know of supports overthrowing any UK government. It's the idea behind elections.

Each case should be judged in it's own merits.

It IS that simple.

Trump releasing them is a travesty of the legal system, the bedrock of civilised society.

Either you support that, or you don't.

its always simple in your mind. Its how you seem to get through the complexity of life.

 

[MNW67]

First offence, conditional discharge, bound over, suspended sentence etc. Not 2 months in Jail. Some got 1-2 years on top for the B***S*** charges.

As I've said - it really is a very different system in the US.

This is the first example of a 2 year sentence I found. It seems pretty lenient.

61-year-old engineer and conservative activist from Westminster, California, arrested by the Los Angeles office of the FBI on charges that include the assault of a police officer during the January 6 riot.[81] According to the FBI's charging documents, the suspect allegedly called for more rioters to enter the tunnel of the Capitol before entering himself, where he engaged in a confrontation with a Capitol Police officer whose body camera captured the man. The scuffle resulted in the officer being knocked down and losing his helmet.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

its always simple in your mind. Its how you seem to get through the complexity of life.

Either you support people released like he did or you support each case being assessed on its merits.

Where do you stand on that complex thought ?

 

[motorbiking]

Either you support people released like he did or you support each case being assessed on its merits.

Where do you stand on that complex thought ?

I've answered. Post 63.

 

[motorbiking]

This is the first example of a 2 year sentence I found. It seems pretty lenient.

Clashing with police then. Wouldn't get 2 years here.

 

[MNW67]

Clashing with police then. Wouldn't get 2 years here.

Assaulting police in a riot. Just think back a few months. I am sure the sentences were much higher.

 

[motorbiking]

Assaulting police in a riot. Just think back a few months. I am sure the sentences were much higher.

Look at the video footage. He was in a crush at the front, not slinging petrol bombs in the street. it's much closer to those so called pro-Palestinian protestors scuffling with police. I am not supporting the idiots, but excessive prosecution has given trump an excuse.

 

[MNW67]

its much closer to those so called pro-Palestinian protestors scuffling with police.

In a legal march. Come on, get serious!

 

[IT Minion]

Clashing with police then. Wouldn't get 2 years here.

If they'd stormed parliament? I suspect they would. That counts as an agrivating factor surely?

 

[IT Minion]

Look at the video footage. He was in a crush at the front,

If you don't want to be in the crush at the front of a riot, shouting "follow me" and charging down a tunnel is a very poor plan.