Most arrests for decades

[denso13]

How is saying I support West Ham an invitation for others to support them? It’s a stand alone statement.

Nothing to do with others. You alone would be committing an offence if West Ham were a proscribed organisation.

 

[motorbiking]

Is that why the banners were phrased in that particular way. I did wonder if there was some legal reason.

what particular way are you thinking of?

 

[MNW67]

what particular way are you thinking of?

There are lots of things they could have written on their banners. But they all chose the words "I support". I was wondering if they'd had advice that this might not be against the law.

 

[securespark]

I agree with that Lady from the HoL, who said that the Govt have done wrong by making this action group a terrorist organisation, on the same level as al Qaeda.

She said that of course action groups who commit criminal damage should be taken to court and be subject to the laws of the land, but to be branded a terrorist organisation is a nonsense.

Also, the group wanted to overwhelm the police but they were ready by having outdoor processing areas. What the group should have done is that everyone in the group should have refused their details, then they would have had to be taken to a PS.

 

[motorbiking]

I agree with that Lady from the HoL, who said that the Govt have done wrong by making this action group a terrorist organisation, on the same level as al Qaeda.

She said that of course action groups who commit criminal damage should be taken to court and be subject to the laws of the land, but to be branded a terrorist organisation is a nonsense.

Also, the group wanted to overwhelm the police but they were ready by having outdoor processing areas. What the group should have done is that everyone in the group should have refused their details, then they would have had to be taken to a PS.

They certainly didn't have much operational knowledge of plod. Plod will arrest and release immediately on bail with an appointment time to come back for questioning.

 

[motorbiking]

There are lots of things they could have written on their banners. But they all chose the words "I support". I was wondering if they'd had advice that this might not be against the law.

Its pretty clear:

12 (1) invites support, (1A) expresses support. Either or is an offence.

Proscribed organisations - support

www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk

It's interesting that one person was arrested and released and then went back to the protest. I wonder if he has technically committed the 2nd offence while on bail.

 

[MNW67]

How is saying I support West Ham an invitation for others to support them? It’s a stand alone statement.

It looks like it doesn't need to. They are covered by s13 instead:

13Uniform [F1and publication of images].​

(1)A person in a public place commits an offence if he—

(a)wears an item of clothing, or

(b)wears, carries or displays an article,

in such a way or in such circumstances as to arouse reasonable suspicion that he is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation

 

[MNW67]

Its pretty clear:

12 (1) invites support, (1A) expresses support. Either or is an offence.

After a bit more research, I think it is more likely that they are using s13.

 

[motorbiking]

It looks like it doesn't need to. They are covered by s13 instead:

which is why everyone needs to be super careful when discussing it, in here.

 

[motorbiking]

After a bit more research, I think it is more likely that they are using s13.

CTP have said what the arrests are:

1 person arrested under Section 11 [membership of a proscribed organisation]
58 people arrested under Section 12 (1,1A, 2) [inviting support for, recklessly expressing support for, or arranging a meeting in support of a proscribed organisation]
162 people arrested under Section 13 or 13A [wear clothing or carry articles in public which arouse reasonable suspicion that an individual is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation or publishing an image of an article such as a flag or logo in the same circumstances]

 

[MNW67]

CTP have said what the arrests are:

1 person arrested under Section 11 [membership of a proscribed organisation]
58 people arrested under Section 12 (1,1A, 2) [inviting support for, recklessly expressing support for, or arranging a meeting in support of a proscribed organisation]
162 people arrested under Section 13 or 13A [wear clothing or carry articles in public which arouse reasonable suspicion that an individual is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation or publishing an image of an article such as a flag or logo in the same circumstances]

Those are the stats from before this weekend.

I would imagine the wording "I support" used this weekend is an attempt to limit the offence to s13 which only carries 6 months rather than 14 years for s12.

 

[motorbiking]

Those are the stats from before this weekend.

I would imagine the wording "I support" used this weekend is an attempt to limit the offence to s13 which only carries 6 months rather than 14 years for s12.

why do you think this protest was any different to the last?

 

[MNW67]

why do you think this protest was any different to the last?

I haven't been following it. When was the last one. What did their signs and T-shirts say. Who was arrested. What were they charged with. Do you have all the information.

 

[MNW67]

To take blup's example. A man wearing a West Ham top isn't inviting you to support West Ham. He is simply expressing his own support for West Ham. That would be a crime getting you 6 months rather than 14 years if West Ham was a proscribed organisation.

 

[motorbiking]

According to Sky A total of 532 people were arrested on suspicion of supporting a proscribed organisation contrary to Section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Looking at the video its probably the vast number of people just sitting in the group.