The Good News Only - thread...

[cookiemonster]

I agree with Steve Bray's anti Brexit stance. But, is noisy protest only intimidating/unacceptable when you agree with the protester?

What intimidation? The whole idea behind protest is to be noticed which does include being a bit noisy at least.

 

[newfhouse]

What intimidation? The whole idea behind protest is to be noticed.

Andrea Leadsom described Bray’s noisy protest as violent before having second thoughts about possible litigation and deleting her tweet.

 

[winjim]

It doesn't help that 'peaceful' is the opposite of both 'violent' and 'noisy'. Bray's protest may not be violent, it certainly is noisy. So is it a peaceful protest?

 

[Mugshot]

From Brays crowdfunder, which rather succinctly makes the point that Craig appears to be missing

 

[icowden]

It's ok, he is going to go to Crown Court, where he is hoping that the process is loaded in his favour.
"I've been told that I have been summoned and I'll have to go to court and they're being held as evidence, I'm gonna elect trial by jury and let's hope it's 12 Remainers."
I can't imagine that many of you on here would be pleased if other people going in to court said this.

Why? It just demonstrates poor knowledge of the Judicial process. Any jury decision will be based on the point(s) of law raised. Also, he is labouring under the misapprehension that a Jury trial will necessarily be better than just going to the Judge.

As far as the amplifiers are concerned he doesn't have a leg to stand on:-

A Met police spokesperson said: “A protester in Whitehall has had his amplifying equipment seized by Met police officers at around 13:00hrs on Tuesday 28 June.
“The man was using the equipment in a zone where the use of amplified equipment is prohibited. He was spoken to by officers on multiple occasions in relation to specific legislation regarding the use of the amplifying equipment and that it would be seized if he persisted.
“The individual continued to use the amplifying equipment and it was seized.”

There is clear law here.

The more thorny one is his summons for the offence of intentionally or recklessly causing public nuisance. I suspect that his Barrister will be looking to define public nuisance:

• A public nuisance arises from an act that endangers the life, health, property, morals or comfort of the public or obstructs the public in the exercise or enjoyment of rights common to all. A public nuisance is actionable in tort and can also be a criminal offence.

So the argument in court is whether Steve protesting Brexit caused a public nuisance. I think a good Barrister will be able to argue that he didn't cause a public nuisance. However, we don't know that that is what he has been summonsed for. He may well have been summonsed under the one person protest law where the Senior Police Officer considers

that the noise generated by the person carrying on the protest may result in serious disruption to the activities of an organisation which are carried on in the vicinity of the protest

Again, I think it will be an interesting position to argue in Court. Yes, he was protesting and using amplified sound, but can it be demonstrated that he was causing disruption to Parliament? I'd be very surprised if the sound penetrated the walls of Westminster.

 

[mudsticks]

I agree with Steve Bray's anti Brexit stance. But, is noisy protest only intimidating/unacceptable when you agree with the protester?

Noisy protest is (should be) fine from anyone..

So long as it's non violent.

 

[matticus]

From Brays crowdfunder, which rather succinctly makes the point that Craig appears to be missing

View attachment 1506

In a parallel - better - universe, this would be the forum motto.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

Noisy protest is (should be) fine from anyone..

So long as it's non violent.

But can noise be violent?

If someone came and shouted through a loudspeaker outside your bedroom window for a couple of years, and followed you to the shops also shouting at you (sometimes less than a metre away), would you consider it an act of violence or an act of quiet protest?

 

[cookiemonster]

It doesn't help that 'peaceful' is the opposite of both 'violent' and 'noisy'. Bray's protest may not be violent, it certainly is noisy. So is it a peaceful protest?

Yes.

 

[newfhouse]

If someone came and shouted through a loudspeaker outside your bedroom window for a couple of years, and followed you to the shops also shouting at you (sometimes less than a metre away), would you consider it an act of violence or an act of quiet protest?

Nobody has done that, but if they did there are already laws that deal with harassment.

 

[matticus]

It doesn't help that 'peaceful' is the opposite of both 'violent' and 'noisy'. Bray's protest may not be violent, it certainly is noisy. So is it a peaceful protest?

I think anyone answering this needs to know whether it was carried out in Craig's bedroom at 3am.

 

[icowden]

If someone came and shouted through a loudspeaker outside your bedroom window for a couple of years, and followed you to the shops also shouting at you (sometimes less than a metre away), would you consider it an act of violence or an act of quiet protest?

It's neither obviously. Please ask better questions and learn the difference between protest and harrassment.

 

[BoldonLad]

What intimidation? The whole idea behind protest is to be noticed which does include being a bit noisy at least.

Yes, I know that.

But, what if you disagree with the protesters, do they still have the right to be noisy, and, perhaps, intimidating?

 

[newfhouse]

intimidating

What does this mean in this context?

 

[Rusty Nails]

Yes, I know that.

But, what if you disagree with the protesters, do they still have the right to be noisy, and, perhaps, intimidating?

Yes........and No.