You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Tasteless, disrespectful, mindless but is it really a crime worth police involvement?
How come no-one gets arrested in Lewes? They burn a wide range of effigies every year.
Erm.. Lewes is in the leafy South Downs, Grenfel is in a shitty part of LunDun.
Think the answers there TBH.
Totally disrespectful to those that lost thier lives/homes/possessions/lifestyles.
Don’t think the perps GAS though, even handing themselves into Plod does nothing to mitigate the anger/angst of those affected.
Because the Lewes effigy burnings aren't massively racist?
Please show some respect for those who lost their lives. Comparing them to effigies - really?
Poor taste in the extreme but I can't see how the Police can prove 'intent' which is required by Section 4A of the Public Order Act.
Disrespectful and indeed tasteless. Not quite sure if it is a matter for the law.
I was burnt in effigy once on YouTube (true story).
Please show some respect for those who lost their lives. Comparing them to effigies – really?
I am not suggesting that it was in anyway correct. I just find the level of reporting surprising.
An effigy is the depiction of a person that is then burnt on a bonfire.
Because the Lewes effigy burnings aren’t massively racist?
Not racist but some are certainly bigoted.
I can’t see how the Police can prove ‘intent’ which is required by Section 4A of the Public Order Act.
a lot might revolve around the 'Shared on Social Media' which can be 'shared amongst themselves' or 'made available to be found' or can be something more targeted.
I was hearing on the news that the offended party had to have present at the event for it to warrant a crime. It was done at a private party. I'm sure lots of things go on at private partys that the general public wouldn't approve of but that doesn't make it illegal.
but is it really a crime worth police involvement?
Poor taste in the extreme but I can’t see how the Police can prove ‘intent’ which is required by Section 4A of the Public Order Act.
They can easily step down to section 5 which doesn't require intent, but it does require you to be "in-public", so not if sure it's ever been used for things seen on the internet.
Seems like something under the communications act would be more appropriate?
Just bantz, innit.
I am not suggesting that it was in anyway correct. I just find the level of reporting surprising.
An effigy is the depiction of a person that is then burnt on a bonfire.
I know you're not. It just seems a strange comparison as the Grenfell video is reenacting actual events.
Thoughtless, poor taste, and suggests they are shit personalities, but a crime for something done in private?
I'm not keen on seeing thought crimes criminalised. Black humour has always existed.
Making them apologise in person to the survivors would be appropriate though.
Bear in mind this happened on the day when we are encouraged to publicly celebrate the grisly execution of a human, and children are dancing round a bonfire with his burning effigy.
I can see why people are upset but why are we even talking about this? surely tell them it was a daft thing to do and move on?
wasted resources.
It seems to me that we're giving attention seekers exactly what they want.
They can easily step down to section 5 which doesn’t require intent, but it does require you to be “in-public”, so not if sure it’s ever been used for things seen on the internet.
Seems like something under the communications act would be more appropriate?
Section 5 says it has to be:
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.
Bear in mind this happened on the day when we are encouraged to publicly celebrate the grisly execution of a human, and children are dancing round a bonfire with his burning effigy.
Yes, does seem slightly ironic....
Very hard to criminalise black humour / poor taste though, which is probably what this was.
Bear in mind this happened on the day when we are encouraged to publicly celebrate the grisly execution of a human
Firework night was set up to celebrate the Survival of the King, not the execution of Fawkes. 5th November Act 1605. If we wanted to celebrate the death of Fawkes it would be done on the Jan 31st.
<h3 class="LC20lb"></h3>
Bear in mind this happened on the day when we are encouraged to publicly celebrate the grisly execution of a human, and children are dancing round a bonfire with his burning effigy.
well.....technically we're celebrating the foiling of a plot to blow up parliament with all inside, and thought crime aside that does seem ironic given the esteem with which we generally hold the current inhabitants.
(also if you want to be pedantic, he cheated the executioner by falling off the scaffold and breaking his neck, thus avoiding the proper grisly disembowelling and having your balls set on fire bit, but that's just one of the more irrelevant details I remember from history 30 years ago)
This sums it up.
I have seen worse jokes from Frankie Boyle, bad taste maybe, but should we ask everyone who has made a joke in poor taste at a private event apologise to those affected?
I say dry your eyes princess and move on.
Massively disrespectful and very poor taste but not a crime.
If this somehow does get considered a crime then the UK is in a very dark place.
Excellent linkage from Drac there.
Excellent linkage from Drac there.
+1
I think it's bad taste what they did which isn't wrong in its own way the mistake was it appearing in social media. Bad taste jokes sometimes need to be private.
Too many people getting their knickers in a twist. Yes it was bad taste etc etc.
But did it really need the Prime Minister to make a statement on it or for it to even make the national news...
One has to wonder what bad news they're trying to bury today, maybe something about a referendum?
In poor taste? yes
funny? no
need to involve the police and post it to every media outlet we can find? come on, people need to get a grip on themselves. Thank god there are no time machines, because the amount of sick jokes that went round school the day after terrible tragedies when I were a lad would have amounted to public executions today.......then someone would have made a joke about it.
They were pretty stupid to post the video to social media, but everyone has to be famous
If it was a mini-Bradford stadium
Or a mini-Hillborough
Or a mini-helicopter-falling-onto-a-Glasgow pub
Or a mini-Heysel
Or a mini-Omagh
Or a mini-Enniskillin
What would people be saying? Bloody snowflakes.
the mistake was it appearing in social media.
In which case prosecute the BBC who bought this to a massive audience.
This kind of shite is only going to drive ordinary people more and more to the right.
You are all in a very understanding mood this afternoon.
It's disgusting behaviour and tasteless, but police involvement???
Seems legit to run over a cyclist and lie about it, barely getting a mention on the news, but to offend people, well that's just criminal....🙄
Personally I'd just name and shame then, I think that's sufficient. But the idea that this was done only in private is a bit wrong, soon as that gets posted to social media it becomes the public domain, hence interest from the police etc. Which given it's likely and predictable profile after the social media post, the police have to be looking like they are doing something. It's how the illusion of the justice system works.
The perpetrators seem to be from the Croydon area. The irony being that they burnt their own town just a few years back.
I see that the Metro has named, shamed and posted photos of them, their house and cars. Which doesn't seem all that wise a move.
As for prosecuting them - interesting to see where that goes. More saddening is that there are knuckle draggers like this in society, proud to be post such like online. At what point would that have seemed like a good idea?
First news item on R4, then 25mins later an item about 16yo boy stabbed to death in South London, so the police resources are getting diverted from real crime to deal with this crap 😞
I haven't bothered to watch the video but the impression I got from the media reporting was it was done in a deliberately racist way, rather than just being in bad taste. If actually the video isn't blatantly racist then this is waste of police time
The irony of this story is that no one would have been offended by this video (which is utterly abhorent and must be deeply upsetting to the survivors) had the media not shared the video. It was originally posted in a Whatsap group so was encrypted and private but someone in that group decided to leak it.
The reference to the Bradford fire is notable because if you recall, Bernard Manning made a jokle about it (not inviting me to your BBQ) and got ripped to shreds for it by the press (and rightly so). He didn't get arrested though.
So now the police are searching their bins and their houses. But they haven't been charged.
Shame there wasn't this kind of Budget when my mate has his bike nicked and literally lead to Police to the stolen bike in the house of the guy selling it... Sadly there was no budget for doing anything about that.
I'm all for harassing people who have done bad things but haven't broken the law, but can we do that *after* all the criminals have been caught?
Very distasteful
Waste of scarce police resources
Its making me think of Prince Harry dressed as a Nazi...was there an investigation into that? Pretty offensive
I wonder what would've been done if an "I Like To Watch"* style video had been made of the Grenfell Tower..
He (now she) didn't get investigated, arrested or even hassled by the US police, as far as I know.
*An artist called Chris Korda (aka The Church of Euthanasia) made a song and video in 2002 about masturbating over the Twin Towers attack. There were willies in the video, in case you were thinking of having a look.
Getting a bit daft now. Holding a bunch of ****s like this in custody for almost 24 hours when it is highly dubious whether any offence has even been committed.
Going through their bins seems to be a search for something/anything to charge someone with.
There really ought to be some unresolved offences in South London for them to direct their resources to.
Yeah, but someone was [i]offended[/i]! Can't have that can we.
Yeah, but someone was <em class="bbcode-em">offended! Can’t have that can we.
I significant number of people found it to be very offensive and probably racially motivated. The police are doing their jobs. Let them get on with it.
Let them get on with it.
Having an opinion doesn't stop anybody getting on with anything.
The police are doing their jobs. Let them get on with it.
But that's the poing, the police aren't doing their job here, they're doing the politician's job.
It was in very very poor taste but it seems to be growing legs and getting out of hand - it doesn't seem like the best use of time and resources given the number of other issues that London is facing. On the other hand given the media have whipped people up into a frenzy over it, its an easy win to investigate.
In which case prosecute the BBC who bought this to a massive audience.
Errrrrr! Ok.
In which case prosecute the BBC who bought this to a massive audience.
Errrrrr! Ok.
Makes as much sense as the current farce.
Makes as much sense as the current farce.
Yeah I'd agree.
Prosecute WhatsApp! And mobile phones! And cardboard! And Guy Fawkes. Yeah, him too.
Makes as much sense as the current farce.
Yeah I’d agree.
It does seem absurd. The people that did it are quite clearly absolute dicks and everyone understands that. It’s the whole “look at it, look at how offensive it is. Keep looking at it. Don’t look away, here it is again” approach of the media that grates.
It should have been removed from all social media and forgotten about. There are, in my humble opinion, much more important things for our already overworked police forces to deal with.
We agree that turning up in a KKK uniform and burning a cross outside someones house should be illegal, yes?
Well, this is a side effect of that.
More than that, it's a moderately entertaining one.
Well, this is a side effect of that.
Eh?
Eh?
This.
Well, this is a side effect of that.
Eh?
The Public Order Act which has been cited in this, would be used to prosecute people who decide it would be a good idea to go and burn crosses outside peoples houses. Would it not?
How is this any less offensive than someone swinging on the cenotaph, btw? The offender was prosecuted under the same act, yes?
Do we know if any of the people in the video are members of the Labour party?
prosecute people who decide it would be a good idea to go and burn crosses outside peoples houses.
What, like in Mississippi?
[i]Would it not?[/i] .. Probably.
[i], yes?[/i].. Maybe
Do we know if any of the people in the video are members of the Labour party?
Good point, I'm amazed the Express / Torygraph etc haven't suggested it was all Corbyn's fault...
Personally, I blame Thatcher.
What, like in Mississippi?
We're quite good at burning effigies in public, with the intention to cause distress and alarm as well. See the Orange Order.
The Public Order Act which has been cited in this, would be used to prosecute people who decide it would be a good idea to go and burn crosses outside peoples houses. Would it not?
NO! There would quite rightly be *far* more serious offences committed if you did that. Plus the action these morons took doesn't even break Section 4 of the Public Order Act which requires intent.
Plus the action these morons took doesn’t even break Section 4 of the Public Order Act which requires intent.
I guess that depends on the original intention of the leak from the WhatsApp group. I mean, it's not like said morons would have ever considered inviting the black people they know to the group for a bit of "bantz" - people are never that idiotic are they?
The police have to investigate that I guess.
I guess that depends on the original intention of the leak from the WhatsApp group.
I've had a quick look at Section 4 and I don't think so. The fact the police haven't charged them yet also makes me think you're wrong. If it was that simple they'd have been charged.
It would be similar to the frankly odd KKK anology had they rocked up in the garden of a family member of one of the victims. The Klan used to lynch people. Very different from a bunch of dickheads being, well, massive dickheads really.
I’ve had a quick look at Section 4 and I don’t think so. The fact the police haven’t charged them yet also makes me think you’re wrong. If it was that simple they’d have been charged.
It takes a while to get the WhatsApp data doesn't it? The Americans like to take their time.
Very different from a bunch of dickheads being, well, massive dickheads really.
My response to that, is dickheads being dickheads can contribute to the conditions and atmosphere that makes the threat of violence or the use of it, more acceptable.
See the recent anti-Semitic shooting in the US.
Anyway, I guess what I was trying to say is that you can't just pick and choose when to apply the law when given enough evidence to investigate. That's not rule by law is it?
I think our definitions of dickhead appear to be different. From what I’ve read the perpetrators of the incident this thread relates to were making a misguided attempt at being edgy or showing black humour. They missed the mark by a huge margin and were being insensitive, emotionally retarded and idiotic.
That is a far cry from shooting or being a member of the KKK. That’s so far past rule number one I don’t even know where it is.
Like it or not, if we live in a democracy we have to let people act like dicks and occasionally more or less everyone will be offended by something. To step away from that is the beginning of a very slippery slope.
"you can’t just pick and choose when to apply the law when given enough evidence to investigate"
Are you havin a giraffe? If the cops wanted to prosecute everyone for every time there was a law broken, half the country would be cops and half would be prison officers! Discretion and prioritisation happen every single minute of every officer's day!
This is a case where the police are arresting people for having shitty opinions and expressing them. That might be a social problem but it isn't one you can solve through the criminal justice system, especially when within a ten mile radius kids are being murdered, vulnerable people are being exploited and millions of pounds of money stolen from developing countries is being being laundered
I think our definitions of dickhead appear to be different. From what I’ve read the perpetrators of the incident this thread relates to were making a misguided attempt at being edgy or showing black humour. They missed the mark by a huge margin and were being insensitive, emotionally retarded and idiotic.
Considering that the person who reported it to the MET was black, are we sure that the video wasn't used with the intention to cause distress?
That might be a social problem but it isn’t one you can solve through the criminal justice system, especially when within a ten mile radius kids are being murdered, vulnerable people are being exploited and millions of pounds of money stolen from developing countries is being being laundered
And you think the MET are so incompetent they don't know how to triage these cases and don't have a valid reason for investigating? Hell, trying to make the BAME community in London community feel more supported by the MET might get them more leads in other cases.
But I'll trot this one out the next time one of your bikes gets nicked then.
The issue isn't the law, it's the funding of the police.
Considering that the person who reported it to the MET was black, are we sure that the video wasn’t used with the intention to cause distress?
My post was more pointing out that you were comparing the actions of an organisation with a documented history of intimidation and murder with some dickheads making a crass and insensitive effigy.
I don’t believe it was or that it was ever meant to have such a wide reaching audience. Would your opinion be different if somebody who wasn’t black had reported it? Does the skin colour or ethnicity of somebody reporting something automatically make it a race issue? Do you not see that the whole thing has been blown massively out of proportion and fuelled by the media?
Would your opinion be different if somebody who wasn’t black had reported it?
Well, that depends on whether the video or sharing of the video was intended to cause distress and alarm, doesn't it? I'm fairly sure, that's currently what the police are trying to work out.
So it wouldn’t be causing alarm if reported by a white person. Is that what you are stating as that just seema bizarre. Apologies if I’ve read that wrong.
Do you believe that the police would be investigating this at all if it hadn’t been for the ludicrous amount of coverage it has received? I honestly don’t think they would and it would have been forgotten by now. We’re clearly never going to agree so it’s best that I leave this now. Have a nice evening.
So it wouldn’t be causing alarm if reported by a white person
What it indicates is that this isn't just a joke made in bad taste that was shared amongst friends. Like some of you are saying. There is more to the story that we appear not to be privvy to.
Nope, just indicates that somebody (who happens to be black) found it offensive and the police are being forced to waste precious resources investigating it because the media got a hold and ran with it as far as I can tell.
Just broken my promise to walk away haven’t I 🤣
Happy to be wrong though.
And how do you know that?
Is it perhaps because you are a bit biased and think uppity black people should know their place? Or are you currently in possession of more facts than the MET?
What it indicates is that this isn’t just a joke made in bad taste that was shared amongst friends. Like some of you are saying. There is more to the story that we appear not to be privvy to.
This is a huge assumptions !!! What info do you have to support it ? The fact that it was reported by someone who's black ????
Because the reporter is clearly or very likely, not in their social circle. Especially in light of the reports from neighbours suggesting that they are in fact EDL voting muppets.
I could be wrong though, again - the MET will know. Not me. The same goes for the rest of the inverse-outraged on here.
And how do you know that?
Is it perhaps because you are a bit biased and think uppity black people should know their place? Or are you currently in possession of more facts than the MET?
Bravo! I’ve tried to remain civil and you accuse me of being racist. Says a lot more about you than it does me to be honest. Are you in possession of more facts than the MET?
I wonder what Raybanwomble's previous/other log in was?
He's quite the troll. 🙂
Bravo! I’ve tried to remain civil and you accuse me of being racist. Says a lot more about you than it does me to be honest. Are you in possession of more facts than the MET?
Well, I do find it enlightening that we are all outraged about the fact that the police are investigating this and not the fact that some people took joy in mocking the deaths of others.
But keep up your faux outrage, you'd only be genuinely outraged if you were in fact, in possession of the full facts of the case. Also, I never implied you were racist - but biased - big difference. Is it possible that you are easily offended?