Boat race protester gets six months prison for upsetting the elite.

I'm still waiting for Phage or someone equally militant to make an honest case which justifies 6 months in prison for a protest that resulted in no injuries or loss to anyone other than the protestor?

the elite over here have polo tournies

maybe I should run onto the field ?

nah, that would accomplish nothing and I would get in trouble

maybe this bloke should think before he acts

protest them at a public place in front of their offices. have a clear and memorable message

knucklehead

AND he very likely would not be serving any time at all if he would have just said he was "sorry".

reply to post by Zarniwoop


they can sentence people for things that are not against the law. its worse than i thought.

reply to post by syrinx high priest


I can't disagree that it is was a silly way to do it. A megaphone with shouted words would have been a better idea, but let's be honest, the toff's don't care what the plebs think.

Actually, it's not about the deed. It's about the sanction that has been applied. 6 months? Ha Ha, there are many worse deeds that have received far less!!

Fiddle with kids? - 6 weeks

Harm an O.A.P? - 2 weeks

Grow the dreaded Natural plant? - 6 years

Man, this world has gone mad, BIG style.

We're heading to hell in a handcart, well if you're Christian!!

reply to post by Cobaltic1978


The fact is with the NWO in power Christians will not survive easily . Things will be third world for the rest of the commoners . Thats you and yours !

reply to post by Phage


Because they might realize hurting another human being, even one who is being an "idiot," is wrong?

Originally posted by grainofsand
I'm still waiting for Phage or someone equally militant to make an honest case which justifies 6 months in prison for a protest that resulted in no injuries or loss to anyone other than the protestor?

edit on 20-10-2012 by grainofsand because: (no reason given)

This is a protest.

Disrupting a sporting event isn't. Those athletes train day in and day out, consume insane diets to be perfectly weighted for their positions on the boat, and are competing in a sport that requires quick bursts of energy. Disrupting the event is essentially stealing away from all the hard work they have done in training.

I don't see how it's fair to the people in the boat, no matter who the fans are. If police came and interrupted a football match based on their personal feelings of who enjoys/supports or attends it, fans would be outraged calling "police state", yet somehow people here are saying that it's okay when one person decides themselves that a sport is only enjoyed by elites so it should be interrupted.

The following is what real corruption of justice looks like, in my opinion:

(BIANET/IFEX) - A court in the southern province of Adana sentenced speech and hearing impaired Mehmet Tahir Ilhan to eight years and four months in prison for spreading propaganda on behalf of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), and sentenced Ugur K., another suspect in the same trial, to 11 years and 11 months in prison, according to the Firat news agency.

The prosecutor had requested a total of 25 years in prison for Ilhan. “He involuntarily mixed in with the demonstrators after he left the food market for home. I am in tatters with my children [now,]” said Necmiye Ilhan, his wife and a mother of six. Lawyer Tugay Bek also said the charges leveled against his hearing and speech impaired client were incompatible with reason and logic.

“Ilhan is hearing and speech impaired from birth, and he is illiterate. It is impossible for him to accompany the slogans. It is incompatible with reason and logic that such accusations be leveled against the suspect who has absolutely no physical capacity to spread propaganda for the [PKK,]” Lawyer Bek said, adding they were going to appeal the verdict.

www.ifex.org...

reply to post by antonia


Ahh... Nothing like a little time off the KB to get perspective back. Now then... You raised a couple other points?

If you think that's what I did then report it, but the point still stands. It is an entirely subjective question as to how useful it was.

Hmm? I admit I GET reported occasionally...but I don't send reports unless something has gotten so outrageous and so far out of line that I fear I'll end up post banned or worse if I handle it myself. Been a couple..it's rare...and snarky 1 or 2 liners is a world away from anything of that sort. back to topic though...

Okay, you raise a decent point on his accomplishing anything. In the one example, I cited the British troops marching on Parliament and their accomplishing something because they did, apparently and it was tangible. As I understand it, it was minor but the Gov't agreed to reconsider disbanding the Unit that had really been the last little push needed to take to a proper march. There, there is nothing subjective about it. It's a matter of record and directly to line of what they sought.

I'd even say Occupy accomplished a great deal. Tangible...and real. Namely, it made an entire nation aware of a whole class of people that, if nothing else, few John Q's even bothered to think about existing, let alone know or care were extremely pissed off and willing to move beyond words.. Change? Hard to say..Occupy isn't over and the long term effects take time. It was a massive movement. Occupy's goals included as a MAIN one, public awareness and increased understanding of the issues about our little Corptacracy or whatever one wants to call this mess. Goal, action, success....in in almost comical over-simplification and leaving about a thousand caveats and but's out of it, I do admit.


This guy? Well, lets look at this goals. He was pissed off about Government cuts as the article indicates. We're talking about him...so obviously he got his 15 minutes of fame and for a normal person, that's a tangible gain..I suppose. (Susan Smith got hers too...not always a net positive by itself). He seemed very successful in disrupting the sporting event of some University Students. Did that generate sympathy? Accomplish much? I can't see it...but maybe someone in England or London itself sees it different on sympathy?

Was anything accomplished in relation to the goal or..just a rant apparently, he started with? As above, I can't see it. Did anyone in 'Her Majesty's ' Government change any law, regulation, guideline or budget matter? Has anything been remotely discussed in response to what he did? Any action anywhere, aside from anger of the length of sentence now?

It seems to me, rather than get sympathy or force so much as a discussion of change in the circles needing to do it......he managed to get the book thrown so hard at him, it knocked him clear outta his chair.

^^^ Now in the world of accomplishing things, that last part is absolutely not subjective... He did, said or just had a way about him that pissed that Judge off to no end imaginable...is my guess by how many seem shocked at the sentence? Must not be common or anything close...

Again though...... Aside from a record setting sentence to outrage everyone over a broken justice system...I don't think he intended to be the poster boy for exactly. .I miss anything, in terms of how I described accomplishment by the first 2 examples, that he actually did get done by this? If you have tangible points beyond those already listed for media attention, I'd be curious by just getting the insight of how London works compared to American cities on such things.

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by syrinx high priest

 

I can't disagree that it is was a silly way to do it. A megaphone with shouted words would have been a better idea, but let's be honest, the toff's don't care what the plebs think.

the polo field is actually right off a fairly large public road in greenwich. a megaphone would be heard no doubt. I wonder about the legality of standing on town property and doing that. noise ordinance ? they'd probably take me away as a nuisance to traffic, and they would be right. you're in the end tho, they would have some brandy and a good laugh

"Your offence was planned,"
"It was deliberate. It was disproportionate."

The same can be said of the judge

I think the protestor was wrong;

"Trenton's protest was a reaction to an increasingly brutal business, media and political elite." link

That isn't a protest, but a show of misbehavior from a person who doesn't like the fact that the boaters were doing something that (he) felt was elitist.

However I think the punishment is disproportionate to the 'crime'.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

This guy? Well, lets look at this goals. He was pissed off about Government cuts as the article indicates. We're talking about him...so obviously he got his 15 minutes of fame and for a normal person, that's a tangible gain..I suppose. (Susan Smith got hers too...not always a net positive by itself). He seemed very successful in disrupting the sporting event of some University Students. Did that generate sympathy? Accomplish much? I can't see it...but maybe someone in England or London itself sees it different on sympathy?

Several people on this board seem to sympathize with him and he's gotten everyone here talking about his cause in a way. He did accomplish something if you think about it that way. We can't know exactly what he was aiming for. It might not have even been planned out. The guy might have just been passing by and just lost it. Not everything in life is some planned ordeal. By the standards you propose Rosa Parks wasn't accomplishing much. (not that I am equating the two at all) by just getting mad and telling the authority she wasn't moving.

Was it smart? No, but not everything in life worth doing is. He get something out of it so in the end he did accomplish something.

But let's be real, there is nothing the man could have done without being arrested. Several other posters have brought up the class issue and that's what is at the heart of this matter. This man didn't get 6 months for interrupting a boat race, he got six months for pissing off the upper crust.

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by grainofsand
I'm still waiting for Phage or someone equally militant to make an honest case which justifies 6 months in prison for a protest that resulted in no injuries or loss to anyone other than the protestor?

edit on 20-10-2012 by grainofsand because: (no reason given)

This is a protest.

Disrupting a sporting event isn't. Those athletes train day in and day out, consume insane diets to be perfectly weighted for their positions on the boat, and are competing in a sport that requires quick bursts of energy. Disrupting the event is essentially stealing away from all the hard work they have done in training.

Somebody should have told Emily Davison.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Crakeur
no, he got six months for being a public nuisance. he jumped into the water, disrupting a boat race, putting himself and the folks in the boats at risk.

Exactly. He crossed the line big time, jumping into the water, risking his own safety and life as well as the safety and life of those who happened to be in the boats. He was a public nuisance and caused a lot of trouble.

He did not just jump in the water, OP and it is not fair or realistic of you to downplay what he did. It gives a not so honest spin. I guess what I am saying is, be fair, OP....

Originally posted by mr-lizard

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by grainofsand
I'm still waiting for Phage or someone equally militant to make an honest case which justifies 6 months in prison for a protest that resulted in no injuries or loss to anyone other than the protestor?

edit on 20-10-2012 by grainofsand because: (no reason given)

This is a protest.

Disrupting a sporting event isn't. Those athletes train day in and day out, consume insane diets to be perfectly weighted for their positions on the boat, and are competing in a sport that requires quick bursts of energy. Disrupting the event is essentially stealing away from all the hard work they have done in training.

Somebody should have told Emily Davison.

en.wikipedia.org...

I guess you didn't read the entire article:

Legacy

Some historians have argued that Davison's action may have harmed the suffragette cause rather than furthered it, as the monarchy was highly respected in Britain at the time.[11]

By the way, people do self immolation all the time. What it accomplishes exactly is lost on most, definitely lost on them.

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by ANOK

Yes you can get into Oxford etc., on a scholarship. But to get a scholarship to schools like that you have to have extremely high grades, be involved in community services, and be good at some kind of sports. It also helps to have parents of some importance.

The chances of a commoner fitting their requirements is extremely thin.

 

Commoners are stupid people are they now? This is ludicrous, some of the excuses and examples some of you have been using in this thread.

God forbid I have a child that does well in school, sports and is active in their community and they end up at cambridge via scholarship.

They certainly would deserve your disdain then wouldn't they?

I've seen the twisting of thoughts & words before, but never before to the extent that you are doing in this thread. Nobody ever said or even insinuated that 'commoners are stupid', the poster merely stated that to get into one of these schools, one would need to have very good grades.. then went on to mention other 'credentials' that might help in this area. I feel that you know exactly what people are saying, but want to twist words around, trying to make light of the words and opinions of others.

It's true that some folks get away with doing things that 'common folk' go to jail for. It happens all the time. There really is a class warfare taking place here, and obviously in the UK as well. I hope you're not denying that it's wrong whenever the scales of justice are not balanced for the poor or less than wealthy, because we rarely see the rich sent to jails.. and it isn't because they are such saints

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

Think about this very carefully for a moment. The oppressor may inflict unimaginable cruelties on innocent victims -- but the victims may only protest in ways which the oppressor deems "acceptable." The profound injustice is obvious, but not in itself remarkable or unexpected: this is how oppression operates. But ask yourself about the deeper reason for the prohibition. This is of the greatest importance: the victims may only protest within a constricted range of "permissible" behavior because, when they exceed the prescribed limits, they make the oppressors too uncomfortable. They force the oppressors to confront the nature of what they, the oppressors, have done in ways that the oppressors do not choose to face.

Most excellent comment! I wish that I could quote the entire post, but I would be 'punished' and my post removed if I try. Very good read

reply to post by RobinB022

It's true that some folks get away with doing things that 'common folk' go to jail for. It happens all the time. There really is a class warfare taking place here, and obviously in the UK as well. I hope you're not denying that it's wrong whenever the scales of justice are not balanced for the poor or less than wealthy, because we rarely see the rich sent to jails.. and it isn't because they are such saints

What does that have to do with a commoner getting into Cambridge, or boat racing in general? Nothing.

The only reason it comes up is because this "protester" believed it was somehow relevant. But the truth is he was pulling a stunt, to further his own cause, which was to lash out at a group (not really the one targeted as previously explained) for his own misplaced anger.

Precedence? Well, he could have got 4 years like the fellow that tried to sabotage a football match.

R v Ong 2001 1 Cr App R (S) 117
Plan to turn off lights at Premiership football match. D intended to financially gain by placing bets. 4 years.

www.cps.gov.uk...

Personally, I think he has mommy and daddy issues, being that he is part of the elite he claims he is rallying against.

Educated at the esteemed Sydney Church of England Grammar School, followed by the London School of Economics, Trenton Oldfield can claim to know a thing or two about elitism.

With fees in excess of £15,000 a year, Shore – as his former school is affectionately known – is regarded as one of Australia’s leading and most exclusive private schools.

He still maintained a relationship with his family, having lived in the house owned by his father, Ross Oldfield, an engineer and multiple property owner, in Hornsby Heights in Sydney's north west.

There was no sign of Mr Oldfield last night at the £350,000 flat in East London he shares with his girlfriend.

Lets see him cut all ties with his family and give back everything he's been given, at the same time tearing up his diplomas and degrees, then going from their to declare himself better than everyone else. He has no problem pulling on the tender chords of the common man, but a large issue actually acting like one.

As I said before, I personally know people who have gone to elite schools, participated in boat racing, and none of them came from anything.

This guy is a coward and pathetic excuse in my opinion.

Originally posted by RobinB022
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

 

Think about this very carefully for a moment. The oppressor may inflict unimaginable cruelties on innocent victims -- but the victims may only protest in ways which the oppressor deems "acceptable." The profound injustice is obvious, but not in itself remarkable or unexpected: this is how oppression operates. But ask yourself about the deeper reason for the prohibition. This is of the greatest importance: the victims may only protest within a constricted range of "permissible" behavior because, when they exceed the prescribed limits, they make the oppressors too uncomfortable. They force the oppressors to confront the nature of what they, the oppressors, have done in ways that the oppressors do not choose to face.

Most excellent comment! I wish that I could quote the entire post, but I would be 'punished' and my post removed if I try. Very good read

alas, it seems to have gone unnoticed and drowned out by the

"why'd he have to spoil the rich kids fun and SERIOUSLY INCONVENIENCE them!!!
UNACCEPTABLE!!! Off With His Head!!!!!" crowd
so quick to protect the privileges of their masters [probably still buying into the lie that if they work themselves to death, they too will enjoy said privileges!!!

aaaaawwwwww poor widdle which kids had go on a diet and this evil protestor spoiled their fun!!!!!
lol some homemade mustard gas or stolen sarin might have served better and gotten rid of part of the problem to boot.

or a homemade drone [or a catapult] launching and dumping a few gallons of blood from the local butchers onto their expensive clothes at least

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

"why'd he have to spoil the rich kids fun and SERIOUSLY INCONVENIENCE them!!!
UNACCEPTABLE!!! Off With His Head!!!!!" crowd
so quick to protect the privileges of their masters [probably still buying into the lie that if they work themselves to death, they too will enjoy said privileges!!!

Did you miss this post?

The guy who jumped in the river is from the "elite" crowd. Last time I checked my parents didn't send me to a private school that cost 20,000 a year or buy me a 600,000 dollar house....