|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jun 6, 2023 17:32:47 GMT
The motorcyclist didn't put anyone at risk. The woman who grabbed the motorcyclists arm while he was in control of a large, powerful motorbike put him, herself and the other protesters in the immediate vicinity at risk of serious harm. Had he lost control because of her action it wouldn't have been pretty Can't you read FFS, I never mentioned the motorcyclist put anyone a risk, it was that silly fuckin old woke fool woman, by grabbing hold of him he could have lost control of his 'lethal weapon' and ploughed into innocent members of the public who weren't part of the criminal protesters, no court in the land would find him guilty of any offense. Sigh! |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 6, 2023 17:32:49 GMT
So your still supporting these total time wasters then darling? These idiot are your beloved leaders paymaster. They say jump and he says how high.
Now Just Stop Oil sends Starmer 'ransom letter' ordering him to resign if demands not met
I'm not supporting anyone here. I'm vaguely interested in the legal aspects. I'm more than happy to be corrected. I'm not in the least suggesting that my post is in any way a definitive statement of the law. Just your usual crap darling. Watch the video in my link one forthright citizen treated thes scum like the scum that they are.. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jun 6, 2023 17:33:42 GMT
I'm not supporting anyone here. I'm vaguely interested in the legal aspects. I'm more than happy to be corrected. I'm not in the least suggesting that my post is in any way a definitive statement of the law. Just your usual crap darling. Watch the video in my link one forthright citizen treated thes scum like the scum that they are.. Maybe. But I was discussing the law surrounding the situation in the video link, not its moral aspects. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jun 6, 2023 17:36:41 GMT
Why hasn't that woke lefty daft woman been arrested? It's there for all to see she's accosting this innocent victim. Now that's an assault. I'm pretty sure he would have been within his rights to clobber her in the face at that point. I can't imagine what she thought she was doing or why she had the right to do it. Probably pretty heavily mind-washed. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jun 6, 2023 17:37:12 GMT
I'm pretty sure he would have been within his rights to clobber her in the face at that point. I can't imagine what she thought she was doing or why she had the right to do it. No. Everything depends on the correctness of the article I linked. As I've mentioned, it says that the only the state is allowed to physically abate a public nuisance. The gentleman on the motorbike would have had a defence to a charge of assault if he was an agent of the state. He didn't appear to be. Yet, he physically abated the nuisance. He committed an assault. The lady was attempting to stop him. If he had 'clobbered' her, he would have faced two charges of assault: one against the original protestor and one against her. For all I know, there may be some ancient statute that allows members of the public to accost people obstructing the highway. If you're aware of one, I'd be interested to learn about it. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 6, 2023 17:37:31 GMT
Just your usual crap darling. Watch the video in my link one forthright citizen treated thes scum like the scum that they are.. Maybe. But I was discussing the law surrounding the situation in the video link, not its moral aspects. These scum who are blocking our streets are criminals, What part of that is it that you do not understand? |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jun 6, 2023 17:40:00 GMT
I'm pretty sure he would have been within his rights to clobber her in the face at that point. I can't imagine what she thought she was doing or why she had the right to do it. Probably pretty heavily brainwashed. We all know had the motorcyclist clobbered her in the face the plod would have immediately arrested 'him' for assault, this is how absolute insane the police have become, people in this day and age can get arrested for lifting their hands to their own children, so what gives people the right to 'think' they can raise their hands to general members of the public who they don't know from Adam. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jun 6, 2023 17:40:40 GMT
Maybe. But I was discussing the law surrounding the situation in the video link, not its moral aspects. These scum who are blocking our streets are criminals, What part of that is it that you do not understand? I understand they're blocking the streets. Nobody has denied that. I'm discussing the legal issues in the video linked. What part of that don't you understand? |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jun 6, 2023 17:41:31 GMT
I'm pretty sure he would have been within his rights to clobber her in the face at that point. I can't imagine what she thought she was doing or why she had the right to do it. Probably pretty heavily brainwashed. We all know had the motorcyclist clobbered her in the face the plod would have immediately arrested 'him' for assault, this is how absolute insane the police have become, people in this day and age can get arrested for lifting their hands to their own children, so what gives people the right to 'think' they can raise their hands to general members of the public who they don't know from Adam. As I said, he would have faced two charges of assault: one charge for assaulting the original protestor, and another for assaulting the woman who came to his assistance. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 6, 2023 17:45:07 GMT
These scum who are blocking our streets are criminals, What part of that is it that you do not understand? I understand they're blocking the streets. Nobody has denied that. I'm discussing the legal issues in the video linked. What part of that don't you understand? But I do understand darling. I can also smell when a lefty woke enters the arena and the stench level rises with your posts. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jun 6, 2023 17:45:53 GMT
We all know had the motorcyclist clobbered her in the face the plod would have immediately arrested 'him' for assault, this is how absolute insane the police have become, people in this day and age can get arrested for lifting their hands to their own children, so what gives people the right to 'think' they can raise their hands to general members of the public who they don't know from Adam. As I said, he would have faced two charges of assault: one charge for assaulting the original protestor, and another for assaulting the woman who came to his assistance. There is a law that supersedes that law, and will win.
A man who is attacked or believes that he is about to be attacked may use such force as is both necessary and reasonable in order to defend himself. If that is what he does then he acts lawfully. It follows that a man who starts the violence, the aggressor, cannot rely upon self-defence to render his actions lawful.
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jun 6, 2023 17:46:43 GMT
I understand they're blocking the streets. Nobody has denied that. I'm discussing the legal issues in the video linked. What part of that don't you understand? But I do understand darling. I can also smell when a lefty woke enters the arena and the stench level rises with your posts. No, I don't think you do, Jonksy. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jun 6, 2023 17:47:50 GMT
As I said, he would have faced two charges of assault: one charge for assaulting the original protestor, and another for assaulting the woman who came to his assistance. There is a law that supersedes that law, and will win.
A man who is attacked or believes that he is about to be attacked may use such force as is both necessary and reasonable in order to defend himself. If that is what he does then he acts lawfully. It follows that a man who starts the violence, the aggressor, cannot rely upon self-defence to render his actions lawful.
That's a very interesting and somewhat bizarre legal analysis. But, have it your way. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jun 6, 2023 17:48:07 GMT
I'm pretty sure he would have been within his rights to clobber her in the face at that point. I can't imagine what she thought she was doing or why she had the right to do it. No. Everything depends on the correctness of the article I linked. Of course it doesn't. You interpretation is incorrect. Weaving through a crowd of people with a motorcycle on a road is not an assault (nor is it any form of 'abatement') - in fact, it is far more reasonable to argue that deliberately blocking such progress is assault. However, the woman went one step further and grabbed him. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jun 6, 2023 17:48:53 GMT
There is a law that supersedes that law, and will win.
A man who is attacked or believes that he is about to be attacked may use such force as is both necessary and reasonable in order to defend himself. If that is what he does then he acts lawfully. It follows that a man who starts the violence, the aggressor, cannot rely upon self-defence to render his actions lawful.
That's a very interesting and somewhat bizarre legal analysis. But, have it your way. LOL ... take it from me I know.  |
|
