A man who dumped the Colston statue into the sea is given a caution after 4 weeks & keeps anonymity. A man who took a leak in Parliament Square is jailed after 2 days and named & shamed. Activist judges who don't apply the law equally should be fired.
We all saw videos of both People will.recognise him no doubt. He also has a police record with a caution which can impact on employment.
Wow ......missed point here redhelen , two equally if not one worse than the other , one gets let off with a slapped wrist others banged up
I'm just pointing out it's a bit more than a slapped wrist. I have no idea of the sentencing guidelines or his defence. You can have 2 identical criminal acts and the sentencing can be very different due to mitigating factors, how good your legal representation is, probation reports, other offences etc etc.
I think it's brilliant. I think it's hilarious which one has been jailed. The tears from the right wing are brilliant. I thought it was the loony liberal left that were the snowflakes?
In fairness one was charged with Outrage public indecency the other Criminal damage. Not an expert but that suggests the Judge has convicted according to the charge.
It's always dangerous to give a gung-ho opinion based on very limited facts. There were up to 15 people said to have been involved in removing the statue. Only one has been identified so far by the Police. So if you are prosecuting, I would imagine you would ask yourself: has any actual damage been caused? The statue appeared to have been daubed with paint, but that can be removed. The statue itself was recovered. What is the extent of the damage (if any) and did anyone scrutinise the condition of the statue before it was removed from it's plinth? If not, then it would be hard to say with certainty that these actions caused damage (if any). How can you prove that this individual defendant (out of 15) was the person who caused that damage? When you consider that all these factors would have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt for a conviction, it is little surprise that the Police were happier to issue a conditional caution. The urinator, on the other hand admitted his guilt and received due discount for that.
I find it weird people implying defacing a memorial to a slade trader who died 280 years ago is equivalent to pissing on one to a police officer killed in the line of duty defending innocent civilians five years ago. You've got to have an unsavoury agenda to get your knickers in a twist about that.
Tweet by a Cambridge academic saying "White lives dont matter" she gets promoted to a professorship.A football fan charters a plane with a banner White lives matter he gets fired and banned?
I don’t honestly believe this thread. Man who damaged a statue of a renowned slave trader and child trafficker is punished less severely than a cretin who pissed on the memorial of a policeman killed in duty only a few years ago. And that isn’t fair. **** me sideways. Agenda with a capital A.
Those removing the statue should be applauded. The pillock who'd spent the day with far right pals drinking Carling in London amidst clashes with police and thought to píss where he did deserved a good hiding to go with his couple of weeks detention. Why do I think that? Because I don't like racism.
What was damaged is irrelevant, the protester was charged with Criminal damage and sentenced accordingly, the urinator was charged with outraging public decency which is treated as a much serious matter and was sentenced accordingly.
Nice to see the usual Snowflake decision-making matrix is fully operational and working without a hitch.!