No more Protest

I see one of the mothers is saying how unfair the sentence is as her dearest daughter will miss her brothers wedding. So sad boo hoo 😢

I see one of the mothers is saying how unfair the sentence is as her dearest daughter will miss her brothers wedding. So sad boo hoo 😢

Naturally, what interests you and doesn't interest you does not concern me in the slightest.

Must you get so personal and characterize other people's posts in such a dishonest and mean spirited way? You must be awfully insecure to engage in such childish behaviour. Don't post to me anymore if you don't want to talk to me. That's a simple solution which will certainly suit me. Okay?

I see one of the mothers is saying how unfair the sentence is as her dearest daughter will miss her brothers wedding. So sad boo hoo 😢

Yeah, Cressidas mum gave a speech outside of court, started off saying she won't be able to attend her brothers wedding and then the rest gives vibes of- this shouldn't happen to us, we are posh!

Link to it on twitter

Sad thing is, someone with 'so much potential' could have gone on I'm sure to affect real change if they'd been so inclined.

Seriously??!

I see one of the mothers is saying how unfair the sentence is as her dearest daughter will miss her brothers wedding. So sad boo hoo 😢

Regardless of your opinion on the individuals, it is utterly ridiculous for them to have been given jail time just as the new government have expressed their shock at the dire extent of overcrowding in prisons.

I also find it hypocritical that the protesters have been given jail time with weight given to the “potential” dangers of their actions, but the same isn’t applied to the potential danger of other people eg. abusive men, who can harass their victims for years but they’re told nothing can be done until they actually cause harm, by which time it’s too late.

You should really do yourself a favour and download the Judge's Sentencing Remarks which will give you the facts of the situation before him.

I'm not really interested in what you think about some other unrelated event or what you think various people in this thread are saying.

Either you're interested in the facts of the case this thread is concerned with or you're not.

I think we've established you're NOT interested in the facts of the case, but prefer to stand on your soapbox banging your keyboard.

Without facts, your posts become meaningless.

That's your problem, not mine. But if you insist on putting misleading assumptions in the thread, then you can expect someone will challenge you on it.

And they'll be referring to the actual facts of the case as helpfully explained by the Judge. 🤷‍♂️

I should have been clearer. I meant in the case of a protest, not this one in particular. That's why I gave the example of a similar protest in which ambulances got through. Maybe nobody would have died if they hadn't gone through and maybe somebody would have. That's what's difficult to say, in general, because we don't know the condition of the person in it.

Yes, I am focusing on what people in this thread say, because it's a discussion.
You're not going to browbeat me into reading something I'm not interested in reading, so please just stop.

Love it when people tell me what i think.....

Especially when i ve said repeatedly i do not hold to their cause.

I just don't believe people who have not taken part in terrorist activities, like cyber attacks on the NHS, should be sent to jail for longer periods of time than say someone who stuck a glass in someones face or killed someone whilst driving pissed.

Prison should be used sparingly & as a last resort, normally to be reserved for violent people.

However, it appears that many people believe prison should be used for people they don't agree with.......

Again, I don't have an opinion on the sentence and am not currently interested in developing one.
Please stop posting to me if you are going to keep being a broken record. I'll ignore any future posts which are of a browbeating nature.

You can’t properly formulate an opinion if you don’t know the facts

@XChrome why won’t you read the judgment?

This is why your opinion is worthless, as you won’t look at the actual facts

I should have been clearer. I meant in the case of a protest, not this one in particular. That's why I gave the example of a similar protest in which ambulances got through. Maybe nobody would have died if they hadn't gone through and maybe somebody would have. That's what's difficult to say, in general, because we don't know the condition of the person in it.

Yes, I am focusing on what people in this thread say, because it's a discussion.
You're not going to browbeat me into reading something I'm not interested in reading, so please just stop.

On the contrary, you ARE referring to the case itself! 👇

"I do think that in this case, the potential for harm is difficult to establish. The potential harm people on here are talking about is not letting ambulances get by. So if another group did the same thing, but let ambulances and other emergency vehicles through, there goes the potential."

As we can see in the Judge's Sentencing Remarks, the potential for harm was NOT difficult to establish thanks to the JSO convicts' own Zoom call evidence!

It was very much part of the evidence against JSO five.

So, the rest of your assertion there falls away.

After this, you then switch to posters in this thread. 👇

"However, something tells me they would still have been convicted and the same sadists would be getting orgasmic over a harsh sentence. They're pretending it's about ambulances when it's really about being inconvenienced."

Which is also irrelevant in light of what the Judge said about the sheer scale of the potential harm the five JSO convicts intended to cause.

It's ridiculous to focus on what posters in this thread may or may not have said when you still have access to the Judge's Sentencing Remarks!

You were still incorrect to say that you think "in this case the potential for harm is difficult to establish"!

In law, the correct decision was reached at trial regarding the five JSO convicts.

Correct decision.