Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

The Home Secretary is not telling the truth about rioters 'paying the price' ...

243 replies

jxpop665 · 04/08/2024 11:17

as it will be the choice of a jury whether or not the accused is found guilty. She is being a very dishonest politician pretending it is her choice.

There could be a significant situation as in the statue of Edward Colston case, that if sufficient people in a jury agree with the underlying motivations the jury may use jury equity to find the accused not guilty.

Given the purported motivation of failed immigration policy is a political issue for a significant proportion of the population, this is an unlikely be possible outcome.

YABU = The Home Secretary is right, they will pay the price.
YANBU = The Home Secretary should be honest as that choice is for a jury.

OP posts:
swimsong · 04/08/2024 12:21

Proudtobeanortherner · 04/08/2024 12:13

IMHO, the consequences for these rioters will be exactly what you can expect from a Labour Government. They’re very similar to “liberal” parents who think that everyone is an inherently nice person; “there, there, you naughty person, don’t do that again” but definitely not a tap on the wrist because that would be going to far. This government was never going to end well but even I couldn’t have predicted this mess this soon 😢 and please don’t try to tell me that these riots are not at least causally linked to the change in government.

These riots are not at all causally linked to the change in government.

They are though, causally linked to the racist shit-stirring of Farage, the Reform Party candidates and Tommy Robinson.

There's no evidence that the judiciary will give more leniant sentences under Labour. In fact, they have explicitly excluded violent crimes from allowed early release because of overcrowding - a policy that the Conservatives introduced years ago without that restriction.

Original poster
jxpop665 · 04/08/2024 12:18

swimsong · 04/08/2024 12:10

That would count as a hung jury and there will be a retrial. In any case having a political motivation is not a legitimate defence for violent malicious rioting, attacking the police, arson and looting etc

Edited
Show quote history

Agreed it would, and that there is no such defence - just like in the case of criminal damage.

But irrespective, the prosecution has to convince a jury and the jury does not have to give any reasons - a defence does not need to be chosen, they can just decide for whatever reason to not convict.

In the case of retrial - well, agreed, but could happen again at which point would be typically abandonded.

Its simply not the question of this AIBU though - which is whether the Home Secretary can honestly make such a statement that those involved will pay the price given she nor the government has any role.

OP posts:
Yogayogayoga · 04/08/2024 12:16

We don't have a 'failed immigration policy'. We have a 'failed to teach some British citizens to not be racist little shits and take out their frustrations on the wrong people because they're too thick to realise it' policy.

Rummly · 04/08/2024 12:16

SaltAndVinegar2 · 04/08/2024 12:13

Some people think supporting human rights indicates weakness

Show quote history

That depends on the issue.

Blair was willing to derogate if the ECHR had got in the way of his anti-terrorism policy.

SaltAndVinegar2 · 04/08/2024 12:15

Proudtobeanortherner · 04/08/2024 12:13

IMHO, the consequences for these rioters will be exactly what you can expect from a Labour Government. They’re very similar to “liberal” parents who think that everyone is an inherently nice person; “there, there, you naughty person, don’t do that again” but definitely not a tap on the wrist because that would be going to far. This government was never going to end well but even I couldn’t have predicted this mess this soon 😢 and please don’t try to tell me that these riots are not at least causally linked to the change in government.

The riots are linked to 14 years of conservative policy negatively affecting working class areas.

Combined with Elon musk platforming far right activists on X.

Proudtobeanortherner · 04/08/2024 12:13

IMHO, the consequences for these rioters will be exactly what you can expect from a Labour Government. They’re very similar to “liberal” parents who think that everyone is an inherently nice person; “there, there, you naughty person, don’t do that again” but definitely not a tap on the wrist because that would be going to far. This government was never going to end well but even I couldn’t have predicted this mess this soon 😢 and please don’t try to tell me that these riots are not at least causally linked to the change in government.

SaltAndVinegar2 · 04/08/2024 12:13

Bluebellsinthewind · 04/08/2024 12:05

@taxguru I knew he was a human rights lawyer but didn't know that he was criticised for being weak.

Those poor police officers having to deal with this. Also what's not getting done by the police because they are having to put all full fucus on this.

Some people think supporting human rights indicates weakness

twentysevendresses · 04/08/2024 12:12

Clariana · 04/08/2024 11:44

So, courts can sit all night for this, but women who have been raped have to wait up to 8 years for their case to come to court, as reported on BBC Breakfast yesterday morning.

Shows where the new government's priorities lie.

Are you saying that this 8 year wait is the new (less than a month!) government's fault??

🤦‍♀️

SaltAndVinegar2 · 04/08/2024 12:11

jxpop665 · 04/08/2024 12:04

I don't agree with the violence at all. The difference only matters to those who don't feel society has got the situation right.

So, you indicate that you could have two on the jury that approve? If this is three in some cases, then not guilty will be the outcome, irrespective of what they really did - exactly the point I'm making.

Show quote history

I don't think you understand how it works. Firstly, only serious crimes get a jury trial. Most crimes are dealt with in a magistrates court.

Secondly if any of them get as far as a jury trial, they are tried on a specific charge and the jury decide whether have done it on the available evidence. They are advised how to interpret this evidence. They can't just decide not to convict based on their own racist attitudes.

Juries are screened in advance - anyone with a history of far right involvement or anyone who indicates they have prejudged the defendant isn't allowed to participate.

swimsong · 04/08/2024 12:10

jxpop665 · 04/08/2024 12:04

I don't agree with the violence at all. The difference only matters to those who don't feel society has got the situation right.

So, you indicate that you could have two on the jury that approve? If this is three in some cases, then not guilty will be the outcome, irrespective of what they really did - exactly the point I'm making.

Show quote history

That would count as a hung jury and there will be a retrial. In any case having a political motivation is not a legitimate defence for violent malicious rioting, attacking the police, arson and looting etc

Rummly · 04/08/2024 12:07

taxguru · 04/08/2024 12:01

@Bluebellsinthewind

Keir is looking weaker by the day in my opinion

No surprise there. He was a human rights lawyer and widely criticised as being weak/soft on criminals during his tenure as DPP and at the CPS.

That’s unfair.

I don’t trust Starmer - his overweening ambition and willingness to compromise any principle in his own interests are well known - but there’s nothing to suggest he’s some hand-wringing legal softy.

custardlover · 04/08/2024 12:07

And most of these will not have juries. But they will get criminal records and fines / custodial sentences and that may lead to them losing their jobs. Fucking idiots.

custardlover · 04/08/2024 12:05

No he wasn't. Keir Starmer was Director of Public Prosecutions for the 2011 riots and threw the book at them all and fast and successfully curbed it. He knows how to deal with these utter moronic thugs. amp.theguardian.com/uk/2012/jul/03/riot-prosecutions-sentences-keir-starmer

Think the OP might be feeling a bit nervous and engaging in a bit of wishful thinking... regretting something OP?

Bluebellsinthewind · 04/08/2024 12:05

@taxguru I knew he was a human rights lawyer but didn't know that he was criticised for being weak.

Those poor police officers having to deal with this. Also what's not getting done by the police because they are having to put all full fucus on this.

Original poster
jxpop665 · 04/08/2024 12:04

swimsong · 04/08/2024 11:58

There's a huge difference between pulling an old statue down and violently attacking minorities and the police and looting vaping/mobile shops and Greggs.

Your are being naively fanciful. A significant portion of the population being extremist thugs and gleeful support rioters excuses nothing. There might be one or two racists on a jury that agree with you and approve the violence - but that's all you get.

I don't agree with the violence at all. The difference only matters to those who don't feel society has got the situation right.

So, you indicate that you could have two on the jury that approve? If this is three in some cases, then not guilty will be the outcome, irrespective of what they really did - exactly the point I'm making.

OP posts:
taxguru · 04/08/2024 12:01

@Bluebellsinthewind

Keir is looking weaker by the day in my opinion

No surprise there. He was a human rights lawyer and widely criticised as being weak/soft on criminals during his tenure as DPP and at the CPS.

CuriousGeorge80 · 04/08/2024 11:59

YABU and pretty ridiculous.

absquatulize · 04/08/2024 11:59

Clariana · 04/08/2024 11:44

So, courts can sit all night for this, but women who have been raped have to wait up to 8 years for their case to come to court, as reported on BBC Breakfast yesterday morning.

Shows where the new government's priorities lie.

There is a significant deference between a first hearing in a magistrates court, which just needs magistrates or a district judge, prosecuting solicitor and defence solicitor and typically takes a few minutes and a trial in a Crown Court, that would need judge, jury, prosecution and defence barristers and solicitors, witnesses and could last for days or weeks.

Can I suggest to all posters that they take some time to go and sit in a magistrates court for a morning and then a Crown Court for the afternoon to see the differences for themselves.

swimsong · 04/08/2024 11:58

There's a huge difference between pulling an old statue down and violently attacking minorities and the police and looting vaping/mobile shops and Greggs.

Your are being naively fanciful. A significant portion of the population being extremist thugs and gleeful support rioters excuses nothing. There might be one or two racists on a jury that agree with you and approve the violence - but that's all you get.

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 04/08/2024 11:58

Olderkids · 04/08/2024 11:56

I do not condone the violence and destruction at all so there needs to be a very
strong deterrent. By the same token, non- British people who walk around with weapons clearly on display must be treated in exactly the same way, not just gently asked to put their weapon down.
Peaceful protests must be allowed to continue. They represent the view of the majority who are fed up of financing unchecked immigration whilst watching public services for ourselves deteriorate every day.

This isnt the view of the majority.

If it was Reform would have won the election.

Olderkids · 04/08/2024 11:56

I do not condone the violence and destruction at all so there needs to be a very
strong deterrent. By the same token, non- British people who walk around with weapons clearly on display must be treated in exactly the same way, not just gently asked to put their weapon down.
Peaceful protests must be allowed to continue. They represent the view of the majority who are fed up of financing unchecked immigration whilst watching public services for ourselves deteriorate every day.

Maray1967 · 04/08/2024 11:55

Yes - magistrates were appropriately tough in 2011. A few folks who got carried away and joined in regretted it pretty quickly. If my memory serves me right, someone got a conviction that ended their career.

I’m particularly concerned about children being there. If social services weren’t so overstretched, families taking children on something that they know is going to end up in violence should receive their attention.

Bluebellsinthewind · 04/08/2024 11:55

@Ponoka7 yeah, me and dh were just discussing those points. The logistics and money would be a nightmare.

There definitely needs to be a hard line on this. How long will these riots last? What will make it stop? How far could these muppets escalate things?

I also think the PM should do an address to the nation. Rather than snippets in the news.

Original poster
jxpop665 · 04/08/2024 11:55

pikkumyy77 · 04/08/2024 11:43

The question itself is just really …off? The Home Secretary isn’t “lying” or telling thevtruth. What are you, four years old? The HS is expressing the government’s intention to carry through with penalties insofar as possible. She isn’t specifiying but you can assume it will be somewhere between execution and a slap on the wrist. She also doesn’t have to say specifically what she means because its not under her control.

And yes I know there is no more capital punishment in the UK but I’m afraid the OP is so unused to hyperbole and political speech that I will get a lecture on it.

The punishment if found guilty is largely in their control, as they can control the sentencing guidelines - but given around 15% of the population voted reform, it's quite possible to be a violent thug on the streets but a jury unwilling to convict.

I realise she making a point, but why not just be honest? I also do find it strange they can investigate and charge these potential crimes the same day, but Manchester airport police need a lengthy investigation, and so many crimes affecting people all year round do not get much attention at all.

Anyway, my point was that the population decides whether a price will be paid, and once you have 15-25% having some sympathy with the motivation, but not the tactics - governments can struggle to get convictions in a proportion of cases. Has been a driving force of reform for hundreds of years.

OP posts:
absquatulize · 04/08/2024 11:55

jxpop665 · 04/08/2024 11:17

as it will be the choice of a jury whether or not the accused is found guilty. She is being a very dishonest politician pretending it is her choice.

There could be a significant situation as in the statue of Edward Colston case, that if sufficient people in a jury agree with the underlying motivations the jury may use jury equity to find the accused not guilty.

Given the purported motivation of failed immigration policy is a political issue for a significant proportion of the population, this is an unlikely be possible outcome.

YABU = The Home Secretary is right, they will pay the price.
YANBU = The Home Secretary should be honest as that choice is for a jury.

My understanding was that Yvette Cooper in the 4 weeks as Home Secretary has announced a series of steps to address the failings in the previous governments asylum and immigrations policies.
For example scrapping sending people to Rwanda and accelerating the processing of asylum applications which had ground to halt under the previous government, leading to great expense of keeping asylum seekers in hotels for months if not years.
Why would getting on with dealing with the situation cause people to riot? What am I missing/