To think these women deserved to be arrested?

[JosephineCD]

www.thestar.co.uk/news/local/women-arrested-for-spitting-at-deputy-prime-minister-1-4712738

Whatever they or anyone else thinks of Nick Clegg, spitting on him is no way to get their point across. It's a disgusting act and they deserved to be arrested. Hopefully they are charged and given a hefty fine, and maybe community service.

I'll only lend my car of I get to throw glazed ham at DC and Gideon.

Blue don't forget this government was not elected, the torys only got in because the fucking lib dems supported them.

Agree with Bejeezus and MrsTerry; It's disgusting and YANBU but then there is never justice: 'Tony Blair wasn't arrested for an illegal war ffs'. Quite.

No it's not a tricky one at all.

Any human being spitting at another is immediately in the wrong.

There are ways of making your anger/feelings known without resorting to spitting.

I don't care if it's Nick Clegg or the head of the BNP

Spitting is wrong and it's vile.

Ham's good....we can shout "(capitalist) pigs" as we launch said slice

What about footballers and other sportspeople btw? They don't spit AT people, but you do see them spitting on the pitch. Why? This spitting is still vile.

mchappypants I am Irish. Every government here for the past two decades has been a coalition. I assure you that they have all been properly elected. As has the Tory/Lib Dem one.

Sorry bejeezus going to bed now. No more interference with your plans!!

Some times wrong and vile is appropriate worra

Liking the idea of chucking posh food...what about a selection of cheeses and chutney?

What about footballers and other sportspeople btw? They don't spit AT people, but you do see them spitting on the pitch. Why? This spitting is still vile.

Yes it is.

And to spit at someone on purpose for any reason whatsoever is also vile.

Sorry, but security staff have the right to make a citizens arrest (detain you) until police arrive if they have reason to believe that you have committed a crime and as long as they do not use 'unreasonable force', are not committing assault. And yes, although extremely unlikely, if a spitter with a cut or bleeding gums were to spit in someone's face and this entered their mucus membrane (eg. nose) then they could transmit HIV, albeit the chances would be extremely low, however, there are a myriad of other diseases which can be spread this way - apart from the fact that it is assault.

Some times wrong and vile is appropriate worra

Not in this case it isn't.

By all means protest and air your anger/grief vocally.

But do not spit at another human being unless you want to be classed as little more than an animal.

there is no such thing as a citizens arrest

creative, people kick inanimate objects in temper, punch a pillow etc. Would you expect them to be charged with assault? Of course not, which is why spitting on grass (although disgusting) can't be classed in any way the same as spitting on a human being!!??

Apologies, citizens arrest is the wrong term in the uk, but it amounts to the same thing - they have the power to detain. As an ex employee of the second largest police force in the uk, I can say this with confidence.

Personally I think nick Clegg should be arrested for fraud.

I'm not really interested in the legality of it, spitting is wrong but it was aminor incident, barely newsworthy. In fact it probably only in the news to deflect from some other coalition assault on the public.

Why should Clegg be arrested for Fraud?

Failure to remove tuition fees, working with the conservatives to raise tuition fees and remove ema?!

Putting aside the actual debate about those issues, to use certain statements and promises to take advantage of an economically destroyed public demoralised by the two main parties in order to levy yourself in a moderate position of power and then to not only go back on those statements but to aid in the implementation of the complete opposite is in my opinion fraudulent.

I wouldn't describe myself as particularly political but come the next election I will be campaigning like the clappers to dissuade people from voting specifically nick Clegg but also lib dem and anything involving DC/Gideon/Gove & Lansley

Ruby, political feelings aside - the question posed was 'should these women have been arrested?' Purely from a legal sense, yes they should, as they committed the criminal offense of assault by spitting on another person, blatantly and for everyone to see. How 'minor' this is considered by an individual has no bearing on the fact that they broke the law and should be punished accordingly.

I know what the question is as I can read....I answered it on my much earlier post. The thread seeks to garner my opinion on did they deserve to have been arrested not what is the legal viewpoint on this story. I have already given my opinion that they shouldn't have been arrested. You have expressed a different opinion, neither opinions are factual statements so I don't see why you are 'correcting' me.

Also I've already said I don't agree with spitting but just because something is illegal it doesn't make it wrong. It may be a criminal offence but this does not mean in my eyes they deserve to be arrested.

So you don't believe that an individual committing a criminal offense should be prosecuted?

Spitting is vile.

A few years back when I was a trainee lawyer anyone appearing before a district judge in London who had spat during an argument/altercation/fight/detention would almost certainly get 4-6mths custody on the basis that spitting is vile and a serious of fence on it's own in addition to being a hugely aggravating factor in any other offence

And I wasn't 'correcting' you ruby, merely pointing out a fact. Yes, fact. If you commit a criminal offense (which these women did), you should be arrested. Opinion doesn't and shouldn't come into it (except in massively extenuating circumstances, ie insanity, and even this isn't purely down to opinion, but also follows factual guidelines). I wasn't being snarky - you said you weren't interested in the legality, which was the basis of the discussion.

No I don't think all criminal offences should be prosecuted or result in arrest. The thread isn't about the legality, it ask do they 'deserve' and nowhere does it ask about it from a legal viewpoint, it is asking if posters believe the women deserved to be arrested, not should they its do they deserve it.

I think this is just another example of how ineffectual the police are.

I'd be interested to know what offenses you don't think should be prosecuted...... murder, rape, paedophilia? Or just the minor ones like assault, theft, hate crimes? And how would (or by whom) these decisions be made? The accused was drunk? Had been coerced into it? Or maybe they did it for a 'cause' or 'belief'? Where would the line be drawn and where would that leave victims of crime? I'd almost bet my house that you'd call on those ineffectual police if you, god forbid were attacked, or robbed. And those women who this discussion is about - just imagine their outrage were they given a custodial sentence, when they or their food was then spat on. Can't imagine they'd take too kindly.