pt.2 To find floral tributes being left for Harry Vincent offensive

[lostjanni]

We reached the post limit so if anyone wants to carry on the discussion...

Well they sneered st parents in Rotherham working class parents begging them to stop their girls being groomed and abused.

I think the phrase use was child prostitute also slags

They were sneering at parents more recently in Telford.

Maybe if thr elderly couple involved were rich ex bankers or politicians those flowers might be gone but alas poor working class families don’t get that preferential treatment

Well said vicar.
The police also don't decide who is proscuted. That's the CPS. They wouldn't allow crimial damage charge.
Also as the flowers are on street side of the fence, there is no traspass either. Like you don't have the right to park outside your house, path is a public right away.

If someone tells the Met where Billy Jeeves is and when he is there, they will arrest him. Just like anyone else. But thet are not just going raid random sites in hope of finding him. No police force does this, unless it was a murder, and I think we all agree no murder occurred.
Please leave the police alone. Posters like vicar have my total respect. Unvalved, and often not only hated by criminals, but also cricitised and blamed for things they are not responsible for.
Stay safe vicar.

user, why do you think that a criminal dying commiting a crime did not derseve to die? By saying that, you are supporting this criminal, and saying that, Mr Osbourne was wrong in what he did, defending himself and his wife.

Seriously illogical, Aeroflot. Are you seriously suggesting that every criminal deserves to die? Shall we bring back hanging for theft? Contesting that proposition in no way equates either to supporting the criminal or saying that a victim is not entitled to exercise his right of self defence. What Vincent deserved was to be arrested, tried and locked up for the longest period allowed by law. I fully accept that he took the risk of whatever happened when he forced someone to defend himself, up to and including death, but that does not equate to saying that it's fine that he died.

look frank - its not littering.

Except it is - that's exactly what it is.

if the police were to start forbidding floral tributes left at at sites then do you not think there would be uproar next time there is a fatal accident near you?

Possibly - but I thought you said it wasn't littering - is it or isn't it?

it would actually be quite likely to cause more trouble if the police waded in and took a side.

The Police are taking a side. They have judged that their (the Police's) life will be easier if they warn the generally law-abiding residents to stay off the flowers than warn off the criminal family putting them up. That's their choice and judgement to make - but it's ridiculous to pretend that it's not a choice being made by the Police - it so obviously is.

The police also don't decide who is proscuted[sic]. That's the CPS. They wouldn't allow crimial[sic] damage charge.

But the CPS quite often don't allow a charge following action by Police. Let's have a think if we can think of recent case of where that happened........

That doesn't stop the Police speaking to suspected offenders, up to and sometimes including arrest.

Totally agree Frank the police are sacrificing the innocent for the bigger louder scarier mob. Seriously not blaming beat bobbies they do as senior officers tell them but no way on this earth would this be happening in Mayfair or any other exclusive address. No bloody way

Would you have supported charges being brought against a rape victim though Bert, as you did against Mr OB?

When did she do that? I haven't seen it.

Or could it be that she said that IF there was sufficient evidence that he had committed a crime that would justify his being charged?

BTW - I accept it's a very very difficult one for the Police - I just think it's patronising to say "not us guv, we have no choice" - so many cases where Police can/can't intervene in stuff - it's a judgement call, and I wish vicar was prepared to acknowledge that.

well if the travellers who are harbouring JEEVES,and the chances are pretty high that thats where he is why dont tthey do the decent thing and hand him in

Why would they have to be harbouring him? He may well be cowering on his own in a B&B somewhere. From what I've heard, travellers aren't likely to be too impressed that he left Vincent to die.

Aeroflot
No one deserves to die. It is a human right to life. Yes Vincent isn't a man I feel sorry for, I want people like him and Billy Jeeves arrested and jailed. I despise all crime. But we stopped the death penalty in the 1960's so the law supports my view.

I have said numerous times I have empathy for his kids and Mr Brooks and his wife.

No one deserves to die. Because if we as a society ignore this, you end up like America and Mexico, where people just shoot suspected criminals, even if it turns out they are wrong. I don't want to live like that. I would rather we trusted the police to deal with
Do you vote Conservative, if you do look in the mirror, because even the home office admit the cuts in police funding is leading to the rise of violent deaths

Oh I don’t subscribe to this loveky myth of bloody ‘black hawk down’ they don’t leave their own bollocks. Scum like this turn on anyone they have no loyalty to anyone but themselves.

If police resources are big enough to investigate Christian couples that refused a same sex couple to stop st their hotel

Do you have any evidence that any police resources were used in that case, Mydog? It would be surprising, to say the least, given that it wasn't a criminal prosecution.

oh somebody will be harbouring him ive no doubt

maybe his siblings/parents

.travellers often have beefs within their own
communitys and its pretty violent and they play by their own rules

OK, what about littering under Section 87 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990?

Section 88 states that that offence is enforceable by "an authorised officer of a litter authority" (not the police) issuing a fixed penalty notice. There isn't a power of arrest.

Bert was clear in a previous thread that she thought Mr OB should be charged and put in front of a jury.

Somebody died. There must, in this case, have been extraordinarily compelling evidence that it was self defense (ie, not just that Vincent was in Mr Osborn-Brooks’s house) for the decision not to take it further to have bee come to so very quickly. None of us know what evidence that was. But in most cases, yes, I still think that the best way to decide what happened is a jury. And yes, I would still think this if a somebody being raped killed their attacker.

Can someone please post a link to the first thread? Thanks.

This thread is just a carbon copy of the first one
Anyone who says anything against the perceived right view, is called symapatheriser for a criminal.
You won't listen to a police officer or anyone else who knows what the law says
As a man married to a farmers daughter and ex cowman, believe me trespass isn't a crime the police deal with.
Continue going around in circles.
The only sad thing nothing anything we say or do on here will MAKE MR AND MRS O BROOKS LIFE BETTER OR RETURN TO normality.
So Bertrand is right it would have better for all concerned that Vincent lived and FACED THE FULL FORCE OF THE LAW AND JAIL.
I know people like us are in the minority, and hated. But doesn't automatically make us all wrong.
Sometimes beleiving in something is hard and unpopular, but it is better to continue believing in them then cave into to be popular. That way leads to dictators.
I am joining vicar.
You just want a 1000 posts that agree with your world view
Thats the problem with SM everyone lives in their own bubbles

Those who can’t read or can’t think

Thankyou you have joined the thread to educate us all. Now why don’t you read the thread before you jump in patronising and sneering

There must, in this case, have been extraordinarily compelling evidence that it was self defense

Not necessarily. There might have been but given the circumstances (intruder killed with his own weapon during a tussle with an elderly man in the middle of the night) it’s highly, highly unlikely that any jury would convict him of the necessary intent for it to be murder or manslaughter. The CPS have to be persuaded that there’s a reasonable prospect of a conviction to take it to court & rather than finding compelling evidence of self-defence they would need compelling evidence that it wasn’t.

Oh god not again, yes he deserved to die, in this situation, he was attacking Mr Osbourne, Mr Osbourne probably overpowered him and in the process killed him. Rather him than Mr Osbourne. Comparing that to the death penalty, ludricous, two very different things.

What full force of the law, he will probably let off in a few months.

Bert

Not quite right there as you can initiate a strike against a home invader if you think your life is in danger. You just can’t chase someone as they are running away or shoot or repeatedly stab someone if they are down.

But you can first strike and not be prosecuted.

I see no point in discussing it would have been better to out him in trial! He’s dead so that’s not happening is it pointless debate