Man-handling climate change protestors

[Leafyhouse]

Anyone else watch with horror as a climate change protestor was forcefully removed by Mark Field from the Mansion House speech? I mean, I'm no fan of political activism, 'direct action' and so on, but she wasn't presenting him with any direct threat, just shouting and being annoying. AIBU to think that his behaviour was totally unacceptable there?

Aggravated Trespass is a criminal offence and that’s what she was doing.

If that's the case, why has she not been charged with this offence? And even if it is true, how does it give a member of the public the right to eject her using considerable force?

In calling the police to deal with a person who is gatecrashing, you are personally authorizing someone to use violence on your behalf, no one is going to go to bed and leave a stranger who has invaded your home.
Therefore you all are willing to advocate violence if a person won't leave when they are asked to....

The Lord mayor asked the protestor to leave, and as it is his gaff I reckon he had that right. At that point she became a trespasser.

Common law

part of English law that is derived from custom and judicial precedent rather than statutes.

So no statute to quote but sec 3 criminal law act only requires that force used be reasonable....which it was (ask my mate Eric the law lecturer)

If you are so desperate to lump me in with jim davidson to prove a point rather than focusing on the legal argument....I reckon you are desperate

The Lord mayor asked the protestor to leave, and as it is his gaff I reckon he had that right

Where? And it's not his property legally. It's his official residence, but he is not the owner. That would make it pretty awkward if he's turfed out at the next election.

Also, asking someone to leave does not authorise another random member of the public to use force to eject that person. I'm still waiting for you to cite the law which suggests the contrary.

Wait till they become the grammar police, always a guarantee that the thread has beaten someone so they resort to insults....

So all of a sudden the Lord Mayor asked the protestor to leave? That’s a new one.

I’m not ‘desperate’ to lump you in with Jim Davidson, Buster, I’m merely pointing out that that’s where you are. Your legal argument, as you call it, has yet to provide any justification for Mark Field’s assault on a peaceful protestor.

It’s notable that the police are investigating his actions. They are not investigating hers

I posted the law a few pages back...
Maybe you should also read the links, they are very helpful.

Here's a quote from the gov.uk page on "Aggravated Trespass". It makes no mention of the 'rights' of random members of the public to forcibly eject anyone. It seems only a police officer has that right.

*Powers to remove persons committing or participating in aggravated trespass.

(1)If the senior police officer present at the scene reasonably believes—

(a)that a person is committing, has committed or intends to commit the offence of aggravated trespass on land [F5in the open air]; or

(b)that two or more persons are trespassing on land [F6in the open air] and are present there with the common purpose of intimidating persons so as to deter them from engaging in a lawful activity or of obstructing or disrupting a lawful activity,

he may direct that person or (as the case may be) those persons (or any of them) to leave the land.

(2)A direction under subsection (1) above, if not communicated to the persons referred to in subsection (1) by the police officer giving the direction, may be communicated to them by any constable at the scene.

(3)If a person knowing that a direction under subsection (1) above has been given which applies to him—

(a)fails to leave the land as soon as practicable, or

(b)having left again enters the land as a trespasser within the period of three months beginning with the day on which the direction was given,

he commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or both.

(4)In proceedings for an offence under subsection (3) it is a defence for the accused to show—

(a)that he was not trespassing on the land, or

(b)that he had a reasonable excuse for failing to leave the land as soon as practicable or, as the case may be, for again entering the land as a trespasser.

(5)[F7A constable in uniform who reasonably suspects that a person is committing an offence under this section may arrest him without a warrant.]

(6)In this section “lawful activity” and “land” have the same meaning as in section 68.*

Does 'common law' supersede this somehow?

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/33/part/V/crossheading/disruptive-trespassers

@IcedPurple
Please do watch the video on the BBC. It clearly is the Lord mayor making the request to leave. And it us his residence so he has a proprietary interest. Or would you have to wait for your landlord to turf out a unwanted guest in the house you are renting? Rather impractical.

Arrest and charge for aggravated trespass would be a bit difficult.....It having happened 48 hours ago... But definitely trespass..

@IcedPurple

If that's the case, why has she not been charged with this offence?

Because there needs to be a complaint and an investigation. The same goes for any assault complaint she may make.

And even if it is true, how does it give a member of the public the right to eject her using considerable force?

It would give them the lawful power to use force. Whether it was proportionate or not would be for a court to decide.

Please do watch the video on the BBC. It clearly is the Lord mayor making the request to leave.

Did he make this request in the hearing of Mark Field? Did he request Mark Field to forcibly remove the protester?

And it us his residence so he has a proprietary interest.

What's a 'propriety interest' and what legal rights does it bestow?

Or would you have to wait for your landlord to turf out a unwanted guest in the house you are renting? Rather impractical.

I'd have to wait for the police if I wanted to abide by the law in fact. Terribly impractical.

Arrest and charge for aggravated trespass would be a bit difficult.....It having happened 48 hours ago...

Why? A crime is a crime even if it happened 10 years ago.

@icedpurple
Trespass and aggravated trespass two different things...

I believe aggravated trespass was bought in to stop hunt saboteurs and others protesting against the roads (newbury) in the 90's.

It was used recently against people who occupied fortnum masons

Common law removal of a trespasser still stands.

Because there needs to be a complaint and an investigation.

Let's see if there is one then.

It would give them the lawful power to use force

Huh? You just said no charges of aggravated trespass have been made. Therefore we do not know if a crime has been committed. That being the case, how could a random member of the public possibly have the right to use force against someone who may or may not have been breaking the law? Makes absolutely zero sense, particularly since, according to the link above, only the police have the right to remove trespassers.

I'd have to wait for the police if I wanted to abide by the law in fact. Terribly impractical

No you would not. You have a right in law to use reasonable force to eject a trespasser.

Proprietary interest I would best describe thus:-
You rent a house, you don't own it, but you live ther the furniture is yours and it is your property. You have a proprietary interest as long as you are the tenant.

Oh FFS buster you're tying yourself up in knots here.

If only a police officer has the right to remove someone guilty of aggravated trespass - an actual crime - how can a random dude have the right to forcibly remove someone not guilty of any crime?

And what exactly is this 'common law'? Where is it written down and can you cite the particular clause you are referring to? As I've asked you to do many times already?

Just when you think this thread couldn’t get any weirder ...

No you would not. You have a right in law to use reasonable force to eject a trespasser.

Not according to the link above. Can you cite evidence for your claim? Although it's irrelevant as Mark Field has no more rights to the Mansion House than you or me.

Proprietary interest I would best describe thus:-
You rent a house, you don't own it, but you live ther the furniture is yours and it is your property. You have a proprietary interest as long as you are the tenant.

Aside from the fact that few of those things apply to the mayor, who is not a tenant, I asked for a legal definition of this term, not one you just made up now.

For someone supposedly itnersted in a rational legal debate, you're not offering much.

@Alsohuman

Yeah thinking of bowing out as it's making my head spin. Noone has been charged let alone convicted of any crime of trespass.... yet a random nobody has the right to forcibly remove someone just because maybe possibly perhaps they might perhaps maybe have committed a crime they have not even been charged with.

I just checked and you do have the right to remove someone, it is what counts as reasonable force. ..
The longer video shows a woman with her arm behind her back, that is more force than a hand on the back of the neck and hand on arm...

I just checked and you do have the right to remove someone

Citation needed. And who is 'you'?

Anyone...is you.
Also the protester left the main group and advanced towards Hammond so she did show intent...which was why she was stopped. Had she not move she would not have been where she was .

It's his official residence. He lives there for the time he is mayor. It's a grace and favour residence. Like number 10, chequers, that flat bercow has...

I'm not in knots at all. I have not mentioned aggravated trespass at all. Others have but I would not rely on that legislation in this case.

This was simple trespass.

Those of you defending Mark Field - this is the company you’re keeping:

Jim Davidson
Crispin Blunt
Darren Grimes
Arron Banks
Michael Fabricant
Suzanne Evans
Nadine Dorries
Johnny Mercer
Iain Dale
Isabel Oakeshott
Julia Hartley-Brewer

Also Katie Hopkins

Yep great company 🙄

"If you are so desperate to lump me in with jim davidson..." You and others defending Mark field's actions here are aligning yourselves with other supporters of his re these actions by your own words and thoughts.

Even IF she had been committing a crime that doesn't make excessive use of force as seen in that video acceptable. Even the police have to act legally and not use excessive force. She posed no threat, was unarmed, didn't even resist, let alone fight back.

Completely and utterly unacceptable actions.

Anyone...is you.

Like I said, citation needed. Where is the law by which 'anyone' can remove a trespasser and how is it relevant in a case where the 'remover' is in no way the proprieter of the property?

www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q508.htm