Protesters charged

[Sapphire387]

A woman has apparently been charged for a 'breach of the peace' for holding up a sign that read 'fuck imperialism, abolish the monarchy'. A man has been charged with the same, for shouting at Andrew and calling him 'a sick old man'.

AIBU to find this deeply concerning and an attack on freedom of speech?

Whether pro or anti-monarchy, I think we should all be allowed to express our views on this.

YABU - they should have been charged.
YANBU - they should not have been charged.

Yes, they usually settle before going to court!

I'm deeply concerned and worried by all this. I wonder if the bill ending the right to protest being passed a few months ago, was passed because they knew things would kick off if the queen croaked it. It's all so shady & undemocratic

Is this a joke that passing over my head?

There is no written constitution in the UK -

The Constitution of the United Kingdom or British constitution comprises the written and unwritten arrangements that establish the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as a political body. Unlike in most countries, no attempt has been made to codify such arrangements into a single document, thus it is known as an uncodified constitution. This enables the constitution to be easily changed as no provisions are formally entrenched;[2] the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom recognises that there are constitutional principles, including parliamentary sovereignty, the rule of law, democracy, and upholding international law

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom

...an election? After abolishing the monarchy?

Sorry please don't send send the police to my house.

If someone had taken against my Granny ...

But they haven't. No one was doing what they did following the death of Maggie Thatcher, when 'ding dong the witch is dead' was being publicly performed and heckling abounded at the ceremonial funeral by many who had suffered at the hands of her policies. Despite my sympathy with that - and I couldn't bear the woman either - I thought that behaviour was absolutely hideous, and still do. (Offensive, but still not arrestable).

No one has been reported as having expressed similar sentiments about the late queen. No one. A comment was shouted at her son (who she cossetted and protected) and was making a stance with which many entirely agree, even if they didn't appreciate the timing. As for #NotMyKing, given the hereditary system means her son accedes the moment she takes her last breath, people ARE, silently and without agitating, holding up placards conveying that sentiment. And given the Windsors accept and are figureheads of such a system, unfortunately that goes with the turf. It's every bit an appropriate time to make such a protest.

Yes, and actually it is a form of Holocaust denialism to make false equivalencies of hecklers being arrested for verbal abuse to the systematic genocide of millions.

The COVID restrictions gave them an ideal way in. I voiced my fears about this at the time, openly and on social media, as I couldn't understand why there wasn't an outcry. It's a very murky, and potentially dangerous precedent.

Agree. Incredibly distasteful. But apparently being 'offensive' only works one way.

The point is that totalitarianism rarely starts with just rounding everyone up into camps. (Sometimes, but rare.)Read about Assad, for example. It starts with people getting carted away for saying controversial things in public.

If everyone just accepts that, as someone said above "Well the police wouldn't arrest someone without cause," then there's the danger of things getting worse.

That person wasn’t protesting King Charles III

Your point is perfectly reasonable written like that- when it’s not made by posting a famous Holocaust quote.

British people really do need to understand their own constitution. The monarch still holds a great deal of power. It's absolutely not a ceremonial role. Even if you want to keep the monarchy, okay, but don't act like they're just some nice family being set upon by some meanies.

No they were protesting the fact that the Royal Family paid for and protected a powerful man who abused young women. It's called speaking out against abuse. Andrew might like to reconsider prancing around in a bright uniform after what he did.

MarieIVanArkleStinks
people ARE, silently and without agitating, holding up placards conveying that sentiment

Who has been arrested for silently holding up a sign? No one as far as I can make out.

YANBU OP. It's very worrying indeed. This country is going to hell in a handcart.

If it were in the news that people were taken away by police in China for shouting against Xi Jinping or holding up a placard as he walked past, I doubt anyone on here would be defending their actions.

It's heartening to see that the majority of posters agree that free speech rights should be preserved and arrests not in line with the law should be strongly questioned. I'm also glad that this is now being similarly discussed on wider media such as radio stations and news outlets.

IfCanCanICan
holding up a placard

Which protester was taken away by police for holding up a placard? One woman was asked to move on, but not asked to leave the wider area, another was arrested for breach of the peace, "but the sign is not understood to be the reason for her arrest."

I thought the guy shouting at Andrew was awful. I mean, Andrew himself is awful of course, but the guy has just lost his mother.

That said, I don't think the guy should have been arrested. Poor judgement and a lack of compassion aren't offences as far as I'm aware.

As for the woman holding her placard, surely this was just a peaceful protest that she had every right to make? It doesn't matter whether others agree with it or not. I can't see how it was an arrestable offence.

Oh ok. Not sure then.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom

Interesting ruling here;

2019
The police acted legally when they arrested suspects they believed were planning a “zombie picnic” that would disrupt Prince William’s wedding to Kate Middleton in 2011, the European court of human rights (ECHR) has ruled.

In a significant ruling on the use of preventive detention, the Strasbourg court backed decisions by British judges on the legality of removing demonstrators from the streets before the ceremony.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/28/police-acted-legally-over-royal-wedding-arrests-court-rules

Are people joking about, "You need to read the constitution" ?

The Royal Family are an enormously powerful institution. The monarch holds a great deal of executive power, notwithstanding Parliamentary sovereignty.

If you're fine with that, okay, but many people think that should be changed. And they have the right to say so.

Thanks @Mackie5 but that doesn't say what you think it says. I'm willing to bet my degree in politics is a little more useful than a wiki link.

I’m amused here by the fact that people don’t appear to know the British constitution. Please read it then comment.

Oh, dear.

Theres nothing wrong with helping a family member with legal fees, every person has a right to legal representation when accused of abusing a young woman. There was no criminal case filed or charges against him by the young woman involved. The case that was settled out of court was a civil case. The royals didn’t “protect” him, they stripped him of all his titles, income and privileges. And he wasn’t “prancing around in a bright uniform” he was in a plain black suit walking silently behind his mothers coffin. He had every right to be there and every right to be safe from harassment.