"Disabled" Guy - "pepper sprayed" at 2012

On 02/08/2012 07:22, Doug wrote:
On Wednesday, August 1, 2012 7:13:40 PM UTC+1, Judith wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 19:01:36 +0100, Bertie Wooster


wrote:



snip





Critical Mass is a customary procession, and as such need not
file any

paperwork.



So other than there being no need for paper work what exactly does
it being a

customary procession permit them to do?

In the absence of any organisers London CM is not required to give
advance notice of the ride to the police nor have a pre-planned route
and it does not have to comply with Section 11 of the Public Order
Act.

But it does have to comply with Section 12.


--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

On 02/08/2012 09:06, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 21:16:31 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

On 01/08/2012 20:58, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 20:32:52 +0100, Martin wrote:

On 01/08/2012 19:01, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 18:31:45 +0100, Martin wrote:

On 01/08/2012 18:09, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 17:44:22 +0100, JNugent

I'm sure they scan the South London Press every day for examples of such
"brutality".

Can you spell "hyperbole"?

If we are going to tell other world leaders about how they behave
towards peaceful protest

So it was a protest then. Had the correct paperwork been filled in and
were the protesters complying with the law?

Yes.

Critical Mass is a customary procession, and as such need not file any
paperwork.

In your last post you said it was a "protest" now you are saying
"procession". It seems you're back-tracking on what you said now.

And what do *you* think? Can people on a procession protest?

*Peacefully" (which entails not interfering with the rights of others), yes.

Is there anything to suggest that the procession was going to be
anything other than peaceful?

Yes. CM are well known for being law breaking scum.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

On 02/08/2012 01:28, Phil W Lee wrote:
"Ophelia" considered Wed, 1 Aug 2012 21:30:11
+0100 the perfect time to write:



"Pedt" "\"@ wrote in message
...
In message , at 19:01:36 on
Wed, 1 Aug 2012, Bertie Wooster sniffed the air
and proclaimed
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 18:31:45 +0100, Martin wrote:

On 01/08/2012 18:09, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 17:44:22 +0100, JNugent

I'm sure they scan the South London Press every day for examples of
such
"brutality".

Can you spell "hyperbole"?

If we are going to tell other world leaders about how they behave
towards peaceful protest

So it was a protest then. Had the correct paperwork been filled in and
were the protesters complying with the law?

Yes.

Critical Mass is a customary procession, and as such need not file any
paperwork.

I thought when CM asked for a review on s11 they were saying that the
monthly ride was for enjoyment. I bet the judge wasn't told it was for
enjoyment of protesting.

Nice of you to come out with the truth that CM is actually a protest group
on bicycles and bugger all to do with the joys of cycling.

I don't understand. Is cycling not for pleasure? Why is it always
confrontational?

It's only confrontational if the police decide to make it illegal.

It's illegal under the Public Order Act 1986.

Of course, they don't have the power to make up laws like that, but
that doesn't stop them violently enforcing them.

Nobody made the law up, it's been on the books for 26 years.

No doubt they were all just following orders.

Goodwins Law?

Make me an expresso would you?

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

Phil W Lee spake thus:

®i©ardo considered Wed, 01 Aug 2012 09:26:02 +0100
the perfect time to write:

On 01/08/2012 02:07, Phil W Lee wrote:
"Tired" considered Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:30:05 +0100 the
perfect time to write:

Phil W Lee wrote:
:: "James Allen" considered Mon, 30 Jul 2012
:: 20:21:47 +0100 the perfect time to write:
::
:::
:::
::: "Tired" wrote in message ...
:::
:::
:::: she should get some recognition there standing up to an angry
mob :::: like that, without the protection of a stab vest or
truncheon) :::
::: Looks to me like she's holding an ASP at one point?
:::
::: This video makes me feel quite confused actually, on the one hand
I ::: often find myself looking at videos of the police in situations
::: like this and thinking they "are" just violent thugs who get off
on ::: the power they have, but OTOH I can't help thinking that these
::: cyclists, especially the so-called disabled guy and the **** in
the ::: green t-shirt who joined him on the bonnet deserved a good
beating.
:::
:: Who will be left to complain when they come for you?

They didnt come for anyone, dont be so stupid.

You clearly don't bother to read anything about the subject of the
post you are responding to.

The police deliberately set up a confrontation, and their own actions
and statements prove it.


So when did they organise your little bike ride then and why did you
find it necessary to take part?

It wasn't "my little bike ride" and I wasn't on it.
It is, however, a customarily held procession that the police set out
deliberately to disrupt.

Is deliberate disruption only something your chums are allowed to
instigate?

On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 01:24:25 +0100, Phil W Lee wrote:

snip


The truth will all come out, be patient.

It has.
We've seen it.
Thugs in uniforms making up laws such as "you can't cycle north of the
Thames" and then violently enforcing them.

Quite frankly, the filth that made that one up isn't worth a gobful of
spit to extinguish him if he was on fire (we can only hope, but I fear
that punishment will have to wait until another life).

If the police want people to respect them, they should not act in such
a contemptible fashion.



I must apologise for my miscomprehension that you are in fact a barrister.

I now understand that whilst your knowledge of the law knows no bounds you are
in fact a trainee barista at McDonalds. Is that right? I would hate to repeat
it if it isn't?

On Wed, 1 Aug 2012 23:22:51 -0700 (PDT), Doug wrote:

On Wednesday, August 1, 2012 7:13:40 PM UTC+1, Judith wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 19:01:36 +0100, Bertie Wooster

wrote:



snip





Critical Mass is a customary procession, and as such need not file any

paperwork.



So other than there being no need for paper work what exactly does it being a

customary procession permit them to do?

In the absence of any organisers London CM is not required to give advance notice of the ride to the police nor have a pre-planned route and it does not have to comply with Section 11 of the Public Order Act.



You had no need to say " it does not have to comply with Section 11 of the
Public Order Act." as you had already explained what it meant.

Unless you are thinking there is a requirement in there to obey the traffic
laws regarding red lights, cycling on pavements, and blocking road junctions.

Of course there isn't.

On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 05:18:43 +0000 (UTC), Peter Keller
wrote:

On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 20:23:21 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote:

**** for brains,

If someone insults you as BEING someone you're not, the best way to
diffuse that is to sarcastically and grossly play out the part of who
they're telling you are.


Oh - I understand now. *That* is why you are appearing to have **** for brains
- you are just playing the part.

Silly old sod.

On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 09:06:58 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 21:16:31 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

On 01/08/2012 20:58, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 20:32:52 +0100, Martin wrote:

On 01/08/2012 19:01, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 18:31:45 +0100, Martin wrote:

On 01/08/2012 18:09, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 17:44:22 +0100, JNugent

I'm sure they scan the South London Press every day for examples of such
"brutality".

Can you spell "hyperbole"?

If we are going to tell other world leaders about how they behave
towards peaceful protest

So it was a protest then. Had the correct paperwork been filled in and
were the protesters complying with the law?

Yes.

Critical Mass is a customary procession, and as such need not file any
paperwork.

In your last post you said it was a "protest" now you are saying
"procession". It seems you're back-tracking on what you said now.

And what do *you* think? Can people on a procession protest?

*Peacefully" (which entails not interfering with the rights of others), yes.

Is there anything to suggest that the procession was going to be
anything other than peaceful?



Yes - there were a number of people making it quite clear that they expected
and would contribute to trouble.

I have posted some of their comments already for you.

On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 09:09:48 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

snip


Or are you referring to my bike ride on 25 July along the A13? If you
are, it was the zil lanes holding up traffic that amused me.

wriggle wriggle

On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 01:28:50 +0100, Phil W Lee wrote:

snip


It's only confrontational if the police decide to make it illegal.
Of course, they don't have the power to make up laws like that, but
that doesn't stop them violently enforcing them.
No doubt they were all just following orders.


Is it true that you are going to be acting for the three people arrested? Or
have the CPS called in your expertise for the prosecution.