Magic Roundabout Protest (again)

[Simon Pieman]

I can't really cause any agro with the fuzz. If someone else wants to rally people up on the day then fine.

I just think for now we should concentrate on getting people there, the visuals there and the rest will follow.

[TalkTalk]

I'll stand in the middle and see what the point of law is, just out of interest.

It is good preparation for any future events.

[TalkTalk]

In fact I will wear a suit and tie and carry a clipboard and pretend I am doing a traffic survey.

 

[axs]

I can't really cause any agro with the fuzz. If someone else wants to rally people up on the day then fine.

I just think for now we should concentrate on getting people there, the visuals there and the rest will follow.

me too.

[pauld]

As a point of info, the cops today said they wouldn't arrest people for standing in the centre of the roundabout per se, but they probably would take the view that anyone stood there was causing a potential traffic hazard and so would ask them to move on. Anyone who refused to move on having been asked to do so by a police officer would risk arrest.

Erm clearly the above is a paraphrase of what they told us - I am NOT an official spokesman for Wiltshire Feds (whatever some of you may think!)

[TalkTalk]

Anyone who refused to move on having been asked to do so by a police officer would risk arrest.

And what law is that Paul?

Loitering with intent to be stationary?

I'm not being funny but you can't be arrested for standing still.

[pauld]

Anyone who refused to move on having been asked to do so by a police officer would risk arrest.

And what law is that Paul?

Loitering with intent to be stationary?

I'm not being funny but you can't be arrested for standing still.

Oh, breach of the peace is the usual. I understand what you're saying Alan but in practice if they think they need to nick you to make you do something/stop you from doing something, they will. I'd imagine there is some kind of catchall in Road Traffic law about not distracting traffic (which was the general point they seemed to be making today along with the perennial Elfi'n'Safety) which they could use to justify asking people to move on in the first place, then if you refuse either something under that law, obstructing an officer in the course of his duty or as I say the old standby of BoP.

You may be right that there isn't actually a law that gives them specific powers of arrest in this circumstance (The Magic Roundabout (Standing in the Middle of) Act 2004 or something), but I'm just trying to say that in practice not having the applicable legislation won't stop you from getting nicked. Arguing the toss with the coppers on a point of law (ESPECIALLY if you're right) is a pretty good way of guaranteeing an afternoon in the vans.

[TalkTalk]

Arguing the toss with the coppers on a point of law (ESPECIALLY if you're right) is a pretty good way of guaranteeing an afternoon in the vans.

Hmmm. I'm up for that.

I'll bring a solicitor along with me.

[Simon Pieman]

Shall I ask my solicitor tomorrow?  

[TalkTalk]

Breach of the peace

There is no offence of breach of the peace. But if a police officer sees a breach of the peace or reasonably believes that a breach of the peace is about to start, he or she may arrest, disperse or detain those causing the problem and, if necessary, take them before a Magistrates' Court to be bound over.

There is a breach of the peace whenever a person causes harm or appears likely to cause harm to persons or property, or acts in a manner, the natural consequence of which, is to provoke others to violence.

If a breach of the peace occurs, one or more of the public order offences of threatening behaviour, disorderly conduct, assault or criminal damage is likely to have been committed. In such a case, the police can choose whether to charge an offence or go before the magistrates for a bind-over order.

That's fine. Standing still doesn't figure in that one.

http://www.yourrights.org.uk/your-rights/chapters/the-right-of-peaceful-protest/public-order-offences/breach_of_the_peace.shtml

[TalkTalk]

Static Demonstrations and Assemblies

Unlike public processions, there is normally no requirement to give prior notice of an assembly but, under the Public Order Act, the police do have specific powers to control assemblies. Two persons can constitute an ‘assembly’. A public place is any highway (including the pavement) and any other place to which the public or a section of the public can have access.

The senior police officer at the scene has the power to impose conditions but only if he or she reasonably believes that:

    * The conditions are necessary to prevent serious public disorder, serious damage to property or serious disruption to the life of the community, or
    * The purpose

of the person organising the assembly it is to intimidate others.

The only conditions may be imposed on a public assembly under POA are on:

    * Location of the assembly,
    * Maximum number of people participating in the assembly,
    * Maximum duration of the assembly

Note also that although the police have power to impose conditions, there is no power to ban a public assembly altogether, Therefore if the conditions are so strict that they in effect prohibit the assembly from taking effect in any meaningful way (such as if the conditions restrict the protest to 5 people, in a side street away from the public and for a maximum of 5 minutes), it may be that they amount to a ban and are unlawful. An attempt by the police to impose excessively strict conditions may also be a breach of the protesters rights to assembly under Article 11 of the Convention.

http://www.yourrights.org.uk/your-rights/chapters/the-right-of-peaceful-protest/static-demonstrations-rallies-and-assemblies/static-demonstrations-and-assemblies.shtml

[pauld]

Lovely. Won't stop them nicking you. The definition you're relying on would be pertinent in a court but if they're looking to charge you they wouldn't rely on BoP anyway, they'd charge either under Road Traffic Regs or Public Order Offences if you'd cut up lairy when they tried to move you on. BoP is most often used to justify an arrest when there's no intent to charge or to justify an initial arrest when they're not sure what it is you're actually doing but are pretty damn sure there must be something about it somewhere and we'll look it up when we get back to the nick. And sometimes it's used because they genuinely fear a breach of the peace. (NB none of the above should be taken as in anyway being useful or valid legal advice).

Bottom line is, if you're asked to move off the MR and refuse to do so eventually they'll get fed up and nick you. If you want to try it out as a test case, all well and good, but the general advice is more aimed at those who want to not get nicked.

[sonic youth]

alan, you could quote every law in the book until you're blue in the face - if plod want to nick you, they will.

[TalkTalk]

They'd charge either under Road Traffic Regs or Public Order Offences if you'd cut up lairy when they tried to move you on.

I'm not arguing with you for the sake of it PD, I'm just fascinated by what rights the police think they have over law abiding peaceful individuals.

If I didn't "cut up lairy" and I avoided all of threatening behaviour, disorderly conduct, assault or criminal damage - public order offences and I also did not obstruct the Queen's Highway then they would not have any grounds to move me on.

I'm well up for an afternoon's conversation with Wiltshire's finest.

[sonic youth]

I'm just fascinated by what rights the police think they have over law abiding peaceful individuals.

a badge.

nuff said