Was it? He was convicted of encouraging violent disorder and criminal damage, he wasn't sent down for "misinformation".
Was it? He was convicted of encouraging violent disorder and criminal damage, he wasn't sent down for "misinformation".Because part of his crime was spreading misinformation....
It is comparing other crimes with similar sentences when asked if it was a fair sentence, of course other cases and crimes will be mentioned.
Was it? He was convicted of encouraging violent disorder and criminal damage, he wasn't sent down for "misinformation".
Sentencing him, Judge Neil Flewitt KC said the defendant was 'prominent' among people responsible for spreading misinformation following the Southport attack.
MaybeTo be fair, he should have done it in the name of Islam and encouraged people to carry out terror offences and he would have got less:
Birmingham Daesh supporter convicted of terror offences following friend's prison sentence | Counter Terrorism Policing
A 19-year-old man from Birmingham has today been found guilty of terrorism offences following a trial at Birmingham Crown Court.www.counterterrorism.police.uk
Yes, thank you, I saw that the first time - it's not what he was convicted for though, is it?
This is nonsense - everything that is "part of" a crime isn't a crime in itself.Well yeah, it's part of what the crime was in trying to stir things up ...
This is nonsense - everything that is "part of" a crime isn't a crime in itself.
I assume you're suggesting Hope Not Hate should be prosecuted for spreading misinformation - good luck proving that they were encouraging violent disorder and criminal damage.
Do you ever get tired running all this interference and whataboutism any time someone gets convicted after attending or organising a far-right racist protest?They don't need to be, the spreading misinformation part is enough to at least start off with an arrest.
Do you ever get tired running all this interference and whataboutism any time someone gets convicted after attending or organising a far-right racist protest?
Yes - "whataboutism" in other words"Running all this interference"
You asked if I thought his prison sentence was fair, you got an answer with other crimes that got the same or less.
I clearly said he deserved prison but wasn't sure about the length of sentence.
Yes - "whataboutism" in other words
Your consistency in standing up for him, and those who share his views, is well noted
In fairness they arguably did encourage the mob to mentality to protect when they said the far right grouping in Birmingham. If you remember it was outside that pub and the idiot that came out got beaten up by herd mentality. Surely their actions incited that in the same way this guy suggesting mobbing up outside the hotel.This is nonsense - everything that is "part of" a crime isn't a crime in itself.
I assume you're suggesting Hope Not Hate should be prosecuted for spreading misinformation - good luck proving that they were encouraging violent disorder and criminal damage.
You would have to prove that Hope Not Hate deliberately spread misinformation with the intention of creating violent disorder - no-one could argue that with a straight face.In fairness they arguably did encourage the mob to mentality to protect when they said the far right grouping in Birmingham. If you remember it was outside that pub and the idiot that came out got beaten up by herd mentality. Surely their actions incited that in the same way this guy suggesting mobbing up outside the hotel.
I bet I could, Im a member of the Labour party. From top to bottom, we can argue anything with a straight face.You would have to prove that Hope Not Hate deliberately spread misinformation with the intention of creating violent disorder - no-one could argue that with a straight face.
How can he plead not guilty to carrying a bladed weapon?Southport stabbings: Not guilty pleas entered for Axel Rudakubana
Not guilty pleas were entered on charges of murdering three girls and attempting to kill 10 others.www.bbc.co.uk
Pleading Not guilty to all charges.... unbelievable tbh.
Isn’t it quite difficult to remove judges, shitty or not?You can't easily compare offences and sentences anecdotally Nick based on simple reports in crappy rags... have you knowledge or experience of the Britch legal system? Have you read the statements or proof's of evidence in any of these cases? The context of inciting national riots and civil unrest causing physical harm to the police and emergency services at the time significantly raises the bar of sentences automatically. I think this is correct and would like to think Conservative & Unionist would have taken same stance. That said there are some shitty judges out there that perhaps the Conservative & Unionist party should have reviewed at during their 14 years in power, if they could have been ar$ed? Of course anyone involved in serious crimes like terror/abuse etc. deserves significant time in jail, but perhaps if the Conservative & Unionist party had invested properly in prisons then maybe some of the 'random' cases you highlight (mostly ethnically related) might have got longer sentences - for me this might have also included the serious crimes of Horizon chief executives and Michelle Mone/Doug Barrowman.
Why does it seem acceptable to suggest that one group did this and that another didn’t?You would have to prove that Hope Not Hate deliberately spread misinformation with the intention of creating violent disorder - no-one could argue that with a straight face.
Because the alternative explanation isn’t rooted in realityWhy does it seem acceptable to suggest that one group did this and that another didn’t?
Why does it seem acceptable to suggest that one group did this and that another didn’t?You would have to prove that Hope Not Hate deliberately spread misinformation with the intention of creating violent disorder - no-one could argue that with a straight face.
In your opinion. Not in everyone’s.Because the alternative explanation isn’t rooted in reality
I don’t think a court of law would find them guilty - if you disagree, why not show me your evidence?Why does it seem acceptable to suggest that one group did this and that another didn’t?
In your opinion. Not in everyone’s.
I doubt either of us can prove our opinion is correct, so they must be equally valid.
However, if misinformation had been spread and violent disorder was created, they can’t claim to be entirely innocent, can they?
Did You read the post where I doubted either of us had evidence.?I don’t think a court of law would find them guilty - if you disagree, why not show me your evidence?
I don’t think a court of law would find them guilty - if you disagree, why not show me your evidence?
I don’t have any evidence that you’re not a tax criminal either. However interesting it might be for me to see you face tax charges, it’s not how our justice system works, you’re being silly.Did You read the post where I doubted either of us had evidence.?
It was misinformation. It resulted in violent disorder.
Personally I think it would be interesting for it to be tried in a court of law. Won’t happen though as Starmer would be calling in old favours from the CPS again.
He doesn’t want to alienate the muslim community, there are far too many votes there.
I assume you’re referring to the list of anti-immigrant protests which he later said was a hoax. Did he make that list up? Did he share it with the intention of sparking violence?Didn’t Lowles admit he used social media to whip up protests across many cities by falsely claiming there was going to be far right protests across several cities?
I assume you’re referring to the list of anti-immigrant protests which he later said was a hoax. Did he make that list up? Did he share it with the intention of sparking violence?
If you're asking people to mob up and defend against another mob, then I'm not sure what else the intention might be. Not about who is in the right or wrong, but both (imo) are equally accountable for their presence and if that presence has been fueled by someone suggesting another aggressor, I dont see how that differs from p[protests against the original perpetrator.I assume you’re referring to the list of anti-immigrant protests which he later said was a hoax. Did he make that list up? Did he share it with the intention of sparking violence?
Well I’d suggest he didn’t mention it so everyone could go out and have a nice cup of tea.
Again, if you have evidence that he specifically wanted to generate violence then let’s see it.If you're asking people to mob up and defend against another mob, then I'm not sure what else the intention might be. Not about who is in the right or wrong, but both (imo) are equally accountable for their presence and if that presence has been fueled by someone suggesting another aggressor, I dont see how that differs from p[protests against the original perpetrator.
I actually said 'both mobs (whether defending or attacking) were equally accountable for their presence' and never mentioned that the this guy was equally accountable to the guy prosecuted. I suspect you knew that though, but making your own stories out of posts to serve your agenda. I guess it's journalistic licence!Again, if you have evidence that he specifically wanted to generate violence then let’s see it.
The idea that he’s “equally accountable” to a guy with Mein Kampf in his boot who set up a Telegram channel urging “heavy hitters” to “mask up” and gather in numbers outside a mosque and hang the Home Secretary is ridiculous.
You’re conflating the overwhelmingly peaceful counter-protests with the violent disorder outside the Southport mosque (“I’m not sure what else the intention might be”)I actually said 'both mobs (whether defending or attacking) were equally accountable for their presence' and never mentioned that the this guy was equally accountable to the guy prosecuted. I suspect you knew that though, but making your own stories out of posts to serve your agenda. I guess it's journalistic licence!
“Especially when”?Stoking up fear did, of course, cause violence. Especially when it's stuff about a Muslim woman being attacked with acid and that the EDL are coming.
How can he plead not guilty to carrying a bladed weapon?
isn’t his defence basically that he is neurodivergent?
Why don’t pyscopaths make similar pleas?
“Especially when”?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?