Irish travellers rounded up in Manchester.

[East Level 2]

Why do you tag people when you quote their posts?

You know they get an alert, either way?

He's worried you'll reject the stuck down envelope and that made him think you might also reject the alert when he quotes your post. - Can't always trust the Royal Mail at Christmas.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

No I didn't! Ages ago Ric told me to do it.

So can I use an envelope

Don’t you mean @Ric ?

Yes, you can use an envelope.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

He's worried you'll reject the stuck down envelope and that made him think you might also reject the alert when he quotes your post. - Can't always trust the Royal Mail at Christmas.

Have now accepted the use of an envelope. I’m a big tent guy.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

So a bunch of innocent children aren’t allowed to have a day out nowadays
I say ‘innocent’ because as far as I’m aware these children haven’t committed any crimes apart from the crime of being travellers (or suspected) ?
So it’s ok for the police to manhandle young girls and force them onto a train? Wow
The same people supporting this totalitarian behaviour will be the same people who won’t allow this post to stay around for long like my previous post
Very very sad day for human beings and freedom

You appear to have a very limited understanding of the situation.

 

[City Hobgoblin]

Won't anyone think of the organised gangs of feral shoplifting children ?!

 

[Blue Mist]

Have now accepted the use of an envelope. I’m a big tent guy.

Is that just a saying or what you wear?


Just askin'

 

[Kippaxpete]

Just a question as I know you've not phrased it as such (maybe @bert38 can answer), but when it comes to a 'protected class' which law supersedes which when it comes to racial discrimination and potential criminal and/ or antisocial behaviour?

It seems pretty obvious to me, but maybe the law makes this a very thin line to work with?

It's a little more complex than simply determining whether one piece of legislation supersedes another. In short, the Equality Act 2010 does not provide immunity from prosecution for criminal behavior. If an individual is suspected of committing a crime, they can be prosecuted regardless of their protected characteristic (in this case, race). For example, if someone with a protected characteristic commits theft or assault, they can be prosecuted like anyone else.
While the Equality Act protects against discrimination, it does not prevent lawful prosecution. Where it becomes difficult for the police and the judiciary is when arrest or prosecution is challenged as being predicated on discriminatory motives. While I'm not privy to the details of this case, I'd like to think the police acted on prior intelligence about the motives of the group in question and were, therefore, confident that their actions were not liable to be challenged as discriminatory under the EA 2010.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Is that just a saying or what you wear?


Just askin'

Both

 

[Kippaxpete]

tbf, you have identified the legal difference with aplomb! It was a philosophical question, but I didn’t specify as such!

Thanks matey. I acknowledge you were coming at the issue from a different angle but thought it useful to offer a legal perspective to help place some of the more extreme views in that context.

 

[Fat Chance]

The copper at the very start of the video said a nasty assault had occured.