Quality policing of student demos - NOT!!!
16 December 2010, 01:16 PM
#91
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12.8 Section 5 - Conduct likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress
This is by far the most commonly used piece of legislation on demos, and the one with which activists will be most familiar. A person is guilty of this offence if he
a) uses threatening, abusive words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress.
Notes on Section 5
The police will often warn you under Section 5 simply as a preventive power to control behaviour on a demo and they often have no intention of following it through with an arrest, especially where no threatening behaviour has been used.
Unlike Section 4A there is no requirement that anyone actually be caused harassment, alarm or distress and therefore no need for a witness to that effect. The police need only say that your conduct took place within the sight or hearing of a potential victim, although it will obviously help to prove their case if they can produce a witness.
Section 5 differs from Section 4A in that there is no need to show that you intended to cause the harassment, only that it was likely to be caused. This means that to a certain extent your behaviour will be judged objectively on the effect it was likely to have, rather than on the effect it actually had on any victim.
Section 5 and the Police
It is often said that the police cannot be caused harassment, alarm distress under Section 5, but this is not strictly true. The current law is stated in the case of DPP v Orum, where the court was asked to decide on whether or not a constable can in law be caused harassment, alarm or distress. It was decided that although police officers can be caused harassment, they were far less likely than ordinary members of the public to be caused distress by insulting words and behaviour. Whether or not the police were actually caused harassment is a question of fact for the magistrates to decide having regard to all the circumstances: the time, the place, who the police officers were etc.
Displays of Upsetting Pictures
The police sometimes threaten protestors with prosecution under Section 5 for displaying upsetting pictures eg of dead animals. It has been held in court that an upsetting picture can be “insulting” within the ordinary meaning of the word, in a case where pictures of aborted fetuses were displayed to persons attending an abortion clinic. However, in our opinion most animal rights placards could not similarly be held to be insulting in the ordinary meaning of the word. This is especially so as the prosecution must also show that you intended or were aware that your conduct might be insulting (see below).
Megaphones
The police occasionally tell activists that it is an offence under Section 5 to use a megaphone or other instrument to amplify sound. This is clearly not the case. Use of a megaphone does not, in itself, amount ‘threatening, insulting, abusive or disorderly behaviour”. However, if you were to shout insulting and abusive comments through a megaphone or point it deliberately in someone’s face, this could amount to an offence. Also bear in mind that there are sometimes local bye-laws prohibiting amplified sound in public areas.
Defences
It is a defence to show that you had no reason to believe that there was any person within sight or hearing likely to be caused harassment etc. This is an objective test and you will be judged on what you ought to have believed rather than what you actually believed.
The prosecution also has to show that you intended your words or behaviour to be threatening, insulting or abusive or were aware that they might have this effect. So if you are charged with displaying an upsetting picture or placard under Section 5, you will have a defence under this section – ie that you had no idea that the picture was threatening insulting or abusive”
You have a statutory defence that your conduct was “reasonable” – see notes on Section 4A above.
Arrest and Punishment
Section 5 is triable summarily only, the maximum penalty is a fine, and it is not an “arrestable offence”. A constable may only arrest if:
a) a person engages in offensive conduct which a constable warns him to stop, and
b) that person engages in further offensive conduct immediately or shortly after the warning.
The constable need not be in uniform, and the arresting constable need not be the same one who issued the warning. He must warn you regarding the offensive conduct while it is actually happening and not afterwards.
You can only be arrested if the further offensive conduct takes place within a short time span. This is not defined, but conduct taking place over an hour later could not, in our view, be defined as taking place shortly afterwards and an arrest here would be unlawful.
You might receive several arrest warnings under Section 5 during the course of a demo and still not be arrested. This is because the warning is usually used to control public order, although the police may well arrest you if the disorderly conduct continues. You can often tell whether the police genuinely mean to arrest you or not. There is also the power of arrest for breach of the peace and under Section 25 PACE .
Many activists assume that if they are warned under Section 5 and commit no further offence, then they will not be prosecuted. Although this is usually the case, you can actually be prosecuted – by way of a summons – for just one breach of Section 5. Recent overzealous policing tactics at animal rights protests has consisted of police demanding peoples’ names and addresses under Section 25 of PACE in order to serve them with a summons for a single offence under Section 5. As Section 5 is a non-arrestable offence, the police do have the power to do this, and can arrest you if you refuse to give your detail.
This is by far the most commonly used piece of legislation on demos, and the one with which activists will be most familiar. A person is guilty of this offence if he
a) uses threatening, abusive words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress.
Notes on Section 5
The police will often warn you under Section 5 simply as a preventive power to control behaviour on a demo and they often have no intention of following it through with an arrest, especially where no threatening behaviour has been used.
Unlike Section 4A there is no requirement that anyone actually be caused harassment, alarm or distress and therefore no need for a witness to that effect. The police need only say that your conduct took place within the sight or hearing of a potential victim, although it will obviously help to prove their case if they can produce a witness.
Section 5 differs from Section 4A in that there is no need to show that you intended to cause the harassment, only that it was likely to be caused. This means that to a certain extent your behaviour will be judged objectively on the effect it was likely to have, rather than on the effect it actually had on any victim.
Section 5 and the Police
It is often said that the police cannot be caused harassment, alarm distress under Section 5, but this is not strictly true. The current law is stated in the case of DPP v Orum, where the court was asked to decide on whether or not a constable can in law be caused harassment, alarm or distress. It was decided that although police officers can be caused harassment, they were far less likely than ordinary members of the public to be caused distress by insulting words and behaviour. Whether or not the police were actually caused harassment is a question of fact for the magistrates to decide having regard to all the circumstances: the time, the place, who the police officers were etc.
Displays of Upsetting Pictures
The police sometimes threaten protestors with prosecution under Section 5 for displaying upsetting pictures eg of dead animals. It has been held in court that an upsetting picture can be “insulting” within the ordinary meaning of the word, in a case where pictures of aborted fetuses were displayed to persons attending an abortion clinic. However, in our opinion most animal rights placards could not similarly be held to be insulting in the ordinary meaning of the word. This is especially so as the prosecution must also show that you intended or were aware that your conduct might be insulting (see below).
Megaphones
The police occasionally tell activists that it is an offence under Section 5 to use a megaphone or other instrument to amplify sound. This is clearly not the case. Use of a megaphone does not, in itself, amount ‘threatening, insulting, abusive or disorderly behaviour”. However, if you were to shout insulting and abusive comments through a megaphone or point it deliberately in someone’s face, this could amount to an offence. Also bear in mind that there are sometimes local bye-laws prohibiting amplified sound in public areas.
Defences
It is a defence to show that you had no reason to believe that there was any person within sight or hearing likely to be caused harassment etc. This is an objective test and you will be judged on what you ought to have believed rather than what you actually believed.
The prosecution also has to show that you intended your words or behaviour to be threatening, insulting or abusive or were aware that they might have this effect. So if you are charged with displaying an upsetting picture or placard under Section 5, you will have a defence under this section – ie that you had no idea that the picture was threatening insulting or abusive”
You have a statutory defence that your conduct was “reasonable” – see notes on Section 4A above.
Arrest and Punishment
Section 5 is triable summarily only, the maximum penalty is a fine, and it is not an “arrestable offence”. A constable may only arrest if:
a) a person engages in offensive conduct which a constable warns him to stop, and
b) that person engages in further offensive conduct immediately or shortly after the warning.
The constable need not be in uniform, and the arresting constable need not be the same one who issued the warning. He must warn you regarding the offensive conduct while it is actually happening and not afterwards.
You can only be arrested if the further offensive conduct takes place within a short time span. This is not defined, but conduct taking place over an hour later could not, in our view, be defined as taking place shortly afterwards and an arrest here would be unlawful.
You might receive several arrest warnings under Section 5 during the course of a demo and still not be arrested. This is because the warning is usually used to control public order, although the police may well arrest you if the disorderly conduct continues. You can often tell whether the police genuinely mean to arrest you or not. There is also the power of arrest for breach of the peace and under Section 25 PACE .
Many activists assume that if they are warned under Section 5 and commit no further offence, then they will not be prosecuted. Although this is usually the case, you can actually be prosecuted – by way of a summons – for just one breach of Section 5. Recent overzealous policing tactics at animal rights protests has consisted of police demanding peoples’ names and addresses under Section 25 of PACE in order to serve them with a summons for a single offence under Section 5. As Section 5 is a non-arrestable offence, the police do have the power to do this, and can arrest you if you refuse to give your detail.
Last edited by Snazy; 16 December 2010 at 01:20 PM.
16 December 2010, 01:23 PM
#92
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are right, there is no offence of "calling a copper a c***" and other such profanities, however they all still fall under the umbrella of section 5.
So you are vague yet correct.
16 December 2010, 02:32 PM
#93
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was discussing the general principal however that if someone is genuinely disabled requiring a wheelchair then to drag him out of it and across a road is dangerous to the man concerned for the reasons I stated earlier unless perhap's he is in danger for a different reason. You have to have some thought for the person when dealing with badly disabled people.
Les
16 December 2010, 05:13 PM
#94
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12.8 Section 5 - Conduct likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress
This is by far the most commonly used piece of legislation on demos, and the one with which activists will be most familiar. A person is guilty of this offence if he
a) uses threatening, abusive words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress.
Notes on Section 5
The police will often warn you under Section 5 simply as a preventive power to control behaviour on a demo and they often have no intention of following it through with an arrest, especially where no threatening behaviour has been used.
Unlike Section 4A there is no requirement that anyone actually be caused harassment, alarm or distress and therefore no need for a witness to that effect. The police need only say that your conduct took place within the sight or hearing of a potential victim, although it will obviously help to prove their case if they can produce a witness.
Section 5 differs from Section 4A in that there is no need to show that you intended to cause the harassment, only that it was likely to be caused. This means that to a certain extent your behaviour will be judged objectively on the effect it was likely to have, rather than on the effect it actually had on any victim.
Section 5 and the Police
It is often said that the police cannot be caused harassment, alarm distress under Section 5, but this is not strictly true. The current law is stated in the case of DPP v Orum, where the court was asked to decide on whether or not a constable can in law be caused harassment, alarm or distress. It was decided that although police officers can be caused harassment, they were far less likely than ordinary members of the public to be caused distress by insulting words and behaviour. Whether or not the police were actually caused harassment is a question of fact for the magistrates to decide having regard to all the circumstances: the time, the place, who the police officers were etc.
Displays of Upsetting Pictures
The police sometimes threaten protestors with prosecution under Section 5 for displaying upsetting pictures eg of dead animals. It has been held in court that an upsetting picture can be “insulting” within the ordinary meaning of the word, in a case where pictures of aborted fetuses were displayed to persons attending an abortion clinic. However, in our opinion most animal rights placards could not similarly be held to be insulting in the ordinary meaning of the word. This is especially so as the prosecution must also show that you intended or were aware that your conduct might be insulting (see below).
Megaphones
The police occasionally tell activists that it is an offence under Section 5 to use a megaphone or other instrument to amplify sound. This is clearly not the case. Use of a megaphone does not, in itself, amount ‘threatening, insulting, abusive or disorderly behaviour”. However, if you were to shout insulting and abusive comments through a megaphone or point it deliberately in someone’s face, this could amount to an offence. Also bear in mind that there are sometimes local bye-laws prohibiting amplified sound in public areas.
Defences
It is a defence to show that you had no reason to believe that there was any person within sight or hearing likely to be caused harassment etc. This is an objective test and you will be judged on what you ought to have believed rather than what you actually believed.
The prosecution also has to show that you intended your words or behaviour to be threatening, insulting or abusive or were aware that they might have this effect. So if you are charged with displaying an upsetting picture or placard under Section 5, you will have a defence under this section – ie that you had no idea that the picture was threatening insulting or abusive”
You have a statutory defence that your conduct was “reasonable” – see notes on Section 4A above.
Arrest and Punishment
Section 5 is triable summarily only, the maximum penalty is a fine, and it is not an “arrestable offence”. A constable may only arrest if:
a) a person engages in offensive conduct which a constable warns him to stop, and
b) that person engages in further offensive conduct immediately or shortly after the warning.
The constable need not be in uniform, and the arresting constable need not be the same one who issued the warning. He must warn you regarding the offensive conduct while it is actually happening and not afterwards.
You can only be arrested if the further offensive conduct takes place within a short time span. This is not defined, but conduct taking place over an hour later could not, in our view, be defined as taking place shortly afterwards and an arrest here would be unlawful.
You might receive several arrest warnings under Section 5 during the course of a demo and still not be arrested. This is because the warning is usually used to control public order, although the police may well arrest you if the disorderly conduct continues. You can often tell whether the police genuinely mean to arrest you or not. There is also the power of arrest for breach of the peace and under Section 25 PACE .
Many activists assume that if they are warned under Section 5 and commit no further offence, then they will not be prosecuted. Although this is usually the case, you can actually be prosecuted – by way of a summons – for just one breach of Section 5. Recent overzealous policing tactics at animal rights protests has consisted of police demanding peoples’ names and addresses under Section 25 of PACE in order to serve them with a summons for a single offence under Section 5. As Section 5 is a non-arrestable offence, the police do have the power to do this, and can arrest you if you refuse to give your detail.
This is by far the most commonly used piece of legislation on demos, and the one with which activists will be most familiar. A person is guilty of this offence if he
a) uses threatening, abusive words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress.
Notes on Section 5
The police will often warn you under Section 5 simply as a preventive power to control behaviour on a demo and they often have no intention of following it through with an arrest, especially where no threatening behaviour has been used.
Unlike Section 4A there is no requirement that anyone actually be caused harassment, alarm or distress and therefore no need for a witness to that effect. The police need only say that your conduct took place within the sight or hearing of a potential victim, although it will obviously help to prove their case if they can produce a witness.
Section 5 differs from Section 4A in that there is no need to show that you intended to cause the harassment, only that it was likely to be caused. This means that to a certain extent your behaviour will be judged objectively on the effect it was likely to have, rather than on the effect it actually had on any victim.
Section 5 and the Police
It is often said that the police cannot be caused harassment, alarm distress under Section 5, but this is not strictly true. The current law is stated in the case of DPP v Orum, where the court was asked to decide on whether or not a constable can in law be caused harassment, alarm or distress. It was decided that although police officers can be caused harassment, they were far less likely than ordinary members of the public to be caused distress by insulting words and behaviour. Whether or not the police were actually caused harassment is a question of fact for the magistrates to decide having regard to all the circumstances: the time, the place, who the police officers were etc.
Displays of Upsetting Pictures
The police sometimes threaten protestors with prosecution under Section 5 for displaying upsetting pictures eg of dead animals. It has been held in court that an upsetting picture can be “insulting” within the ordinary meaning of the word, in a case where pictures of aborted fetuses were displayed to persons attending an abortion clinic. However, in our opinion most animal rights placards could not similarly be held to be insulting in the ordinary meaning of the word. This is especially so as the prosecution must also show that you intended or were aware that your conduct might be insulting (see below).
Megaphones
The police occasionally tell activists that it is an offence under Section 5 to use a megaphone or other instrument to amplify sound. This is clearly not the case. Use of a megaphone does not, in itself, amount ‘threatening, insulting, abusive or disorderly behaviour”. However, if you were to shout insulting and abusive comments through a megaphone or point it deliberately in someone’s face, this could amount to an offence. Also bear in mind that there are sometimes local bye-laws prohibiting amplified sound in public areas.
Defences
It is a defence to show that you had no reason to believe that there was any person within sight or hearing likely to be caused harassment etc. This is an objective test and you will be judged on what you ought to have believed rather than what you actually believed.
The prosecution also has to show that you intended your words or behaviour to be threatening, insulting or abusive or were aware that they might have this effect. So if you are charged with displaying an upsetting picture or placard under Section 5, you will have a defence under this section – ie that you had no idea that the picture was threatening insulting or abusive”
You have a statutory defence that your conduct was “reasonable” – see notes on Section 4A above.
Arrest and Punishment
Section 5 is triable summarily only, the maximum penalty is a fine, and it is not an “arrestable offence”. A constable may only arrest if:
a) a person engages in offensive conduct which a constable warns him to stop, and
b) that person engages in further offensive conduct immediately or shortly after the warning.
The constable need not be in uniform, and the arresting constable need not be the same one who issued the warning. He must warn you regarding the offensive conduct while it is actually happening and not afterwards.
You can only be arrested if the further offensive conduct takes place within a short time span. This is not defined, but conduct taking place over an hour later could not, in our view, be defined as taking place shortly afterwards and an arrest here would be unlawful.
You might receive several arrest warnings under Section 5 during the course of a demo and still not be arrested. This is because the warning is usually used to control public order, although the police may well arrest you if the disorderly conduct continues. You can often tell whether the police genuinely mean to arrest you or not. There is also the power of arrest for breach of the peace and under Section 25 PACE .
Many activists assume that if they are warned under Section 5 and commit no further offence, then they will not be prosecuted. Although this is usually the case, you can actually be prosecuted – by way of a summons – for just one breach of Section 5. Recent overzealous policing tactics at animal rights protests has consisted of police demanding peoples’ names and addresses under Section 25 of PACE in order to serve them with a summons for a single offence under Section 5. As Section 5 is a non-arrestable offence, the police do have the power to do this, and can arrest you if you refuse to give your detail.
My eyes, my eyes...
16 December 2010, 06:03 PM
#95
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
16 December 2010, 09:10 PM
#97
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Section 5 is triable summarily only, the maximum penalty is a fine, and it is not an “arrestable offence”. A constable may only arrest if:
a) a person engages in offensive conduct which a constable warns him to stop, and
b) that person engages in further offensive conduct immediately or shortly after the warning.
a) a person engages in offensive conduct which a constable warns him to stop, and
b) that person engages in further offensive conduct immediately or shortly after the warning.
Sct 5 POA, like every offence on the statute books, is now potentially an arrestable offence under the right circumstances
And the warning doesn't have to be given anymore prior to arrest.
Oh, and there are plenty of other offences being abusive to a Police officer can cover, but technically you are correct that there isn't an offence of swearing at a PC
16 December 2010, 09:24 PM
#98
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Five years out of date that info.
Sct 5 POA, like every offence on the statute books, is now potentially an arrestable offence under the right circumstances
And the warning doesn't have to be given anymore prior to arrest.
Oh, and there are plenty of other offences being abusive to a Police officer can cover, but technically you are correct that there isn't an offence of swearing at a PC
Sct 5 POA, like every offence on the statute books, is now potentially an arrestable offence under the right circumstances
And the warning doesn't have to be given anymore prior to arrest.
Oh, and there are plenty of other offences being abusive to a Police officer can cover, but technically you are correct that there isn't an offence of swearing at a PC
I'm glad the law has changed in the favour of the officers putting up with these idiots.
16 December 2010, 09:25 PM
#99
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 2,310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If he was being a dick then why not drag him out of his wheel chair! Why treat him any different. He clearly is a big enough man to be participating in these bull **** childish demonstration, so floor him lol. If people are going to protest do it right, don't be a bunch of ******* about it. Police should floor all the idiots causing **** ha.
Thanks
Sam
Thanks
Sam
Last edited by Saalro; 16 December 2010 at 09:26 PM.
18 December 2010, 02:58 PM
#100
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If he was being a dick then why not drag him out of his wheel chair! Why treat him any different. He clearly is a big enough man to be participating in these bull **** childish demonstration, so floor him lol. If people are going to protest do it right, don't be a bunch of ******* about it. Police should floor all the idiots causing **** ha.
Thanks
Sam
Thanks
Sam
I can only say that is a very selfish and mindbendingly ignorant attitude.
Les
18 December 2010, 06:37 PM
#102
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought he sounded like a right **** on the breakfast show personally. Disability aside, anyone who declares 'I hope that every member of the goverment is removed from their seat like I was removed from my wheelchair' needs to grow up, shut up and go home.
Bunch of soap and tax dodging arseholes IMHO.
Bunch of soap and tax dodging arseholes IMHO.
Best ignored.
19 December 2010, 12:08 PM
#104
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If he is a fake then he got what he deserved of course.
I still say that if the person in a wheelchair is not known to be a fake then it is wrong and dangerous to manhandle them out of the chair and drag them along the ground.
If it is necessary to move the chair out of the way, surely the coppers can easily take control of it and move it to where they want without risking injury to the occupant.
Gross physical mishandling of a disabled person is all wrong and would be disgraceful behaviour.
Les
I still say that if the person in a wheelchair is not known to be a fake then it is wrong and dangerous to manhandle them out of the chair and drag them along the ground.
If it is necessary to move the chair out of the way, surely the coppers can easily take control of it and move it to where they want without risking injury to the occupant.
Gross physical mishandling of a disabled person is all wrong and would be disgraceful behaviour.
Les
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Scott@ScoobySpares
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
55
05 August 2018 07:02 AM
JackClark
Computer & Technology Related
3
18 September 2015 11:19 PM