No the flags are not illegal. Why you think they are is beyond me.
Wow, UK has lost freedom of speech
- Thread starter Hercules56
- Start date
I'm not too bothered about the irony of an American castigating us UK folk about free speech because there are serious issues in the UK regarding freedom of expression. Look at the Public Order Act 2023, the restrictions on protesting and the criminalisation of aspects of protesting should be repealed, similar stuff in the recent Crime and Policing bill should also be repealed. But of course these aren't the simplistic and silliness the USA critics like to go on about. Just above we have an American saying certain flags are banned!
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Not all hurty words are "stigmatising"
Correct
Perhaps, but it should not be the police administering those consequences, it should be the complainant themselves. Hurty speech should ALWAYS be a civil matter. If some snowflake doesn't like someone else using hurty words like calling them a retard, or misgendering them, or if they don't like someone else's actions such as burning a Qu'ran, or a Bible, they should get a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ lawyer and sue them. Stop expecting the taxpayer to front up with the cost of a half-dozen cops to enforce their opinions and worldview on others. And if they can't afford a lawyer, tough! They should stay off social media so they won't get offended. As my dear departed Dad used to say, "if you find the programmes on that channel offensive, change the bloody channel, or turn the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ TV off".
The Police should be policing streets, not tweets. Fifteen years ago, if you suggested that we'd be jailing people for offending others on the internet, or that comedians would be arrested for making bad taste jokes, you would have been called crazy. If we carry on down this path towards a Society where our opinions are judged for their "rightness" or "wrongness" according standards set by some anonymous, unaccountable bureaucrats, and those opinions are suppressed (or we are punished); a Society in which we can't say anything for fear of offending someone; a Society in which no-one is allowed to refer to you by the "wrong" pronoun, or make a joke at your expense, or call you a bad name, then we face the very real danger of that Society becoming boring and humourless. Religion will be replaced by Compliance as the opiate of the masses, as the populace are stripped of their individuality, a Society where diversity of opinion will not exist; where every member will be chilled from expressing their opinions as they become ever more mindful of the consequences; a Society where showing any dissent might anger the Great God of Political Correctness; a Society in which our freedom to express, innovate and be creative will have long since been sacrificed on the altar of Social Justice.
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist
You'll forgive me if I dismiss everything you say based on your continued use of the word "hurty".
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
Hercules56
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 17,176
Citation please. I think you're engaging in extreme hyperbole and exaggeration.
Trump is a fascist but the government has not made any such official declaration, legal or unofficial or otherwise.
jeremyp
Philosopher
No you are not. In England and Wales (note there are three legal systems in the UK), you do not have to say anything in your defence. The only thing that changed legally a few years ago is that the police are now allowed to say in court that you didn't present your defence when you were arrested. Previously they could not do that. The wording of the caution is a reminder to the arrestee that not saying anything now might look bad to the jury.
For example, if you are arrested for some robbery and you say nothing at the time, but at court you produce a witness who will testify you were with them in a pub five miles away, it looks suspiciously like you asked the witness to lie about your whereabouts after you got arrested.
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2012
- Messages
- 16,193
How often the public complain to the police about abuse, or perceived abuse, they have received or seen online, determines how often the police react. Most criticism is directed at the police, courts and government, but the public have played the largest role in what has developed.
Hercules56
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 17,176
It is illegal to show support for Hamas and Hezbollah in the UK. That includes waving their flags.
Thermal
August Member
That's the weirdest thing I ever heard. Why could a cop not say that a suspect clammed up and wouldn't state their alibi that would clear them from suspicion?
That's the part that I found confusing. A cop saying it would harm your defense sounds like the harm would be procedural, like inadmissiblity. But it's just friendly advice, I guess.
Last edited:
No it doesn't. For example if I was making a movie that had Hamas somewhere in it I could use their flag. It's the support that's illegal not the flag waving.
In the USA that couldn't be used as part of the prosecutor's argument in a criminal trial, the jury will be told that they can't infer anything about the accused and what they are charged with by them not saying something. The change in E&W hasn't really altered anything, as soon as the solicitor turns up you will be told to say "no comment" to everything, therefore the reason you didn't say anything at the time of the police interview is that you had legal advice not to.
Hercules56
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 17,176
Wrong.
Under the Terrorism Act of 2000, it is illegal to display symbols associated with banned terrorist organizations. This law applies if there is reasonable suspicion that the person waving the flag is a member or supporter of Hamas. Metropolitan Police have confirmed that anyone displaying a Hamas flag will be arrested.
Hamas became a banned terrorist group in 2021.
Last edited:
Thermal
August Member
Totally can. Discovery rules are not a guideline here. Google sums up:
"However, if you intend to use an alibi as a defense in a criminal trial, you must provide advance written notice of this intention and your alibi witnesses to the prosecution, as required by state "discovery rules". Failing to provide this notice may result in the court barring you from presenting the alibi defense at trial, and could also expose you to charges like obstruction of justice if you provided false information about your alibi."
I'm pretty sure over here, you don't get your responsibility waived by saying you listened to counsel. You just have a new claim for inadequate counsel, and if you prevail in that, you might get another bite at the apple.
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
That's not quite the same thing, we're not talking about saying nothing then springing a surprise alibi at the trial, I'm not actually sure if that would be allowed or not, if nothing else contempt of court, wasting police time and obstruction of justice might come into play. It's more that if you stay silent when arrested, are released on bail the next day then contact the police with alibis once you've had a chance to speak to them and explain exactly where you all spent you're inconfirmable period of interest together in front of no independent witnesses the prosecution is allowed to point out that you failed to provide this exonerating evidence at such a time as they could have contacted the witnesses to confirm it before there was time for collusion. Incidentally British police aren't allowed to lie, such as telling you they've checked your alibi and been told it's fake or saying a co-defendant has confessed or implicated you when they haven't.
You seem to have missed the "IF".
The USA police seem to use the "Reid technique" whereas over here they use the "Peace technique".
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
In the US, that is all part of your 5A right to stay silent. Neither the Police, the judge or the jury are allowed to infer anything from you silence because your silence is an absolute, unquestionable right.
I dislike the UK version of Miranda, because it's worded like a veiled threat.... 'talk to us now or the judge/jury might not believe you later'.
The USA versions tend to be stronger, saying something like "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law."