New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
Sign up
60
posted 1 year ago by Hyperborean_ on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +60Score on mirror )
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
the-new-style on scored.co
1 year ago 2 points (+0 / -0 / +2Score on mirror ) 1 child
One thing that's interesting is that they call what happened "riots" and in UK law riot below, yet no one has been charged with rioting.


Riot.

(1) Where 12 or more persons who are present together use or threaten unlawful violence for a common purpose and the conduct of them (taken together) is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his personal safety, each of the persons using unlawful violence for the common purpose is guilty of riot.

(2) It is immaterial whether or not the 12 or more use or threaten unlawful violence simultaneously.

(3) The common purpose may be inferred from conduct.

(4) No person of reasonable firmness need actually be, or be likely to be, present at the scene.

(5) Riot may be committed in private as well as in public places.

(6) A person guilty of riot is liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or a fine or both.


HimmlerWasRight88 on scored.co
1 year ago 2 points (+0 / -0 / +2Score on mirror ) 1 child
> (4) No person of reasonable firmness need actually be, or be likely to be, present at the scene.

LOL WUT


You can't go rioting in the woods with your friends
the-new-style on scored.co
1 year ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror )
Police are not considered to be people of reasonable firmness. They are expected not to fear for their personal safety quite so easily.

So a group of 12 people facing off against police with common purpose can be considered rioting.
Toast message