Not the royal wedding activists say they were held by police to avert protests

[alp227]

Source: The Guardian

Activists have condemned a series of "pre-crime" arrests carried out by the Metropolitan police on the eve of the royal wedding as disturbing, Orwellian and of doubtful legality.

Republican activists planning events almost a mile away from Westminster Abbey were held for up to 24 hours in police cells around the capital on Friday as tens of thousands turned out to watch the celebrations.

Those arrested include 30-year-old stunt film-maker Charlie Veitch, who is part of the group Love Police.

He was arrested at his home in Cambridge at 5pm on Thursday on the charge of "conspiracy to cause a public nuisance" and on suspicion of involvement in last month's UK Uncut protest inside luxury retailer Fortnum and Mason.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/may/01/wedding-activists-rounded-up-police

[Drale]

1. Are these the people who basically made terrorist threat against the wedding?

[alp227]

2. article doesn't say so, and there were no credible terrorist threats anyway n/t

[Drale]

3. Ok just wondering

[rfranklin]

4. Totalarism in action...guilty until proven innocent...

This is exactly what we were told to be fearful of from the Soviet Union when I was a kid.

[Drale]

5. The concept of incident until proven guilty is pretty rare throughout history

including in todays world, even in democratic countries.

[Muskypundit]

6. and your point?

They also used to throw people into rivers to see if they were witches throughout history, I'm not getting the point your trying to make.

[liberation]

9. No it is not

the concept of fallacy however...

[xocet]

13. Yes. That is a rare concept:

"...incident until proven guilty...."

Etc.

[dipsydoodle]

11. Partly for their own protection.

If they'd caused issues near the crowd they'd have had the shit beaten out them with the police being unable to help them. This was news prior to the event from a list of known trouble makers. The list was compiled from the most recent protests using film footage and stills.

[Ferret Annica]

12. Not true, look at the link to someone who did a great job...

... his entire activist career protesting peacefully and doing great videography. And read his words on this sameful detainmenr.

http://www.cveitch.org/

From the site:

The offence of ‘public nuisance’ is almost a Millennium old. It dates back to the 12th Century, when it was a criminal writ belonging only to the Crown – wildly ironic given its use 900 years on to quash political dissent against the (apparently only symbolic) monarchy on the future head of state’s wedding day. The use of this fossilised law illuminates the archaic stagnation of England’s political and legal system.

A conspiracy in English criminal law is an agreement between two or more persons to break the law at some time in the future. The evidence for the allegation is a video Charlie posted to Youtube on April 23rd 2011, titled ‘Charlie’s Royal Wedding Rant’, in which he describes to the nameless and faceless Youtube viewers, including the intelligence officers, his intentions to peacefully and publicly voice his anti-royalist opinion in Soho Square, London – distanced from the Royal Wedding procession route. On April 18th 2011, Charlie visited Scotland Yard of his own accord to inform the Metropolitan Police of his intention to deliver anti-royalist messages of peace, love and equality in a public space away from the royal procession route on the day of the wedding. This was met with gratitude, handshakes and apparent understanding by the sergeant. The Youtube ‘evidence’, contrary to the police’s attempts to use it for incrimination, demonstrates that Charlie had not actually made any agreements with any other individuals, and had certainly not conspired to engage in any criminal activity.

[2banon]

14. me too.

Not sure if that was the standard meme in the UK, but it certainly was here. My reading of John LeCarre suggests it was certainly was the same in the UK.. on the other hand the brits security apparatus were engaged in severe Orwellian activities in Ireland. soo.. not much new here in that regard

[Zorra]

7. That's a bloody royal shafting if you ask me. nt

[laylah]

8. FFS! This was a wedding between two

that have had NO choice but to be in the limelight! I apologize if I missed the "point"; however, the obvious dissing is sooooooooo crass, IMVHO!

[liberation]

10. Yeah, the victims here are the royals...

... not.

The "prince" was free to renounce to his royal condition, and marry his beloved in anonymity if he so chose. The people who had no choice here were the ones detained.

Good gried.