'plane Stupid' Protesters Could Face Jail Sentences.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35403577

Do you agree that they should be jailed?

It seems a little harsh when an illegal immigrant can walk through the Channel tunnel and when arriving in England is granted citizenship.

[Svejk]

Don't see why not.

[Booldawg]

was the one who walked through the tunnel granted citizenship or just allowed to stay?

[youngmafbog]

Jail them. And perhaps give some of them a wash or would that violate their 'ooman rights.

Should have jailed the illegal immigrant too until sent back to the safe country he came from.

[retrocop]

Yes. Criminal damage (involved in aggravated trespass) Countless passengers inconvenienced by 25 flights disrupted. This pointless and selfish action is not about saving lives as they profess but their actions could of cost lives.
Might get a chance of a wash in the nick as well!!

[New Judge]

It's the other way round, AOG.

Do we agree that is lenient to allow an illegal immigrant to walk through the Channel tunnel and when arriving in England is granted citizenshi whilst "Plane Stupid" protesters are jailed. (as an aside the CPS are still proposing to prosecute the Channel Tunnel migrant. We'll have to wait and see the outcome).

The answer to my revised question is an empahtic "yes". The answer to your original question is that I do agree they should be jailed. Their action caused inconvernience to around 100,000 people and the cost of their action runs into many millions of pounds. It was committed at a sensitive location where the security services have more important things to do than to deal with their childish petulance. They have shown no remorse for their actions (on the contrary, seeing them interviewed yesterday they were quite proud of their achivements).

Like it or not, expansion at Heathrow is almost a certainty (and should have begun long ago but for spineless governments) and they should grow up.

T

[steg]

Must be English citizenship he got then

[anotheoldgit]

Booldawg

/// was the one who walked through the tunnel granted citizenship or just allowed to stay? ///

He was granted asylum, allowed to stay in Britain, given state-funded accommodation and a £37 weekly allowance, free NHS healthcare, prescriptions, dental care and eyesight tests.

That is better than being granted citizenship, what British citizen are given all of these?

[anotheoldgit]

There are two matters that should be addressed, why didn't they first watch over them and see how long they remained handcuffed together, nature calls and all that, and secondly what if there had been a terrorist amongst them offered a wide open fence to the planes on the runway?

[andy-hughes]

You can't decided leniency for one crime on the basis that people commit another crime, that is not how justice works.

If I break someone's arms and legs, it is not mitigation to say that other people murder people, so my crime is lessened because of that.

The law must deal with crimes as it finds and prosecutes them, and the notion that it 'seems unfair' doesn't enter into it.

[Islay]

//That is better than being granted citizenship, what British citizen are given all of these?
//

Any British citizen claiming unemployment benefit is given all of these!

[Baldric]

Yes they should be jailed, they caused far more disruption than he did.

[anotheoldgit]

/// the CPS are still proposing to prosecute the Channel Tunnel migrant. We'll have to wait and see the
outcome). ///

Any idea how long that may be Judge, not heard anything further since the beginning of January?

[andy-hughes]

I omitted to answer your question AOG - apologies - yes they should be jailed if that is what the law decides is appropriate.

Again, they should not be jailed because they caused more disruption than one asylum seeker - their case must be tried on its own merits, as all cases are. That is the only way justice can be fairly meted out.

[Baldric]

///given state-funded accommodation and a £37 weekly allowance, free NHS healthcare, prescriptions, dental care and eyesight tests.///

I don't need the accommodation or the allowance,
but I get the rest (since I was 59, now 64) without even having to ask for it.
4 out of 6 ain't bad.

[viv41]

I agree with them. We are damaging the environment enough as it is !!

[Baldric]

///Again, they should not be jailed because they caused more disruption than one asylum seeker///

I did not suggest that they should Andy, as I'm sure you know, I was simply making a point.
Please stop altering the meaning of posts to fit your agenda.

[anotheoldgit]

andy-hughes

/// You can't decided leniency for one crime on the basis that people commit another crime, that is not how justice works. ///

Who has suggested any leniency? Both crimes should carry an automatic jail sentence.

/// If I break someone's arms and legs, it is not mitigation to say that other people murder people, so my crime is lessened because of that. ///

Most including yourself use this kind of excuse to lessen certain illegal happenings, ie what about all those white criminals etc etc.

/// The law must deal with crimes as it finds and prosecutes them, and the notion that it 'seems unfair' doesn't enter into it. ///

Thank you Judge Rinder.

[andy-hughes]

Baldric - /////Again, they should not be jailed because they caused more disruption than one asylum seeker///

I did not suggest that they should Andy, as I'm sure you know, I was simply making a point.//

I think you did suggest it Baldric, your post is too brief to be open to misinterpretation in my view - you said, quote -

"Yes they should be jailed, they caused far more disruption than he did."

If there is a different interpretation to be put on that than the one I have pointed out, then it is not there to be seen.

//Please stop altering the meaning of posts to fit your agenda.//

I have not 'altered' your post, merely commented on the fact that either your meaning is clearly set out, or, if as you seem to suggest, you did not mean to say that, then it the working of your post that is at fault, not my interpretatgion if it.

I don't have 'an agenda' to fit things to.

[anotheoldgit]

Baldric

Free Dental care, without asking for it, how do you manage that?

[andy-hughes]

AOG - //andy-hughes

/// You can't decided leniency for one crime on the basis that people commit another crime, that is not how justice works. ///

Who has suggested any leniency? Both crimes should carry an automatic jail sentence. //

You have - you said, "It seems a little harsh ..." which clearly underlines your position - that the plane protesters going to jail appears unduly severe in the light of an illegal immigrant walking through the tunnel and being granted citizenship. The inaccuracy of your comparison has already been advised to you, but it does not impact on the statement you made in your OP - or my response to it.

/// If I break someone's arms and legs, it is not mitigation to say that other people murder people, so my crime is lessened because of that. ///

Most including yourself use this kind of excuse to lessen certain illegal happenings, ie what about all those white criminals etc etc. //

I have no idea what you mean by that statement - I do not believe I have ever used the greater severity of one crime to mitigate another, as an 'excuse' or otherwise.

/// The law must deal with crimes as it finds and prosecutes them, and the notion that it 'seems unfair' doesn't enter into it. ///

Thank you Judge Rinder. //

That was my comment - Judge Rinder does not appear as yet to have posted a view.