Police given powers to enter homes and tear down anti-Olympics posters during 2012 Games

July 21, 2009

Police have been handed ‘Chinese-style’ powers to enter private homes and seize political posters during the London 2012 Olympics. Little-noticed measures passed by the Government will allow officers and Olympics officials to enter homes and shops near official venues to confiscate any protest material. Breaking the rules could land offenders with a fine of up to £20,000. Civil liberties groups compared the powers to those used by the Communist Chinese government to stop political protest during the 2008 Beijing Games. Anita Coles, of Liberty, said: ‘Powers of entry should be for fighting crime, not policing poster displays. Didn’t we learn last time that the Olympics should not be about stifling free expression?’ The powers were introduced by the Olympics Act of 2006, passed by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, supposedly to preserve the monopoly of official advertisers on the London 2012 site. They would allow advertising posters or hoardings placed in shop or home to be removed. But the law has been drawn so widely that it also includes ‘non-commercial material’ – which could extend its reach to include legitimate campaign literature.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: ‘This is a Government who just doesn’t understand civil liberties. They may claim these powers won’t be used but the frank truth is no one will believe them.’ Liberal Democrat spokesman Chris Huhne said: ‘This sort of police action runs the risk of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. ‘We should aim to show the Chinese that you can run a successful Olympics without cracking down on protestors and free speech.’ Scotland Yard denied it had any plans to use the powers. Assistant Commissioner Chris Allison said: ‘We have no intention of using our powers to go in and take down demonstration posters.’

But critics said that – given the powers were now law – it was impossible to predict what would happen in three years time. Campaigners said the existence of the powers was ‘dreadful’. Peter McNeil, who is against the holding of equestrian events in Greenwich Park said: ‘It’s bullying taken to another level. It’s quite appalling that this should happen in a democracy.’ The power emerged as the Home Office and police outlined the £600million security operation for the Games, which will cost more than £9billion in total. They said hundreds of flights could have to be diverted every day, with planes prevented from passing over the main venue for the London games. Olympic security chiefs said they expected to have to ‘manage’ the airspace over the Olympic Park in east London.

A senior Home Office official said: ‘We do expect there will have to be some management of the airspace. We do not expect that any airports will have to close.’ The officials said they had no evidence of a specific terror threat against the Games at the moment. But current preparations assume the terror threat level will be at ‘severe’ during the event, despite it being reduced to ‘substantial’ for the UK earlier this week. It is the lowest threat level nationwide since before the July 7 attacks in 2005. A DCMS spokesman said: ‘The advertising provisions in the London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006 are there to prevent ambush marketing and the over-commercialisation of the Games, not to prevent or restrict lawful protests. ‘The measures will only apply to areas within a few hundred metres of the London 2012 venues. The Government is currently developing detailed regulations for advertising during the Games which will enable these powers to come into effect. The Government will be consulting on the regulations in 2010.’

Source = http://www.dailymail.co.uk

Police powers for 2012 Olympics alarm critics

July 21, 2009

The government was accused tonight of giving itself draconian powers to clamp down on protests at the 2012 Olympics. Critics said the powers were so broad they would potentially give private contractors the right to forcibly enter people’s homes and seize materials. Opposition parties and civil liberties groups criticised the powers as top security officials announced plans concerned with keeping the games, to be held mostly in London, safe from terrorist attack and from “domestic extremists” and public order problems like disruptive protests. The legislation is directed at curbing advertising near the Olympic venues. A government spokesperson said the laws, passed in 2006, were meant to stop “over-commercialisation” of the games.

But civil rights campaigners are worried about several clauses in the London Olympic Games and Games Act 2006. Section 19(4) could cover protest placards, they said, as it read: “The regulations may apply in respect of advertising of any kind including in particular – (a) advertising of a non-commercial nature, and (b) announcements or notices of any kind.” Section 22 allows a “constable or enforcement officer” to “enter land or premises” where they believe such an advert is being shown or produced. It allows for materials to be destroyed, and for the use of “reasonable force”. The power to force entry requires a court warrant. Causing still further concern is a section granting the powers to an enforcement officer appointed by Olympic Delivery Authority. Anita Coles, policy officer for Liberty, said: “This goes much further than protecting the Olympic logo for commercial use. Regulations could ban signs urging boycotts of sponsors with sweat shops. Then private contractors designated by the Olympic authority could enter homes and other premises in the vicinity, seizing or destroying private property.”

The Liberal Democrats’ home affairs spokesman, Chris Huhne, said: “This sort of police action runs the risk of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. The police should take a deep breath and read the excellent report from the chief inspector of constabulary on the tolerance of protest. We should aim to show the Chinese that you can run a successful Olympics without cracking down on protesters and free speech.” Chris Grayling, the shadow home secretary, said: “This is a government who just doesn’t understand civil liberties – they may claim these powers won’t be used but the frank truth is no one will believe them. Neither the police nor any other official should be invading people’s homes for what appear to be commercial reasons.”

Source = http://www.guardian.co.uk

London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006

2006 CHAPTER 12

An Act to make provision in connection with the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games that are to take place in London in the year 2012; to amend the Olympic Symbol etc. (Protection) Act 1995; and for connected purposes.

[30th March 2006]

Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

——————————————–

Section 22 – Enforcement: power of entry

(1) A constable or enforcement officer may—

(a) enter land or premises on which they reasonably believe a contravention of regulations under section 19 is occurring (whether by reason of advertising on that land or premises or by the use of that land or premises to cause an advertisement to appear elsewhere);

(b) remove, destroy, conceal or erase any infringing article;

(c) when entering land under paragraph (a), be accompanied by one or more persons for the purpose of taking action under paragraph (b);

(d) use, or authorise the use of, reasonable force for the purpose of taking action under this subsection.

(2) The power to enter land or premises may be exercised only at a time that a constable or enforcement officer thinks reasonable having regard to the nature and circumstances of the contravention of regulations under section 19.

(3) Before entering land or premises a constable or enforcement officer must take reasonable steps to—

(a) establish the identity of an owner, occupier or person responsible for the management of the land or premises or of any infringing article on the land or premises, and

(b)give any owner, occupier or responsible person identified under paragraph (a) such opportunity as seems reasonable to the constable or enforcement officer in the circumstances of the case to end the contravention of the regulations (whether by removing, destroying or concealing any infringing article or otherwise).

(4) The power to enter premises may be exercised in relation to a dwelling only in accordance with a warrant issued by a justice of the peace; and a justice of the peace may issue a warrant only if satisfied on the application of a constable or enforcement officer that—

(a) there are reasonable grounds to believe a contravention of regulations under section 19 is occurring in the dwelling or on land that can reasonably be entered only through the dwelling,

(b) the constable or enforcement officer has complied with subsection (3),

(c)the constable or enforcement officer has taken reasonable steps to give notice to persons likely to be interested of his intention to apply for a warrant, and

(d) that it is reasonable in the circumstances of the case to issue a warrant.

Source = http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/12

Monday 28th was the first day of what’s set to be a five day hearing with judges Lord Justice Richard and Lord Openshaw. The hearing will encompass four Judicial Reviews which are:

• one Judicial Review into the pre-emptive arrests  for ‘breach of the peace’ on the day of the royal wedding

• one Judicial Review into the pre-emptive arrest of a minor for ‘criminal damage’ the police believed he would cause (evidence: two pens)

• one Judicial Review into the raid on the Grow Heathrow squat the day before the royal wedding – for which a supposed link to rupublican extremism was the excuse

• one Judicial Review into another raid on a squat for which – again – a supposed link to left wing extremism was the excuse given.

The first, and largest, Judicial Review is expected to take two days.

On Monday 28th of May Karon Monaghan QC, representing the arrestees, set out her arguments:
In the morning she set out the framework of other cases involving protest, dissent, and arrests and stated that the police’s actions on the day of the royal wedding demonstrated a ‘self-evident policy which equated the intention to protest with criminal conduct’. She stated that ‘what it [this case] not about it the right to protest being absolute – it is not’ but that on the day of the royal wedding the police acted with an ‘impermissably low threshold of tolerance’ which had the effect of ‘the suppression of a dissenting voice’.

• ‘The fact that others may take part in criminal conduct does not mean that my clients lose their right to free expression or their assembly rights … an indvidual assessment must be made.’
• It was brought up that the state is not merely under a negative obligation to not prevent public protest – it may be under a positive obligation to actively facilitate protest.
• In all the cases the violence which police claimed they feared would soon breach the peace was violence which coming from provoked monarchists – therefore the police were under a specific obligation to facilitate any intention to protest.
• Mentioned the ruling of Lord Roger on a breach of the peace case – when Lord Roger concluded that ‘Police must take no more steps than is necessary to prevent it [a breach of the peace]‘ therefore the police – by handcuffing and arresting protestors instead of, say, asking them to go away – acted disproportionately.
• In the afternoon Karon Monaghan QC went through the individual cases of pre-emptive arrest one by one.
• None of the officers went through the process or came to the conclusions necessary to affect a legal arrest – they were simply acting on the instructions of their superiors.
• Police officers aren’t simply employees. Each officer’s authority comes directly from the crown and each officer is individually accountable for their actions – therefore it’s unlawful for an officer to fetter their own discretion.

Coming up on Tuesday 29th:

• Arguments related to articles 5 and 8 of the European Court of Human Rights
• The video of the Charing Cross 10′s arrests will be played
• The barrister acting for the Metropolitan Police will begin.

——————————————————

“you guys know all about 1968…Billy club to the fucking skull…we’ll beat your white ass…We’ll come look for you, each and every one of you.” – Chicago Police Officers – May 2012

——————————————————

——————————————————

What happened in 1968?

——————————————————

Detained protesters accused of Chicago terror plot

May 19, 2012

CHICAGO  — Prosecutors on Saturday accused three activists who travelled to Chicago for a NATO summit of manufacturing Molotov cocktails in a plot to attack President Barack Obama’s campaign headquarters, Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s home and other targets. But defense lawyers shot back that Chicago police had trumped up the charges to frighten peaceful protesters away, telling the judge it was undercover officers known by the activists as “Mo” and “Gloves,” not his clients, who brought the firebombs to a South Side apartment where the men were arrested. “This is just propaganda to create a climate of fear,” Michael Duetsch said. “My clients came to peacefully protest.” On the eve of the summit, the dramatic allegations were reminiscent of previous police actions ahead of major political events, when officials moved quickly to prevent suspected plots but sometimes quietly dropped the charges later.

——————————————————

——————————————————

Prosecutors said the men were self-described anarchists and told a crowded courtroom that they intended to create mayhem in Chicago. A state’s attorney cited one of three men boasting weeks earlier about the damage they would do in Chicago. “After NATO, the city will never be the same,” he quoted the man as saying. At one point, one of the men asked the others if they had ever seen a “cop on fire.” Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy dismissed the idea there was anything more to the arrests than police responding to “an imminent threat.” “When someone was in the position (of having) Molotov cocktails — that’s pretty imminent,” he said. “It was not a completed investigation.” The suspects are Brian Church, 20, of Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.; Jared Chase, 24, of Keene, N.H.; and, Brent Vincent Betterly, 24, of Oakland Park, Fla.

——————————————————

——————————————————

If convicted on all counts — conspiracy to commit terrorism, material support for terrorism and possession of explosives — the men could receive up to 85 years in prison. Later, outside the courtroom, Duetsch said the two undercover police officers or informants were also arrested during the Wednesday raid, and defense attorneys said they later lost track of the two. “We believe this is all a setup and entrapment to the highest degree,” Duetsch said. The suspects were each being held on $1.5 million bond. Six others arrested Wednesday in the raid were released Friday without being charged. They apparently came to Chicago late last month to take part in May Day protests. Relatives and acquaintances said the men were wanderers who bounced around as part of the Occupy movement and had driven together from Florida to Chicago, staying with other activists.

——————————————————

——————————————————

Court records indicated no prior violent behavior. Longtime observers of police tactics say the operation seemed similar to those conducted by authorities in other cities before similarly high-profile events. For instance, prior to the Republican National Convention in 2008 in St. Paul, Minn., prosecutors charged eight activists who were organizing mass protests with committing crimes “in further of terrorism” after investigators said they recovered equipment for Molotov cocktails, slingshots with marbles and other items that could have injured police.

Source = http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76517.html#ixzz1vLGYl7Ja

Click image to enlarge

——————————————————

——————————————————

NLG Opposes “Terrorism” Charges Against Occupy Activists

PRESS RELEASE
Chicago Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild
For Immediate Release: May 19, 2012

National Lawyers Guild Decries Terrorism Charges Against Occupy Activists protesting NATO Summit
Preemptive raids and conspiracy charges are common characteristics of National Special Security Events

Chicago, IL — After holding NATO protesters for up to 48 hours, and releasing 6 out of 9 arrestees without any charges, the City of Chicago filed state charges last night against 3 Occupy activists from Florida, including possession of explosives or incendiary devices, material support for terrorism, and conspiracy. On Wednesday night at approximately 11:30pm, police raided a house in the Bridgeport neighborhood, detained several people in multiple apartments, and arrested 9 activists. Police broke down doors with guns drawn and searched residences without a warrant or consent.

“The National Lawyers Guild deplores the charges against Occupy activists in the strongest degree,” said Sarah Gelsomino with the NLG and the People’s Law Office. “It’s outrageous for the city to apply terrorism charges when it’s the police who have been terrorizing activists and threatening their right to protest.”

NLG attorneys are questioning why it took the city 48 hours, the limit on holding arrestees without a court hearing, to impose such serious charges. Although some accusations of Molotov cocktails have been made by police, they have provided no evidence of criminal intent or wrongdoing on the part of the activists. On Thursday, when asked about the raid at a press conference, Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy knew so little about the alleged terrorism investigation that he said he would have to gather further information before commenting.

The 3 activists charged are Jared Chase, Brent Beterly, and Brian Jacob Church. Last week, all three defendants were surrounded by several police squad cars outside of a CVS, detained for no apparent reason and asked questions about why they were in Chicago and what they planned to do during the NATO summit. One of the defendants recorded the encounter and posted an edited version on YouTube. When Superintendent McCarthy questioned the validity of the footage in the media, the entire video was quickly posted.

More than 20 people have been arrested so far in the lead up to the NATO summit, which begins tomorrow. At least 3 arrestees in addition to the ones charged tonight are still in custody. “Preemptive raids meant to intimidate and stifle dissent are all too common during National Special Security Events, such as the NATO summit,” said Gelsomino.

NLG attorneys will be representing the 3 defendants in their criminal cases and will be at their bond hearing tomorrow at 12pm at 2600 South California Ave.

Source = http://nlgchicago.org/blog/nlg-decries-occupy-terrorism-charges-nato-chicago

——————————————————

Overturned room at Bridgeport apartment raided by CPD on 5/16. Activists protesting the NATO summit were staying in the home.

Home brewing equipment in Bridgeport apartment illegally raided by CPD on 5/16. Activists protesting the NATO summit were staying in the home.

Broken door jamb in Bridgeport apartment illegally raided by CPD on 5/16. Activists protesting the NATO summit were staying in the home.

——————————————————

——————————————————

NATO Blog: Some protesters detained as evening march snakes through Loop

As President Barack Obama and NATO leaders headed into Chicago this evening, demonstrators marched through the Loop for hours and sometimes scuffled with police officers. Several protesters were detained in the first serious confrontation of the day.  Earliler, demonstrators spent the middle of the day outside Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s house protesting cuts in health care. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived at Wrigley Field but did not sing “Take Me Out to the Ballgame.” After a night of marching, chanting and testing the patience of Chicago police in the Loop, the last remnants of anti-NATO protesters slipped away into the night. There were repeated scrums with police whenever the front of the roughly 1,000-strong crowd tried to push past police, who kept them circling in the general vicinity of the Loop for hours. Some of the clashes resulted in arrests and detentions, but Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy said there were only about half a dozen arrests.

The crowd remained largely peaceful and there were no reports of major damage. Police likewise accomplished a goal of keeping protesters south of the Chicago River downtown and away from the glizty Michigan Avenue retail district, where many NATO dignitaries are staying. The last big group of protesters headed into Greektown late tonight, but eventually lost gas as police relaxed their presence accordingly. The group’s energy ebbed and flowed in the last couple hours of the march, and it “officially” dispersed at Occupy headquarters in a W. Cermak warehouse. Relations between police and protesters also went back and forth – with some noticeably warm exchanges. Other marchers maintained their anger at police  with angry chants. The march dwindled as protesters walked south on Halsted Street and then east into Chinatown, until only about 75 people remained. Most of them boarded Red Line trains to head back to the city around 11:30 p.m., looking tired as they climbed the stairs to the platform.

Asked how he was holding up, one protester answered simply: “Exhausted.” “I’m pretty impressed with what we did, but I’m not looking forward to waking up and doing it again tomorrow,” said the man, who gave his name only as Curran and said he was from Boston. “But when I wake up tomorrow I think I’ll feel differently.” Moments later, he and dozens of other protesters boarded a northbound train as several police officers watched from the platform, making sure the train left without incident. Among them was 73-year-old John Grobner, who’d been walking since 6 p.m. on the route that moved aimlessly yet peacefully. Grobner, from Minnesota, is here with the Catholic Worker movement to protest the war. He said his feet needed a soak but he was doing okay. “It’s a Catholic Worker thing,” he said smiling. “It’s faith and resistance.” The days of protests are leading up what is supposed to be the biggest rally of the NATO summit, tomorrow at Grant Park on the first day of the meeting for world leaders. The anti-war rally is to include a march south on Michigan Avenue to the McCormick Place convention center where the NATO meetings are being held.

Source = http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/natosummit/chinews-nato-summit-obama-metra-lake-20120519,0,3320279.htmlstory

Chicago Police driving into NATO Protestors

On the 22nd of May #OccupyOil will be holding a funeral procession for Dutch Shell Oil. In a turnaround we are calling for the end of Shell’s destructive behavior throughout the world, from the west coast of Ireland to the Niger Delta.

Many people have lost their lives resisting the behavior of this unethical company.

It time we said “Rest in Peace Shell”.

Shell makes nearly £1.6m profits every hour. Help us say farewell to this 1% company.

When and where

St Paul’s Cathedral
Arrival 815am
The Shell Corpse will leave at 845am.

Strict dress code: BLACK

Contact:

Twitter – @OccupyOil – #OccupyOil

Facebook -

Group – http://Facebook.com/Groups/OccupyOil
Event – http://Facebook.com/Events/230582443683609

Website – http://OccupyOil.co.uk

Youtube - http://YouTube.com/OccupyOil

Bring noise, banners, black umbrellas and more importantly yourselves.

Tube and Rail Stations close by:

St Paul’s Tube Station (Central Line) – (5 minutes)
Mansion House (District and Circle Line) – (8 Minutes)
City Thames-link (National Rail) – (5 Minutes)
London Blackfrieers (National Rail) – (7 Minutes)
London Canon Street (National Rail) – (13 Minutes)
Bank Tube Station (Central Line) – (15 Minutes)

The City of London Police has unsuccessfully attempted to illicit information regarding the upcoming global event – Occupy Oil the Sequel (RIP Shell). PC Julie Hall (573CP) sent Occupy Oil an e-mail requesting the number of people who are attending this event along with the proposed action. Also sent with the e-mail was two PDF Application Forms. One being for a Procession protest (Appendix 1) and the other being for a Static protest.

The Human Rights Act 1998 protects the right of every citizen to peacefully protest. These rights are listed under Article 10 and Article 11 of the Human Rights Act. Case law also establishes that the Police are not allowed to prevent any peaceful protest without good reason.

Below is an extract of the  e-mail which can also be seen in the picture below:

From: (Julie.Hall@City-of-London-PNN-Police.uk)

NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

It has come to our notice you and other groups are intending to hold some form of demonstration / precession at or around the Shell AGM on Tuesday 22nd May.

We would like to speak to you regarding this so we can police the event proportionately.

We would look to facilitate any peaceful protest but would appreciate you completing the attached form to provide us details regarding numbers and any proposed action.

If you can complete the attached form and return it to us with as much detail as possible, I would be most grateful – alternatively please give me a call on  020 7601 2592.

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

E-Mail from City of London Police

Appendix 1

An Example of City of London facilitating a protest

——————————————————–

Let’s make a stand this May 22!

Join Occupy Oil

——————————————————–

HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998

SCHEDULE 1 – The Articles

PART I – The Convention Rights and Freedoms

Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life)

1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Article 9 (Freedom of thought, conscience and religion)

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.
2. Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Article 10 (Freedom of expression)

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

Article 11 (Freedom of assembly and association)

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
2. No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This Article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the State.

Source = http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1

Case Law

R (Laporte) v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire and others  [2006] UKHL 55

A test case taken by John Halford to challenge the policing of an anti-war demonstration at RAF Fairford in 2003. The House of Lords ruled that the claimants’ Article 10 and 11 ECHR human rights to freedoms of speech and assembly were breached and that peaceful protest can only be prevented in the most extreme circumstances, a development the most senior House of Lords judge, Lord Bingham, described as a ‘constitutional shift’.

——————————————————–

R (Rubens and McClure) v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner (CO/6880/2009)

A challenge to a police decision to unlawfully arrest, search, handcuff and film over 60 peaceful protesters gathered inside a social centre at Earl Street during the 2009 G20 protests. Gwendolen Morgan and Stephen Grosz acted for the majority of the protesters, who were awarded damages resulting out of their treatment by way of civil claims. The police also agreed to destroy the films and photographs of the claimants and not place their data on the Police National Computer.

——————————————————–

R (McClure and Moos) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis

John also represented a number of activists who were kettled and beaten while protesting at the April 2009 G20 Climate Camp. On Thursday 14 April 2011, the Divisional Court ruled that the use of kettling and force against 4000-5000 represented an unlawful policing operation. Offensive “shield strikes”, were ruled “unnecessary” and “unjustified”. Instructions to subordinate officers were “not satisfactory very general and imprecise”. During the course of the evening “officers declined to release people who should have been released.” Police evidence given direct to the Court by the senior officer responsible for the operation, CI Johnson, that groups within the Climate Camp were intent on disorder and criminality was “not… convincing” according to the Court.

——————————————————–

R (Morris, E and T) v Chief Constable of Kent Police [2009] EWHC 2264 (Admin)

A judicial review of the Kingsnorth Climate Change Camp policing operation brought by John Halford on behalf of the well-know activist Dave Morris and 11 year old twins. The secret police policy of subjecting those who wanted to pass through and join the protest to multiple stops and searches of was ruled to be unlawful and a breach of protestors’ Article 8, 10 and 11 rights. A civil claim arising out of the successful judicial review was settled with a significant payment, an apology and Kent’s agreement to disseminate an agreed letter setting out the ‘lessons learned’ to all other UK forces.

——————————————————–

Source = http://www.seppo.net/e/

Reblogged from beyondclicktivism:

• 
• 

By Tim Hardy

Trigger warning.

The livestreams and photographs coming from today’s Occupy London action are deeply distressing. The police are acting with impunity, seemingly unconcerned by the fact that their behaviour is being witnessed. There are many images to review and videos to watch but the sequence in this video from 8.52-9.22 stood out immediately.

As the policeman in the front pulls back at 8.52 you can see one of his colleagues in the background has his gloved hand clamped over the mouth of a woman who is seated.

Read more… 301 more words

Reblogged from OCCUPY WALK USA:

‘Sonic weapon’ deployed in London during Olympics

May 11, 2012

The Ministry of Defence has confirmed a device which can be used as a “sonic weapon” will be deployed in London during the Olympics. The American-made Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD) can be used to send verbal warnings over a long distance or emit a beam of pain-inducing tones. The equipment was spotted fixed to a landing craft on the Thames at Westminster this week. An MoD spokesman said it would be used “primarily in the loud hailer mode”. Royal Marines operating in patrol craft from HMS Ocean are also heavily armed with conventional firearms.

The piercing beam of sound emitted by the device is highly directional. Some versions of the LRAD are capable of producing deafening sound levels of 150 decibels at one metre. But the device, which was used this week during Exercise Olympic Guardian, can also be used to broadcast verbal warnings, such as ordering crowds to disperse. The San Diego-based LRAD Corporation has previously sold the device to the US Army, which deployed them in Iraq for crowd control. They have also been bought by the US Navy and Air Force as well as a number of police forces worldwide.

Source = http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-18042528

Pain-inducing loudhailer for Olympics: Sonic weapon to be used on Thames to make boats stop

May 12, 2012

A weapon that can emit a piercing beam of pain-inducing sound will be deployed at the Olympics, it emerged last night. The Ministry of Defence has confirmed plans to use the sonic equipment which was used by US troops in Iraq. The kit, which the MoD says will mostly be used as a loudhailer to make boats stop on the Thames, was seen this week fixed to a landing craft on the river at Westminster. Experts say the weapon, in operation during this week’s Exercise Olympic Guardian which tested Games security, is mainly for making crowds disperse and is called the long range acoustic device. Sound emitted by it can be pointed in virtually any direction. Some versions of the American-made LRAD are capable of producing deafening sound levels of 150 decibels at 3ft – which is the same as being stood next to the speakers at a very loud rock concert and causes the sensation of being compressed as if underwater.

Source = http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/pain-inducing-loudhailer-for-olympics-sonic-weapon-829532

Chicago police bulk up with $1m in riot gear for ‘peaceful’ Nato summit protests

May 11, 2012

“This is a device that has the capability to inflict permanent hearing loss on people,”

Chicago police confirmed to the Guardian that they will have a LRAD available at the 20 May protest, “as a means to ensure a consistent message is delivered to large crowds that can be heard over ambient noise”. “This is simply a risk management tool, as the public will receive clear information regarding public safety messages and any orders provided by police,” said Chicago police spokeswoman Melissa Stratton. However while the device can be used simply to transmit voice messages, it also has a “deterrent tone”, emitted at a volume which is painful to the human ear and which can be used to disperse crowds.

LRADs have been purchased by the US army and navy, and have also been used in commercial shipping as an attempt to drive away pirates. The device was first used at a protest in the US at the G20 Pittsburgh summit in September 2009, however there are ongoing complaints that its use there caused some people to suffer permanent damage. Karen Piper, a university lecturer, claims she suffered irreversible hearing damage that day, and is currently bringing a legal case against the city of Pittsburgh. ”This is a device that has the capability to inflict permanent hearing loss on people,” Piper’s lawyer, Vic Walczak, told the Guardian, adding that the device is “more dangerous than a Taser”. “We don’t believe it should be used against demonstrators. It should not be used outside the battlefield.”

Source = http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/11/nato-protests-chicago-police-riot-gear

Sonic weapon deployed for Olympics

May 11, 2012

Source = http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9261613/Sonic-weapon-deployed-for-Olympics.html

London 2012: Sonic Weapon Deployed For Olympics

May 11, 2012

A device which can be used as a sonic weapon is being deployed in London for the Olympics. The American-built long range acoustic device (LRAD) can be used both as a high-powered loud speaker and to emit an ear-piercing beam of sound. The Ministry of Defence confirmed that it was among a “broad range of assets” being used by the armed forces to provide security during the Games. A spokesman said it would be used primarily in “loud hailer mode” in order to issue verbal warnings to any boats on the River Thames that were causing concern.

However the LRAD, which can reportedly emit a highly directional beam of sound at a pain-inducing 150 decibels, has also been used by the US Army as a crowd control device in Iraq. “As part of the military contribution to the police-led security effort to ensure a safe and secure games, a broad range of assets and equipment is being used by our armed forces,” the MoD spokesman said. “This includes the LRAD which will be deployed during the Olympic Games primarily to be used in the loud hailer mode as part of the measures to achieve a maritime stop on the Thames.”

Source = http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/05/11/london-2012-sonic-weapon-deployed-olympics_n_1510627.html

“Two members of Durham Constabulary staff who held and twisted the arms of a prisoner to make him answer their questions have been fined by magistrates. CCTV footage taken in the custody suite of Peterlee police station last March shows David Healer screaming in pain during the assaults by Sergeant Stephen Harvey and civilian detention officer Michael Mount.”

Click here to continue

http://4therecord.org/uk-police

Reblogged from Skywarriors Blog:

I feel compelled to pen a blog tonight; it has been a busy few days.  May Day, The Big Six Energy Bash and now the news tonight that the encampment at Parliament Square has been finally removed, after Maria from Peace Strike lost her right to appeal and Simon Moore’s ASBO has been upheld by Westminster Magistrates Court.

I first came to London two years ago on the 30th of April. 

Read more… 469 more words

Peace Strike http://PeaceStrike.org