Skip to main content

Down with Mandela

In Parliament Square there is a staute of Nelson Mandela, he of South African anti-apartheid fame.  I heard him speak once, but unfortunately to do so I had to listen to some sanctimonous arsehole called Tony Bliar (misspelling deliberate), but that's another story.

I understand that students are unhappy about the rise of tuition fees but I couldn't really understand why somebody thought it necessary to dawb Mr Mandela's statue with the pink paint that I saw on it this morning as I rode to court.  Nor, if they simply wanted to protest was it necessary to write "fuck police" in big letters on Winston Churchill's statue.

A few days ago I saw students protesting outside Parliament about the reduction in funding for school sports.  They were well organised, very vocal, got themselves on the tele but managed to avoid closing the whole of central London and trashing the place.

Comments

  1. You really don't understand the underlying motives, do you? It's about young males kicking against the authority of the elders of the tribe. It's about defiance of those perceived to be better off, in their struggle to BECOME the better off. It's about testosterone, and the joy of violence, and showing off to the females who egg them on, and the chance of a quick shag after the party's over.

    Tuition fees are the background music. Could be anything -- if the government had suddenly banned Marmite, the yobs would react in the same way.

    Because like it or not, we're all built more or less the same way.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Actually, I do get it and having looked at the pictures released by the police this morning I am pretty confident that they are not students. They are far too old to be students who would be affected by these changes, which does somewhat undermine your rather evolutionary psychology based explanation.

    The people who perpetrate this sort of violence are the people who 30-years-ago would have been fighting on football terraces.

    But, whenever a student is interviewed on TV they seem to applaud, condon, encourage and warn of future violence. While I accept that there maybe some editorial bias I can only go by what evidence I have seen.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Whats worrying is the encouragement from the likes of the new boss of Unite Union. I am also aware that parents were encouraging their kids to get involved. So far it seems like a "blast" to them but now we have one student with a very serious head injury - if it continues someone will lose their life. Also the arrests have started and more to follow. I agree most of those involved will be members of SWP or anarchists but if there are some misguided students they will find themselves in Crown Court and, if convicted, go down, lose any future job prospects and never get into Canada or the USA.

    If the idiot son of the Pink Floyd member who climbed the Cenotaph and swung on the flag and didn't realise what it stood for, is anything to go by, then I don't see why we should subsidise their academic careers as they clearly are not learning anything!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Maybe I am not up with the proposed legislation, but "far too old to be students who could be affected" concerns me a bit. Not that I'm a protestor or anything, but I did get a degree at 50-ish. Whoever says you can only get them at 20-ish. Is the legislation aimed only at young students or something?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Phisheep, I was under the impression that the current system of fees applied to those under a certain age and that if you were over that age then you paid the full wack anyway. When I was a young student a mature student explained to me that was how it worked. Maybe it's changed or I've got it wrong over the years.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ched Evans

Before I begin, I will say that at around 4,500 words this is probably the longest blog I’ve ever posted but I think it’s all necessary to set the scene for this case and explain the background that has been largely ignored or airbrushed in the press. Despite its length, I have not attempted to include every little detail of either fact or law but have done my best to provide a balanced picture of the Ched Evans case, what happened and why the courts reached the decisions they did. There has been so much written about the Ched Evans case over the past weekend, much of it based on a very shaky grasp of the facts and law, that I decided I would read up about the case and weigh in (hopefully on a slightly firmer footing than most of the articles I’ve read so far).

Broadly speaking there seem to be three groups who have opinions on the case:
1.Sexual violence groups (including people describing themselves as “radical feminists”) who appear to take the view that the case is awful, the Court o…

How do the police decide whether to charge a suspect?

A question I’m often asked by clients (and in a roundabout way by people arriving at this blog using searches that ask the question in a variety of ways), is “how do the police decide whether to charge or take no further action (NFA)?”
What are the options?
Let’s have a quick think about what options are available to the police at the end of an investigation.
First, they can charge or report you for summons to attend court.  Charging means that you are given police bail and are required to attend court in person.  A summons is an order from the court for you to attend or for you to send a solicitor on your behalf.  In many cases where a person is summonsed, the court will allow you the option of entering a plea by post.
Second, you may be given a caution.  These can be a simple caution, which on the face of it is a warning not to be naughty in future, or it can be a conditional caution.  Conditions could include a requirement to pay for the cost of damage or compensation, etc.  Either…

Bid to prevent defendants knowing who accuses them of a crime

When I read The Trial by Kafka and Nineteen Eighty-Four by Orwell, I took them as warnings of how a bad justice system wrecks lives of those caught up in it. Sadly, some Members of Parliament and the House of Lords seem to view the books more as a guide to how they would like our Criminal Justice System to run. Today, I read of plans to hide the names of accusers and witnesses from defendants in a large number of cases. Victims of sexual offences, such as rape, have had the right to lifelong anonymity for many years now. This means that it is a criminal offence to publish information that will lead to a complainant being identified. A Bill currently being considered by Parliament would extend that anonymity to bar defendants and their lawyers knowing the name of the person accusing them. This would apply not only in sexual offences, as has been reported in the press, but also in violent offences.
The anonymity currently offered to victims of sexual offences is not total, the complainant…