Saturday, 15 August 2009

Innocence is for the rich.

Terrorist or tourist, who took this? The low flat building in the background, which is obviously not the subject of the photo, is part of the local council offices.

Over on the often-reasonable Tom Harris's blog, there's a video by Five-Bellies Prescott, the man whose face resembles the moon rising over a stack of crumpets, all about why people should shut up about the NHS and stop complaining. Be silent about the deaths, you don't hear those dead people complaining, do you? If they don't mind, why should you?

This isn't about the video. This is about a throwaway remark, intended to be a little joke, at the end of that post:

But in recording the video, JP has identified a crucial area of public policy: why are MPs allowed to record videos on the Terrace of the House of Commons whereas my constituents are frequently told by police officers that they’re not allowed to take photographs?

Honestly, it’s one rule for them MPs and another for the rest of us…

Yes, very good. Laugh it off, Mr. H. It doesn't affect you, so really there's nothing to worry about is there? Just like all those fancy new diseases introduced into the NHS since Labour took over, but not found in the private care you MPs enjoy, there's no need for alarm and hysterical babbling from the public. Why don't they all just get private care if they're so worried about it? Why don't they all just give up carrying cameras around if they're so scared they might be arrested for photographing landmarks, London buses, butterflies and anything else that might be of use to a tourist?

And why, oh why, won't they get the message and just stop driving? Most of all, why do they protest their innocence when we send them fines? If they've been charged, they must be guilty. Don't they see that? Some of the commenters on this article do see it. They have complied with the doublethink brainwashing entirely. They have been trained by a method that I've tried to elucidate but never succeeded. Fortunately, Dick Puddlecote has a very nice analogy which goes a long way to showing how it's done.

Well, Mr. H. will no doubt be delighted to learn that now, if you are charged with a speeding offence (and soon, any offence because this is just testing the water) and you didn't do it, proving your innocence will cost you far more than just paying the fine and accepting that you are now a DNA-recorded, CRB-check-failing criminal. Once charged, you are guilty. Your options are to confess and accept a lesser punishment or to protest your innocence and take the harsher punishment. There is no 'free to go' option any more. Do go and read about the Spanish Inquisition's methods. They were the same.

So MPs can take videos where the rest of us can't take snapshots. That's small fry compared to the fact that MPs and their extraordinarily wealthy friends will soon be the only ones able to afford to prove their innocence in court. For the rest of us, once charged, we either pay the fine or go to court - which will cost us far more than the fine if we win, and vastly more than the fine if we lose. In effect, once charged, you are guilty unless you can afford to prove otherwise.

Where is this headed? Well, imagine you've been stopped while photographing something and told that you are to have your camera confiscated and then get fined under the Prevention of Tourism* act. Your DNA will be recorded and you will be flagged as a suspected terrorist on any future CRB check. What do you do? Go to court to prove your innocence? That's going to cost a lot more than your camera and a lot more than your fine because even if you win, you'll be paying the lawyer who represented you.

It's open season for ridiculous charges once this takes hold because no matter what you are charged with, just accepting the charge and paying the fine will cost you considerably less than trying to get any kind of justice.

It already happens - if a council prodnose claims he saw you drop litter, you pay the fine or go to court where his word will be taken over yours (note he does not need to present actual evidence) and you'll pay a higher fine. Whether you are guilty or not is of no interest to the court. They just want your money.

So now, speed traps with radar guns no longer need to catch you speeding in order to generate revenue from you. They just need to say they saw you speeding. All they need is your number plate, and they can collect cash from you. Try to protest your innocence and they'll take more.

It's all about revenue generation. Police can confiscate money from you in the street if you have a sizeable amount of cash on you. Paying in the takings from your shop? Well, the police are entitled to pretend they think it's drug money and take it from you. So watch out for the Dick Turpin Patrols on your way to the bank. If you're a real drug dealer you have nothing to worry about. Real dealers are likely to be dangerous so they'll be left alone. The easy targets are the ones they go for.

We pay tax on money we earn, tax on interest on money we save, and tax on money we spend. In anything that has a form of duty on it, we pay that tax and we pay VAT on the whole price, including duty - so we pay tax on the tax. Still it's not enough. So now we are to pay fines whether guilty or not, and if we object, we pay more.

We will soon pay fines for committing crimes that don't exist. Don't like it? Just you try going to court with it. You'd better be stinking rich if you want to prove your innocence. Even if you win, it's going to cost you a lot more than just giving them the fine in the first place.

What are the Tories saying about all this? Are they going to change any of it?

Or are they going to continue in the same vein, now that they've seen how far Labour can push people and get no reaction?

*Before anyone corrects me with some made-up story about a 'prevention of terrorism' act, consider how many thousands of tourists have been legally harassed under the Act, compared with zero terrorists even slightly inconvenienced by it. Whatever it was written as, in practice it's a prevention of tourism act. That's what it does, so that's what it should be called.


Ctredit Crunch Investor said...

Absolutely perfect. Sums up everything that is wrong with this cesspit of a country.

Blue Eyes said...

We will soon pay fines for committing crimes that don't exist.


caesars wife said...

Yeah its the fear construct that you might offend the state , thereby giving it legitamacey .

I was visiting a shopping Mall a couple of weeks back , and happened to be carrying a leather zippable papers case , no handle under the arm job .There was security guard who was surprised when I asked him for directions to the arts centre , said he didnt know and pointed me to help desk.As I left him I noticed he was on the radio ,I asked woman on help desk and she was quite helpfull , I then became aware that about 4 security guards were approaching the desk , useual suss you out manner , all the time he was looking at my papers case "everythin alright" he said to helpdesk woman , she nodded.

my point is pervades into all sorts of areas undermining perfectly ordinary aspects of daily life .

I was wondering if I ought to ware one of those old Titanic life vests composed of blocks of cork , and ask for directions to the production of HMS pinnafore at the theatre , probebly end up tazered .

tony loves peter said...

we need to get rid of the 646 asap...................65 million of wont take long........

what a lovely country labour have created.a country where we,the people-are subservient to a load of gay ,vile,corrupt spies that steal our money and sentance our armed forces to death-

while filling their fat faces and bank accounts............

things dont have to be this way........we all need to grow some and get rid of these leeches......

Leg-iron said...

Blue eyes - We will soon pay fines for committing crimes that don't exist.


It works like this:

You get stopped by a pseudoplod and handed a fixed penalty notice for stepping on the cracks in the pavement. Fine, £30.

You think 'ridiculous' and of course, it is.

To contest it you have to go to court. You are certain to win your case and have the £30 fine dismissed. That outcome is absolutely guaranteed. Everyone involved knows it, and knew it from the outset.

The lawyer costs you £3000. You get about a third of your costs refunded so you're still down £2000. The pseudoplod is not even reprimanded.

What will you do the next time it happens?

Anonymous said...

What will you do the next time it happens?" If you have any sense and enough money do what I did and leave the shithole of a country.

JD said...

I left, some time ago, but I'll be back with some piano wire when the time comes. JD.


Wesley Groves said...

"You will find it far easier to establish a police state than to dismantle one". New Scotland Yard delenda est.

aljahom said...

I wonder if Tom will allow my comment to pass moderation...


Jess The Dog said...

Answer is simple. National campaign of civil disobedience. Everyone says "no" and refuses to pay the fine, courts are swamped and those who fall foul of the courts say "no" as well. It needs a campaign on the scale of No2ID.

Marchamont Needham said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Marchamont Needham said...

they don't normally confiscate cameras - they just delete the photos.

In other words, they accuse you of a crime then immediately destroy the evidence. How is that not conspiracy to pervert the course of justice?

microdave said...

Except that it's extremely difficult to remove photos from a flash memory card. Plenty of free recovery software available on the internet.

It just shows how ignorant they are....

Another excellent post, Leg Iron.

Demetrius said...

Indeed, revenue collection. Not far from Parliament is Embankment Station, which has public toilets. Once free, they are now cost 50p a go (think families), and the disabled ones cannot be opened with Radar keys. So in Embankment Gardens there are lots of people now going into the bushes. The idea of public facilities was public health. Back home the recycle bins are hardly ever collected because the complexities defeat the ordinary man and they are tagged as not eligible, and fees are needed. So now many people are burning the uncollected toxic stuff in their back gardens at night fall. My brain hurts.

Dick Puddlecote said...

Great piece LI, and ta for the link.

As for this bit below:

It already happens - if a council prodnose claims he saw you drop litter, you pay the fine or go to court where his word will be taken over yours (note he does not need to present actual evidence) and you'll pay a higher fine.

Here is a perfect example. The court accepted that his explanation was perfectly feasible ... but found him guilty anyway on the council nark's say-so.

'Beyond reasonable doubt' is a term which has been consigned to history.

Blue Eyes said...

I am still unsure of your premise here. How does "pseudoplod" fine you? Does he issue you with a Penalty Notice for a crime that does not exist? How does he/she do this? If the crime doesn't exist then why do you even need a lawyer? Or are you too scared to stand up in a court to say "this crime doesn't even exist"?

The idea is so far-fetched as to be laughable. One of these days you need to be brave enough to turn away from your computer screen, open your curtains and actually have a look to see what the world looks like outside.

James said...

It looks like this is going to apply to all criminal cases in England and Wales from October. See the government's response to the "consultation" here, on page 13 it says:

We have decided to implement option 3 as proposed. We intend to use the
appropriate legal aid rate for the type of case. In the magistrates’ court, we
intend to use the hourly rates in the Unified Contract (Crime) applicable to
non-standard fee cases and, where appropriate, fees for assigned
counsel. In the Crown Court, we intend to use the litigator and advocate
graduated fee rates, and Very High Cost Case (VHCC) rates for cases that
would have qualified as VHCC cases. In the Court of Appeal, High Court
and House of Lords, we intend to use the applicable “ex post facto” rates.
We intend to implement these reforms in October 2009.

Leg-iron said...

Blue Eyes

I can assure that you most of my day is spent away from my computer and most of my conversatons are verbal rather than typed.

How can psuedoplods fine you for non-crimes, and make it worse if you object? In the comment above yours, Dick Puddlecote gives a link to the story of a lorry driver who was fined £200 for smoking and littering even though he says he was using an electronic cigarette.

His accuser presented no evidence other than her word. The judge found the driver's story consistent but still found in the council's favour and he ended up paying the fine, plus costs. £715 in total.

Trainspotters are handed anti-terrorist search forms and their details recorded. Even schoolchildren have been listed as suspected terrorists.

Look outside? I look outside a lot. If I didn't, I'd feel safe and secure.

Blue Eyes said...

OK littering is a crime that does exist. I am asking how your "pseudoplod" fines you for a crime that doesn't exist. Do you see the difference between the two? There is a difference between being wrongly accused of a criminal offence and being fined for committing an offence that doesn't exist.

You won't find me defending over-zealous use of terror legislation or defending people being prosecuted for littering, but there is a bit difference between that and your allegation that we are somehow sliding into a state where people can be prosecuted for offences that do not exist.

twustifarian high jinks ends carrer in finance said...

One of Wesley's Middleclass warriors, if you look closley you can see he is actually crying!

Image - Jumping Justin getting arrested.

" Quentin wing mummy, wing mummy wight now ! Dont they know I am a twustifarian and I got to Oxford University. Get Uncle Woger on the phone wight away as he is a judge. Mummy, Mummy make the nasty policeman go away.

Wesley's goverment stooges and thugs - UAF said...

Let's take a closer look at wesley's `comrades` in the UAF shall we?

Wesley's UAF attack man with hammer

Wesley's UAF attack and rob 15 year old boy

Wesley's UAF attack young girl

role models for UAF who appears at their shows for kids

UAF harcore plastic Communists

UAF coward attacking a woman

and here is Wesley

Fausty said...

It seems clear that the Prevention of Terrorism Act should have been The Promotion of Terrorism Act.

Isn't that what they want, after all, in order to ensure that the populace remains fearful?

Anonymous said...

Pay nothing tell them to fuck off and go to court. If they threaten to send you to prison so what get social services invloved if you have kids. Fuck the system it is time to play.

Constantly Furious said...

Congrats, OH, on being the #3 Libertarian Blog in the Total Politics survey.

Here's the full list of the top 20, with links, as voted for by the admiring millions.

It'd be great if everybody on the list - specially the big boys at the top - did the same; either copy the post, or link to it from your own blog.

A little bit of mutual backslapping and link-love, eh?

gweedos blog of meaningless trivia said...

Constantly Furious said...
Congrats, OH, on being the #3 Libertarian Blog in the Total Politics survey.

Here's the full list of the top 20, with links, as voted for by the admiring millions.

It'd be great if everybody on the list - specially the big boys at the top - did the same; either copy the post, or link to it from your own blog.

A little bit of mutual backslapping and link-love, eh?

16 August 2009 16:37

Don't expect any help from gweedo squawks!

The guy is a number one tit with communist like control methods.

Hardly a Libertarian.

Leg-iron said...

Blue eyes - the laws allowing the State to make you pay to prove innocence against made-up charges starts in October.

The anti-terrorism laws look good on paper. In practice they are used to harass everyone but terrorists. The RIPA laws look good on paper. In practice they are used to criminalise bins that don't close and to spy on families in case their kids go to the 'wrong' school.

So these new cash-generating laws will rapidly go the same way.

It won't start with charges like 'stepping on the cracks in the pavement'. It'll start with a photographer charged with causing a public nuisance for photographing a landmark somewhere. To avoid the fine, he'll have to go to court to prove he was just taking a photo and not causing a nuisance.

That will cost him much more than the fine. Even if he wins.

Like Dick Puddlecote's analogy of the monkeys and the ice-water, people will soon realise that it's easier just to accept the fine rather than protest their innocence. Those who are conditioned will report anyone else taking photos to the police, because they've been conditioned to believe it's illegal when it's not.

Eventually, park keepers can demand a fine for walking on the grass and if you want to object, you'll have to go to court, and that's going to cost you a lot more than the fine even if you win.

Can people be so conditoned? Increasingly, I see shop staff turn to ice when I ask for a pack of tobacco. It's evil in their eyes now. Even going back only a few months, these same staff would have just handed it over without a blink. It was simply a product on sale. Now I might as well be asking for heroin.

That's not from the Daily Mail. That's from a local supermarket right here where I live.

Again, buying a bottle of whisky now gets a frosty look from checkout staff who, until recently, would not have thought twice about someone who's nearly fifty buying a bottle of booze.

People can be conditioned, and are being conditioned, right here where I can see them. Not in the pages of newspapers with stories of isolated incidents in faraway places. Right here, in this town, now.

I take a short cut to the bus stop, across a playground. The alternative adds half a mile to the trip. Until recently, no problem. Now, as a single man crossing a playground I am watched by parents in the same way a flock of sheep watches a passing dog. Exactly the same way.

Conditioning people to accept the fine rather than the court costs will not be difficult.

Once that's done, anyone can be fined for anything at any time. Protest, go to court, win, and pay more.

I know it's not illegal to take a photo in the street. You know it's not illegal. Ask around at your local pub, shops, anywhere.

You'll be amazed at how many don't know it's not illegal, and shocked at how many believe it is illegal.

The conditioning won't work on you and it won't work on me, nor will it work on most of those reading this. It doesn't need to. It will work on enough people that the rest of us will be forced to comply by public pressure.

Just like Dick's monkey story.

Anonymous said...

I see the BNP website is down again, how strange, whenever there is an election or a lot of coverage the site gets attacked.

Still think we live in a democracy?

Wesley Groves said...

Demetrious & Legge, Yes the charging for pissholes is de trop. I tried reasoning with "them" when it was introduced but go nowhere. UAF piss poor showing yesterday. Must do better next time, Oberscharfuhrer. Finally fines, as with my fine from North Wales police one must keep moving. Haven't paid a penny after four years. A.C.A.B (plus B.N.P).

Anonymous said...

Nice outfit Wes!

Is that your boyfriend McKeagan or whatever his name is to your right?

you make a lovely couple!

Now I know why you have an obsession for the Nazis and WW2, it's the uniforms innit!

Turn you on do they Wes?

Bet you is well dissapointed that the BNP don't wear the uniforms eh!
after all the effort you made an all!

Still nice to see it's only the anti fascists that talk about SMASHING the political opposition!

a clear incitement to violence

The irony!

Wesley Groves said...

Leibe Herrenvolk, I see that you have my photo on Redwatch but not my real name. Don't you feel silly being outsmarted by an untermensch?

Anonymous said...

Wesley Groves said...
Leibe Herrenvolk, I see that you have my photo on Redwatch but not my real name. Don't you feel silly being outsmarted by an untermensch?

16 August 2009 17:57

Yeah your real smart Wes, can't you tell how impressed we all are!

Attacking women and children, inciting and causing violence, yeah were really impressed.

Now do one you odious freak.

Anonymous said...

quit clogging up the comments with all your bullshit you fucking wankers

Anonymous said...

Obama's step mother is a free loading piece of shit !

can you believe that we import a 59 year old woman from the USA and sort out her kidneys. She loves the fucking service so much she stays forever and two years later we give her a double hip replacement - send the cunt his fucking bill !

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
quit clogging up the comments with all your bullshit you fucking wankers

16 August 2009 19:09

You think political violence and state sponcered oppression is bullshit?

You've come to the wrong blog.

run along now the BBC have some fresh propaganda for you.

Anonymous said...

Email Wesley Groves Kevin Egan and tell him he is a sawn off one eyed gay nonce who thinks he is a muslim and a member of the IRA, but is nothing more than a forty-nine year old benefits scrounger and a fan of visiting foreign orphanages where CRB checks are not required.

Tell him he is a CUNT, everyone else does even his mother.

Anonymous said...

Anyone actually know why the bnp site IS down?

Fascist EU said...

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain


Related Posts with Thumbnails