After the teenager was arrested, the police refused to take details or statements from the many bystanders who had witnessed the demo and the non-crime.
The police then seized the videotape of the action in an attempt to stop the truth being shown.
The video link below shows the police refusing to take witness details/statements and then telling the demonstrators lies - ie that the use of a megaphone on a demo is illegal under the Public Order Act.
Two complaints have been sent to the IPCC - one for the non-taking of witness details and the other for lying about the use of a megaphone being illegal under the Public Order Act.
The video of the arrest and illegal acts by the police can be seen here :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mhkWmRrgO4
SHAC report of the demo available here :
http://www.shac.net/news/2009/april/17.html
Comments
Hide the following 5 comments
various bits of legislation.
18.04.2009 11:36
It is also an offence to use a loudhailer/megaphone on a public highway (which the road and pavement is included) if it can be heard by someone over 50feet away and there is a person 'annoyed' by the noise.. (highways act)...
SOCPA 2005 has a specific prohibition on the use of loud speakers at protests (specifically defined areas)...
S14 Public order act is used to prohibit certain things at protests, such as megaphone use, banging drums, blowing whisles etc if it causes ANNOYANCE to other people.
If you have lots of shoppers complaining to the police about the noise, then expect s14 to be used.
André1
Megaphones
18.04.2009 12:20
Protests are not political canvasing, and that act specifically does not mention protests.
The highways act does not cover peaceful protest. SOCPA does not ban megaphone use on protests. Section 14 can only limit: a) the numbers of people who may take part, b) the location of the assembly, and c) its maximum duration; not megaphone use. To use a s.14 for this would be unlwaful.
So in short, the use of a megaphone is not unlawful, although how it is used may be. For example, sticking it in someone's face could be called harassment. Politely talking towards a company premises is NOT unlawful.
Dave
Barclays: An Analysis
18.04.2009 15:12
Keep up the great resistance! Barclays are clearly feeling the heat across the globe at the moment by SHAC particularly in England, Ireland, USA, Italy, amongst other countries.
//////////////////////////////////////////
Barclays: An Analysis
I'm getting the distinct impression that Barclays thought SHAC would tone it done after 8 months of campaigning, instead of increasing the pressure and are living to regret the initial investment. They are experimenting with a small dose of repression, but will soon realise it has the opposite effects, as at first they didn't act like they cared - now it seems they're livid!
Furthermore I think it's because HLS, the state and their lackies conned them into it, to a degree. Deluding them into believing "it'll all be sorted when 7 shactivists get 50 years in January" - as - "nobody would bother risking time in jail after the convictions" - they conjured up quite a hilarious lie, managed to fool executives, and/or encouraged them to gamble.
Their desire to 'protect' HLS is understandable, as it's to indirectly defend themselves, nothing more, nothing less. Barclays are also major NYSE Euronext investors (HLS' only listed stock exchange) so they knew they would be next. Just a shame they invested in HLS and are paying the price for it! When they dump them it'll be the largest result for sometime though, definitely further reigniting the campaign and putting capital back in its place.
I predict another 1-3 months - and they'll be gone, maybe less with even more ALF direct action*. These corps rarely last a year, normally cutting themselves loose after 9-11 months if they get round to lasting over 6 months that is. Unless they don't get round to calculating the losses on being a HLS associate like Marsh Inc. did - fools!!
These targets traditionally sustain a 1-3 month campaign**, sometimes 6 month (ish), or more rarely just short of a year (due to using risk assessments instead of basic intelligence). Barclays must be doing these (unless they're as stupid as Marsh Inc.) but are doing so with optimism and a heavy dose of unrealistic patience. It's also more difficult to accurately estimate financial risk when dealing with more than one country. Do they average it for all countries, or correlate results to those affected - its all about perception. A perception they are going to regret in the near future as they must be loosing big profit over it by now.
In summary, they are living on corporate hopes and dreams, AKA : free market capitalism.
* http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22barclays%22+site%3Adirectaction.info&meta=&aq=f&oq=
** http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/422852.html
"In this list you will find some of the world's largest companies including all four main high street banks in the UK, the world's largest financial institution, the world's second largest bank and the world's largest insurance broker. All these companies have made clear and unequivocal statements to SHAC stating that they will never deal with Huntingdon ever again. Incredible isn't it? But there again with Huntingdon $89 million dollars in debt and with NO commercial bank and insurance company anywhere in the world prepared to deal with them it's hardly surprising." - http://www.shac.net/SHAC/victories.html
the future
Barclays selling investment arm.
19.04.2009 13:50
InvestWatch
It is an offence.
20.04.2009 21:22
I once reported a pedo and while I was telling the copper how disgutsing this monster was and that I wouldn't normall speak to the police but I had to this time, he replied : "It's an offence". [child abuse].
This is how they speak and is evidence of how they have become robots.
anon