Inciting a riot

Written By: - Date published: 11:20 am, August 18th, 2011 - 46 comments
Categories: crime, law and "order", uk politics - Tags:

The “authorities” don’t trust communications technology and social media. They don’t control it (yet). It empowers communication between ordinary people. It can facilitate mass movements, and that can be “dangerous”. Western governments tend to sing the praises of this new technology when it is used by the citizens of other countries, such as in the recent “Arab uprising”. They’re suddenly not so keen when it is used by their own citizens, as in the recent riots in England.

The English government, for example, is considering claiming the power to shut down text messaging and social networking during times of unrest. That will be a fascinating debate on a large stage.

While such big debates go on in public, more specific cases are playing out in the legal system, and precedents are being set.  Consider the example covered in The Guardian yesterday of two young men convicted for  posting messages on Facebook inciting people to riot in their home towns.  The Guardian reports that “No trouble resulted from their actions”.  None the less they were tried and sentenced .  Do you want to guess the nature of the sentence?  What is an appropriate punishment for their actions?

Keep your answer in mind – here’s what happened.  They each got four years jail time.  In my opinion that is totally disproportionate, and blatantly vindictive.  Fortunately it has provoked a backlash of criticism, and the glare of publicity might bring about a reconsideration.  If legal precedents are going to be set for this kind of case, then the public need to keep a watchful eye and make sure that the precedents are sensible.  There should be nothing legally different about the use of “new” technology.  Posting something on Facebook should be legally equivalent to sticking up a poster or publishing a letter in the paper.

46 comments on “Inciting a riot ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Bill 1
    18 August 2011 at 11:33 am

    As I understand it the English judges have been directed to ignore sentencing policy in relation to the riots in England.

    Meaning, there will be an avalanche of appeals, but by the time they are heard, the sentences will, by and large, have already been served.

    edit. There was a kid arrested in Scotland for putting similar messages on facebook. Will be interesting to see the difference in the sentence handed down, no?

    • Bored 1.1
      18 August 2011 at 11:56 am

      Just as well for the rioters that Botany Bay is no longer available. A better alternative is that the British elite were forcibly requested to reside in their off shore holiday mansions.

  2. Bill 2
    18 August 2011 at 11:51 am

    For the sake of accuracy, you might want to edit your post slightly. There are two judicial systems in Britain. (One covers Scotland and the other covers England and Wales) There isn’t a British judicial system.

    On a more ‘minor’ note…all of the rioting occurred in English cities, ie in England. It makes as much sense referring to them as British as it would to refer to them as European or as happening in the English speaking world…

    • r0b 2.1
      18 August 2011 at 12:21 pm

      No harm in such a clarification, I’ve changed Britain to England, thanks.

      • Bill 2.1.1
        18 August 2011 at 12:26 pm

        Heh. See how tricky this gets? It’s a British government (there is no English government). But an English judiciary. (There is no British judiciary). Anyway…

        So I’m guessing that a British government would be claiming the power to blah, blah, blah in England and Wales.

  3. clandestino 3
    18 August 2011 at 12:05 pm

    Shocking sentences. We seem to be moving this way as well. Fucking over our young people for life so we can be seen to be ‘doing’ something about these kids. Harsh sentencing is just the latest in a long line of repressive actions by the elite.

    • Colonial Viper 3.1
      18 August 2011 at 8:43 pm

      a long line of repressive actions by the (generally older) elite.

      Interesting isn’t it. The generation in power, 50 plus, really don’t know what to do with the young ones (~20 years old) except call out the riot squad.

      Its not going to end well for society.

  4. Puddleglum 4
    18 August 2011 at 12:34 pm

    Hi Bill,

    I’m not sure why you are quibbling over the English/British label. Are you saying that no Scots, Irish, Welsh (or other nationality) people rioted in London and other English cities?

    Or are you saying that it is the effects of the laws passed by the UK Parliament on England that have been unable to be softened by an English Parliament or Assembly (i.e., you are advocating the establishment of an English Assembly, perhaps?).

    I hope you’re not trying to make some ‘cultural’ claim about rioting not being a Scottish (or Irish, or Welsh) ‘thing’ but typical of those ‘Sassenachs’. There are Scots, for one, who would not agree with that argument:

    ““So far from gloating about this being an English phenomenon, if I were Alex Salmond I’d be looking at the most deprived areas of Scotland – Shettleston in Glasgow, areas of Inverclyde and Dundee – with an expression of alarm.” 
    He added: “43,000 Scottish children grow up in over-crowded housing. Just as in England, one in five Scottish young people are unemployed.”

    “In Glasgow, you have these big pitched battles on Sauchiehall Street and bridges on the River Clyde, where gang members come into town and run at each other with machetes and swords,” said Mr Knight. “That’s been reduced, but those pitched battles, they call it ‘recreational violence’, they don’t have that in England. 

    “I don’t think Alex Salmond should be congratulating himself because there’s a lot of violence in Glasgow, it’s a different type.””

    Surely the point to remember is that this has nothing to do with the country (or ethnicity) but the conditions within which people live.

    Disclaimer: But then I was born in England (the North). Perhaps I should argue that these riots should be called the ‘city riots’ since they didn’t happen in my hometown so are obviously a problem of large urban conurbations and nothing to do with the English elsewhere? You see, it makes no sense calling them the English riots when it didn’t happen in most English communities… you may as well call them the British, European, Anglo-Saxon … riots.

    • Bill 4.1
      18 August 2011 at 4:24 pm

      Hello there Puddleglum.

      Rioting has happened in Scotland. (10 000 English troops with tanks sent to quell the disturbances and issued with ‘shoot to kill’ instructions in Glasgow in 1919)

      So no, I don’t believe for a second that the Scots, or the Welsh for that matter, are immune to rioting.

      But it’s a fact that the riots happened in England. And it’s a fact that the British government doesn’t have the same legal authority in Scotland as it does in England and Wales. Laws passed by the British government apply to England and Wales. (eg custody laws that were changed by the British government had no effect in Scotland.) It is two entirely seperate legal systems with different possibilities (eg In Scottish law a person can be found ‘innocent’, ‘guilty’ or ‘not proven’. Not so in England and Wales)

      And the same underlying social factors that exist in England (“the conditions within which people live” – as you put it) don’t exist within the same framework in Scotland. They are different countries with different legal systems, different education systems, and a different level of access to free health care and so on. And social and cultural attitudes are different.

      You wouldn’t say that the massacre in Norway happened in Scandanavia and leave it at that. There is acknowledgement of the distinct cultural and national identities of Norwegians, Swedes and Danes. They wouldn’t be casually lumped together as one in spite of similarities. So why do it in the case of Britain?

      • Puddleglum 4.1.1
        18 August 2011 at 8:13 pm

        I see now what you mean and I agree. You’ve convinced me. (As an aside, your example of Scottish rioting was interesting but the troops sent in – by the British government, after the Glaswegian Police were overwhelmed and the Lord Provost feared a ‘Bolshevist uprising’ – were regiments from around Scotland, not including Glaswegians. They don’t appear to have been English troops.)

        The legal framework and cultural tradition are different between Scotland and England and there are cultural differences. I still don’t know how much those differences matter in relation to the kinds of riots that happened in the English cities but they obviously do matter in relation to sentencing practices. If they also have affected things like police behaviour, the nature of public housing, concentrations of urban youth, and the like, they may well matter in relation to the riots.

        Despite being born in England (and my disclaimer above), I have no special affinity with the place – except that I’m perhaps more critical of its elite than the elite of other places (maybe that’s because I know more about what they’ve done, domestically and around the world – the latter with the vigorous help of the Scottish elite, it has to be said).  

        And, my grandmother always used to say that, in Britain, the further north you went the friendlier people got; those down south she wouldn’t trust (a bit unfair) and the friendliest people, she would adamantly say, were the Scots.

        So far as the tragedy in Norway goes, to be honest I don’t particularly see it as a Norwegian phenomenon. In my mind – and I might be wrong – I could just as easily imagine it happening in other countries around the region (e.g., Sweden, Netherlands, Finland). For me, while it happened in Norway, it was about changes and trends happening throughout many parts of Europe. The specifics would be different but not the thrust.

        • Bill 4.1.1.1
          18 August 2011 at 10:03 pm

          “An estimated 10 000 English troops in total were sent to Glasgow in the immediate aftermath of the Battle of George Square. This was in spite of a full battalion of Scottish soldiers being stationed at Maryhill barracks in Glasgow at the time. No Scottish troops were deployed, with the government fearing that fellow Scots, soldiers or otherwise, would go over to the workers side if a revolutionary situation developed in Glasgow.”

          http://gdl.cdlr.strath.ac.uk/redclyde/redclyeve14.htm

          As for police actions in Scotland, Strathclyde police have a ‘Violence Reduction Unit’ which is involved with Community Initiative to Reduce Violence (CIRV) – a multi agency programme which is aimed at violent gang members, is voluntary and has (apparently) reduced crime among participants by about 50% and crime across gangs as a whole by about 20%.

          They don’t try to break up the gangs, acknowledge that they play a community role for members and treat violence as a disease (ie treatable)rather than as a crime (punishable).

          http://www.restorativejustice.org/RJOB/evaluation-released-on-glasgow2019s-community-initiative-to-reduce-violence-cirv

          Also (and this is only my own experience), but when I lived in Scotland you could bowl on up to a cop and ask him/her for directions or the time or a light or whatever. But when I lived in London, catching a cops eye was a really bad idea as it brought you to their attention. And you really didn’t want that.

          I should add for clarification. I have no great love for the place (Scotland); which is why I left.

          • Puddleglum 4.1.1.1.1
            18 August 2011 at 10:55 pm

            Sounds like good things are happening in Strathclyde (could be exported south!).

            The Battle of George Square gets more and more interesting. Were the English troops ignorant 17-19 year olds, unaware of what they were being asked to do or were the ‘English’ troops actually Scots (who also didn’t realise what they were being asked to do)?? (Note the ‘NB’ right at the end of the link). 

            • Bill 4.1.1.1.1.1
              19 August 2011 at 9:40 am

              I guess a copy of ‘The Times’ from 3rd feb 1919 would be useful to discern the accuracy of what was what. Like somebody said, it would be good if the regimental badges of the uniforms in the photos could be identified.

  5. Bored 5
    18 August 2011 at 1:05 pm

    From Open Democracy, this is very well worth a read. To me the reactionary sentences illustrate perfectly the brutalisation of the citizen.

    http://energybulletin.net/stories/2011-08-16/disorder-world-cities-comparing-britain-and-france

    • Campbell Larsen 5.1
      18 August 2011 at 6:58 pm

      Great article, the French are more honest in owning their problems – to wash our hands of disillusioned youth is just adding insult to injury.

      • Campbell Larsen 5.1.1
        18 August 2011 at 8:58 pm

        ‘It would be unthinkable in France to publicly incite citizens to denounce troublemakers and to have their pictures published. The very word ‘denunciation’ translates as ‘délation’, invoking dark episodes during World War II. French journalists and commentators (with a class lens) prefer to blame the state repeatedly for not implementing policies remedying structural deficiencies and inequalities’

        Shonky would rather blame and shame our youth than acknowlege the fact that their problems have been (and will continue to be) exacerbated by his policies.

  6. Rich 6
    18 August 2011 at 1:11 pm

    I’d say these sentences show how much the British (whatever) establishment’s pooing themselves.

    They must realise that jailing is just deferring the problem. They’ve now got jails filled with thousands of rioters and protesters (along with muslim radicals) who’ll have a few years to learn, plan and organise, as the IRA did in Long Kesh. As these kids trickle back out, the situation will just get worse for the UK establishment.

    I’d predict there’ll be continued and spasmodic rioting and it’ll escalate to bombings and shootings by next summer.

  7. Nick C 7
    18 August 2011 at 1:44 pm

    The basic common law around party liability is that if you are found guilty of inciting a riot you are a party to the offense of the rioters and you can actually be found guilty of rioting. Given the masses of aggrevating factors associated with these particular riots such as the immense amount of damage caused and the oppourtunistic nature I dont think the sentance is too surprising.

    I dont believe the Guardian article. If it is true that “No trouble resulted from their actions” then they would have been found not guilty, as contributing to the offense in some way is a nessesary element of the crime. Merely declaring your support for a crime is not illegal.

    • The Voice of Reason 7.1
      18 August 2011 at 2:07 pm

      “Merely declaring your support for a crime is not illegal.”
       
      Er, isn’t that a pretty good definition of criminal conspiracy, Nick? Which is a concept pretty closely related to ‘inciting a riot’, which is what they were convicted of doing. The fact that nothing happened as a result of their call to arms is no defence, any more than saying “I only threatened to kill her” is a defence against a menaces charge.
       
      Good thing you’re not a lawyer, eh?

      • Nick C 7.1.1
        18 August 2011 at 2:32 pm

        “Er, isn’t that a pretty good definition of criminal conspiracy, Nick?”

        No. Conspiricy requires you to plan to do something. I could say on FB: “Good on X for not paying his taxes because taxes are immoral” but that wouldnt be a crime provided I didnt evade my taxes or assist him in evading his.

    • lprent 7.2
      18 August 2011 at 2:22 pm

      NickC: I think that you are being rather naive idiot. There are usually a ton of interesting little laws on the books that may be used when required.

      My personal favorite was when the police charged my niece and a friend for “intimidation by loitering” – a section of the Crimes Act that was brought in in 1981 to deal with members of gangs loitering around people that they were trying to extort money from. However my niece was at a protest being noisy and waving placards – all well within the legal limits.

      But as far as I can figure out, the police wanted a search warrant to look for intelligence. So they charged her with an offense under the Crimes Act for which they could get a search warrant. She was convicted in the District court by a judge that appeared to dislike protesters more than she liked the law. It was eventually overturned in the high court – mostly because protesting just about the exact opposite of loitering – something that the police were well aware of when they charged her.

      But that offense carried a potential prison term that she could have been sentenced to.

      Now this isn’t exactly an isolated case. It is pretty routine for police to charge people with all kinds of charges that they have little possibility of getting through for various reasons. They will often drop them when it comes up to court. But if they get a ‘good’ judge (ie one that thinks the police can do no wrong), then they will carry it through until conviction. Often these are overturned on appeal from a higher court. But that typically takes years.

    • r0b 7.3
      18 August 2011 at 2:22 pm

      I dont believe the Guardian article. If it is true that “No trouble resulted from their actions” then they would have been found not guilty

      You can choose to believe or not believe anything that helps you cope Nick C.  But:

      In one case, two men in their young 20s received four-year jail terms for creating Facebook event pages for riots that never actually happened.

       

      • Nick C 7.3.1
        18 August 2011 at 2:28 pm

        “In one case, two men in their young 20s received four-year jail terms for creating Facebook event pages for riots that never actually happened.”

        I think thats clearly still incitement. The riot may not have happened in the particular time and place which the FB event suggested but they still absolutely provided encouragement to the rioters.

        • Bored 7.3.1.1
          18 August 2011 at 2:51 pm

          Nick C, I have been reading your posts, they make me feel …like rioting. When arrested I will give the Police a trace to your posts as my reason, they incited me to break the law. When the Court questions the logic I will point out to them that is exactly how I was feeling.

    • weka 7.4
      18 August 2011 at 3:33 pm

      I dont believe the Guardian article. If it is true that “No trouble resulted from their actions” then they would have been found not guilty, as contributing to the offense in some way is a nessesary element of the crime. Merely declaring your support for a crime is not illegal.
       

      So if I hire one person to murder another and they don’t do it have I committed a crime? Of course I have. There is a difference between being intellectually supportive of a crime and actively promoting one.

      • Nick C 7.4.1
        19 August 2011 at 12:14 am

        “So if I hire one person to murder another and they don’t do it have I committed a crime? Of course I have. There is a difference between being intellectually supportive of a crime and actively promoting one.”

        You would not be guilty of murder, or of being party to murder because a murder didn’t happen. You could possibly be convicted under conspiricy charges or something of that nature.

        Here the people are guilty of inciting a riot. In order to incite a riot, a riot must actually happen, and there must be causation: Your incitement must have contributed to the riot in some way.

        • weka 7.4.1.1
          19 August 2011 at 11:55 am

          It is definitely against the law to organise a murder even if the murder doesn’t take place (likewise something like kidnapping). I can’t remember what the law is called though.
           
          I haven’t looked at whether the UK law on inciting riots is clear that a riot has to have actually happened, or if the attempt is a crime in and of itself. I would suspect the latter, but it would be good if someone clarified.

  8. r0b 8
    18 August 2011 at 2:25 pm

    Oh and it gets “better”!

    British man arrested for organising water pistol fight
    …
    And now, a 20-year-old Colchester man has been charged with “encouraging or assisting in the commission of an offence” for trying to organise a water pistol fight, using Facebook and his Blackberry phone. 

    • grumpy 8.1
      18 August 2011 at 3:52 pm

      Nothing is too stupid to happen in Britain any more…….

      • Bored 8.1.1
        18 August 2011 at 4:03 pm

        When a country elects a Tory toff who once belonged to a gang who deliberately damaged property, who ran away from the Police to avoid capture and prosecution, and who let somebody take the rap for it…yes nothing is too stupid to happen in Britain anymore.

        When the country also elects a coalition partner who take the Torys at their word and collude with them despite what their supporters wanted….yes nothing is too stupid to happen in Britain anymore.

        When a countries juduciary and Courts are instructed by politicians in the administration of sentences…yes nothing is too stupid to happen in Britain anymore.

        When a country has an opposition that is as tainted with the upper class corruption as the UK Labour party…yes nothing is too stupid to happen in Britain anymore.

        When a country can prosecute rioters for looting but turns a blind eye to the looting by the finance industry and the banksters…yes nothing is too stupid to happen in Britain anymore.

        • In Vito Veritas 8.1.1.1
          19 August 2011 at 4:40 pm

          And nobs like you support and have supported Labour, Clark, Goff etc who once belonged to a gang who rioted and damaged property in 1981, and then voted them in? No sign of hypocrisy there then Bored.

  9. Rodel 9
    18 August 2011 at 8:01 pm

    I don’t like the rioting and the damage to business people trying to make a living, but there is something sickening about the speeches made by the British PM, his deputy and the well paid judges.

  10. Colonial Viper 10
    18 August 2011 at 8:40 pm

    Cell phone network shut down to prevent subway protest

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/bart-spokesman-says-cellphone-shutdown-was-his-idea/2011/08/17/gIQAgofNLJ_blog.html

    Bay Area Rapid Transport heard of a protest being organised so they somehow managed to turn all cell phone coverage in the area off.

  11. Colonial Viper 11
    18 August 2011 at 9:16 pm

    Germans Torch Top BMWs, Audis, Mercs in Protest

    http://www.thestar.com/wheels/article/1040474–flaming-angry-berlin-arsonists-targeting-pricey-luxury-cars?bn=1

    The above story says a hundred plus cars have been covertly torched in some kind of left wing protest.

    The map below suggests that 600 cars have been hit. Anyone translate?

    http://www.brennende-autos.de/

    • rosy 11.1
      18 August 2011 at 9:33 pm

      According to Google Translate (I have it on auto-translate, for some reason :roll:) it says:
      After 633 arson attacks documented in three and a half years this website has not been updated since 06.10.2010.

      Also:
      Why Burning-Autos.de?
      In May 2007, we walked past at lunch near our offices directly Kreuzberg in the salvage of a car wreck. With a digital camera we have a spontaneous couple of photos taken. Back in the office came up with questions: Where is the most happening yet? How many times the car was that? Our software developers are currently working on an application around Google Maps, so we have just collected the data and built the map.

      This website is solely intended to improve geographical representation of the action and is not politically motivated, we dissociate ourselves from any form of violence. Our team works in everyday life with Internet sites around the theme of holidays , such as Berlin travel guide or hotel in Berlin . This site uses our existing technology (presentation of travel tips on Google Maps).

      Source: Police Berlin

      It looks like your first link is the most current.

    • joe90 11.2
      18 August 2011 at 9:34 pm

      Counter
      633 arson attacks on cars in Berlin
      Mercedes (130)
      VW (91)
      BMW (60)
      Opel (43)
      Audi (43)

      Chronicle
      2010: 130 arson attacks so far
      2009: 216 arson attacks
      2008: 135 arson attacks
      2007: 152 arson attacks

      The latest arson attacks:
      05.10.2010 – Paul-Lincke-Ufer
      VW
      05.10.2010 – Paul-Lincke-Ufer
      Mercedes
      30/09/2010 – Reichenberger Strasse
      Mercedes
      21.09.2010 – Triftstraße
      VW Golf
      18/09/2010 – Willi-singer-road
      Nissan Almera
      15.09.2010 – Lichtenrader Street
      Toyota

      In addition:
      After 633 arson attacks documented in three and a half years this website has not been updated since 06.10.2010.

  12. Maynard J 12
    18 August 2011 at 9:28 pm

    Where there were riots, they were very bad, threatened people’s lives and led to mayhem, fear, deaths, violence.

    That’s what these people were actively trying to incite, presumably so they could nick a plasma tv.

    I’m a card-carrying leftie, and am sort of uncomfortable with four years in jail, but struggle to see what an appropriate sentence for what they did would be.

    • r0b 12.1
      18 August 2011 at 9:33 pm

      How about a few hundred hours of community service cleaning up riot damage or helping those who were affected?

    • rosy 12.2
      18 August 2011 at 9:40 pm

      “I’m a card-carrying leftie, and am sort of uncomfortable with four years in jail, but struggle to see what an appropriate sentence for what they did would be.”

      I’m really uncomfortable with 4 years jail for idiocy. Surely a community sentence would be much more appropriate. More importantly it appears the government is directing sentencing. This is way beyond the scope of government in a parliamentary democracy with separation of the legislative body and the judiciary. A huge over-reaching of power.

      Two of the most significant figures in the British legal establishment have made urgent warnings about tough sentencing for riot-related offences as the split in the coalition over the response to last week’s violence dramatically widened.

      Lord Macdonald, who led the prosecution service in England and Wales for five years, warned that the courts risked being swept up in a “collective loss of proportion”, passing jail terms that lack “humanity or justice”.

      Meanwhile his fellow Liberal Democrat peer Lord Carlile, the barrister who was until this year the government’s independent adviser on terrorism strategy, warned against ministerial interference in the judicial process, arguing that “just filling up prisons” would not prevent future problems.

  13. prism 13
    18 August 2011 at 9:52 pm

    Tuhoe conversations were tapped and someone made apparently, some strong comments that something should be done to… whatever. We all know at least some of what the police did here in reaction to that. Is this British thing similar?

    Then there are horrible USA men and women supporting national front type thinking and violence with virulent, anti-anybody-different-from-me messages. I’d like to see those spreaders of viciousness and encouragers of violence and harrassment get a jail term.

    Perhaps it’s the strength of what you say and whether you expect to influence anyone. Being ‘passionate’ about things is an overused word these days. So someone would have to be more than passionate about inciting a riot. In a private conversation! Having yourself, a friend or family member stopped and checked by the police for the umpteenth time after hearing about a young person like yourself being shot by them could make anyone despairing and ‘passionate’ enough to go out and make a civil disturbance. When you have little to lose it might seem justified, but the police now can break down your door with a hand-held battering ram. Do they knock first and wait for someone to come?

  14. millsy 14
    19 August 2011 at 11:37 pm

    While I belive that a lot of those involved in the riots who deliberately set out to damage life and personal property should face the full force of the justice system, I think that a lot of the sentences are very, very disporportionate, and are intended to make an example of the underclass (or whatever term is in vogue).

    Such as the mother who got jailed for 4 months for accepting a shirt given to her by a friend. That, IMO is more about the ruling class (the rich, and those moralists who lick their boots), making an example of a ‘loose woman’ who should just shut up and accept her lot in society.

    To me, that is sickening.

    I hope one day the whole edifice of the British economic and class system comes crashing down. And it will.