The Fall of the Rule of Law in Once Merry Old Britain, By Paul Walker

The David Spring sentencing has been commented extensively on blogs, as indicating the fall of Britain as a liberal democracy, and the rise of a multicultural fascist state. David Spring, a 61-year-old retired train driver was sentenced to 18 months in prison; he pleaded guilty and offered no legal defence, which was probably a big mistake. Most websites are saying that Spring merely said a crude sentence about Allah. But it seems that Spring was not charged with blasphemy as such, although there is another such a case which will be covered, but he was charged with "threatening unlawful violence" per The Serious Organised Crime Act 2005, which he pleaded guilty to. Spring did say the sentence with the four-letter word about Allah, but he also said a number of four-letter words to the police. This may justify some sort of violation of public order, although it has been held that merely swearing at police is not grounds for arrest. However, there is no evidence here of unlawful violence which would enliven The Serious Organised Crime Act 2005, but this Act does give higher penalties. As argued below, the sentencing was to make an example of him, to discourage others from similar behaviour.

So, for expressing a political opinion, even using colourful language can lead to someone who is White getting a prison sentence, as over a thousand are now finding, but roaming the streets with a machete, if you are non-White, supposedly defending your tribe from the nearly invisible radical Right, will attract no police notice. Welcome to modern Britain.More details on the fall of the rule of law are in the extracts below.

https://news.starknakedbrief.co.uk/p/the-crown-prosecution-service-and

"On Tuesday, Judge Benedict Kelleher of Inner London Crown Court sentenced a 61-year-old retired train driver to 18 months in prison. David Spring pleaded guilty to one count of violent disorder after attending a demonstration at Whitehall, London, on July 31st in the wake of the Southport child murders.

The news went viral. This was mainly because Your Local Guardian ran with the headline, "Sutton man, 61, who chanted 'who the f*** is Allah' jailed" - a clever frame that garnered a hell of a lot of clicks. It was as if the UK had reignited their long-lost blasphemy laws.

In reality, because Spring pleaded guilty to violent disorder, his sentencing had nothing to do with speaking about religion or race. He accepted "threatening unlawful violence" per The Serious Organised Crime Act 2005.

The bizarre thing is, all the news reports cited no evidence that he threatened unlawful violence. Amidst a flurry of adjective-laden "factual" reporting, some of the worst behaviour exposed included calling police officers "f**king w***er", "c****", participating in chants of "you're not English anymore" and shouting "who the f*** is Allah".

To our delicate British sensibility, these are vulgar words, but by any objective measure, they do not constitute literal encouragement of "unlawful violence".

According to the Greater London Authority, the governance body of Greater London, the courts also "do not accept that simply swearing at a police officer is sufficient grounds for an arrest".

Popular YouTube commentator, Politico, scoured through footage of the event and confirmed that Spring did not commit any physical violence. His "crime" involved walking up to the police after he saw an officer pitifully punching an attendee to the face several times.

(I say "event" because footage shows protestors protesting peacefully before a small minority turned violent and started lobbing what authorities term "missiles", which include anything from crumpled paper to drink cans).

Since Spring pleaded guilty, whether he actually broke the law was not up for judgement. Judge Kelleher only issued judgement on his sentence. He notably said, "what you did could and it seems did encourage others to engage in disorder."

Note the words "could" and "seems". These are not words that belong in an evidence-based court.

Judge Kelleher added that a custodial sentence was appropriate to deter others from engaging in similar behaviour. He was making an example out of him.

Now compare Judge Kelleher's actions to a case where a defendant actually physically assaulted a police officer days earlier.

On July 31st, the same day as the event Spring attended, 20-year-old Ozzie Cush travelled to Trafalgar Square and kicked a police officer. Video footage showed him committing the assault. He pleaded guilty, and Kelleher sentenced him to 10 months' jail time - 8 months fewer than Spring.

Cush and Spring reportedly took to the streets for similar reasons - to protest mass immigration and/or the Southport child murders.

So Judge Kelleher effectively punished nasty words, hostile gestures, whatever you want to call it, not as if it is synonymous with physical, material violence but as if it is worse than physical, material violence.

This is probably because Cush pleaded guilty to common assault of an emergency worker, which carries a maximum sentence of two years compared to violent disorder, which carries a maximum sentence of five years.

It remains a mystery why Cush did not face charges of actual bodily harm as the worker he assaulted reported "some immediate pain but did not sustain any lasting injuries from the incident." Something that meets the burden of proof needed for an actual bodily harm charge - the maximum sentence of which is five years.

Judge Kelleher also remarked: "Your actions also ran the risk of inflaming the wider situation and encouraging others to attack the police." Suggesting that there was plenty enough evidence to pursue a violent disorder charge against Cush, but the Crown Prosecution Service decided not to.

Arguably, kicking a police officer is much more likely to incite violence than swearing.

In short, there are bizarre inconsistencies in the prosecution and sentencing between "far right" rioters/protestors. Let alone compared to the sex offenders, child molesters, and fugitive bank scammers who have been spared jail in recent years.

And it is the combination of the Crown Prosecution Service's choice of charges, our illogical sentencing guidelines, and the judges' discretion in issuing them that is causing it.

If challenged, violent disorder charges can be difficult to prove. The cases can also be lengthy. Other commentators have pointed this out and suggested something more nefarious is occurring with these guilty pleas.

They say the state is effectively intimidating certain defendants with harsh sentences and rushed hearings. As a part of Keir Starmer's crackdown, those who pleaded guilty have been fast-tracked. While the state has systematically remanded in custody those who pleaded not guilty, pending trials that are expected to take place in September.

Part of the incentive to plead guilty involves the state offering a reported third off their sentences.

Perhaps this is why we've seen people like Spring enter guilty admissions. He thought it would make his life easier, or possibly, money was an issue. Instead, he and a host of other Brits, will now spend this Christmas, and even next, behind bars.

As one judge almost hauntingly said to an army veteran on Wednesday:

"You are the person that provides me with the most difficulty because it cannot be levelled that you hit anyone, neither have you thrown anything, neither is it said that you spat at anybody… (but) anybody party to this disorder has to receive a custodial sentence".

Gary Harkness, the army veteran, too pleaded guilty to violent disorder. He was jailed for a year.

The laws do not make sense, some of the prosecutions don't, and neither do some of the judge's decisions. But they've certainly given Starmer nice mainstream headlines to stand behind. He's helping jail all the violent, racist "far right Nazis", or so they would have you believe…"

https://www.amren.com/features/2024/08/there-will-not-always-be-an-england/

"For many people, the nation-state is no longer the primary identity, but international relations are still based on Westphalian norm of theoretically sovereign states. And yet, today's political orthodoxy requires that Western states be for everyone. Anyone of any race can be American, European, Australian, or Canadian.

However, many people, even liberals or multiculturalists, are blood-and-soil nationalists for people they like. Almost everyone is a nationalist for someone. Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Chuck Schumer all want open borders for America, but are far-right nationalists for their own groups. A nation is occupied when those who control it force you to live under their tribal preferences even in "your own country."

Working-class whites recently rioted in Britain after a Rwandan murdered three white girls. The Labour government and allied journalists seemed far less angry about the murders than about the riots or the assertion that the Rwandan was not British. (He was born in Wales, so he is as British as King Arthur). The government has arrested more than a thousand people, charged hundreds, and already sentenced some.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer harshly denounced the rioters and showed no sympathy for their concerns. There have been few articles telling us to consider "root causes," unlike what happens when non-whites or Muslims riot. "Two-Tier Keir" took a knee for George Floyd, who died 4,000 miles away, but despises his own people.

The Labour Party entered government with a pledge to empty prisons. However, after the riots, the government has captured, tried, and convicted its enemies with remarkable speed. Many did not even riot.

Judge Francis Rafferty said that even those who just watched a riot will be refused bail. British police announced that Steven Mailen is going to jail for 26 months because was "gesticulating and shouting" at officers. Another man is going to jail because of a Facebook comment denouncing "filthy b*stards." He says he was referring to police, but Judge John Termperley said "there was a racial element to the messaging and the posting of these emojis," and said the case "has to be viewed in the context of the current civil unrest up and down this country." The same judge sent a man to prison for eight weeks for posting messages with images of Asian men, along with the message, "coming to a town near you." The same judge spared a man who downloaded "indecent child images" because he supposedly showed "remorse."

Just a few weeks ago, gypsies in Leeds rioted after family services tried to remove children. Police retreated, fearing danger. The West Yorkshire police chief said the retreat meant "community mediation" could calm tensions. There have been arrests but no convictions, and no one is being arrested for social media posts. Can anyone imagine police negotiating with white "community leaders" in the hope of mediation?

Last fall, there were large pro-Palestine demonstrations in London. Police mostly ignored attacks on property or insults to white British, but did not ignore the "far-right." A 67-year-old man who made "racist comments" was arrested. In 2020, Black Lives Matter demonstrators vandalized a statue of Winston Churchill and destroyed a statue of Edward Colston. Four people who toppled the statue were acquitted because they argued that the statue itself was a symbol of hate, so they were right to destroy it. The United Kingdom is like America; every time police have to kill a black man, there could be a riot.

In 2011, police killed a black named Mark Duggan, sparking five nights of riots. British police warn against "armchair thugs," but don't seem worried about actual intimidation by non-whites."

https://www.amren.com/news/2024/08/more-than-1000-arrested-following-uk-riots-police-say/

British authorities have now arrested more than 1,000 people following days of rioting involving violence, arson and looting as well as racist attacks targeting Muslims and migrants, a national policing body said on Tuesday.

The National Police Chiefs' Council said in its latest update that 1,024 had been arrested and 575 charged across the UK.
Those arrested include a 69-year-old accused of vandalism in Liverpool.

A 13-year-old girl pleaded guilty to violent disorder at Basingstoke Magistrates' Court, prosecutors said, having been seen on July 31 punching and kicking the entrance to a hotel for asylum seekers."