Racist rants inadvisable now fellow-passengers have camera phones

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Mon May 14, 2012 4:07 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1393615 wrote:

Are you saying that if an area company or place is privately owned we lose our freedom of speech? Because that's the excuse used now for public protests.

Uh ha!!! I think I just worked out how 'they' are going to silence the populace!!!!!!

In the US, a privately owned business can set rules for its patrons. Restaurants can require that patrons be wearing a shirt and shoes, churches can ask someone to leave if they are making a cell phone call in the middle of a service, local art galleries have posted rules regarding cell phone use inside. It is their right to do so.

Outside, on public property, they are free to say whatever they want. Outside, they have freedom of speech and everyone else has the freedom to walk away if they don't feel like listening. Where, in the concept of freedom of speech does it say anything about compelling someone to listen to rants?

Post by **spot** » Tue May 15, 2012 3:57 am

Wandrin;1393617 wrote: Outside, on public property, they are free to say whatever they want. Outside, they have freedom of speech and everyone else has the freedom to walk away if they don't feel like listening. Where, in the concept of freedom of speech does it say anything about compelling someone to listen to rants?

We have two flavors of criminal law relating to racial insensitivity. One is in employment and retail law where it's illegal to discriminate on the basis of race. The other is that if any crime (such as assault or murder or theft or intimidation, for example) was influenced by racial hatred then the sentence will include an additional element to cover that aggravating racial component. Putting anyone in fear in a public place by means of a verbal assault is a criminal offense in England and Wales.

Post by **spot** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 2:57 am

One wonders what's going on - tomorrow's trial has been deferred yet again, this time until September.

It is the second time West's trial has been put back in recent months. She had been due to stand trial in June but the case was adjourned for further psychiatric reports.

Trial of alleged YouTube tram racist Emma West moved to September | This is Croydon

littleCJelkton · Post by **littleCJelkton** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 12:13 pm

Kanye West- "President Bush Hates Black People"

Michael Richards- "Throw his ass out he's a NI#G#R!!!!"

The list goes on and on though this bigotry is greatly disagreed, but with it is their right to say such things. The only consequences to such actions should be to ones moral character. As an American I can not see a reason why this woman was jailed, and as a member of this site I find it confusing too as some of the bigotry spouted out by some Members on this site (Religious, Sexist, Nationalist, Heightist) is as bad or worse and we don't call for jail time, and most of these members are not banned as we are Mature enough to let ignorance play its toll in discrediting that very person who spouts it.

Post by **spot** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 12:41 pm

We live in different countries with different Constitutions and different legal structures applying different legislation.

One advantage of that is we can see the result of those differences in the ranges of stability, contentedness and happiness exhibited by our respective populations.

If we do eventually all become subject to a One World Government under a common legal system I'd hope the country with the highest average indicator of stability, contentedness and happiness for the lowest-rated quarter of its population provides it. I doubt very much whether that would be either yours or mine.

littleCJelkton · Post by **littleCJelkton** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 2:31 pm

spot;1398865 wrote: We live in different countries with different Constitutions and different legal structures applying different legislation.

One advantage of that is we can see the result of those differences in the ranges of stability, contentedness and happiness exhibited by our respective populations.

If we do eventually all become subject to a One World Government under a common legal system I'd hope the country with the highest average indicator of stability, contentedness and happiness for the lowest-rated quarter of its population provides it. I doubt very much whether that would be either yours or mine.

Unless the lowest-rated quarter of the worlds population is the creator of the One World Government, which without a World Wide Class warfare revolution I doubt would happen. If their is a One World Government it would probably come about because of the higher quarter of the population, but that still doesn't matter in any rate to the fact that in either government nothing that occurred in the video of the woman on the tram should result in being arrested.

Post by **spot** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 2:38 pm

That's an interesting opinion but it has little to do with the reality of the laws of England, under which her arrest and charging was inevitable. Whether she'll be found guilty in court is yet to be determined.

littleCJelkton · Post by **littleCJelkton** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 2:52 pm

spot;1398876 wrote: That's an interesting opinion but it has little to do with the reality of the laws of England, under which her arrest and charging was inevitable. Whether she'll be found guilty in court is yet to be determined.

Well what is this thread discussing? If under the Laws of England she should be charged and arrested? If Under the Laws of a proposed FG member Government should she be charged and arrested? If under a proposed One World Government built by the lowest-quarter of the population should she be charged and arrested? if under a proposed One World Government built by the Highest or Middle quarter of the world should this woman have been arrested and charged? Should online footage shot from a cell phone be allowed as evidence? should people in public transportation units be allowed cell phones? If it is just under the laws of England the purpose of the post is pointless. All of the other questions though are open to discussion and as there are more than just members from England on this site the discussion is open to more than just the opinion of those who live there.

Post by **spot** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:11 pm

I have no desire to upset you, I was merely responding to "in either government nothing that occurred in the video of the woman on the tram should result in being arrested", given that under English law it was totally inevitable. Maybe we're using "should" differently.

littleCJelkton · Post by **littleCJelkton** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:43 pm

No we are referring to the wrong governments. I was replying to a post proposing the theoretical notion of One-World Governments one being created by the Lowest quarter of the population of the world, and one created by the Highest quarter of the Population of the world, and the quote " in either government nothing that occurred in the video of the woman on the tram should result in being arrested" was in reference to either the Low-Quarter One-World Government as opposed to the High-Quarter One-World Government not England as opposed to America.

Post by **spot** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:59 pm

littleCJelkton;1398883 wrote: No we are referring to the wrong governments. I was replying to a post proposing the theoretical notion of One-World Governments one being created by the Lowest quarter of the population of the world, and one created by the Highest quarter of the Population of the world, and the quote " in either government nothing that occurred in the video of the woman on the tram should result in being arrested" was in reference to either the Low-Quarter One-World Government as opposed to the High-Quarter One-World Government not England as opposed to America.

All I said with regard to any future universal legal system is "I'd hope", not that I think it would be, just that "I'd hope". I'd hope it was based on the greatest possible happiness of the least happy quarter, because it's too bloody easy to make just the happiest quarter happy at the expense of a very unhappy underclass. You'll have already noticed that where you live.

littleCJelkton · Post by **littleCJelkton** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 4:27 pm

spot;1398886 wrote: All I said with regard to any future universal legal system is "I'd hope", not that I think it would be, just that "I'd hope". I'd hope it was based on the greatest possible happiness of the least happy quarter, because it's too bloody easy to make just the happiest quarter happy at the expense of a very unhappy underclass. You'll have already noticed that where you live.

What ever theoretical or real government we are talking about here it does not matter, as either due to the generality of the proposed question or there being no question at all the thread has become generalized. So? what is/are the question(s) to the actions and legality of the lady on this tram? The Legal system of England and how i should or if it should change based on the story of this lady in the tram? The legal system of America and how it should help those in England decide how to legally attack this woman? What should the legal ramifications if any be for this woman?....................??????????????? If we can Reduce the generalities down to specifics so that all who are not you, or live in your country of origin know what you want to discuss then maybe we all can join the conversation and it might be a little more meaningfull, and produce worthwhile results

Post by **spot** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 4:35 pm

littleCJelkton;1398888 wrote: You still haven't described what you were trying to discuss in this thread?The purpose of this thread is to discuss Emma West's rant on the tram. That's what it says in the opening post. So far the rant's led to her arrest and her being charged and her being held on remand for a week or so last December and the cancellation of two subsequent court dates. We're still awaiting the outcome which might, perhaps, unfold around six weeks from now.

littleCJelkton · Post by **littleCJelkton** » Mon Jul 16, 2012 4:54 pm

spot;1398890 wrote: The purpose of this thread is to discuss Emma West's rant on the tram. That's what it says in the opening post. So far the rant's led to her arrest and her being charged and her being held on remand for a week or so last December and the cancellation of two subsequent court dates. We're still awaiting the outcome which might, perhaps, unfold around six weeks from now.

So if the evidence shows she did this and your legal system dictates what happens to those who do this. Their really is not a discussion at all, It is just a re-hashing of old-news

Post by **spot** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 12:16 am

littleCJelkton;1398891 wrote: So if the evidence shows she did this and your legal system dictates what happens to those who do this. Their really is not a discussion at all, It is just a re-hashing of old-news

News by its nature becomes old. The thread discusses the case at the time the case moves forward, when the news is fresh and juicy. Those condemned to eat it re-hashed are those who come to each post long after it was written.

As for the rehashing of old news in general, again we come face to face with the trans-Atlantic divide. In Europe that's called History, it's how our society makes progress. In (to quote Gore Vidal) The United States of Amnesia no such recognition exists, old news is non-news and society continually repeats its mistakes. My lesson being yes, it's available for discussion regardless of how long ago it happened, the re-hashing of old news is vital.

littleCJelkton · Post by **littleCJelkton** » Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:57 pm

spot;1398897 wrote: News by its nature becomes old. The thread discusses the case at the time the case moves forward, when the news is fresh and juicy. Those condemned to eat it re-hashed are those who come to each post long after it was written.

As for the rehashing of old news in general, again we come face to face with the trans-Atlantic divide. In Europe that's called History, it's how our society makes progress. In (to quote Gore Vidal) The United States of Amnesia no such recognition exists, old news is non-news and society continually repeats its mistakes. My lesson being yes, it's available for discussion regardless of how long ago it happened, the re-hashing of old news is vital.
Ok then what is it open to discussion of, If it is legal in england-america-russia-a fake low quarter population created world, a upper quarter world, if it is not legal in any of those stated before should it be changed, and/or if it is illegal in any of those stated before. As far as Europe not repeating its mistakes that is not true Napoleon and Hitler, WWI and WWII, and England's handling of the U.S., Australia, India and China all are representations of Europeans repeating if not the exact same very similar mistakes, are we now also discussing the ability or inability of countries to repeat past mistakes?????

Post by **spot** » Wed Sep 05, 2012 9:03 am

spot;1398890 wrote: The purpose of this thread is to discuss Emma West's rant on the tram. That's what it says in the opening post. So far the rant's led to her arrest and her being charged and her being held on remand for a week or so last December and the cancellation of two subsequent court dates. We're still awaiting the outcome which might, perhaps, unfold around six weeks from now.

GottesmÃ¼hlen mahlen langsam, mahlen aber trefflich klein;

Ob aus Langmut Er sich sÃ¤umet, bringt mit SchÃ¤rf' Er alles ein.

Though why Croydon Crown Court feels itself omnipotent I'm not sure. Emma West had been due to face Croydon Crown Court on Wednesday, 5 September, but her case was adjourned again, for the third time. "This Is Croydon" reports that Emma West of New Addington, is charged with two racially aggravated public order offences after video was posted on YouTube. The case has been adjourned again as the Crown Prosecution Service has asked for further reports to be compiled.

The case had previously been adjournments in June and July. Both times the reason given was the need for further psychiatric reports.

Emma West, alleged â€˜racistâ€™ Croydon tram lady, trial adjourned

TÃ½r · Post by **TÃ½r** » Tue Jun 04, 2013 11:00 pm

My little German quote in the previous was vollstÃ¤ndig weitsichtig.

Emma West pleads guilty to racially abusing passengers on Croydon tram after millions watch video on YouTube

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Jun 05, 2013 2:49 am

What a sad waste of time getting to the crux of it all, the lady has 'issues' seems to be the bottom line.

TÃ½r · Post by **TÃ½r** » Wed Jun 05, 2013 3:21 am

Once so many people had seen the viral video there wasn't a lot anyone could do to mitigate things. I'm glad it's finally written off, I hope they can start to recover from the circus that descended on them.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:03 am

I feel desperately sorry for her.

For one, I've seen far worse racist rants on public transport that despite being on youtube never led to any arrests.

For two, any human being Is capable of having a moment of madness which Is not Indicative of their character as a whole.

I would Imagine she has pleaded guilty just to get the whole sorry event over and done with to return to normal life.

Unless anyone has ever been through an arrest, trial and national media coverage following your every move, no one can judge her decision to plead guilty.

People don't realise that when you suddenly find yourself the centre of national news and even unkind, Ill Informed comments In forums and the like, It affects your entire family as well as you and your family are not the guilty parties.

I am glad she had the support of nationalist parties, because overwhelming support Is what gets you through.

I had a local police officer a couple of years ago on trial for assault during an arrest and after a year of his life, he was finally found not guilty. When he came In the shop he said only then did he understand the trauma of It all and It's affects on health and family.

I am not saying weather she was right or wrong but I do think she has suffered enough. It's very easy to judge when you are not aware of all the facts.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Jun 05, 2013 6:36 am

oscar;1428886 wrote:

I am glad she had the support of nationalist parties, because overwhelming support Is what gets you through.

Right wing groups such as the National Front and British National Party had adopted her cause after she was charged with a racially aggravated public order offence in November 2011.

Westâ€™s barrister said their support - including sending her flowers and cheques - had â€œgreatly distressedâ€ his client and led her try and take her own life.

Their support wasn't beneficial, according to her Barrister, not only to her case but her mental well being.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed Jun 05, 2013 7:00 am

Bruv;1428896 wrote: Their support wasn't beneficial, according to her Barrister, not only to her case but her mental well being.

I find that slightly suspect. They were looking at physciatric reports before the full weight of nationalism jumped on the bandwagon. Having said that, I can't disagree with It.

The problem with becoming the focus of national media attention, Is that you become ' public property' overnight and strangers think they are within their rights to just approach you.

While I had many good people come out In force to support me, even two MP's..you get others that don't now you from Adam jumping on the bandwagon usually with needs of their own. I even had complete strangers contact me asking If they could be In the courtroom just because they wanted to see my lawyer In action. Then others were contacting me not to support me but because they wanted me to help their own cause. Others turned up at court for no other reason than because they knew there were TV camera's there. Those are people who drain the very life force out you and contribute to the whole trauma. It takes a very level headed person to deal with that lot and I don't mean that In a big headed sense. In Emma's case, If you are already fragile, the pressure can be enormous and affect your health. My own circus got so bad, that my lawyer appointed me a press agent to field phone calls and letters.

But as with the nationalists, they think they are helping you but they are not. In times like that, you need support and people around you but It has to be YOUR people and not anyone who just fancies getting on TV.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Jun 05, 2013 2:53 pm

Here comes another one..................

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed Jun 05, 2013 6:29 pm

She's not a racist, she's a drunk

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:47 am

LarsMac;1428943 wrote: She's not a racist, she's a drunk

I wouldn't say such things drunk

TÃ½r · Post by **TÃ½r** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 4:13 am

Bruv;1428949 wrote: I wouldn't say such things drunk

I can't remember what I'm like drunk, it's too long ago since I last tried it. I doubt it included being intolerant though.

From memory, drunk happens only on spirits and only after half a bottle. I'm not sure I'd survive the experience these days.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 7:58 am

LarsMac;1428943 wrote: She's not a racist, she's a drunk

In vino veritas.

Just ask Mel Gibson!

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 7:59 am

Bruv;1428949 wrote: I wouldn't say such things drunk

I've met folks who would, and have.

Mel Gibson DUI Jail Video Triggers Legal Dogfight | TMZ.com

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:49 am

LarsMac;1428965 wrote: I've met folks who would, and have.
Mel Gibson is a knob, he would say that drunk or sober.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:52 am

An interesting article about Australian racism and yet more videos........frightening some of it.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 11:21 am

Bruv;1428978 wrote: An interesting article about Australian racism and yet more videos........frightening some of it.

Any of you watch that piece on Jane Elliot's work?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:05 pm

I watched that the first time round and I watched it all the way through again, all four parts

I agree with the idea that most if not all whites are racist, to a degree, deny it as much as you like.

For myself I am married to a black Zimbabwean, and strange and worrying as it might be, I recognise a racist streak in myself.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:39 pm

Bruv;1428991 wrote: I watched that the first time round and I watched it all the way through again, all four parts

I agree with the idea that most if not all whites are racist, to a degree, deny it as much as you like.

For myself I am married to a black Zimbabwean, and strange and worrying as it might be, I recognise a racist streak in myself.

You say that like you think that only white folks are racists.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 2:29 pm

LarsMac;1428998 wrote: You say that like you think that only white folks are racists.

I shall get you on the Jane Elliot program.............that'll sort you out.

White privilege is an interesting idea too

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jun 06, 2013 2:58 pm

Bruv;1429005 wrote: I shall get you on the Jane Elliot program.............that'll sort you out.

White privilege is an interesting idea too

Well, I ain't one a them blue-eyed Bastards, I can tell ya THAT!!!