Body & Soul0 min ago
If found guilty, what would be an appropriate punishment for this young woman?
No doubt some will ask what happened to provoke such a foul mouthed tirade (especially in the presence of her young child).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/...gland-london-15923875
Whatever happened, bravo to those who chastised her, and double-bravo for everyone keeping their cool and not responding in kind.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/...gland-london-15923875
Whatever happened, bravo to those who chastised her, and double-bravo for everyone keeping their cool and not responding in kind.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I can only realistically see a Racially Aggravated Section 5 Public Order Act (disorderly behaviour) charge succeeding arising from this. The more serious offence (Section 4A) needs to be supported with “Intent” to cause harassment alarm or distress. Given that the young lady is almost certainly under the influence of something or other it is likely that the charge will be the less serious one.
Section 5 is the part of the Act on which the delightful Denzel Harvey found himself on the receiving end for a prolonged stint of foul mouthed abuse aimed at police officers:
http://www.theanswerb.../Question1078364.html
You will see that his Honour Judge Bean suggested that such foul behaviour was so commonplace now that hardened police officers should not be troubled by it and he duly quashed Mr Harvey’s conviction.
It will be interesting to see if a similar view is taken about the behaviour exhibited by this shining example of an English Rose. It is probably true that black people are frequently on the receiving end of such abuse. So it is possible that the black people who found themselves unfortunate enough to be on the tram that day may be told that, since such abuse is so common these days they should not take any offence.
If convicted of Racially Aggravated Section 5 the maximum penalty is a fine of £2,500. No other penalty is available. Magistrates’ sentencing guidelines (for a first time offender pleading not guilty) suggest a “starting point” of a week’s net income.
Section 5 is the part of the Act on which the delightful Denzel Harvey found himself on the receiving end for a prolonged stint of foul mouthed abuse aimed at police officers:
http://www.theanswerb.../Question1078364.html
You will see that his Honour Judge Bean suggested that such foul behaviour was so commonplace now that hardened police officers should not be troubled by it and he duly quashed Mr Harvey’s conviction.
It will be interesting to see if a similar view is taken about the behaviour exhibited by this shining example of an English Rose. It is probably true that black people are frequently on the receiving end of such abuse. So it is possible that the black people who found themselves unfortunate enough to be on the tram that day may be told that, since such abuse is so common these days they should not take any offence.
If convicted of Racially Aggravated Section 5 the maximum penalty is a fine of £2,500. No other penalty is available. Magistrates’ sentencing guidelines (for a first time offender pleading not guilty) suggest a “starting point” of a week’s net income.
Like I said............drunk people?.....drugged people?
Are you seriously suggesting that her comments are in any way, shape or form as reprehensible as those made by Emma West?
I suggest that the black woman is entitled to hold her own opinions and wouldn't have said a word had EW not felt it necessary to share the workings of her tiny and befuddled mind with the entire tram carriage.
Are you seriously suggesting that her comments are in any way, shape or form as reprehensible as those made by Emma West?
I suggest that the black woman is entitled to hold her own opinions and wouldn't have said a word had EW not felt it necessary to share the workings of her tiny and befuddled mind with the entire tram carriage.
Sgt rock isn't it obvious that the black lady obviously meant scummy racist drunken junkies or are you (As many of you do) looking for a reason to become angered against someone without a real reason?
Or is there a reason?
I think we already know the answer to this so lets not play games and say what we really mean here.
Or is there a reason?
I think we already know the answer to this so lets not play games and say what we really mean here.
"the thing what nobody has asked
what started her to shout out did someone say something to her that upset her.
everyone is quick to jump on her being a junkie/drunk foul moth white trash but something may have been said that has not been recorded"
So by your logic something was said that made her take drugs/drink whilst in charge of a minor and then launch into an unholy and immoral rant against what appears to be placid people on their way home?
How very odd to think that.
If this was the case, why didn't she mention it at all and why did no one come to her aid?
what started her to shout out did someone say something to her that upset her.
everyone is quick to jump on her being a junkie/drunk foul moth white trash but something may have been said that has not been recorded"
So by your logic something was said that made her take drugs/drink whilst in charge of a minor and then launch into an unholy and immoral rant against what appears to be placid people on their way home?
How very odd to think that.
If this was the case, why didn't she mention it at all and why did no one come to her aid?
Latest Posts
ChatterBank0 min ago
Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
ChatterBank4 mins ago
Attempted Robbery In Cape Town
ChatterBank7 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.