Freedom of speech

[cromwell]

Oh I suggest I did read this properly

Well apart from the fact you missed out the relevant bit you hadn't read you said ffs he threw a petrol bomb.

Even if he had been charged with throwing a petrol bomb ( which he hasn't) innocent till proved guilty means nothing to you.

[Unlucky4Sum]

Oh I suggest I did read this properly

[cromwell]

But have I?

Yes I know of a few people that love to post false stories that hated me countering them with referenced evidence of provenance.  As for your perception of 'elsewhere' based on stories from losers, well frankly I couldn't give a stuff.   

That's ok I don't give a stuff either but I am happy to admit when I got something wrong bold instead of shouty capitals.

You didn't read your link properly but won't admit it.

[Unlucky4Sum]

I wasn't talking about me,have you ever considered why you alienated so many people here and elsewhere.

But have I?

Yes I know of a few people that love to post false stories that hated me countering them with referenced evidence of provenance.  As for your perception of 'elsewhere' based on stories from losers, well frankly I couldn't give a stuff.    

[cromwell]

Well obviously I'm going to rub up the wrong way posters that over and over again deny that being seen to have lit and thrown a petrol bomb is a serious matter.

I wasn't talking about me,have you ever considered why you alienated so many people here and elsewhere.

[Unlucky4Sum]

You are clearly not worth the effort,I've been patient with you but all you do is rub posters up the wrong way.

Well obviously I'm going to rub up the wrong way posters that over and over again deny that being seen to have lit and thrown a petrol bomb is a serious matter.

[cromwell]

So now you imagine I've been posting in bold.

I read my own link, it clearly shows he was not charged with merely observing.  You were wrong and no amount of childish insults from you will change that.

He's charged with riotous assembly and if you're part of a group encouraging others to riot then rightly you get charged especially if you are seen to throw a petrol bomb

You are clearly not worth the effort,I've been patient with you but all you do is rub posters up the wrong way.

[Unlucky4Sum]

You been taking lessons from Smurf,posting in bold doesn't make you right,you didn't read your own link and are now scrabbling to cover.
I don't care who trumps who a judge saying a casual observer is liable to arrest is not on.
The thread title is a generality as many are but it is all part of the same issue.

So now you imagine I've been posting in bold.

I read my own link, it clearly shows he was not charged with merely observing.  You were wrong and no amount of childish insults from you will change that.

He's charged with riotous assembly and if you're part of a group encouraging others to riot then rightly you get charged especially if you are seen to throw a petrol bomb

[cromwell]

I'm sorry you don't understand charging but he IS charged with 'riotous assembly' and the evidence against him is of allegedly throwing a petrol bomb.

NOT a freedom of speech issue

And the later High Court hearing trumps the earlier remarks at the lower court that you rely on.

You been taking lessons from Smurf,posting in bold doesn't make you right,you didn't read your own link and are now scrabbling to cover.
I don't care who trumps who a judge saying a casual observer is liable to arrest is not on.
The thread title is a generality as many are but it is all part of the same issue.

[Unlucky4Sum]

I'm sorry you don't understand charging but he IS charged with 'riotous assembly' and the evidence against him is of allegedly throwing a petrol bomb.

NOT a freedom of speech issue

And the later High Court hearing trumps the earlier remarks at the lower court that you rely on.

[cromwell]

'Asked about his alleged heavy involvement in the disturbances, the prosecution barrister replied: "Air support CCTV observed an individual they state is the defendant lighting a petrol bomb and throwing it towards a passing PSNI vehicle, then taking something else from another individual and throwing it at a passing PSNI vehicle."

So he's charged with 'riotous assembly' with the throwing petrol bomb evidence being part of the case against him.

How on earth do you suppose this is a freedom of speech issue.

Clutching at straws,your link clearly states

Armstrong has not been charged with possessing or throwing any devices.

you said 
FFS Armstrong is charged with throwing a petrol bomb at police.

You can't even admit you got it wrong,that's ok anyone else looking in can.
The point anyway is the judges comment

Anybody involving themselves in this type of behavior, this type of disorder, as an active participant or a curious observer can expect to be, save for the most exceptional circumstances, remanded into custody, and this defendant is remanded into custody."

Expand Quote

[Unlucky4Sum]

'Asked about his alleged heavy involvement in the disturbances, the prosecution barrister replied: "Air support CCTV observed an individual they state is the defendant lighting a petrol bomb and throwing it towards a passing PSNI vehicle, then taking something else from another individual and throwing it at a passing PSNI vehicle."

So he's charged with 'riotous assembly' with the throwing petrol bomb evidence being part of the case against him.

How on earth do you suppose this is a freedom of speech issue.

[cromwell]

FFS Armstrong is charged with throwing a petrol bomb at police.

https://previewm.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/courts/teen-who-allegedly-threw-petrol-bomb-during-east-belfast-rioting-attended-because-of-posts-on-snapchat/a1634730866.html

'A student allegedly spotted throwing a petrol bomb at police during rioting in east Belfast only went to have a look because of Snapchat notifications, the High Court heard today.
Prosecutors claimed Cameron Armstrong was "heavily involved" in street violence in the Connswater area on Wednesday, August 7.

But the 18-year-old, of Lewis Gardens in east Belfast, denies taking part and claims he fled the scene as soon as trouble flared.

Armstrong, who faces a charge of riotous assembly, was granted bail to live under curfew with relatives in Co Down.'

I take it you don't read your own links

Armstrong has not been charged with possessing or throwing any devices.

[Unlucky4Sum]

Of course they do but casual observers jailed for being nosey ?

FFS Armstrong is charged with throwing a petrol bomb at police.

https://previewm.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/courts/teen-who-allegedly-threw-petrol-bomb-during-east-belfast-rioting-attended-because-of-posts-on-snapchat/a1634730866.html

'A student allegedly spotted throwing a petrol bomb at police during rioting in east Belfast only went to have a look because of Snapchat notifications, the High Court heard today.
Prosecutors claimed Cameron Armstrong was "heavily involved" in street violence in the Connswater area on Wednesday, August 7.

But the 18-year-old, of Lewis Gardens in east Belfast, denies taking part and claims he fled the scene as soon as trouble flared.

Armstrong, who faces a charge of riotous assembly, was granted bail to live under curfew with relatives in Co Down.'

[cromwell]

People have been jailed for many reasons. What particular offences are you suggesting shouldn't carry jail terms...

PS — I agree the coconut placard seems OTT, but indicating rioting hooligans should have their throats cut is going to be a difficult stance to defend...

See the post immediately following yours