Some 'people' make me ashamed to be the same species...

[subaqua]

What could they be prosecuted for ?

bit sick telling them to jump , but curious as to what law they broke.

 

[marknotgeorge]

What could they be prosecuted for ?

bit sick telling them to jump , but curious as to what law they broke.

Possibly something like Breach of the Peace, or obstructing a police officer in the course of his duties. I'm sure the CPS can think of something to at least get them into court.

 

[marknotgeorge]

[QUOTE 3594173, member: 9609"]Assisting a suicide is illegal, encouraging someone to jump is assisting ? wiki link[/QUOTE]
Thing is, the actual crime doesn't really matter. All that needs to happen is for the papers to report something like "the court heard that Joe Bloggs was heard to be shouting 'Jump!' at Bill Scoggins, who was on the bridge while suffering from severe depression. Bloggs was also seen filming the incident on his smartphone." Society will hopefully do the rest.

 

[Over The Hill]

I think this has two elements that are worth looking at separately.

The shouting does seem to be as said above assisting a suicide and awful.

The filming bit may be a slightly different matter. Firstly we don't know the motivation for filming. If it is to get some sick pleasure from the event then it seems bad but we all watch the news and saw the footage of Concorde on fire, and endless disasters from the tsunami to a terrorist incident all recorded by bystanders. Indeed the papers we buy and the TV news we watch can make you very rich from selling a clip you have taken from just being in the right place at the right time. The police also use their own cameras and release the material for TV. So where does reporting stop and some other unacceptable behaviour begin? If a bystander took a picture of something sold it to the paper and you bought the paper, would you not be as bad or worse?

From that, do we then want to pass a law whereby someone can decide that you can or cannot film something in a public place? Sorry but that does not get my vote.

It is a tragic incident but I do feel we need to take care in how we react to it.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

What could they be prosecuted for ?

bit sick telling them to jump , but curious as to what law they broke.

I'd happily see them charged with "...using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour intending to and causing harassment, alarm or distress - section 4A of the Act; "

GC

 

[subaqua]

I hate to say it but I'm not surprised by the report. Telford (in fact Shropshire) is a very odd place... very "local".

reminds me of Milton Keynes, Warrington ( the bit from sankey way to the M62) and Skelmersdale . what could they possibly all have in common

 

[subaqua]

I'd happily see them charged with "...using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour intending to and causing harassment, alarm or distress - section 4A of the Act; "

GC

yeah but I would happily see motorists charged with all sorts . doesn't mean they can be though.

 

[SteCenturion]

Nothing to say really.... just ???

 

[glasgowcyclist]

yeah but I would happily see motorists charged with all sorts . doesn't mean they can be though.

It would be a competent charge, so they could be.

GC

 

[CopperCyclist]

I'm not in the slightest bit shocked unfortunately. Welcome to the people I have to work with daily.

 

[ComedyPilot]

Nothing new. I attended a call on the Humber Bridge where a distressed male was looking to jump but was being talked down by a negotiator. It just so happened that a local school trip was walking across the bridge at the time (opposite side) and there were some of them shouting for the man to jump. Judging by the complaint against police I got, their teacher didn't appreciate being told to shut the fuggin kids up, and get them the fug away from the scene.

 

[Brandane]

What could they be prosecuted for ?

bit sick telling them to jump , but curious as to what law they broke.

In Scotland they could definitely be prosecuted under the common law charge of Breach of the Peace, which covers a multitude of sins. Here is the definition:

"Where something is done in breach of public order or decorum which might reasonably be expected to lead the lieges being

• alarmed or
• upset or
• tempted to make reprisals at their own hand, the circumstances are such to amount to a breach of the peace."

This broad definition showed that a charge of Breach of the Peace can arise from virtually any conduct which caused or (can generally be regarded as being reasonably likely to cause) either alarm, annoyance, upset or embarrassment to another person or person." This effectively means that you can be charged with breach of the peace for doing absobluty anything. Any person can has the power of arrest if there is grounds for someone commiting breach of the peace. It states on know your rights, "The police and any other person have a power of arrest where there are reasonable grounds for believing a breach of the peace is taking place or is imminent".

Unfortunately I don't think common law applies in England, i.e. there has to be a written statute for each and every offence.

 

[subaqua]

In Scotland they could definitely be prosecuted under the common law charge of Breach of the Peace, which covers a multitude of sins. Here is the definition:


Unfortunately I don't think common law applies in England, i.e. there has to be a written statute for each and every offence.

yeah but the sour faced cow made it illegal to sing at fitba FFS

 

[Brandane]

yeah but the sour faced cow made it illegal to sing at fitba FFS

You are still allowed to sing "All things bright and beautiful", probably. Just avoid religion, politics, history, Ireland, immigration, emigration, and football!

 

[subaqua]

You are still allowed to sing "All things bright and beautiful", probably. Just avoid religion, politics, history, Ireland, immigration, emigration, and football!

so everything then !