Pro-life activist arrested for praying silently near an abortion facility

a reply to: Terpene

Her mere prensence in that zone is a legal offense.

if that is so per the PSPO (or Restraining Order, or whatever), then so be it. Arrest her for that.

Playing smarty pants with the cops is what got her in troubles, and rightly so.

I didn't see where she was "playing smarty-pants" with the cops, and I did watch carewemust's video of the incident. Did you?

I'd like to see the law that states that "playing smarty-pants" with a cop is against the law. Inadvisable, yes, unwise, probably, but not illegal. That is purely subjective; a cop can think one is "playing smarty-pants" when one is simply trying to explain why they are there. What's the legal definition of "playing smarty-pants"?

She was standing there doing nothing in place like that, it's consideted a form of protest, whats so hard to understand.

That is. Existing in a place is now a protest? Standing is protesting? When did that happen?

The other day I had a friend drive me around (was a very rough day). As I waited for him to pick me up, I stood in front of Walmart. Was I protesting Walmart without knowing it? There's a good probability that at some point while I was standing there, I was praying. Should I be arrested?

Physical presence is what got her in trouble not thoughts.

Well, according to nickyw above, she was released on bail, and a condition of that bail prohibited her from praying. Anywhere. That sorta shoots your argument in the head, doesn't it? Her offense was praying. The video from carewemust shows the officers arresting her immediately after she admits she might have been praying. The order explained by bastion earlier as well states that praying is an offense.

The Activities prohibited by the Order are:
i Protesting, namely engaging in any act of approval or disapproval or attempted act of
approval or disapproval, with respect to issues related to abortion services, by any means.
This includes but is not limited to graphic, verbal or written means, prayer or counselling.

Now, I took that to intend verbal or at least overt prayer, but it seems silent prayer, thoughts that are not sanctioned by TPTB, are also included.

That excuse is now debunked, not my me alone, but by at least three other posters using video and printed evidence. She was arrested for silent prayer.

Praying should never ever be a reason not to get in trouble, when my actions go against the law, my praying sure as hell will not save me. I hope you are not expecting some special treatment because she was praying.

That is my point: praying should never, ever, under any circumstances be a legal violation. Neither should it provide special treatment. But no one in this thread has stated that it does. Your assertion that it does is the only mention of special treatment for praying, and the circumstances of this case declare quite loudly that it does not.

Im almost getting the impression that fanatic hroup she is part off, is playing stupid now that ATS pretty much just deconstructed the argument they wanted to promote.

"Deconstructed the argument"? I just gave you three different pieces of evidence by other posters to indicate that she was arrested for praying. If anything has been "deconstructed," it is the argument that she was arrested for any overt actions that violated a PSPO.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Yes that's the Christian spin on the story then there are those that are not biased that see it for what it is, someone getting into trouble for silent protest, civil disobedience, call it what you want.

Considering these buffers are made especially because Christians showed to be a real PITA, it's maybe a little late to complain, it would have been wise to reflect on the behavior that forced authority to take these steps... If enough people complain something has to be done, you can't have groups disturb public peace with impunity.

a reply to: Terpene

Video... legal documents... court decisions... those are "Christian spin"?

Dude, your bias is showing strong enough that the glare is blinding me.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Someone saying something without source is not really anything than spin. One footage of fox, sorry to call bias on that...

So where are the sources for these statements?

a reply to: Terpene

I linked to the posts where they were mentioned in each case. That is the extent of which I will waste my time arguing against the kind of bias that assumes fault based solely on religious bent and ignores hard evidence.

I actually thought for a while there we could get back to a civil discourse. I see now I was mistaken; you apparently hate anything Christian and make all your decisions of right and wrong based solely on that.

Do you really think Fox made up that video? They got the actual cops involved (or very close look-a-likes), went to the same spot where it all occurred, recorded the interaction the way they envisioned it, and aired it on the news? And they did all this because what? A story that hasn't caught wide media traction that they want to obfuscate anyway? If you believe that, I can't help you. Your bias is too deeply ingrained for you to be able to accept anything that doesn't match your personal narrative.

TheRedneck

Again she wasn't arrested for silent prayer or silent protest. She was charged with multiple breaches of breaking the order, spending 40 days illegally protesting there for 12 hours a day singing and shouting, causing fights, arguments and her actions resulting in police having to attend 100s of times.

She led a decade long campaign of harrasment and intimidation that resulted in over 2000 people complaining about her group, a ban was put in place because of the huge detriment in quality of life they were causing for people who actually live there.

Police had had to attend to fights they were causing in the days leading up to the arrest and didn't arrest them despite the clear and obvious breaches of the order an anti-social behaviour going on and the groups refusal to follow the order.

Yes she and Fox are lying in their version of events and completely fail to mention she's head of the group that have been causing problems for everyone for the last decade, lies multiple times about what she was arrested and charged with, lies about the dozens of times the police, council, safety officers have spoken with the group to try and avoid arrests. Lie about UK law, lie about the order in place and why it was granted, lie about her stunt to sue the council prior to this and existend of the 40 day protest.

To make it worse she now has the cheek to try to act like a poor, persecuted victim that was just arrested for praying silently instead of the reality that authorities have bent over backwards to accomodate them and the order would never have been put in place if they showed basic respect to people who live there instead of going out their way to make their lives a misery and was given 100s of 'last chances' by authorities who only asked she gave basic respect to others.

They're not a normal pro-life group - they're an agressive violent version from Texas, US trying to get abortion for any reason banned in the UK even rape, incest or when known the mother will die which is something 98% of the UK oppose.

While she's lying about events to make it seem she's been targetted by draconian policing for her views; what happened in reality is the opposite as anyone causing this much of a public nuisance, anti-social behaviour and crime, wasting 1000s hrs police time and repeatedly ignoring police advice would have been arrested years earlier.

The fact she got away with it for over 10 years and is seemingly the only person in the UK ever charged for breach of PSPO shows how tollerant police and council are and in no way, shape or form was she targetted for her views.

a reply to: bastion

Again she wasn't arrested for silent prayer or silent protest.

You can repeat as many times as you want. I have spent 14 pages now asking "Why did the cops ask her if she had been praying just before arresting her?" So far, no one has given a reasonable answer. I've heard everything from the cops in the UK go around asking that all the time, like it was small talk; I have heard they didn't ask her that, refuted by the Fox video; I have heard all kinds of stories, but no actual reason... just denial.

You were one of the posters I referenced. Your own post included language from the PSPO that included prayer as an offense. Now you claim it is not an offense. That's all I need to hear.

As for Fox lying, yes, they concentrated on the elephant in the room instead of the list you gave of "omissions" which I have already agreed with. Yes, she should have been arrested; I will grant that. But she should never, ever be arrested for what she is thinking! I don't care what your laws are or where you are or how badly you want to defend your country... that is WRONG and nothing you can ever say will make it less wrong.

As far as I am concerned, what with this episode of prosecuting illegal thoughts and so many people defending it, I am looking at the UK the same way I look at China or Iran: a corrupt, third-world country where there is no actual law and people can be prosecuted for absolutely anything at any time on the whim of a judge or cop. I wonder how long until you guys have your own Tianaman Square massacre?

From your explanation, I wouldn't be surprised now if you told me she was being prosecuted for being from Texas. That's the impression you and others have left me with.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Terpene

If you want her to be illegal, you get the legal order against her specifically.

I believe it was bastion who kindly explained such things do exist in the UK, but that in this instance, they wanted to disallow the group, and in order to do that, they had to disallow the activities of the group - protesting. If she was not actively engaged in those activities, then she cannot be removed simply for being who she is. At that point, she is a private citizen who could otherwise be engaged in ordinary business.

When the police asked her if she might be praying, it is proof that she was likely engaged in nothing more overt than simply being herself.

So if you want to disallow her, specifically, you go through the legal channels to make that happen *or* you wait for her to engage in an overt act of protest which *is* disallowed. Neither of those things appears to have taken place.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Meh if it's beyond you that a fanatic pro life group, is using the same despicable techniques as the pro choice group, to influence public opinion, you're either looking away or really have no idea about the dynamics and techniques at work, when dealing with public perception.

Your argument are sound, but i would not protect a pro choice activist for staying in the buffer zone doing Nothing more than that, when that is clearly not welcomed...

You sound so pathetic in that victim role, it doesn't suit you at all...

a reply to: ketsuko

It's so funny you have never taunted authorities like she and her ilk does, you have no idea how the streets and these games work.
No... you want to be a victim so desperate, it's so funny how pathetically similar you are to the BLM and Antifa keyboard warriors, in that regard.

a reply to: TheRedneck

No I said she was never arrested for silent prayer or silent protest which is true as evidenced by her charges - still trawling through myself but if you search her organisation '40daysforlife' on local news, police and council records there's several years worth of reports that completely contradict her/ADF version of events.

This document gives more background and some evidence police and local residents submitted of criminal behaviour to get the order in place plus lengths the council and police have gone to to ensure the measure doesn't infringe on basic human rights: WARNING DIRECT LINK TO WORD DOC -cant find alternative yet - Submissions of Evidence

She wasn't arrested for what she was thinking either as there's thankfully no thought crime law in the UK and no plans or public calls to introduce any (but unfortunately she has allegedly physically assualted two local residents in days leading up to her arrest).

Religious beliefs are rightfully highly protected under multiple domestic and european articles of human rights so there's no chance of anyone being arrested for prayer. I can understand the confusion as these are boring UK/ECHR Laws and Rights and in her statements to US press she's lying and claiming police and council lawyers haven't gone above and beyond to ensure they've not been infringed upon.

I've noticed the question but don't understand it - Do police in the US have to ask certain questions on approach or are people required to answer them? Over here she could have just asked if she's being detained and walked away refusing to answer any questions.

His reasons will likely come out at trial but personal guess in the meantime is he's giving her another last chance to leave the area and avoid all the paperwork involved in an arrest while also gathering evidence that can later be used in court.

An arrest in the UK is more like being detained in the US and being charged is more like an arrest. If the arrest hadn't been deemed proportionate and neccesary or wasn't overwhelming evidence that'd result in a clear conviction should the case go to trial then police don't persue charges - especially when the defendent has aditional protections.

I'm confused how given the decade of evidence of anti-social behaviour, police and council intervention, 2000+ plus complaints from local residents and so on I've left you with the impression she's done nothing wrong and is only being prosecuted because she's from Texas (which she isn't by the way), care to explain or is that 'all I need to hear'?

a reply to: Terpene

Actually the one using pathetic excuses is you. The "pro-choice' crowd don't "silently protest"... The pro-choice crowd yell, attack, and destroy. More pro-life groups and buildings have been attacked than pro-murder/pro-abortion groups or buildings. Far more. What's more, your attempt to claim that "silently praying" is the same as yelling obscenities, pushing people, attacking people, destroying buildings and property, etc, which is what the pro-choice crowd do, is not only dishonest but downright a lie.

a reply to: bastion

Then why did the police ask her if she was praying before arresting her?... TheReckneck has asked you, and others, this several times and you keep ignoring it and obfuscating the tuth.

a reply to: Terpene

if it's beyond you that a fanatic pro life group, is using the same despicable techniques as the pro choice group, to influence public opinion, you're either looking away or really have no idea about the dynamics and techniques at work, when dealing with public perception.

I could say the same thing about you, since I have already agreed with that sentiment. You keep wanting to argue about a point we agree on instead of the one issue I have.

Tell me, do those "despicable techniques" include standing somewhere in silent prayer, doing so little openly that others have to ask if you're praying?

TheRedneck

a reply to: bastion

Here is the list of offensive activities that cannot be performed according to your own link:

The Activities prohibited by the Order are:

i Protesting, namely engaging in any act of approval or disapproval or attempted act of approval or disapproval, with respect to issues related to abortion services, by any means. This includes but is not limited to graphic, verbal or written means, prayer or counselling,

ii Interfering, or attempting to interfere, whether verbally or physically, with a Robert Clinic service user, visitor or member of staff,

iii Intimidating or harassing, or attempting to intimidate or harass, a Robert Clinic service user, visitor or a member of staff,

iv Recording or photographing a Robert Clinic service user, visitor or member of staff or

v Displaying any text or images relating directly or indirectly to the termination of pregnancy.

Let's go through these one by one, shall we?

She was standing alone and not making a sound. Therefore she was not protesting. She was not passing out any material at the time, so there was no graphic or written means employed. She was not making any sound before being approached, so there was no verbal communication occurring. The only possible offense in the first paragraph she was physically possible of making was praying, since it is the only action that can be undertaken silently by oneself without the use of printed or graphic material.

The office was closed at the time, so there was no one there for her to interfere with.

And since the office was closed, there was no one there for her to harass.

And since the office was closed, there was no one there for her to record.

While I did not get to see every inch of her clothing, I didn't see any indication it contained images or text relating to pregnancy or the termination thereof, and I have heard nothing that indicates she was charged with such.

Therefore, at the time of the incident, she did not violate any of the activities expressed in the order as supplied by you, with one and only one possible exception: she could have been praying silently. Since she was obviously arrested, that means she was arrested for a violation, and the only violation that could have been for was praying.

She wasn't arrested for what she was thinking either as there's thankfully no thought crime law in the UK and no plans or public calls to introduce any

Then why was she arrested? For something she had done earlier? Was there a warrant out for her arrest? If so, why was that warrant only applicable within the PSPO zone? Does the UK permit crimes based on location?

I've noticed the question but don't understand it - Do police in the US have to ask certain questions on approach or are people required to answer them? Over here she could have just asked if she's being detained and walked away refusing to answer any questions.

Over here, police are allowed to ask questions, and a person does have the right to refuse to answer. However, if an officer were to ask such an obviously religious question as "Have you been praying?" the case would likely be thrown out of court for police intimidation of the person and an attempt to violate their freedom of religion. The same thing would happen if the officer asked "Are you a Republican?" "Who did you vote for?" "Are you Latino?" "Are you homosexual?" or any other such biased question. An officer may not, in their active duties, take actions that would indicate the likelihood of having a bias against the arrested.

His reasons will likely come out at trial but personal guess in the meantime is he's giving her another last chance to leave the area and avoid all the paperwork involved in an arrest while also gathering evidence that can later be used in court.

She was released on bail... call it what you will, but that is an arrest. She was then told, as a condition of that release, that she was forbidden from praying. That is a direct violation of her freedom of religion, no matter what you want to call it! Prayer is the single and only route Christians use for communication with God. She was literally told, "You cannot speak to your God."

There is no possible way that can be interpreted as upholding any semblance of religious freedom.

I'm confused how given the decade of evidence of anti-social behaviour, police and council intervention, 2000+ plus complaints from local residents and so on I've left you with the impression she's done nothing wrong and is only being prosecuted because she's from Texas (which she isn't by the way), care to explain or is that 'all I need to hear'?

I agree with your assessment of her decades of behavior. Can you not understand that? I agree with you! Do you need it on CNN or BBC to understand that? Do you need a lighted neon sign flashing across the sky over your home for 40 nights, proclaiming "TheRedneck agrees with bastion," to understand that? I do not have any concerns about enacting a special order, and if she tries to protest, chant, speak, pass out pamphlets, speak to employees or potential customers, get in anyone's way, etc., etc., etc., LOCK HER UP! She deserves it!

Please, please, please, I am begging you... stop thinking and just read for one minute... one minute out of all the years you have and will live. Just one damn minute... I AGREE WITH PUTTING OUT THE PSPO! I AGREE WITH PROSECUTING HER FOR OPENLY VIOLATING A PSPO!

Can you at least understand that? Just that. At this point I am asking for nothing else.

I have only one issue and that is that she violated none of the PSPO orders at the time of her arrest, unless one considers silent prayer as a violation. She could not possibly have violated any other provisions; it is simply not physically possible. So either she was arrested and charged, and bail was arranged, for silent prayer and denied her basic human right to believe and practice her religion in her own mind, or she was arrested for something else entirely besides what was in the PSPO... that is why I facetiously asked if she was being arrested for being from Texas.

You just disproved every statement you made. All I am doing is pointing it out, and you still don't get it!

TheRedneck

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Oh another one of these keyboard warriors never to set foot in the street never to taunt authorities, you have not seen these protest in the street, i did...

You can keep wishing whatever you want, the truth of the matter is this women is a PITA to the people. Police has the right to ask any and all questions they like, your free too not answer.

Too stupid to get away when the writing was on the wall, she wanted to be arrested. So her idiot followers can be all victims and at this point you do yourself no favor in standing up for such a despicable person, molesting people over many many years, taunting authorities and outright disregarding the law. I guess you want to be those Christians, as you can't distance yourself, from these fanatic groups.

I can see you now, for what you want to be. Sorry I assumed It would be fair to treat people on an individual base but if you stand up for such idiots, you prolly are one...

a reply to: TheRedneck

Sure phisically being there, is a form of protest, civil disobedience, and silent protest are great techniques, to make yourself look like a victim of police overreach...

It's text book and your being played by a fanatic group, either that or you are part of those fanatics. Every other sane person would distance themselves from such antisocial behavior.

a reply to: Terpene

Sure phisically being there, is a form of protest, civil disobedience, and silent protest are great techniques, to make yourself look like a victim of police overreach...

Physical existence cannot be a crime. If it were, you, me, and everyone else would be in jail. the only exception is a restraining order or PSPO that specifies that a specific individual cannot be in a certain place.

If the employees show up for work, are they violating the PSPO? Will they be arrested? Might as well shut the business down if that's the case.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

It can be a crime if your prolonged presence violates the law... They would have a much harder time to get her if she kept moving trough the zone, but that would not have the impact she wished for, as a passerby does not catch attention at all...

What she did is clearly a form of protest.

a reply to: Terpene

It can be a crime if your prolonged presence violates the law

Only if one's name is listed specifically as being prohibited for that area.

Care to show me the order that specifies her by name?

TheRedneck