back to article Organised crime law crushes animal rights duo

Four and a half years in jail for “conspiring to interfere with contractual obligations”. That was the sentence handed down to animal rights activist, Sean Kirtley, on Friday, in what is claimed to be the first contested trial under the Serious and Organised Crime Act 2005 (SOCA). Kirtley was found guilty of co-ordinating the …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Flame

@ Paul Fisher

Why yes I am quite capible of putting myself in others position...like the poor people this type of fuckwit tries to mess with?

Oh but since they on the other side of this debate they probably don't count...

Tell you what I will respect the AR/ALF when all members of them will stop using any and all products that are made/tested with the actions they find so objectiable...sound fair?

Like I also said this Law is not welcomed by me.

You have no idea how I deal with animials so try and not make yourself look even more stupid ok? But hey since you are perhaps one of the psychopathic fluffy bunny huggers (you know the ones that put their opinions higher than selected other people, no what was the defination of being a psychopath again?) you are just as fuckwitted as they are...

0
0

@Mycho

"Isn't 'first they came for the...' implicitly covered by Godwin's Law?"

That had been my feeling until I realised that it seemed to be used to get past the Godwin filter.

If there was going to be a Gnuber's Law* perhaps it could be used to call anyone on their attempt to slip past Godwin's Law?

*ego-cringe - any other name would do as well.

Also, I'd hate to see the original text trivialised through overuse by the tin-foil hatted anti-gov brigade.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

He just called for a boycott

He just asked people to contact these companies to boycott this vivisection company.

Whether you agree or disagree with Vivisection, do you agree that consumers/citizens should be allowed to boycott? Do you agree that people should be able to call for boycotts?

Some of those people may have gone further than contacting the companies, but they're separate people and he doesn't control them.

There is nothing so special about vivisection companies that elevates them, so this law will get extended to cover non animal labs.

0
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Punishment

These "animal rights" creeps (and their relatives) should not be allowed to use any medicine or medical treatment that used animal testing in their development.

0
0
Joke

when are they coming for

All you vicious killers out there that support the murder of innocent wheat, maize, soy, and cotton just to feed and clothe yourselves.. SHAME

0
0
Stop

Suffragette terror?

Mr James writes:

"...I could well be wrong, but I don't remember Emily Pankhurst and co sending letterbombs, hurling abuse at families and threatening to maim relatives".

Well, no. Unless you had recently celebrated your hundredth birthday, chances are you would not remember.

But whilst Emily Pankhurst may not have been directly involved in such activities, our history of the "suffragists" has largely airbrushed out the more unpleasant details. Certainly, SOME individuals were involved in attacks on prominent individuals, attacks on property and - allegedly - fire-bombing.

One particular incident laid at the door of campaigners resulted in a major fire and loss to human life.

I have to say I was pretty innocent of this stuff until I had to do some background research on the struggle for women's rights. Basically, they weren't all sugar and spice.

Like most political movements that develop an activist wing, there those who were relatively respectable, and those that weren't. And when it came to the public view, there were incidents they probably were responsible for, as well as incidents just laid at their door. Plus a load of stuff where we will never know the truth.

As for popularity...if you'd taken a poll circa 1910, you might well have found that the general public viewed them much as they view animal right's activists today.

Honest.

0
0

@Steve

These individuals and their ilk are bad people. Animal rights extremists are exactly that - extremists. These letters are usually sent to the recipients home address not the business premises. The recipients can feel 'violated' , harrassed and threatened even by a letter, that on the surface appears harmless. These letters can often lead on to an incendiary device under a car to add to the menace. Rant on Steve, about a subject you seem to know nothing about.

0
0

Outraged

I know from the comments on animal-rights-related articles that most people reading The Reg are completely over-the-top in their outcry and hatred of animal-rights activists. So I probably already have my answer, but I'll ask anyway...

Am I the only one outraged by these stupid laws? Why is it that we feel the need to create laws to specifically "protect" one group of people when laws are *ALREADY* in place to protect them?

According to the article, in order to be found guilty under SOCA section 145, you must *ALREADY* be guilty of a crime. So if what you did was already a crime, why do we need another law against it? It's like the idiotic "hate crime" laws. We already have laws against murder, assault, etc. So why do we create additional laws against those very same acts if the victims are specific groups of people? Are we trying to say that those groups of people deserve more protection than people not in those groups? Are we saying that it's somehow "worse" to beat up a homosexual than a heterosexual, or that it's "worse" for a white person to murder a black person instead of another white person? Silly me, I thought it was the actions we were trying to protect people from. I hate bigotry and xenophobia, and I wish we could eliminate it; I wish everyone could just live and let live, agree to disagree. But once we start creating laws which criminalize thoughts, we have lost all sense of freedom and are rapidly approaching 1984.

If a "third party" is persuaded to break a contract, they are the only one to blame. If I'm driving, and a girl slides her hand up my thigh and says "Drive fast, speed turns me on", and I then proceed to accelerate beyond the posted speed limit, does that mean she is guilty for being a party to my "conspiracy" to speed?

We don't need more laws. We need to enforce the laws we have, and we need to use common sense. Unfortunately, I think common sense died a long time ago.

0
0
Stop

@Neil Hoskins

The first comment said it all.

I know the guinea pig farm involved in the controversy and I also know the church where the inexcusable crime of digging up a deceased relative took place. What on earth were they thinking?? I am personally an atheist but what the fuck? Could they seriously not realise that doing this would majorley hurt their cause?

Once I heard on the radio an activist saying that if they were trapped in a burning building and were only able to save one thing (out of a dog or a human) they would choose the dog... pretty much sums a lot of these people up.

You can be damned sure that if it was the dog in the activists place, it would save neither.

0
0

There is a very fine line between .....

There is a very fine line between government and totalitarian pigswill.

STOP VOTING FOR THESE IDIOTS.

0
0

@Tonto Popaduopolos

Re: "Violated". I don't have a TV and therefore have no license.

However, I get these threatening letters (one was a photo of a court summons on a doormat) from the TVLA telling me to get a license or go to jail.

I fell violated.

So when's the plot squad going to take them down?

0
0
Thumb Down

The mind of the beholder.

How long is it before we have someone charged with "suspician of intent to conspire with intent"?

0
0
Silver badge

@Gnuber

Very well, I propose we call it Gnuber's Addendum to Godwin's Law, or GAG for short.

0
0
Joke

SOCA? Well named

Serious Organised Crime Act.

Down Under we use "soccer" (yes it is bad English, being derived from "Association Football" --> Assoc. etc) to label the "world game" since we already have two codes called football (three if you count Union and League in Rugby) which are played by men with leather balls.

Since my perceptions of the games run to semi-organised warfare, I would say this is a most aptly abbreviated piece of Parliamentary output.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

@Chris C

You're getting dangerously close to suggesting that the police should do their jobs; there's a law against that you know.

0
0
Gold badge
Dead Vulture

Re: "Another poitn"

".....if you earnestly believe that experimenting on animals is equivalent or close to murder and torture what would you do?"

Easy one: Voluntarily section myself as I'd have gone completely barking.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

@Mark

Threats of legal action aren't threatening behaviour.

I think it's on the basis that if you feel threatened then you've done it, if you haven't then you should welcome your chance in court to get stitched up for something you haven't done.

Taking photo's through your letter box might be a problem for them though.

0
0
Stop

@ Mark

You FELL violated. How far did you fall. Knob.

0
0
Ben
Flame

So...........

when are DEFRA gonna have their day in court then , me and my fellow thousands of slaughtered livestock want an answer now .......... if the uncontrolled release of disease into the environment and its ACCEPTED consequences doesn't carry a STIFF custodial sentence for those PROVEN GUILTY then this sentence for protest against the abuse of animals to develop the latest tech in anti wrinkle cream for the ladies is CRIMINAL! F*ck you! anybody would think that the Law is actually there to "PROTECT" something or someone .........i wonder what it can be? Some of the posts in this thread indicate that electrode lobotomization has been an utter success , were gonna need an ARK to survive the drool ............

D isease

E mission

F *cks

R ural

A griculture

0
0

@JonB

Hang on, how can you tell me how I feel?

That's the problem with these "if you feel threatened" laws. They just don't work.

Case in point. Pub. Landlord about 6'4 (and full of muscle) locked a mate of mine in because he wouldn't start a fight so the landlord could beat him up without getting to jail. I should note: friend is normal build and about 5'8. Told the police he "felt threatened".

a) 6'4 vs 5'8???

b) if he's frightened, why lock himself in the room with the person he is scared of?

So don't you tell me what I feel.

0
0

@ Mark 16.26

Mark,

I'm sensing you're getting annoyed. Your last post makes no sense and you're careering off the point.

Let's say you work as a taxi or delivery driver. Your work takes you to Huntingdon Life Sciences, picking up and delivering on a regular basis. If you were to receive a letter from the ALF or similar on your doormat, you would think 'how did they get my address?'

The letters may start off asking you to cease all trading with HLS. You have read in the papers that these things can escalate so you start paying more attention in your daily routine. You then notice someone hanging around outside your address. More letters arrive with, lets say, a photo of you and your vehicle and some words that you find threatening. You still continue to visit HLS because you have to earn a crust.

Damage to your own and your partner's vehicles ensue followed by more letters to you and your partner etc.

Then one night your vehicle catches fire next to your house. You lose everything.

I'm not saying that this would happen in every case of 'letters' but similar has. If you have any contact with HSL and their ilk you would be wise to check your vehicle every time you get in it and watch your back.

That is why these people need stopping by the authorities using whatever legislation fits the bill.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Answer to the larger question

"A much larger question is why the Government feels the need to legislate so specifically in respect of animal rights activists."

Because the animal rights extremists are an actual threat to safety rather than hypothetical terrorists.

"Asking politely" to contact suppliers in their book = phoning in bomb threats and sending powder through the post.

Whether you support their cause or not - and funnily enough, I do - their tactics and fanaticism makes your average suicide bomber look like a wavering dilettante.

Anonymous, because I speak from experience.

0
0
Flame

Harrasment

"When she has not been busy maiming and killing animals at her place of work, one of her past voluntary activities has included being involved with Riding for the Disabled, quite ironic really when you consider how many times she will have deliberately caused individual animals to 'become disabled'.

"....One of her pastimes is skiing paid for with the blood money that she earns torturing, maiming and murdering animals. Dr Sue Hughes is also on the council for a Worcester school for Girls, now, we think it is bang out of order to have a sick vivisector sitting in council within an establishment that is supposed to be guiding children in the right direction in life. Many parents would not be too happy to know that such a monster is helping to carve their kids futures. ..."

So calling someone a murder and a monster then publishing there places of work is ok is it? Would you like to be on the end of this?

Wonder how many "nice" emails she gets, if that is there tone on a website, what do you think they send from random hotmail accounts.

There is a line between legitimate protest and harrasmentsand having met many animal activists, trust me, many of them have a very blinkered view of right and wrong.

All those wearing organic hemp shoes who don't wash and grow their own food feel free to protest. Those that use oil based products, eat imported food, wear leather clothes, you are all evil as you all murder the planet and it's little creatures!

I wonder if they found a cure for cancer, AIDS, Alzhiemers using these techniques, would they turn it down if they or their kids were dying. Would they really?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

graverobbing

To quote the article:

Animal rights activists are no strangers to extreme direct action. The recent theft of a body in order to put pressure on the owners of a guinea pig farm is witness to that.

Are these people accused of doing this? Then why is it mentioned? Perhaps you could have said of the police "this is the same British police who shot an innocent Brazillan electrical in the face".

0
0
Coat

Oooh.

@ Chris C.....

<quote>

If I'm driving, and a girl slides her hand up my thigh and says "Drive fast, speed turns me on", and I then proceed to accelerate beyond the posted speed limit, does that mean she is guilty for being a party to my "conspiracy" to speed?

</quote>

No.... it means she's a slut and up for anything. That would make you a lucky man, me and thousands of other dirty old buggers jealous.

You wouldn't happen to have her number would you? Or would ringing her a couple of times be classed as harrasment? Especially if she was a bunny-girl.....

Mines the black plastic mac.....

0
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018