Friday, June 27, 2008
Power of arrest used against Belfast blogger…
Malachi O’Doherty points to a disturbing development, that could have widespread implications, not simply for bloggers, but for any journalists in their legitimate business of tracking down a story. It’s with regard to a Belfast blogger called Alan Murray, who has been using his blog Holylands Warzone to campaign against the privatisation of public housing in his local area of Belfast. Malachi notes:
He is on a very important issue here and he has been writing about it more eloquently than most - and got beaten up for his trouble. But the worry for bloggers is that they can be prosecuted for naming public figures whose conduct they question! And if a blogger can be prosecuted for this, then so can a journalist.
Update: Tim picks up on the story, and very usefully points us in the direction of some critical background on the loosely worded legislation that allows it... who in turn cites this piece from George Monbiot...
Update 2 Incoming from Instapundit, hold on tight… And: New Slugger post here.
He also provides a timeline with Murray’s version of what happened. The critical point, from journalist’s or blogger’s point of view is that the PSNI have responded to a complaint against writing on the Internet under the law of criminal harassment. Indeed, Murray claims to have been arrested twice: first on 2nd July and then again on 27th September last year.
I cannot and do not wish to speak to the veracity of Murray’s claims against the individuals named on his website. Free speech is rightly moderated by a civil code that gives both sides the opportunity to put their case before a court of law.
There is certainly a case for the involvement of the police if a blogger, or one of their commenters implies physical threats against a specific individual. But I’ve been through Murray’s blog and have not been able to find any evidence of such; which might explain why no charges appear to have been preferred.
If Malachi is right, the use of police power of arrest appears to have been used directly against a citizen for criticising several public figures on the Internet. That’s a development that should worry more than just the citizens of Belfast.
Mick Fealty @ 11:12 AM
They can’t convict anyone of the McCartney murder or stop a Bulgarian family being burnt out of Bushmills on the third attempt but they can arrest a man for criticising some protected-species quangocrat?
Brilliant. Malachi should call the Human Rights Commission - so that Monica McWilliams can have him arrested as well.Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 11:28 AMYou are absolutely right - this is a matter that the Human Rights Commission ought to vigorously pursuing, with the support of all parties in the Assembly.
I’m presuming this Alan Murray is no relation to the Telegraph journalist?
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 11:36 AMIn a perfect world, maybe, Damian - but in this world the HRC is run by people who actively oppose freedom of speech.
This guy will get no help from them.Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 11:41 AMI totally agree with shore road resident, in his first post.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 11:54 AMCan I update you, SRS. There was an armed robbery as well as the fire bombing in the past 24 hours. The police appear to be fairly impotent when it comes to serious offences.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 11:59 AMI’ve come across this blog before when I blogged about The Gown’s inappropriate treatment of the death of a Holylands resident. It is intemperate, hysterical and far from constructive. The same might be said for many of the student responses to it. Whether you admire the site or not, however, if there is not more to this and he was arrested for criticism, then that’s an outrageous curtailment of free speech.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 11:59 AMRight enough, Chekov, I’d forgotten about that.
How come nobody at The Gown got arrested for gloating over a man’s death? Time to dial 999 I think. If not, why not?Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 12:01 PMHardly surprising Mick to quote a song I heard, “there isn’t a courtroom in the land that would put a bankman on remand, even though they’ve been ripping off the people for years”.
So what we have here is legal redress being used on a person who is himself without any sufficient legal redress re those students in Holyands making life hell ad infinitum.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 12:53 PMNo I’m not the well known journalist of the same name. I use extremely strong language on my blog because it describes the absolute horror of living in an environment that has been turned into a holiday camp for people who spend three years and lots of public money not going to class. I reference Suzanne Breen’s recent article to show that an awful lot of people feel that way. An area that was once bohemian and cultured has been turned into a playground for wealthy and ignorant sectarian chauvinists.
http://holylandswarzone.blogspot.com/2008/06/that-suzanne-breen-article-in-full.html
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 02:47 PMAs far back as 1999, I recall from working at the CPS that practically all charges of “harassment” named a policeman as the “harassed” one. It was at the time just another option to charge anyone who made themselves a problem to the cops.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 03:27 PMI use extremely strong language on my blog because it describes the absolute horror of living in an environment that has been turned into a holiday camp for people who spend three years and lots of public money not going to class.
But you also justify criminal acts against people’s property and describe them as ‘acts of resistance’.
http://holylandswarzone.blogspot.com/2006/10/resistance.html
There infringement of freedom of speech represented by these charges may be odious, the students’ behaviour may similarly be odious, but the approach of this blog is also odious. I don’t think we should entirely lose sight of that fact. This is someone who sees burning a student’s car as an ‘act of resistance’.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 03:48 PMWe are currently governed by people who regard blowing cars up as an act of resistance. They celebrate the fact regularly, and publicly. But they don’t get arrested.
If Mr Murray sets a car on fire, by all means charge him with a crime. This is a charge for a thought-crime.Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 04:14 PMChekov,
I’d say there are two issues here. One is Alan Murray’s seeming support for crime as a form of resistance. That could lead to allegations of the crime below:
46
Encouraging or assisting offences believing one or more will be committed
(1)
A person commits an offence if—
(a)
he does an act capable of encouraging or assisting the commission of one or more of a number of offences; and
(b)
he believes—
(i)
that one or more of those offences will be committed (but has no belief as to which); and
(ii)
that his act will encourage or assist the commission of one or more of them.
(2)
It is immaterial for the purposes of subsection (1)(b)(ii) whether the person has any belief as to which offence will be encouraged or assisted.From the Serious Crime Act 2007.
This is not what he was arrested under, which may be revealing as to the confidence in any potential conviction. In any case, I cannot find any account on the blog of a complaint being lodged with PONI, which adds to my incredulity at the post you linked to.
Then there is the number of crimes, with residents as victims, which go unpunished and uninvestigated. It seems odd that Mr Murray has been repeatedly arrested given the failure to prosecute elsewhere on countless occasions.
It should also be remembered that students are also victims of this environment. I certainly wouldn’t pay for a child of mine to stay in the Holylands during a course at Queen’s. Those adults who do are, in my opinion, failing their children in this regard.
There is also the issue of the apparent impossibility to be excluded from Queen’s. I know people who have taken first year four times. That is beyond a joke, and encourages the lifestyle that gives rise to these problems. There are bigger issues here, governmental policies to increase the number of students, and therefore student debt, which may tie the hands of the University. That may also explain police actions.
Finally there is the extremely serious accusation of abuse of statute in order to permit criminal behaviour to continue, in this case taking the form of an attack on free speech. Because the State is the actor here, and the potential for precedent, I’d consider this the most serious aspect. That is why I think the HRC ought to be involved, fully supported by the seven parties in Stormont.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 04:49 PMDeepest sympathy to the remaining Holylands residents. As I’ve said time and time again on Slugger - Queens is an utter, utter dump. It’s ‘graduates’ are a by-word for parochial, fuck-witted ingorance.I regularly encounter supposed ‘law graduates’ from Queens - the vast majority of them can barely read and write with any modicum of coherence. Quite how this hole continues to market itself as a ‘university’ when the near entirety of it’s student body consists of slack-jawed bog-trash from west of the Bann is simply beyond me.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 04:51 PMDisturbing article by Breen particularly in relation to the trauma suffered by the family of the late Mr. Morgan whom I know was an extremely decent man.
I attended a presentation recently given by the person at Queens with responsibility for student behaviour. I have to say that I was less than convinced that he was sufficiently streetwise or determined to really tackle this problem.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 05:41 PMI do not endorse violence against people or property. What I describe as “Resistance” should be viewed as the desperation of those who have been denied all legal means of redress. To complain makes oneself a target and the police and universities will systematically do nothing to prevent that. Indeed the universities complaints procedures appear to be designed to make targets of residents in order to shut them up. Thus we are told that the number of complaints has fallen by 40%. This is falsely ascribed to the introduction of wardens who are incapable of protecting themselves from assault, let alone residents.
It is a hideous and terrifying truth that only “Resistance” has had any effect on those who’s behaviour has to be seen to be believed. I don’t like it, but see it as having all the inevitability of a force of nature. It makes no sense morally or logically to condemn it. One may as well condemn the victim for resisting the rapist. Indeed the whole language of “conflict” in the Holyland is to impose “moral equivalence” as well as some notion of equivalence of force upon the obliteration of a community by institutional power. The Holyland has become a jungle and the reign of terror inflicted upon residents is propped up by the police and universities.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 06:10 PMThere was a time when at least five houses in the Holylands/Queen’s area would have been home to family members of mine. Indeed for the very early part of my life, it was home too. Rugby Court, University Avenue, Agincourt...all left now. And all citing the sort of behaviour in Breen’s article.
Chekov, I see where you’re coming from. But this has truly gone beyond reprehension. The area is practically no-go. These were once beautiful streets, part of what I call “red-brick Belfast”. And the state of them is disgraceful. Vomit-filled, litter-strewn, there’s barely a family left in them.
I have nothing but sympathy for Alan. The people ranging these streets after dark treat University disciplinary procedures as a joke, and ASBOs as a badge of honour. Rape by landlord is indeed too light a phrase to use.
Damien, fine words you write; but I have yet to see Stormont, or indeed anyone else, lift so much as a discarded broken bottle, never mind a finger to do anything. Oh and students as victims of the environment? They’re all over the age of 18. Isn’t there a coming of age sometime around there...? I myself lived as a student for a year in the Holylands. Plenty of parties - but we never felt the need to piss against someone’s car, or play hurley at 3am. And that was only 12 years ago.
Sure, it’s just youthful hi-jinks, isn’t it?
Good luck, Alan. I suggest some sort of backup action from members of this site, but I doubt it would be too forthcoming.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 06:49 PMRaven,
As regards students, my point was that there are also students who live in the Holylands who suffer in much the same way as the residents do, even if they haven’t families to worry about, and who are not part of the problem. Like you described yourself, but up against a lot more these days.
As regards political parties supporting action being taken against this, I think we can agree that to date little has been contributed, but that it should be called for. That is what I was doing.
All this is less worrying to me than the apparent misuse of legislation described. Combined with the recent reports of local government abusing anti-terrorist legislation, it makes for a worrying picture. The plight of the residents shows how ineffective the justice system can be, despite its sometimes excessive capacities.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 07:47 PMSure, I’ll just get on the blower to David McClarty, Gregory Campbell, Mark Durkan, George Robinson, Francie Brolly, yer man McQuillan, and Wee John Dallat up here. They’ll sort it out for us.
On the point of “excessive capabilities”, I wonder if the current administration in Stormont will be willing to put a cap (bust a cap, anyone?) on the over-reach of those powers? Perhaps make here an example of how civic society can be run without CCTV, DNA over-reach, ID cards, and so forth?
Or perhaps we just like to fall back on 9 DUP MLAs....?
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 07:53 PMWell argued. I’m taking nothing away from the suffering of the residents. The point of the thread, however, seems to have passed most contributors by, including yourself.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 08:54 PMRaven,
If the police won’t listen to the residents, who do you think has any chance of exerting any pressure on them? That’s why I mentioned it. Do you, does anyone, have any ideas, or do you just want to mock mine?
I have suggested:
1. The HRC have an obligation to at least examine this.
2. PONI should have been contacted by the blogger.
3. The political parties, especially the local MP and MLAs have an obligation to their constituents to exert influence in their interests, and in the interests of justice.
4. Queen’s policy of keeping failing students needs to be exposed as a major part of the problem.
5. Queen’s may be under pressure to adopt that policy, awareness of which may help to negotiate further disciplinary action, or further protection for the residents.
6. The PSNI might be under similar pressure, awareness of which may help to negotiate better responses on their behalf.I’ve been constructive on what is not the central point of the thread. You indulged in a little reminiscing.
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 09:06 PMcars can rape people?
okay then we should burn em
Posted by on Jun 27, 2008 @ 11:05 PMDamian,
the police ombudsman has been aware of this for over a year. Their investigation into this prosecution and the failure to prosecute the boyfriend of Katrina O’Neill or those who were party to the assault and/or made false witness statements, and were party to the giving of a false name by my assailant seems to be going nowhere very fast. The police are suitably uncooperative and have refused to provide full disclosure with respect to the current prosecution of myself as required by my Statement of Defence. No surprises there.Our MLa’s? Alistair McDonnell-Major landlord; Alex Maskey-openly lauds landlords at residents meetings as if we should be grateful they’ve raped the area. Being a wiley man he names and lauds two of them who are not involved in money laundering. The dogs in the street know those who are.
The disciplinary procedures make targets of residents. Don’t expect the cops to prosecute “students”. They will not anger a manufactured catholic middle class, despite the fact that these people are sectarian chauvanists who openly celebrate the displacement of protestants from Mid-Ulster and bring the same mentality to the Holyland; this is their area, get the residents out. Don’t call it social cleansing; don’t call it ethnic cleansing; don’t say nothin’. The cops treat residents, apart from a select few (guess who) with naked and brutal hostility. This is clearly a policy decision. Don’t expect that to change.
The universities will allow “students” to repeat first year ad infinitum because it brings in loads of money and first year does not count towards the degree marks. If the truth be told the “students” have learned in school how to do the bare minimum to get by and get their piece of paper at the end of a three year (or more)party. Students who have genuine difficulties based on health, family circumstances etc are the ones that end up getting screwed. The “temporary withdrawal” option is forced on students whether they like it or not. For complex legal reasons I will say no more on this other than to say that the head of occupational health has been known for years as “Sweeny Todd”. Believe me I know, and so do others who’ve had the same experience.
Posted by on Jun 28, 2008 @ 01:39 PMUniversity students are adult individuals and should be treated as such, not as some sort of amorphous group that can be “managed”. Universities provide a service; they shouldn’t so eagerly accept the role of policing their customers. Uncuff the police and let them deal with them within the law.
Posted by on Jun 28, 2008 @ 05:18 PMAlan,
I’m very sorry to hear all that. I couldn’t find any record of the PONI complaint searching your blog. I’m not greatly surprised, though I am still let down, by the political response. If I could make another suggestion, you could place the official responses at the forefront of your case, and try to stick to a few lines - a message that will stick in people’s minds and attract maximum media attention. I know a lot of people have a ‘bloody students’ attitude that, whie I completely disagree with it, would probably do you some favours in garnering public support. If I can summarise your points into what might be an effective message to hammer home til your bored of it:
1. Politicians’ vested interests are causing them to fail constituents.
2. Police must be permitted to protect ratepayers from the physical and psychological injuries they are suffering on a daily basis, and Queen’s must be permitted to remove failing students.
3. No-one should ever be the victim of the law to satisfy any financial interests.
You could campaign for a maximum number of repeats for first-year students. You could work with the landlords and police under the premise that a safer area is worth more in rent, even if they don’t make basic repairs. This ‘ethnic cleansing’, ‘resistance fighter’ stuff is really not impressive and will only hamper your cause. I wish you all the best, and hope you don’t find this presumptious or naive.
Posted by on Jun 28, 2008 @ 07:38 PM
