Party Vibe

Register

Welcome To

Legal grounds for party bust

Forums Life Law Legal grounds for party bust

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Party the other day got busted. We spoke to supervising officer who cited Common Law, Prevention of Suspected Breach of the Peace as the reason for stopping the party.

    She said grounds for breaching the peace were noise complaints and the potential for trouble due to there being a large group of people together.

    We are interested in dissecting this for the possibility of a challenge. I wonder if anyone knows:

    (a) Much about Breaches of the peace as law and the ins and outs of it. Any links to explanations or primary material?

    (b) Way of finding out what complaints were made, because we believe there were none (due to conflicting statements from different officers)? Freedom of information?

    Any help would be much appreciated.
    Cheers

    Not sure you’ll have much luck with a legal challenge – even if breach of the peace wasn’t the real reason, any legal challenge will likely be met with the CJA and it’s ““music” includes sounds wholly or predominantly characterised by the emission of a succession of repetitive beats.” clause that defines a rave, and gives them the power to break it up without any other justification….

    That’s why there were protests about it when it was going through parliament. Sucks, but there it is.

    Breach of the peace was what they used to try cases before the CJA 1994 amendments – with limited success in most cases, which was the reason for the new powers.

    If you want the laws pertaining to breach of the peace, and the other stuff, you want the “criminal justice and public order act 1994 amendments“. Section 63 for the most part. The original act was 1953 I believe, but most of the stuff you’re looking for was amended in the 1994 version…

    The “peace” (known as the Queens Peace in England and Wales) and just the “peace” in Scotland) is defined by common law and is supposed to have been decided over hundreds of years.

    it is as noname said normally just used today to “back up” other statute laws such as a warning.

    For instance if two of you were arguing on the street and squaring up to each other and a couple of bobbies walked past, they would often separate the two combatants, arrest them under suspected breach of the peace (as going on to having a fight is obviously not peaceful :wink:) and then if you calmed down you’d both get dearrested and sent on your way in opposite directions.

    sadly inconsiderate crews in SE England, London and Eastern England and perceived links with gang culture and youth violence now mean raves are seen as medium level crime rather than “youthful high jinks”

    in this case its a warning to pack up and leave now or lose your rig and then get done under more stringent criminal laws (with the chance of ending up on bail for years with ASBO-style conditions and then a heavy fine)

    FOI will not give you details of complainants, this is for their human rights as even vague details may identify them (for instance if there is only one house in sight its a bit of a giveaway if they say “one person living nearby complained) and the cops are worried you may bust their windows or rob/torch their house in reprisal for a rig getting nicked (certainly in the 90s some of the London crews threatened to do this to “nimbys what grassed” – although I am unsure whether this actually happened).

    I’ve noticed a definite hardening of metpol’s attitudes to raves, sadly I think a combination of increasing gang involvement in some parties and BoJo trying to make his mark is causing this…

    General Lighting;222670 wrote:
    and BoJo trying to make his mark is causing this…

    is bojo the guy with the stella box on his head? :yakk:

    DaftFader;222747 wrote:
    is bojo the guy with the stella box on his head? :yakk:

    no, its the bloke with the funny hair what has been drinking Red Ken’s left over wine :laugh_at:

    General Lighting;222753 wrote:
    no, its the bloke with the funny hair what has been drinking Red Ken’s left over wine :laugh_at:

    did red ken do his hair? …:laugh_at:
    http://www.gorgeousshop.co.uk/redken/haircare/?kw=redken%20hair%20products&fl=148797&ci=509513722&network=s&gclid=COngr4qf_JMCFRuD1QodR21OWA

    isn’t breach of the peace covered under public order act?

    its odd in the sense that the law is all about would a reasonable person be intimidated etc. but if there are no standard members of the public about, i.e a free party whereby everyone is there of their own consent (unless its in the middle of a town centre and random members of the public are about, which is unlikely) then surely you shouldn’t be done on a public order offence.

    Also where people are arrested because they night provoke a breach of the peace it seems weird that at a party the people most likely to invoke a breach of the peace are the police officers themselves being present.

0

Voices

5

Replies

Tags

This topic has no tags

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Forums Life Law Legal grounds for party bust