Only if the cop was holding the camera right up into the blokes face while he shouts yid...
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Only if the cop was holding the camera right up into the blokes face while he shouts yid...
I agree that the y word definitely comes under causing harassment, alarm or distress in section 5. As in it can be proven to be offensive. Furthermore, you don't actually need anyone to give evidence to say they were offended although someone does need to be offended.
I just can't see how any 'racially aggravated' offence can be proven as the standard of mens rea is higher. If we look at the crime and disorder act 1998 it outlines this.
Is your argument (edit: what you think they might argue) that hostility is shown towards the victim's membership by Tottenham fans' using the y word?
Last edited:
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...facing-prosecution-for-yid-chant-9176982.html
Not entirely conclusive but it sounds like we don't want to start charging spurs fans who use it in this way.
Really pleased for the fans but disagree that this was a critical moment.
We really needed this to be thrown out by the court, to set legal precedent.
As far as I can see, this just gives the coppers green light to arrest a few more and wait for the CPS to charge again and again until they get the result they so clearly want.
Potentially. Whatever Spurs fans may argue about reclaiming the word, etc, the fact is that this debate has been going on for some time and it has been made clear that parts of the Jewish community still find it offensive and the word has not yet ceased to have negative connotations for a not inconsiderable amount of people. At the time of these arrests fans had been warned of this, but chose to use it anyway in spite of the warnings and the knowledge that some Jews find it offensive - and did so in a forum that was very likely to have Jews present. I think if you know something is considered a racial slur and use it anyway that can amount to hostility, irrespective of whether or not the they argue that the word is reclaimed. After all, it's not just about whether or not the user of the word considers it to be reclaimed, it's also about whether or not he knowingly uses it in earshot of someone who disagrees with that and is likely to deem it a racial slur.
That's my take on it anyway - but then I don't practice criminal law so my take on it only goes as far as an assessment of the legislation. There is probably case law that is relevant to the debate as well, the content of which I couldn't tell you without going and looking it up.
Last edited:
Well, in case you haven't spotted, there is often filming carried out the Lane. I'm not sure you'd need to shove a camera in someone's face in order to get some footage from which you can lipread the word "yid".
Probably one of the problems here is that the process the police were following was to warn people prior to charging. The people who were charged, I assume, were those who had already had a warning - but chances are that when the arrests were carried out it was done by an officer who had issued the warning and then just went ahead and arrested - probably not thinking that things like video footage might be necessary. Pure speculation of course.
legally they need a warning to make an unwarranted arrest that is why they do it.
I know. What I'm saying is that the police possibly just assumed that the ignored warning and the officer's statement was enough. But then, as I say, I am now in the realm of pure speculation.
I will agree that it seems the CPS was and will continue to test the waters with this. My (and the majority of people I've spoken too) main gripe with this is why is it that spurs fans are targeted first? Why are we in the preposterous position where there was 3 spurs fans arrested and going to court while west ham fans at the time was racially abuse those being arrested?
I'd be willing to have a debate on whether we should drop Yid from our vocabulary. Only after we stop having anti-semetic abuse thrown at us consistently at games, in pubs and online
I'd be willing to have a debate on whether we should drop Yid from our vocabulary. Only after we stop having anti-semetic abuse thrown at us consistently at games, in pubs and online
yer sorry :avbpray: i realized this just after posting :adebaehug:
The way I see it one doesn't depend on the other, which is why it's disappointing that Spammers who come out with such remarks while in our away end are not prosecuted. There is debate around the Y word, but I don't think that can be said about gas chamber slurs - and even more overt instance of racial hostility.
OF WHAT I'M MOST PROUD IS BEING A YID!
Very, very good news. Doesn't stop the Police throwing cautions around, but if the seem to know the prosecution won't be successful they aren't worth the paper they're written on as long as you don't sign anything. They can still make threats as they've pulled this before going to court, but as we've really known for a while now - they are empty.
YID ARMY!
Very, very good news. Doesn't stop the Police throwing cautions around, but if the seem to know the prosecution won't be successful they aren't worth the paper they're written on as long as you don't sign anything. They can still make threats as they've pulled this before going to court, but as we've really known for a while now - they are empty.
YID ARMY!
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...facing-prosecution-for-yid-chant-9176982.html
Look at the CPS statement. This isn't just a lack of evidence or a need for video cameras.
"In considering whether a criminal offence could be proved we have to look objectively at the words used, and the context in which they were used. As part of the review, the context of the use of the words alleged in this case was reconsidered, and we have decided that, although the same words used in other contexts could in theory satisfy the criteria for 'threatening, abusive or insulting', it is unlikely that a court would find that they were in the context of the three particular cases in question.
We have therefore concluded that there is insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction. This decision has no bearing on any other cases that may be brought to our attention and all cases will be considered on their own facts and merits."
As we've said all along, the context is such that it is completely legal for us to use the word Yid in the context we do, and the CPS now recognise that. They are leaving open the possibility to, say, prosecute West Ham or Chelsea fans over it, but going by this there is no reasonable way any of us will be convicted for being Yids!
Look at the CPS statement. This isn't just a lack of evidence or a need for video cameras.
"In considering whether a criminal offence could be proved we have to look objectively at the words used, and the context in which they were used. As part of the review, the context of the use of the words alleged in this case was reconsidered, and we have decided that, although the same words used in other contexts could in theory satisfy the criteria for 'threatening, abusive or insulting', it is unlikely that a court would find that they were in the context of the three particular cases in question.
We have therefore concluded that there is insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction. This decision has no bearing on any other cases that may be brought to our attention and all cases will be considered on their own facts and merits."
As we've said all along, the context is such that it is completely legal for us to use the word Yid in the context we do, and the CPS now recognise that. They are leaving open the possibility to, say, prosecute West Ham or Chelsea fans over it, but going by this there is no reasonable way any of us will be convicted for being Yids!
Wait so you're saying there's two definitions of the word Jew? A race and a religion?
Although race is only a social construct yes
I'm saying that Jews are an ethnoreligious group, not just a religious one.
This!
In theory, a spurs fan, same as anyone, could still be prosecuted for using the word, but the CPS have to have a reasonable chance of conviction and that means a likelihood of proving a racially motivated offence took place. Not likely on 99.9% of cases where a spurs fan is singing yid army or the like. Any fan, including Spurs fans, who use it in a racially motivated way may get convicted still, though its not so likely to come from a Spurs fan.
Now a Chelsea or West Ham fan chanting "he's coming for you" on the other hand, clearly would stand a much better chance of prosecution as it is clearly a racially motivated attempt to cause offence. The issue is that the police fail to enforce the law in those instances. Hummmm, Police corruption perhaps? Surely not!
The only way to change this is to apply pressure on the police by recording and reporting and publicising such instances until it is taken seriously, which it should be along with all racial hatred wherever it takes place and whoever does it. But as the papers show today, change is slow and even getting such problems acknowledged is hard work.