UPDATE on Hackney 41 arrests
Published:
December 01, 2011 21:26
by
Glenn McMahon
Neighbourhoods: hackney
POLICE are now saying 41 people have been arrested for suspicion of breach of the peace outside CLR James library in Dalston, Hackney, yesterday of which two remain in custody with the rest bailed (see earlier post for background)
Police originally announced 37 had been arrested for suspicion of breach of the peace following an incident outside the library where a picket was being held as part of the national strike over public sector pensions.
They later released a statement saying they had re-arrested them for affray. Today they announced 41 people have now been arrested for suspicion of breach of the peace (again).
A police spokesman was unable to explain the confusion, but said it would be unusual for people to be bailed-to-return for breach of the peace.
Affray is a considerably more serious offence with a maximum sentence of three years if sent to a crown court.
It is defined as the use, or threatened use, of unlawful violence against another and for someone present to fear for their safety.
Additions
breach of the peace
Published: December 02, 2011 12:34
by
?
It sounds like they were initially arrested for breach of the peace at the time, and then further arrested for affray once in custody. It also looks like they nicked four more people than what they first claimed yesterday.
clarification
Published: December 06, 2011 14:01
by
geek
technically they were "detained" because of a supposedly imminent "breach of the peace" situation. no one can be arrested for breach of the peace because it is not a criminal offence but a situation. whilst they were detained in police custody (and once they could no longer be held for breach of the peace) they were then arrested for affray s3 public order act 1986. for someone to be guilty of affray a person of "reasonable firmness" must "fear for their personal safety", but that person need not actually be present at the scene.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/3
Latest articles feed
Legal clarity is needed
something not right here. Breach of the peace is a situtaion not a criminal offence.
A person is arrested to prevent a breach of the peace, once peace is restored then a breach of the peace no longer exists, therefore there is nothing to keep people detained for.
What you are saying does not make an legal sense. can we have some clarity, because there's nothing worse than well meaning yet inaccurate information being passed as fact.