Dear Mr. Atherton,
Thank you for contacting us to highlight your concerns and those of your members with the recent Hundred of Hoo School "Ciggie Busters" campaign/event.
The school contacted Medway police prior to the event and discussed it with our events manager. We were advised that actors would play the role of the 'smokers' with students approaching them, before taking the cigarette from them and 'advising them' about the health issues.
In addition to this Medway NHS were to also be involved as well as the council.
We did advise the school that to approach non-actors could cause problems and to our
knowledge no non-actors were approached. No one has made any allegations of crime regarding this matter, (in so far as no one who was approached has made any complaints).
The school involved police and other agencies in their planning and I believe took on board all our advice and comments. The filming and actions were part of a project the students were under taking and I am told the cameras were clearly visible to all in attendance. This was a deliberate part of the planning as overt cameras and the use of actors would hopefully prevent the people being approached being offended in
any way.
If a person who was not an actor was approached and their property taken etc. we would consider their complaint. However, as no one appears to have been approached in this manner, we shall not at this time be taking this matter further.
I am sorry you feel offended by this incident, but I can assure you that it was meant to be a light hearted educational project, with no harm intended.
Yours faithfully,
Michael
A/ Det Chief Inspector
Medway Police Station.
(Emphasis mine)
So. It was a light hearted educational project. No members of the public were approached; only actors were used. Therefore, no further action is required.
To start off, the newspaper report clearly said that members of the public, who had not given consent, were approached.
I knew we could not really go and film in public and attack people in that way and take goods off of them, so we devised a cunning plan.
We planted some people and we started with them. People were watching and following us and at the end we tried with some other people.
“I was scared about doing something so crazy on the street - I mean you can get arrested.
You can't get arrested for attacking willing participants. The actors were only there to make the whole excercise look acceptable for when they moved on to "other people".
Just for arguements sake, lets assume that Kent Police are correct and that it was only actors that were used. The papers either misquoted or embellished the story. It's within the realms of possibility.
So because they beleive it was only actors and because no member of the public has made a complaint, they dont deem it necessary to take any further action.
I think someone is missing the point.
A group of people who don't approve of another group have staged a street theatre condoning assaults on that gropup with the intention of making that group stop whatever it is that they dont approve of.
Viva are an animal rights group that disapprove of halal meat.
What would happen if members of viva attacked muslims in a local market and stole halal meat from them? Even if they only used actors, this would be seen as inciting racial violence. We all know how our police take race far too seriously.
These people consider homosexuality to be an evil abomination.
Any street theatre, violence on not, that condoned prejudice against shirt lifters would be stamped on hard and fast by the local plod.
Any other situation you can think of that used similar tactics against a minority would be deemed illegal and stopped.
Dale McAlpine a Christian Preacher was charged with causing “harassment, alarm or distress” after a homosexual police community support officer (PCSO) overheard him reciting a number of “sins” referred to in the Bible, including blasphemy, drunkenness and same sex relationships.
All he did was quote from the bible and he was arrested and charged.
I'm not particularly concerned that PC Copper doesn't want to get involved. Far to many people get arrested for the most piddling of trifles these days. What does annoy me is:
1) The knowledge that if someone had assaulted one of these kids (had they not used actors), they would likely be in the nick themselves.
2) As all these monority "victim" groups get more and more protection from being "offended", smokers are becoming third rate citizens. I cant think of another group of people who are treated so badly by society. Even kiddie killers can claim human rights.
3) Why would school children want to do this in the first place. Has society been so indoctrinated against smokers that children don't see any problem with grose interference in the lives of other people. Other people who have done nothing at all to interfere in anyone elses lives or done any harm to anyone else. I suppose the answer is yes.
But the smokers fought back this time. The ciggy Busters are history. Eveyone involved in this little stunt has disappeared. I doubt they will be silly enough to attempt this again.
No, we don't need the plod. All we need is ourselves. We need to show the righteous that we will not longer put up with their shit. Just like we did with the ciggy busters. Just like Anna is doing with Sandwell council.
The red mist has descended.
17 Comments:
This was never about getting a police investigation anyway. lt was about people just saying 'Enough! no more!'
As you say Bucko, they did get the message ... and all ran for cover!
Job done!
They're only concerned that anti-smoker hatred isn't quite as socially acceptable as they thought it was - nothing else. Give it another year or two of denormalisation and they'll try it again, and again, until the point is reached where it doesn't even raise a murmur. We're almost there after all - as has already been mentioned, if "an event" using actors was staged in a street where they tore the burkhas off Moslems they would still have been done for something, regardless of the fact that everyone involved were actors. This parallel doesn't even seem to have crossed the minds of plod, let alone the shits who orchestrated this event.
Smokers just don't count.
Smoking - Yeah. we dont really want the plod sniffing round:-)
Big Yin - Cheers! Ya filthy smoker!
Longrider - True, but its equally as likely they never did it to anyone who wasn't in on it. That way no one will complain but they can lie to the papers saying they did it to general public and that will make it look like people did actually accept it and go along with it. It's not like the anti smoking zealots are remowned for telling the truth now, is it?
the devils advocate into the melting pot.
Insults,ridicule,sarcasm,embarrassment,
belittling,showing up,accusations of cowardice,
pictures of pissed wet through baboons outside a pub,smoking rats peeping from a dust bin,
the full monty ,rub their noses into the grids.Make them feel like lepers,like vermin,
pass round the white feathers,get them to eat dirt,dish out the white flags.
Lets see what they are made of.
No holds barred
----- Original Message -----
From: xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: margheritagramegna@yahoo.co.uk
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 5:26 PM
Subject: Newspaper quote
Dear Margherita Gramegna,
Will you please confirm or deny the following quote from the Medway Messenger newspaper, online version on, 19th August 2010 by 6pm tomorrow,
“We didn’t start directly with the general public because we were scared of their reaction, so we planted some people to demonstrate with first.
“After that, people actually participated quite nicely and let us ambush them.
“They were actually saying that this was a very funny and interesting approach.”
Thank you in advance,
xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
ps Also, could you confirm whether or not members of the general public who participated were aware not only of the filming taking place, but also the nature of the activities of Ciggy Busters.
--------------------
When you add in the Ciggy Busters Facebook info page (now deleted but not before it was saved) which states the they will target unsuspecting smokers, whilst there may be no complainants known to the police there is clear evidence of premeditated criminal intent.
The Ciggy Busters Facebook page stated:-
"The Ciggy Busters are a group of students who are taking a physical act against smoking. At locations that will only be revelaed at the time of filming unsuspecting smokers will be swormed by a group of students and have their cigarrettes confiscated from their hands...The adverts dont work so we have decided to take action..thank you for your support :)
Privacy type:Open: All content is public."
There is serious crime here. Sanctioning by police and government agencies does not make it legal or lawful; it makes it more serious.
http://thefrogsalittlehot.blogspot.com/2010/08/medway-council.html
Please do let us know if you get a response.
Encouraging criminal activity is a serious offence; it’s incitement. It contravenes sections 44, 45 & 46 of the Serious Crime Act 2007
The nest step is to complain the police complaints authority regarding the above offenses which kent police believes it can ignore by word play.
To all you made so incandescent about such a trivial item I suggest you go and fight a real war , where those that are determined to oppress the rights of others are prepared to to blow your head off. It will certainly focus your mind and have you question your values. You sad, small people.
No. If they haven't formed coherent arguements then they should not be out on the streets villifying smokers. They should be in the clasroom learning. You could not use the "they are just young" arguement if they were targeting gays or muslims etc. Its only because smoking has been so denormalised that you think this behaviour is acceptable.
Hopefully the "vitriolic response" will help them form a coherent arguement; one that says its unacceptable to force your beleifs onto others.
We do think for ourselves. That is the reason why we dont let others dictate our life choices.
I doubt from your comments that you have been involved in a real war. People have spoke on this blog and others, about how their families fought for freedom. They can see that freedom being taken away from us because their relatives invested so much in guaranteeing it.
You, however seem happy to let others make your choices.
Lastly, this is not a freedom of speech issue. I am happy for them to speak about their feelings on smoking. I am not happy for them to say "We will stop you smokng". that is crossing the line from freedom of speech to dictatorship.
You have to ask why they were so quick to try remove all incriminating evidence of the net, which failed due to the wonderful google cached tool.
If they had done nothing wrong and not broke the law what were they worried about?
New term at hundred of hoo should be interesting, i wonder if Margharita will be on garden leave?
Yobbo suffers the effect of crushed testicles and collapses towards me; I push him back by striking the heel of my right hand under the septum of his nose, driving the bones into his frontal cranial lobe thus dissuading him from drawing breath.
Would I be liable or would the claim of self defence protect me?
I wonder.
Post a Comment