Entertainment For Lively Minds
Murdoch Attacker Jailed
Blimey.
If the jailing of Charlie Gilmour seemed a tad harsh to one or two of the massive, what will they make of this:
A man who threw a plate of shaving foam at News Corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch has been jailed for six weeks.
Jonathan May-Bowles [...] was sentenced at City of Westminster Magistrates' Court. [He] was ordered to serve three weeks in prison and pay a £15 victim surcharge and £250 costs [...]
Sentencing May-Bowles, district judge Daphne Wickham said the aim of the attack was to disrupt proceedings, which were "of huge importance" [...] Mr Murdoch would also have experienced a fear of injury as he did not know what was in the pie, she added.
"This is a parliamentary process, which - as you know - conducts itself with dignity and in a civilised fashion," said the judge. "Everybody else in the room expected that, with one exception - you. You attended those proceedings with only one intention, to disrupt them."
Let's just hope that the judicial system is equally harsh on those who sanctioned, conducted and paid for the hacking of people's voice mails.
- More from Red Umpire.
- Login or register to post comments
-
Prison
Seems a bit harsh for a custard pie, but the guy's a fool. He'll be out in three and his audience will have grown as a result of all this.
He might see it as a good deal.
The legal system (and Parliament is part of that)
requires people to respect the system so punishment for contempt of court and similar offences are always very heavy when compared to what the same behaviour would have been punished if it occurred in a pub or at a football match. He is being punished for where he did it more than the actual action of throwing a foam pie I suspect.
I expect him
to be out in time to join the Celebrity Big Brother house.
Fool. The only person who came out looking in any way good from this was Wendi Deng.
He's being punished...
... for making security look bloody stupid.
I'm sure he'll be out swiftly, but surely this is a case for community service at most, fine at least?
If we give even a tiny damn about democratic processes
we must surely believe in them being allowed to take their course unhindered. Disruption of any of those processes - whether it's an investigation, a trial or a parliamentary session or hearing - particularly if the disrpution is threatening and borderline violent - should be dealt with very firmly indeed.
That's why I think that this is a far more serious breach of our civic code and Everything We Stand For And Claim To Be Proud Of than a baying mob jumping up and down on the bonnet of a Jaguar and shouting "Off with their heads!"
People seem to be treating this is if it was just some kind of juvenile ooh-let's-make-teacher-look-stupid jape, on the same level as the egging of Prescott, the green-custarding of Mandelson, or even the Emu-ing of Michael Parkinson. No, it's on a completely different level from that, because of when and where it happened.
Archie
You're just like an eloquent version of me on this.
Point duly taken.
And Mr Marbles is undeniably an idiot whose actions helped not one iota. I just cant get away from the feeling that a custodial sentence isn't correct. Even if the full force of law has fallen upon him, several months picking up litter would be more inconvenient than a few weeks in jail I'd think.
I sort of agree
But the bar has been set by, for instance, sending someone away for twice as long for driving at low speed into a Happy Snaps when nobody was around to be endangered. In that context, this is hardly draconian, is it?
I must say
That's an interesting way to describe a man losing control of his vehicle whilst unfit to drive due to drugs. It wasn't the first time he was caught driving under the influence either.
Should we continue to let persistent drunk / drugged drivers off until they kill or hurt someone, or should we send out the message that it's not acceptable?
Good point
Or it would be if it had anything at all to do with what I said.
Apologies
I assumed you were talking about George Michael, who famously crashed into a branch of Happy Snaps whilst high on drugs.
Thank goodness
for that little arrow.
There is a caveat though. Said process has to be seen to be being carried out with due diligence and weight. Any faffing about or piss-taking on the part of those empowered to execute the process would simply invalidate any umbrage taken at those mocking the proceedings. I mean, think what would happen if say, MPs fleeced the taxpayer with dodgy expense claims. Oh.
What he said
The custard pie didn't help matters one bit, and merely served as a pointless distraction from the matter at hand. Of course I hope Murdoch and co. get their just desserts. (Ho ho ho I am making ze joke)
Hackers and bribers
I don't have any quibble that anything that Leedsboy or Archie have said above; in fact I agree with them.
It will, however, be fascinating to see how harshly the hackers and bribers are treated when the judicial process has run its course. After all, if the disruption of the democratic process is something that needs to be dealt with very firmly (and I suspect that most of us would agree with that sentiment), then anyone who is found guilty of participating in the exchange of police-held information for money needs to be locked up for a very long time. I hope they will be.
Totally agree
.
I'm with Archie
again.
Fools like this make such trials/investigations...
...in the future less likely.
The guy's a clown and three weeks to his extremely timid self will seem like a lifetime but, hey, would either of the Murdochs now be in their rights to have any such further meetings held secretly.
I think they would.
I'd have given him two years....i.e. one year to serve.
They got this one right
He's a twit, and he rightly got made an example of for interrupting something that people felt was important My sincere hope is that he gains not one iota of celebrity out of his little stunt.
one would expect
that jailing of the pie thrower places a certain expectation / benchmark that hacking perpetrators will be meted out a custodial sentence
If I were them I'd be quite unnerved by this sentence
Maybe he should have claimed to be a hunt supporter
Bryan Ferry's son Otis and a few other pro-hunting campaigners got a conditional discharge for invading and disrupting Parliament in 2004.