You are reading a single comment by @pepperedmunky and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
I imagine it was refused as the likelihood is that they would go and do the same, or a similar, thing again. Whether that's right is obviously a different matter.
-
I'm not at all familiar with bail conditions etc but that seems a bit harsh doesn't it? Maybe setting a precedence to deter others?
That the law dates from the 1860s isn't a coincidence: lots of railway laws date back to the introduction of the railways and have harsh penalties by modern standards. Arguably because the railways were built by aristocrats and the new affluent middle classes created by the industrial revolution and they didn't want commoners holding up the trains they'd invested their savings in...
aggi
Fox
@pepperedmunky
Bit shocked to read in the guardian about the 3 arrested for disrupting the train, in front of magistrates this morning and told they would not get bail and would remain in custody until the 16th of May. Seems a bit much considering the lightness of the crime, breaching a law from the 1800s.
I'm not at all familiar with bail conditions etc but that seems a bit harsh doesn't it? Maybe setting a precedence to deter others?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/18/extinction-rebellion-trio-charged-train-protest-canary-wharf