DJKillaQueen

Yes but they were all migrants Rick....no other country in the modern world owes as much to it's success on Migrants than the USA. Really, your inteloerance of Mexican migrants is deplorable and racist.

Very...given that the US was founded on immigrants....... Say Rick...how do you feel about the American Indian population?

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That's all well and good, but surely a bit of > common sense could be used case by case. This > rushing cases through for so called swift justice > is nothing but a ploy to abate the angry mobs. My feelings exactly. A suspended sentence is as good as a custodial sentence and makes sense for non violent secondary crimes. This mother was not part of the riots themselves. She didn't loot. By all measures of previous sentencing for similar crimes a custodial sentence is harsh.

Those too Chener :) PR I think that is a harsh sentence and completely indicative of the vengeful reaction to recent events. Handling stolen goods is a crime but a suspended sentence would have sufficed. Normally a Judge dealing with a mother on a first offence for handling stolen goods would have given community service, or at worse a short suspended sentence. People convicted of first offence GBH and ABH are regularly given suspended sentences...........I think the mother should defintiely appeal. We are all appalled by the recent rioting but the law has to be fair. What is going on here is people being made examples of whilst more serious crimes have numerous precedents of more maliable sentencing. That is not justice as I understand it.

karter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > *throws DJKQ into solitary confinement to cool > off* Too late...I just offered to run naked around Peckham Rye if ED becomes downtown LA (inserts the 'ooh er missus' icon).

So the difficulty is that downside is tangible / direct whereas upside is broader and less immediately obvious. Those are all valid points Senor......it's about getting some kind of manageable balance in the end isn't it...where the risk is minimal, and the effect maximum. We'd all, in an ideal world, love to live in a crime free society. That's never going to happen, even if inequality no longer existed. But a community that works together can reduce the impact of crime, and it can impact in a positive way on those committing crime. There are reasons why we have inequality. There are reasons why some grow up in negative ommunities and others grow up in privilege. Most of those things are created by us, and self perservation and greed are dominent factors in creating those things. And then of course there's fear....fear of the unkown perhaps in this case. Fear certainly pervades when finding ways to 'take on' those who want to make us afraid. Again...it's harder for a criminal to take on a whole community than an individual. Until people start finding time for their community and put in some effort to create that better, safer, society, nothing will change. And community means fighting for better things for all the kids within it...not just your own. We need to lose some of the selfishness was see all around too. My genuine feeling is that ED is not the Aylesbury and that in itself will have a positive impact. I don't think there will be any noticeable increase in crime in the area as a result either. Any problems will be local to the YOS and those attending and will be effectively dealt with by them. The SNT will I'm sure play a role too in helping to ensure there are no major problems. Just to give a case in point. We have a youth club in our tenants hall that has been running for 18 months now. It is overseen by 'kickstart' who provide qualified youth workers etc. When it was first suggested to the committe, and presented that young people from not just the local are would attend, the same concerns were raised about crime and gang activity (because the youth service said it would be used by some kids who can't go to youth clubs in their local areas because of gang problems). In 18 months there has only been one incident - where one boy stole a mobile phone from another boy (known to him) after leaving the club. There is more opportunity for gangs to form and hang out as part of a club surely? But it just hasn't happened. Why? Because it's supervised and because it's not on the doorstep of where these teens live. The teens go back to their home grounds afterwards. The only impact on the local community is them nattering at the bus stop as they wait for their bus in the evening. If I'm proven wrong and ED becomes crime central after the YOS moves in.......I'll be the first to eat humble pie. I'll even run naked around Peckham Rye as punishment lol - I'm that sure the more extreme fears of some are unfounded.

Success means kids becoming productive members of society and in turn benefitting all of us. The kid that's now a car mechanic instead of a career criminal might fix your car one day, or stop to help you whilst broken down at the roadside. More importantly he's paying taxes that in turn help fund your NHS, schools etc. The alternate would have been a kid costing us money to keep him locked up. So to value success only in terms of the young person themself and their local area is short sighted. The more of these kids that are turned around the better for ALL of us, and in turn, we all have a moral obilgation to help facilitate that.

lol senor....what I was alluding to is that there is plenty of evidence of the sucesses of the YOS. I just think it is more constructive to look at those as well rather than highlighting just the failures. Yes there will be some problems but I think they will be minor and easily dealt with by those that operate the YOS, because there's a history of good management there too. Southwark has one of the biggest challenges regarding youth offenders, but it also does better than many in tackling it. The borough has one of the lowest offending rates of young people in care for example - and that's a group that are particular vulnerable. That fact alone should instill some confindence in those that run the units I think.

Those are standard tenancy terms ian for all local authorities but they are interpreted to mean in the local vicinity to the tenancy by magistrates. Other bodies can obtain injuctions to protect other areas from ASB from 'outsiders'. Some tenants that receive custodial sentences tend to lose their homes anyway because they have no right to benefits to pay the rent while they are incarcerated - so normal eviction prccedures for non payment of rent apply. Also a single incidence of ASB would not be considered enough for a migistrate to grant a possession order 9under the current laws). I know this from experience. So if a tenant or the child of a tenant is only guilty of one criminal act relating to the rioting, I don't expect any magistrate to grant possession. Local authorities do however use the threat of eviction to put leverage on parents of ASB behaviour and that often is all that is required to see a change in behaviour. But when you evict a problem family/ individual, they don't go away...they just become someone elses problem. The legislation that covers the law regarding tenants and landlords is the 'Landlord and Tenant Act 1985' And as we can see from Binary's post even the government knows they require a change in law to enable magistrates to grant possession after one act of ASB only. I personally think any effort to introduce a bill and change the law is going to run into complexities, especially regarding children. At present a family or individual has to demonstrate a history of ASB that is detrimental to their local environment. Evicitng tenants after one breach I think will be seen as too harsh by the judicial body that form part of any review. It looks good in the media and pampers to reactionary thinking but by the time this gets to parliament, and the Lords, it will be watered down......

One story of a young man (involved in some pretty awful stuff) and ultimately jailed for assisted rape should not be taken as the overview on this. The Aylesbury has been a particularly troubled estate (that's one of the resons it is being knocked down and rebuilt). Placing a centre for anything within it has faced challenges. Many of those attending lived on it's doorstep (with gang culture always a factor of local life). ED is a different environment altogether and I believe that will make some difference. There are gangs in ED too btw but their impact on the local aea is not as strong as it is in some other areas. A gang member waiting outside to bully another has no impact on anyone but the person being bullied. And there is a specialised YOS to deal with gang related issues. From the details you give though...this particular teen was a lost cause and that's why he's now in jail. You say 'On Balance' Senor but what do you base that on? One case you sat as a juror on? Why not look at the other side, and the success stories of the YOS? Then you may be able to truly have a balanced view. As someone else pointed out, we already have other services in the area dealing with other kinds of vulnerable or criminal people. And thank goodness there are people prepared to deal/engage with them. I don't think anyone does look at whether a YOS operates in an area before moving to it anyway.....most people would expect most areas of London to have such a thing, given the level of teenage crime that happens everywhere - including in ED. I remember some of the same criticisms being levelled at the Harris Boys Academy - that the school would bring lots of teens not local to the area and that would lead to trouble. That's one of the reasons the boys aren't allowed to walk through the park to or from school. Yes there have been a few incidents but nothing to really impact on local crime levels. See what I mean about fears not based in evidence? I suspect most of the 'good people' of ED won't even notice the unit is there tbh. There is no right sentiment to be had either....just common sense. ED is not an island, or a gated community, untouched by anything else that goes on in London. It has many layers like any area. Some us engage with all of tose layers, and thank goodness we do....because the goldfish bowls of some others wouldn't be possible if we didn't.

Thank you for the details. I doubt that any magistrate will grant a possession order from those details - if only because it is just not the normal procedure for dealing with breaches of tenancy. If there is no established prior trend of anti-social behaviour, then there are no grounds for use of that aspect in respect to what is a seperate criminal matter. Similarly, tenancy agreements relate to behaviour within the confines of the tenancy. There are countless young people who receive criminal convictions for all kinds of vandalism, and theft but no-one would ever argue that is automatically grounds for eviction under the tenancy agreement. Wandsworth I suspect are going to have egg on their faces, unless there is of course something else to the case that Wandsworth are not disclosing.

I'm a white 43 year old from Liverpool Otta as it happens......illustrates your point perfectly I think ;) It always makes me laugh when Londoners hark on about imigration polluting the country...as though London, Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham went through some mythical golden ages without it. After all, there were no migrants helping our industrial revolution were there? Having grown up in what at one time was one of the busiest ports in the world I can't say I have ever known a time when Liverpool wasn't at the behest of migrants. Commerce depends on migration. When the fire of London happened......the same xenophobia emerged then. It must have been arson, and immigrants must have been to blame. First it was the dutch and then the French, and angry mobs took it on themsleves to lynch any foreigners they could find. Five centuries later we haven't changed it seems. Blame the foreigners for everything....why not!

I know it has been shown around the world and it's brillant......because it reminds the world that for every looter there are many more local people who are decent and appalled. And such a simple idea too.

Me too, although I take people as I find them. Nationality, ethnic origin or anything else, never comes into it.

It's now in the library PR...on display.....they are going to keep it as a memorial.... so your post it note is to be forever enshrined in local history.... Purple was the colour I was feeling today init! Actually I wanted pink but they'd run out :P

It is friday after all :)

Immigration is a red herring. What we need is a higher proportion of jobs to the available labour force than we have at the moment. And more importantly we need good jobs, that people might want to do for more than a few months.

katie1997 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Anyway, I have just heard news on the radio and > apparently some council has decided to evict > tenants as their son was convicted of taking part > in the riots/looting. Don't know any more than > that. Will be interested to see what grounds they use for pursuing that, and if there is already a prior history of ASB. Can't see it succeeding if there are no previous ASB orders in place though.

There's definitely a gap in the available labour force and jobs.....and yes, opened ended immigration doesn't help that situation to improve. The result is of course competition for jobs and sadly too many people can not compete. The unemployment figures are disproportionate for those under 24 and those over 45-50. It is easy to say these people won't take jobs but that's not my experience of most of the unemployed I know in those groups. They want jobs, apprenticeships, something that gives them prospects. It's not true to say they are all too fussy either. The fact is that employers do employ prejudice because of age, experience, cost, time unemployed and so on. Another problem that I think has impacted greatly on younger generations is the lack of manual skilled jobs. Everything today requires some level of academic qualification and not all youngsters are cut out for that. When we still had skilled manual jobs, made things etc, a kid could start an apprenticeship aged 14. He learned on the job and wasn't required to go to college and pass exams. He could work his way up into a good job in time and he could see that he could achieve that with time and hard work. A lot of the young people that are so called 'un-employable' fall into that catagory, and our economy has no answers for them.

Also where are the jobs for them to do? Look at the high unemployment rate of 16-24 year olds alone......it's not a happy picture.

I had my lovemessage written and posted by proxy on account of broken arm (now sporting a very fetching purple cast as of this morning!).....I'm just happy Poundland is open again :)

I really can't see magistrates applying the current law on tenancies and anti-social behaviour to those involved in the riots and looting. Anti-social behaviour within tenancies usually refers to immediate locality...neighbours etc and even when those rules are broken...it's takes more than one incident of anti-social behaviour to see a request for reposession granted. The Daily Mail and local authorities can make all the noise they like......there is no precedent for eviction under one incident of anti-social behaviour......warnings and second chances are given first. Eviction ia always a last resort. At the end of the day there are already adaqute laws to deal with those that break the law. To confuse that with established defintions of anti-social behaviour is misleading and any defence lawyer would have a field day with any local authority that tries to evict in respect to those convicted of rioting/ looting. And there will be a cost to society if we start evicting council tenants (whilst those who are not council tenants see no punishment beyond the law).....we effectively are saying by that, that the poorer you are the more you'll lose. The law seeks to apply fairness in punishment......can't see such a measure ever becoming law. Yes we have a serious cultural problem, but it's complex (we have seen those rioting come from a rather wider range of demographic that the media first painted) and will require concerted and complex solutions. If we seek only to punish and deprive.....already disfunctional people will grow in disfunction and in turn pass on that disfunction to their children. Is that the kind of society we really want? Of course those who deserve to be punished should be so, but let's apply some common sense as well, instead of the kind of depressing reactionary tone I saw in the DM this morning.

Wow every month...that's very good. I definitely think that the SNTs make a differnce and encourage anyone to attend those meetings and get involved.

Received this via email today from the organisers of the wall..... So an update on the Peace Wall and its future ; 1 ; Firstly we are now on our second Peace wall ! Poundland replaced their window today but were so touched by the communities work that they paid for a new board to be put over the glass so that the people of Peckham could continue with a new Peace wall. The previous three boards, now all full of amazing post it notes, have been moved to Peckham Library for public display until a more permanent home/exhibition space is found for them. 2 ; Secondly, after all the coverage the council have been in touch about preserving the wall for all to see in the future and to mark the resilience of Peckham People for all to see. As i mentioned the originals are now in the library on display and the new wall is in full swing ! Currently the idea is to preserve the boards in some way and display them permanently under the arches next to Peckham library - potentially with the help of some local artists. We are keen to keep an interactive element going as well so the wall can continue to grow - any ideas regarding this please post them on the Peckham shed Facebook page or on the Peace wall itself. 3 ; Thirdly, Peckham shed would like to ask the community to continue to add to and take responsibility for the Peace Wall. As a small charity we aren't able to man the wall every day but would love for the wall to grow for as long as the community wishes it too. So, if you have any time to pop down or are passing by please ensure all the post it notes are attached properly , that people are encouraged to add their ideas/voices, that pens and post-it notes and sellotape are available. Please also feel free to advertise the wall as much as possible.

They need to change the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 before they can evict anyone for having a conviction I'm afraid. They can threaten but there is no permission in law for them to do so. The same goes for benefits removal. To change the law requires a review and any review would seek to apply the law equally....therefore prejudicing one type of conviction over another would not also be likely to get through.