Slashdot Mirror
4 UK Urban Explorers Face Orders Not To Talk With Each Other For 10 Years
First time accepted submitter Trapezium Artist writes "Four friends apprehended exploring the disused Aldwych station in London's Underground are faced with an 'anti-social behaviour order' (ASBO) which would forbid them from talking to each other for a full 10 years. The so-called 'Aldwych four,' experienced urban explorers, were discovered in the tunnels under the UK's capital city a few days before last year's royal wedding and the greatly increased security measures in place led to their being interviewed by senior members of the British Transport Police. Nevertheless, once their benign intentions had been established, they were let off with a caution. However, following an accident caused by another, unrelated group of urban explorers in the tunnels a few months later, Transport for London applied to have ASBOs issued to the Aldwych four. These would forbid them from any further expeditions, from blogging or otherwise publicly discussing any exploits, and even from talking with each other for the 10 year duration of the order. One could argue about the ethics of urban exploration, but this nevertheless seems like an astonishingly heavy-handed over-reaction by TfL."
I'd imagine there'd be a way to comply with the heavy-handed order while having a venue that is out of reach of the ASBO.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
You incarcerate them when you catch them breaking the ruling. ASBOs are a huge end-run around due process, being civil orders that are written with the intention that they'll be broken so that criminal penalties can be applied.
I remember this government admitting that ASBOs didn't work and promising to do something about them, but nothing seems to have changed.
We forbid you to do forbidden things,
And when you do it you can' t tell anyone,
And tell us immediately if you do it,
Because you will, won't you
To get there you have to go over the active tracks, on the underground. Trespass on the tracks, past any notice that forbids it is a criminal offence under byelaws.
"The oldest recipient of an order to date is an 87-year-old who among other things is forbidden from being sarcastic to his neighbours (July 2003). He was subsequently found guilty of breaking the terms of his order on three separate occasions. He awaits sentencing but the judge has already made it clear that "there will be no prison for an 88 year old man". (Source—Statewatch ASBOwatch)"
I know ASBOs are a farce, but jesus, I didn't know how far we had sunk - as a Brit, I'm amazed at this list of more controversial ASBOs - http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmhaff/80/80we20.htm
The point of an ASBO is that magistrates can basically make up a law on the spot and announce that it applies to just a few people.
In theory, it's meant to deal with small numbers - maybe as few as one - of people that are known to cause trouble by making it illegal for them to do things that would normally be perfectly OK because most people would be able to apply some common sense - but in their case aren't. Essentially it gives some flexibility when you've got someone who's discovered a way of persistently annoying people but can usually stay on the right side of the law. The BBC picked up some good examples a few years ago.
Critics have pointed out that it's absolutely ripe for abuse.
I'd imagine there'd be a way to comply with the heavy-handed order while having a venue that is out of reach of the ASBO.
Can they communicate indirectly, via mutual friends?
If not, then since they likely have a number of mutual friends, they are effectively being told not to communicate with anyone who communicates with others in the affected group. After all, what if a mutual friend mentions something one of the other members of the affected group said? How about indirect communication via two degrees of separation? If they are forbidden from indirect contact, then the order is perilously close to requiring solitary confinement or other drastic social exclusion.
An exclusion which prohibits communication with mutual friends is likely a good test case for the ECJ or the ECHR. Similarly, an order which imposes an onerous obligation on mutual friends which were not subjects of the order, would be a good test case for said mutual friends to bring to the ECJ or ECHR.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
They now appear to be using asbos on repeat offenders of actual crime to strengthen the punishments available. There is a repeat offender from London who travels to Scotland to steal the eggs of protected birds, he now has an asbo preventing him from travelling to Scotland during hatching season.
IIRC the asbo increase the maximum sentence for egg theft (6 months) to 5 years.