I’m glad these two idiots won and I don’t care to whom they gave their money. This really is the grossest intrusion into free speech I’ve ever heard in this country since the 1960s.
A petty little martinet at the council and jobsworth coppers; a horrible combination that, in a more oppressive society, leads to far worse abuses of rights.
You really think Wyre Borough Council have that much control over the police? They reported it, and it was the police’s decision to take action.
And in any case, the report suggests that the cause for the council reporting them wasn’t the ‘Christian literature’, but the ensuing behaviour. I can’t help wondering how calm & rational Mrs Roberts was during her* “call to the council…expressing her religious belief that homosexual practice was morally wrong.”*.
I’m not for one minute suggesting that the police questioning the couple was appropriate…all I’m saying is that the incorrect decision was the one made by the police (they’re supposed to be the experts at dealing with evidence and with information from the public, right?)
Even if your suspicions are correct, so what? Let’s say that you have some sort of psychic inside track on everyone’s motives, and that a different standard should apply to Christian advocacy groups than to all others that raise funds and settle lawsuits. What’s wrong with making money? I mean, you keep lobbing this idea that they took advantage of a chance to make some money like it’s some kind of bad thing along the lines of beating children or bashing women. … Bastard killed his baby, murdered his wife, but worst of all, he sold his car!
The BBC said the Christian Institute “supported them during their fight”. Probably included paying the legal fees for their side of the case. The £10,000 was a settlement out of court, and a chunk of that would have been eaten up by the legal costs. Not even a lot of money when compared to, for instance, some reported American suits, or even some down here.
The council and police didn’t have to settle out of court, but they did, on the advice of their lawyers. A whole lot more than £10,000 could have been swallowed by the legal system if this had gone to trial and possibly appeal. I can’t see where this was a “chance to make money” for anyone concerned.
It’s a shame we maybe can’t regard www.pinknews.co.uk as an authoritative source, because this is a much more amusing slant on the story:
Does England have hate speech laws like Canada has? They are, AFAIK, notoriously hard to prove and pin on someone (the line between freedom of expression and hate speech is fine indeed) but if such a law does exist, then, based on the city council complaint, the cops did have the responsibility to look into it, didn’t they?
I do kind of wonder what the rest of that phone call to the council sounded like, but although I dislike the position this couple has expressed, I do tend to think they have the benefit of the doubt here.
Exactly. And the statement given by Lancashire Police admits that they failed to do this sufficiently before questioning the couple.
I suspect the ‘council official’ who made the call was actually the library assistant who took a public hectoring from Mr Roberts about these leaflets regarding civil partnerships (which is public information, at least in my opinion, not ‘gay rights leaflets’). And it’s likely that on display elsewhere will have been details of the council having a zero-tolerance policy on aggressive behaviour towards their staff.
Maybe my reading just isn’t up to par today (god, and I have 3 more days of Christmas parties to go to!) but how would the police have “looked into” the matter if that wasn’t simply going over and asking the couple what happened? Library video surveillance?
I think I’m just not getting part of what happened, and it really just might be me and exhaustion.
Couple notices “gay rights”/Civil partnership pamphlets in the library, and want to put their “Christian” materials next to it. Library says no (and by extension, the city). A possibly mean conversation/phone call ensues, librarian (or person dealing with the couple) calls the cops to tell them about (allegedly) abusive behaviour by the couple, and the cops go ask the couple what’s up, for about 80 minutes. The couple sues over this?
While I think (unfortunately) that the couple should have been allowed to display their materials too (unless there’s a procedure for it yadda yadda yadda), I don’t think there’s much wrong with the cops responding to a complaint about abusive behaviour. I wonder what their “normal” procedures are, as opposed to what happened.
Maybe I should reread the links, but in the meantime, please feel free to point out the missing link to me! 
Ok, I had missed the 365gay link… saying the couple was brought to the police station for questioning… I suppose that’s where the line was crossed with respect to the police action. I thought it had occurred in their home, which, I think, would have been ok.
That may be misreporting from 365gay. Every British article I’ve read about the case just mentioned police officers going to their house.
Yes. I agree with Kal here. The couple apparently were questioned at home – one source says for an hour and twenty minutes, on their moral beliefs. Irish Times.
From what I’ve been able to make out, the leaflets they objected to were official ones about civil partnerships, presumably alongside other official leaflets about bus times/electoral rolls/whatever, and not part of some kind of Speakers Corner free-for-all.
I’m not really sure whether the contents of their leaflets is actually relevant. A simple polite refusal would have been enough. Or maybe a “Please can you make your submission in writing, enclosing an example?” But sending the Boys In Blue around is completely OTT.
Things that are not clear from the articles include:
was the leaflet an official one giving guidance and information, or one mainly in the interests of a third party?
exactly where and how were these leaflets being displayed?
was the initial referral to the police about the ‘Christian leaflet’ proposal or about subsequent behaviour/altercations/etc.?
If the latter, did the police misinterpret the nature of the complaint?