Following yesterday’s article on the cosy relationship between the police and Scottish Government, who are alarming a remarkably wide range of society, a flurry of information has been passed back to me, including the following notes on the Integration of Scottish Criminal Justice Information Systems (ISCJIS) database. The First Minister has stonewalled requests to breakdown religiously aggravated crime, claiming the Crown Office have destroyed their records, but my source suggests the information is available for analysis in the ISCJIS database. I’m told:
“The material stored (in the ISCJIS database) ranges from simple conviction records, to DNA, and social status. The data is used primarily for presenting Criminal History in court cases, and in identifying suspects in criminal investigations. It is also used of course to measure the social impact of changes in Legislation and Enforcement Policy, as evidenced by the current furore. It will also be used to predict the impact of such changes, particularly as regards Equality and Diversity impacts, which is a statutory requirement of any proposed Legislation. You see, the ‘missing’ data is actually necessary in predicting the impact on Equality of the Offensive Behaviour Bill.”
“Essentially, if you want to know how many Section 74 Breach of the Peace convictions (Aggravation for Religious Prejudice) or even charges, there were at a given point in time in a given court, you simply search on the Breach of the Peace Conviction Code and add the modifier code ‘P’ indicating Religious Aggravation. All such offences are then returned, with full access (rights permitted) to the Reports and Case Notes.”
To assist the First Minister, below is information on what the enquiry form he has to complete looks like. This is a link to the operation manual and if he’s really stuck he can call the helpdesk on 0141-585 – 8333.
We can only speculate why the authorities are so reluctant to disclose information on, on a subject so close to their hearts.
Quick shout for the John Thomson Memorial Fund, which is benefiting from the sale of 60″ posters for the recent stage play, check them out on ebay.
OFFENCE AGGRAVATION
DEFINITION: The code for a crime or offence that adds to the Offence Code by highlighting particular circumstances relating to the specific incident as opposed to the actual charge.
DATA ITEMS: Crime/Offence Aggravator.
PERMISSIBLE CHARACTER SET: Code field – Alpha or Zero.
RANGES/VALUES: The code field is 1 character long and consists of an alpha code, which identifies the Aggravation to the offence committed. It is possible that a charge can have a combination of up to 6 aggravations. An aggravation description may be held in a text field within individual systems and will be an automatic expansion of the Offence Aggravation code into text to specify the nature of the Aggravation.
PRIMARY OWNERSHIP: ISCJIS – maintained by Crown Office.
CODES: Over page:-
CODE Aggravation Inactive indicator
Anticipated activation date
0 No Aggravation
A Anti Social Behaviour
B Offending whilst on Bail
C Cancelled
D Domestic Abuse
E Disability
F Football
G Football Banning Order
H Harassment
I Harassment Order
J Connected to Serious Crime Y October 2010
K Offence against a child
OFFENCE MODIFIER DEFINITION: The code for a crime or offence which provides additional information for the specific incident as opposed to the actual charge.
PERMISSIBLE CHARACTER SET: Code field. Alpha, numeric.
RANGES/VALUES: The code field is 4 characters long and consists of an alphanumeric code, which identifies additional elements of the charge. The code will consist of an alphabetic character followed by 3 numeric characters. If no modifier exists, 4 0’s (zeroes) characters will be transferred. An Offence Modifier description may be held in a text field within individual systems and will be an automatic expansion of the Offence Modifier code into text to specify the nature of the Offence Modifier.
PRIMARY OWNERSHIP: ISCJIS maintained by Crown Office
CODES:- See offence modifier codes. The current
definitions are:-
A For Class A Drugs
B For Class B Drugs
C For Class C Drugs
W For Weapons
L Breach of undertaking
Y October 2010
N Sexual Orientation
O Sex Offenders Order
P Religious
R Racial
S Sexual
Q Transgender
Read CQN Magazine for free online here. Subscriptions to the online copy are discretionary but you can contribute here. Old-school hard copies are available here from Magcloud.
[calameo code=000390171e35a62410844 lang=en page=10 hidelinks=1 width=100% height=500]
1,125 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- ...
- 29
- »
philvis
podium man returns
Great pass from McAvennie to Collins
Thousands whistling or humming the botb?. Celtic hauled up for illicit whistling, or humming, indeedy.
Serge
MIB was Andrew Waddell.
Don’t forget the illicit coughing that a journo tried to get us with.
Haha nice one !
BTW here’s an interesting part of the up and coming Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill 3 stage DEc 14th then its law ! Watch yourselves if travelling on a football day as there is a nice wee clause in there that can catch you even if your not going to a match and only going to see your Granny ! I could not believe the words when I read them ! lol
(4) For the purpose of subsection (2)(aa) and (ab)—
10 (a) a person may be regarded as having been on a journey to or from a regulated
football match whether or not the person attended or intended to attend the match,
and
(b) a person’s journey includes breaks (including overnight breaks).
I encourage you all to start a dialogue with Hum(n)za or your local MSP’s and MP’s. We should all engage these people to make them aware of how we feel. Its ok beating our gums on the forum but if we want action we need to go through the correct channels to make our feelings known to these people who funnily enough are supposed to represent us ! Humza’s email addy is
Humza.Yousaf.msp@scottish.parliament.uk
He is on the Justice Committee and is involved in the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill, or go to the Scottish Parliament website, identify your local rep and pester the hell out of them to make sure they get the message about how you feel !
jude2005 is Neil Lennon \o/ @ 14:51
DOH!!! Red Card !!! TOTALLY illicit, FFS. There was a definite hint of passion in there, along with the word “Celtic”.
What on EARTH were you thinking???
See feckers like you, it’s you what are dragging this club down .
For your football penance, witness 10 hun “penalties” and sings 3 Sashes.
ernie lynch
Re ref’s strike – could have. I’m more inclined to think the police emphasised the ‘illicit’ chanting related to what they see as a terrorist organisation. It’s one of those words that immediately stirs up connotations.
The Legend Johnny Doyle
If you are logged on.Enjoyed meeting you and your mate,on Saturday,nice to have a few beers with fellow tims.Slan
Illicit – ?
Celtic play Udinese in a UEFA competition on Thursday night —-
The crowd will be small but factions within that crowd will engage in political chanting–
eg-
Chants in support of Socialism
Chants which are anti -clerical.
Chants in support of Fascism
Libertarian anti state chants.
Chants in support of the Lega Nord which amongst other things wants independence for a place called somewhere called Padania .
Some might wave banners featuring Che , others might wave banners featuring Mussolini or Stalin ——
Political ? —- you bet . Illicit ? —— You will have to ask UEFA — An organization that has difficulty in defining how long a year is.
What was Celtic charged with ?.
What was the evidence?
Who led the prosecution .?
Did Celtic have a defense ?
Did Celtic dispute the evidence ?
What evidence was used to convict Celtic ?.
Why did Celtic accept they were ” guilty ‘
Kangaroo Court justice accepted by a Board seemingly frightened to say boo to a Goose in case the Daily Record writes bad things about Celtic .
Darren Fletcher to take extended break from football due to health reasons.
Afternoon all.
I was going to get involved in the ol song debate but just came across this story on the bbc website
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-16154756
Innocent kids robbed of their life.
Sobering indeed.
“Colours of Day…….” Bang.
Doh.
Sorry.
“Colours of blue….”
Mmm. Good times ahead for us Tims, eh. I mean they might be the establishment, but it’s not as if they’re petty, or small-minded, is it?…Sorry, got to go, just got a note through the door ordering me to paint my wheelie bin blue. Not a problem at all.
Desmond & Reid discussing Celtic
http://youtu.be/ejOMuJ5zIII
oopla —–
For a place called Padania .
bournesouprecipe
Thanks, Awful decision.
Can we politicise Celtic park with don’t vote SNP banners – big TV audience – or would this be deemed illicit also? ;-)
Serge says:
13 December, 2011 at 14:53
Check 2.04 Clear penalty. I wonder would it have been given Today. I have my doubts.
Dive! Booked. Simples.
I remember a Scottish skier having to have his hair re-dyed when he competed at the Winter Olympics. He had a Saltire dyed into his head. It offended the rule that regarded any flag other than that of the Nation the competitor reprisented as a political jesture. No Saltires. No Triclours. Union Flags only next UEFA game!
Incidently, those who want to continue singing songs about the IRA should remember that just because some of us are equating Alex Salmond with Hitler, (sorry Mr Godwin) the Scottish police with the RUC and are begining to question the motives of our owners, we don’t support you if you intend to continue to damage Celtic.
So do we actually know for definite why we were found guilty yet? If not, how are fans supposed to know what they can song and what might bring further punishment for the club? We can make a good guess in some cases (IRA) but can we, for example, still sing of rebelling against the famine and the crown, or is that too political?
I can understand why the club would not appeal this fine, but surely we must be asking questions of the authorities and local and UEFA level in order to seek both clarification on what is now “illicit” and assurances that we will not be singled out for special treatment. If there are new interpretations of the rules now in play then they must apply to all clubs equally and equitably.
Disgusted with the Celtic directors today by their decision,not to appeal against the fine.
This ,i believe,is Lawwell again trying to split the support against the Green Brigade,since they had the banner against the poppies on our hoops.
Lawwell.a man who has presided over our club,when the skint mob has won three leagues in a row,and God forbid maybe four.
What next ?We will soon be told the tricolour has to be taking down.
Lawwell you are a QUISLING GTF.Let the people sing.Slan.
Gordon_J backing Neil Lennon
See my post at 14:37 it may (or may not) help the debate over what is Illicit !
Silver City Neil Lennon @ 15:09
Do you mind if some of us sing Flower of Scotland? Don’t want to offend anyone, know? The English don’t matter apparently.
what gutless money grabbing w–k–s our board are.Their only concern is money, feck the team feck the fans as long as the figures pan out.No honour, no pride, no shame.The problem is how do we get shot of them ??????????????????????????????????????????????
JackGlasgoow,
Thanks.
“many public figures including those within Strathclyde Police have asked supporters to focus on songs regarding football, which are not offensive and which best reflect their club”
Some thoughts:
YNWA – nothing to do with football, but surely not offensive. Should be OK then
The Fields – nothing to do with football, might be offensive to some (although probably not a “reasonable” person). Certainly reflects the origins of the club though. Where does that leave us?
It’s a minefield. As is often the case, the black and white ends are easy enough but the shades of grey make things very complicated.
TimJim
If there was “Sack The Board” T-Shirts the Board would probably demand they be sold at Official Stores.
Illicit ?
Illicit — means forbidden by law ,rules or custom .
Forbidden -means —-contrary to law /rules.
UEFA have to specify what they regard as illicit .
UEFA have to specify what they are forbidding.
Every club in Serie A is as ” guilty ” as Celtic . Why not punish them ?
Will PTFC be charged with double illicitness every time some of their support chants their views re the Queen and The Pope ?
Paul67 et al
Do not know what the charges were. Not allowed to defend ourselves. Found guilty of all the charges. Will not appeal the conviction. Guilty as charged!
Joseph K CSC
The billionaire was in court today I hear.
South Of Tunis
UEFA’s definition is deliberately woolly, meaning they can penalise whatever they wish. The reason no Italian club has been punished for this (or Spanish, or Turkish, etc.) is because the local police have not complained to UEFA about it.
Once Strathclyde’s finest stepped in, the rest has been inevitable. UEFA are not going to oppose a complaint from the local police force of a member club. Similarly, Celtic appealing the verdict or publicly opposing the views of the police would have been fruitless.
Our issue is with the Scottish police and the political project that they are serving. Nothing else.
Celtic Mac—–
Josef K ?
Absolutely ——
Charged by an organization which doesn’t see fit to specify the details of the alleged offense.
Tried in secret.
Decision made by the same people who charged you with the unspecified offense .
Found guilty.
No justice —– Kangaroo Court
i have received replies from Ruth Davidson and Patrick Harvie to the email i sent yesterday with regards to the offensive behaviour bill
both stating that they are against the legislation.
with regards to the board not appealing the UEFA decision surely we, as celtic supporters, should have an email address at Celtic that we can write to them and give our view of this decision.
does anyone know of an email address for such a purpose at Celtic.
we should inundate them with the questions
why were celtic fans found guilty
what was the crime
what are we not allowed to sing
what other football fans in europe have been found guilty of illicit singing
can we sing these songs during SPL matches but not at UEFA matches, since the SPL belive it to be a police matter
do we live in a democratic, free society?
if so, we need specific details of the crime in order to avoid re-offending
i am astounded of forehead to see that this decision is not being challenged by the Board
let me also state i am no fan of the ra chants, however i defend the right of the people within a free society to express their opinions without it being racist or sectarian.
i am currently ashamed to say that due to my disgust with Labour i voted SNP at the last Holyrood election – well that vote is now up for grabs. as long as this legislation is in place i will never vote SNP ever again.
As Annie Lennox often sung – why, why, why? ad infinitum
I would propose the fans remain silent during the entire home match against Kilmarnock, not even cheering a goal or even shushing when a goal is scored
the board need to get the message from the fans
report card – NOT GOOD ENOUGH!!!! MUST DO BETTER!!!!
HH
I don’t really know why I’m posting this as I won’t have time to engage with any replies but aren’t we still missing some information before we criticise the decision not to appeal? i.e. What was the charge for, and what was the explanation that came with the findings?
Purely for talking sake, say the ‘illicit chanting’ was for ‘ooh ahh up the ra’. Say the Polis recorded it and submitted evidence of it of sufficient numbers partaking that it was irrefutable. UEFA would probably accept it on the word of a police force anyway. Say this was explained to Celtic, the UEFA rule book referenced, and basically it was perceived as unacceptable in their findings in whichever way they construed it. What do Celtic do? Appeal this? On what grounds? Off the top of my head the only grounds would be either 1. denial – do not accept that it happened, or 2. That it is not ‘illicit’.
Point 1 would be futile, Point 2 is a path there is no way the Club is going to go down, and would not get the support of a huge number of Celtic fans anyway i.e. defending the chanting of Ooh ahh up the ra, nomatter the context, lyrical or historical merit.
As I said, there’s still missing information here before anyone is lynched, but we do need to know the findings. If Celtic release a statement stating the lyrics of a the Celtic Symphony were enough to put us on a charge I for one think the fans are respectful, resourceful and savvy enough to drop it/change it rather than fart against thunder. But how can we move forward at all, still without clarification of what’s illicit. We’re listening Celtic, silence is not an option here.
If the police reported Celtic to UEFA, why then did they not report Rangers when they played Hibs?
Discriminatory behaviour surely?
RaRaRasputin
You’ve summed up this whole debacle perfectly.
Uefa HAD to act.
Accept the punishment, our real beef is with the Government and their henchmen (the polis)
By the way, any chance you could do a wee add on???
How about ‘Oo Ah up the RaRaRasputin
Clearly, it is very disappointing and a source of real regret amongst our supporters that Celtic´s proud history of exemplary conduct has been tarnished in this way by such a spineless Chairman.
Carte blanche for the impartial police force and a total annihilation of our fans worldwide reputation awaits.
God forgive you Peter Lawwell.
Faithfulthruandthru
I think its… tictalk@celticfc.net
RaRaRasputin ——
Who gave Scottish Plod the right to complain about the alleged behavior of some UK citizens to an organization based in Switzerland .?
Since when have Scottish Plod assumed the right to act as informants for an organization based in Switzerland ?