1
00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:02,040
Speaker 1: We have a second case of a judge ordering police

2
00:00:02,040 --> 00:00:04,240
Speaker 1: to give a mongl mob member his patch back. So

3
00:00:04,280 --> 00:00:09,200
Speaker 1: what's happened here is Sidterata was busted riding his motorbike

4
00:00:09,240 --> 00:00:10,760
Speaker 1: in the middle of the night and Lowerhart near his

5
00:00:10,800 --> 00:00:13,280
Speaker 1: patch on, and the judge found because he was riding

6
00:00:13,280 --> 00:00:15,040
Speaker 1: in the middle of the night, he wasn't causing public

7
00:00:15,120 --> 00:00:16,919
Speaker 1: disorder and he was coming home from a tonguey so

8
00:00:16,960 --> 00:00:19,360
Speaker 1: he would have been emotional, and the judge accepted he'd

9
00:00:19,400 --> 00:00:21,239
Speaker 1: made a mistake and so told the cops hand the

10
00:00:21,239 --> 00:00:24,439
Speaker 1: patch back. Al Gillespie is a White Cuttle University law professor.

11
00:00:24,480 --> 00:00:28,320
Speaker 1: Heyl has the judge made a fair call here or

12
00:00:28,400 --> 00:00:29,400
Speaker 1: is he being too soft?

13
00:00:30,600 --> 00:00:33,040
Speaker 2: It's the same call that we had a couple of

14
00:00:33,080 --> 00:00:35,559
Speaker 2: weeks ago, that the law does not mandate that the

15
00:00:35,600 --> 00:00:38,400
Speaker 2: patch has to be destroyed, and if there's a discretion

16
00:00:38,560 --> 00:00:40,960
Speaker 2: in the law, then judges aren't able to utilize it

17
00:00:40,960 --> 00:00:43,160
Speaker 2: as they have done. We might disagree with it, yeah,

18
00:00:43,200 --> 00:00:44,760
Speaker 2: and if you want it, and if you do disagree

19
00:00:44,760 --> 00:00:47,720
Speaker 2: with it, that's fine, but change the law. But just

20
00:00:47,760 --> 00:00:50,199
Speaker 2: because of a judge interprets it in that way, that's

21
00:00:50,240 --> 00:00:50,760
Speaker 2: their call.

22
00:00:51,400 --> 00:00:53,120
Speaker 1: Has the judge I mean, correct me if I'm wrong,

23
00:00:53,120 --> 00:00:55,080
Speaker 1: But it also sounds like the judges basically made the

24
00:00:55,080 --> 00:00:57,520
Speaker 1: call that the cops shouldn't have necessarily taken it often

25
00:00:57,600 --> 00:01:00,880
Speaker 1: because he was tired and emotional and and just driving

26
00:01:00,880 --> 00:01:01,400
Speaker 1: around at night.

27
00:01:02,320 --> 00:01:04,520
Speaker 2: That's not how I see the case. I mean, part

28
00:01:04,560 --> 00:01:07,080
Speaker 2: of the penalty is still involved him having a gang

29
00:01:07,120 --> 00:01:09,039
Speaker 2: patch in a public place, which is the basis of

30
00:01:09,040 --> 00:01:12,280
Speaker 2: the law, and he's faced penalty to that, and that's correct,

31
00:01:12,319 --> 00:01:14,800
Speaker 2: and it's a good thing. The bigger question is whether

32
00:01:14,840 --> 00:01:16,840
Speaker 2: the gang patch should be destroyed, and the law does

33
00:01:16,840 --> 00:01:20,560
Speaker 2: not mandate that it must be destroyed. There's a possibility

34
00:01:20,600 --> 00:01:22,960
Speaker 2: for what the judge may do, but it's not mandated

35
00:01:22,959 --> 00:01:25,120
Speaker 2: that he must do it. If Parliament wants to change it,

36
00:01:25,280 --> 00:01:25,720
Speaker 2: change it.

37
00:01:26,480 --> 00:01:30,560
Speaker 1: Paul Goldsmith says it's only a couple of cases, not

38
00:01:30,640 --> 00:01:32,600
Speaker 1: a big deal. But if it's a couple of cases,

39
00:01:32,600 --> 00:01:34,360
Speaker 1: shouldn't we expect there will be more of these.

40
00:01:36,000 --> 00:01:40,200
Speaker 2: I think we could see more. Yeah, I think that's

41
00:01:40,280 --> 00:01:43,080
Speaker 2: quite possible. But we've got to also take a step

42
00:01:43,080 --> 00:01:45,640
Speaker 2: back here and actually think about the issue at hand.

43
00:01:45,720 --> 00:01:48,120
Speaker 2: And that's sort of like the actual destruction of private property,

44
00:01:48,760 --> 00:01:53,120
Speaker 2: especially of insignia, which some people may find objectionable. This

45
00:01:53,200 --> 00:01:55,760
Speaker 2: is a different area that we need to think carefully

46
00:01:55,800 --> 00:01:58,840
Speaker 2: about because there are certain objectionable things in our society

47
00:01:59,360 --> 00:02:01,320
Speaker 2: that you may want to prohibit and then if you

48
00:02:01,320 --> 00:02:03,760
Speaker 2: have to destroy them all, and that could have far

49
00:02:03,800 --> 00:02:04,720
Speaker 2: reaching implications.

50
00:02:05,120 --> 00:02:07,520
Speaker 1: Expand on that, what do you mean, Well, you.

51
00:02:07,520 --> 00:02:10,000
Speaker 2: Could think about saying Nazi insignia and some people would

52
00:02:10,000 --> 00:02:12,440
Speaker 2: say find that very objectionable, and whether that should be

53
00:02:12,440 --> 00:02:14,959
Speaker 2: destroyed or prohibited. But you've still got an argument of

54
00:02:15,000 --> 00:02:17,320
Speaker 2: free speech even though we disagree with it. But if

55
00:02:17,360 --> 00:02:19,080
Speaker 2: it's in private or if it's in public, it's a

56
00:02:19,080 --> 00:02:21,760
Speaker 2: different debate. But if it's in private, whether you want

57
00:02:21,800 --> 00:02:23,920
Speaker 2: to actually get into someone's house and say you aren't

58
00:02:23,960 --> 00:02:26,400
Speaker 2: allowed that sign at all, it is very different from

59
00:02:26,400 --> 00:02:27,600
Speaker 2: saying you can't wear it in public.

60
00:02:28,760 --> 00:02:30,959
Speaker 1: Okay, so basically he's not allowed to wear it in public,

61
00:02:31,000 --> 00:02:33,079
Speaker 1: but he can get it back and wear it around

62
00:02:33,080 --> 00:02:33,400
Speaker 1: the house.

63
00:02:34,760 --> 00:02:38,560
Speaker 2: It's an option for It's about the problem that gang

64
00:02:38,600 --> 00:02:43,160
Speaker 2: patches cause when they're in public, for intimidation and for identity,

65
00:02:43,440 --> 00:02:45,280
Speaker 2: and there's a lot of good things that are happening

66
00:02:45,280 --> 00:02:47,360
Speaker 2: from this law. But it's not about saying that the

67
00:02:47,400 --> 00:02:49,920
Speaker 2: gang patch itself was prohibited. It's about saying that the

68
00:02:49,919 --> 00:02:52,120
Speaker 2: gang patch in public is prohibited.

69
00:02:51,919 --> 00:02:54,200
Speaker 1: Right, Al, thank you so much for explaining. Al Gillespie,

70
00:02:54,240 --> 00:02:57,519
Speaker 1: law professor at Wycoff University. Now Police Minister Mark Mitchell

71
00:02:57,600 --> 00:02:58,240
Speaker 1: was asked about this.

72
00:02:58,400 --> 00:03:01,639
Speaker 3: Yeah, I am disappointed out of doubt, but look like

73
00:03:01,960 --> 00:03:04,760
Speaker 3: I said, I don't comment on judicial decisions.

74
00:03:04,960 --> 00:03:07,000
Speaker 1: He's revealed that the decisions are being appealed.

75
00:03:07,160 --> 00:03:10,000
Speaker 3: We've got a process for that and the process has

76
00:03:10,040 --> 00:03:12,560
Speaker 3: been followed. And that quite simply is that the police

77
00:03:12,560 --> 00:03:14,640
Speaker 3: have appealed and they getting crowded or advice a second.

78
00:03:15,560 --> 00:03:18,720
Speaker 1: For more from Heather Duplessy Allen Drive. Listen live to

79
00:03:18,800 --> 00:03:21,840
Speaker 1: news talks. It'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow

80
00:03:21,880 --> 00:03:23,600
Speaker 1: the podcast on iHeartRadio