No news on Charlie Gimour trial

[popelaura2003+-]

As noted in the press, Charlie Gilmour was set to stand trial for crimes committed during the student unrest -- including a clash with the royals and their entourage -- on April 26.
There is not a peep about the trial going forward in any press.
Did Charlie's lawyer wisely reschedule the proceedings given the pro-royal sentiment since the big wedding?
Will the story emerge months from now?

[Keith Jordan]

Or perhaps a super-injunction has taken place!

[my breakfast.]

Well the Americans are too busy pretending that they killed a semi-fictional TV baddy (Trump must have found some good shit on Obama's birth certificate for this smoke screen) and in Britain we are still reeling after a useless chinless wonder (and daredevil stunt helicopter pilot) married some proletarian social climber with a long face.


Actually Charlie should have fucking dynamited the cenotaph. Its a bit disingenuous for a government to throw up some pile of stones every time they send a bunch of kids out to die in some land grab. "Sorry we killed the working population of males in your entire area, but you will be pleased to know we made a mid-priced white marble chunk down here in London, you might get to visit it one day!". Fucking paltry.

[Stephen]

Actually Charlie should have fucking dynamited the cenotaph. Its a bit disingenuous for a government to throw up some pile of stones every time they send a bunch of kids out to die in some land grab. "Sorry we killed the working population of males in your entire area, but you will be pleased to know we made a mid-priced white marble chunk down here in London, you might get to visit it one day!". Fucking paltry.

The alternative, to just forget them, seems to be a far more disagreeable prospect to me.

[my breakfast.]

There must be a better way, or more direct way, of honouring them rather than making all these untouchable chunks of modestly expensive rock about the place.

[Stephen]

Maybe so but it isn't just a British institution of course as these are found throughout the world, and I think that it serves a good purpose to have something as stark and blunt as that to make people reflect on the futility of it all, and of course the bravery of those who died. It definitely shouldn't be a target for anti-war protesters as the edifice itself should represent that anyway. Maybe that's my view as an older person and times have changed but it will be a sad day when the deeds of those people get brushed aside and forgotten I think.

[my breakfast.]

Yes, but those monuments were made by the people who sent those guys out to die in their place. If they were erected using money from the families of the war dead then you should never touch them. However the government could always use their money to build much bigger memorials, or to compensate the families. They could always do more as they caused the deaths of those guys in the first place.

A bit like the Lancaster bomber they had over the Royal Wedding. Why fly past a plane that was being pilotted by dudes younger than me in 1945 deep over enemy country? The Royals 'deserve' this? They are entitled to it? Those planes were made out of sheer desperation, the need to flatten factories making stuff in other countries, the need to demolish dams for hydroelectric power and the need to bomb civilian homes. There is nothing stately or heroic about antiquated battle equipment from one of this country's darkest hours.

[Stephen]

Maybe one of those bouncing bombs could have been landed in the balcony


It would surely have been totally unfeeling to ask the families of the war dead to pay for a memorial instead of the government so I really can't see what else they could have done.

[my breakfast.]

It would surely have been totally unfeeling to ask the families of the war dead...

I'm not saying central government would ask the families, it would be the families acting off their own bat IF they wanted anything in the first place. For the government to not admit guilt in the whole process but to throw up little stone columns and then put a moral exclusion zone around them is the problem I have here.

[snifferdog]

There's never a right or a wrong in these cases. It's true that it was ordinary people who got sent out to battle in a lot of cases and that the ones calling the shots weren't ever in the same danger. On the other hand, if nothing had ever been done to commemorate the war dead, would that have been wrong too? It's all about symbology really.

[Stephen]

I'm not saying central government would ask the families, it would be the families acting off their own bat IF they wanted anything in the first place. For the government to not admit guilt in the whole process but to throw up little stone columns and then put a moral exclusion zone around them is the problem I have here.

Maybe if you could put yourself in the position of having a brother, sister, mother or father who was killed would you feel that you wanted them to be remembered in a very public way on a specific date rather than just be a footnote in family annals? I really don't think anything would happen if it were left to families to do it off their own bat Alan. Apart from organising the whole thing you would need permission from local councils and need the families themselves to agree on siting etc. At least when they are erected by the government they will be there in perpetuity . I guess it's one of those many occasions when the government can't please everyone but I still think they should be respected and that young children should be taught their meaning.

[popelaura2003+-]

Wow, just wondered what had happened to the Charlie Gilmour prosecution and inadvertently hit raw nerves about how to remember the fallen and the quagmire that is the Royal Family.
Not my intention.
I was surprised to read that Charlie opted for a trial at all, though the charges that he mucked with Charles and Camilla's caravan sound sort of serious.
Will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

[my breakfast.]

Sorry for derailing your thread.

[snifferdog]

It's a good point though. He was due to appear in court again on 26th April but there's nothing online.

[Keith Jordan]

Super Injunction!