No, it doesn’t … if her foot had slipped and she’d run over the protesters then she would have been charged with assault and, if one of the protesters had been killed by her action, she would have been charged with manslaughter (or worse).
I suppose that’s a fair point. I know when I was at school you had to go to the closest. Same for my children as I recall. Now I think the parents can, within reason, can select which the child can go to.
Funny you should say that - I saw a European TV series (The Trial (TV series) - Wikipedia) recently and the murder victim was killed by one of the murderer’s stiletto heels penetrating her eye.
Muddy, you have surprised me, on this thread, you have out and out defended a “Chav”, something I would ordinarily do, but for a different reason, maybe you dislike the protesters or what they stand for more, no excuses now, using your vehicle as a weapon is a no no, in any circumstance.
Yes you are darn right I have . She may be a chav - when I last looked that was not a crime - unlike the up their own fundaments sat in the road who were in fact breaking the law . The useless police should have moved them on … She was also a mother just going about her business taking her child to school . She has no criminal record at all yet the judge came down on her like a ton of bricks . He is probably an up himself misogynist too. Judging by some of the comments here she was judged less by her actions than by her looks and accent .i totally support climate change and have campaigned in my own small way for environmental issues for years . But they should have let this woman through to take her child to school they were completely unhurt and will go home feeling smug and self righteous but what have they gained ?
I don’t think much of them to be quite honest.