Lucy Lawless Arrested For Protesting Arctic Drilling
Does it really even count as an arrest if you are arrested for protesting something like Arctic drilling? When you think of being arrested and serving time in jail I wonder where in the hierarchy of prisoners come the prisoners who were protesting something. Lucy Lawless and six other people were arrested when they climbed aboard a Shell owned oil drillng ship and refused to leave. They were charged with burglary? That one seems odd. A little higher up on the food chain in jail. While being arrested Lucy signed Xena DVD's for all the workers. No, not really. Probably inappropriate to bring them out even if they recognized who she was which is doubtful. The protesters had been on the ship four days before they were arrested. They survived on leftover snow from that guy in Sweden stuck in his car. He didn't need anymore. They definitely set out what they accomplished to do which is bring attention to something very important.
Good for her....Save The Planet
ReplyDeleteShe is so beautiful. Anyone watch Spartacus?
ReplyDeleteLove Spartacus. And Lucy is hilarious when she's on The Soup. Good for her.
ReplyDeleteI was so happy when they "revived" lucy's character for Spartacus. I am still trying to get used to Andy's replacement. I am behind a few eppies but I am going to stick with it.
ReplyDeleteLucy is a class act, Greenpeace is non violent and the oil crew were respectful of them. No one was hurt and it all went down peacefully. She said in an interview with TMZ the reason the arrest took so long is becuase they had to get a crew that could climb to the part of the ship that they had holed up in to arrest them.
Now if this had been the Sea Shepard they would of been throwing stink bombs...
@timebob - Friday's episode finally helped me warm up to this season. I think you'll like it (Gannicus!). It is really tough to not have Andy and John Hannah in this season.
ReplyDeleteLove you Enty, but you just proved you are either 1) not a lawyer; or 2) it has been a REALLY long time since your bar exam (which is a very real possibility--I can't wait to forget this shit). The common law definition of burglary is entering into a dwelling at night with the intent to commit a felony therein. So, if people regularly sleep/live on the ship, and they went in at night, then technically it could be a burglary (although many laws actually change the definition). But I still love you!
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, I'm taking the bar exam tomorrow (another one--I'm already licensed in one state, but need another state). Hence my nerdy soapbox. Thanks for humoring me.
I know people get off on picking Enty apart. But at least take the time to read the article he cited. Before you start popping off.
ReplyDelete1) They weren't arrested in the United States they were arrested in Port Taranaki,New Zealand. So laws differ by continents.
2) They were charged with Burglary.
So yes, get off your soapbox you are wrong.
@bridget -- A burglary *has* to take place at night? That seems pretty...bobo. Thieves have got to target people who go on vacation for days/weeks at a time and vacate their homes. I'm sure that most robberies happen at night, but surely there are many that take place during the day?
ReplyDeleteIt just seems stupid to designate an official time frame for an illegal action. Why wouldn't a burglary be a 24/7 type of felony?
Because it is the "common law" definition, meaning it was probably invented in medieval England or something, it makes no practical sense in modern times (you should see the common law property laws...yeesh!). Most jurisdictions have abolished the nighttime requirement. Why do we still learn about it in law school? That's a good question. And to further cement my nerd status, what most people think of as burglary is actually larceny. And robbery has to involve force. Wow, I need to stop studying! Lol
DeleteThis the article Enty cited which the first sentence says they were arrested for burglary.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nzherald.co.nz/oil-and-gas-extraction/news/article.cfm?c_id=415&objectid=10788218
and less commenting and more studying, ok girl, good luck to you.
...also, why would the building have to be designated as a dwelling? Plenty of stores and other businesses are burglarized at night -- not just homes.
ReplyDeleteConfused as Ida & timebob about burglary, please explain.
ReplyDeleteGreenpeace doesn't get it either but this is from another article with a bit of an explanation. Plus Enty was right, it would only to up any jail time they might get.
ReplyDelete"Despite the fact that the charge of "unlawfully being on a ship" was available, prosecutors have chosen to charge the protestors with the more serious charge of burglary.
Greenpeace insists that no property was taken or damaged during the occupation, Greenpeace says in a statement to media.
Nothing was stolen but the charges of burglary were likely related to trespassing and access to the port, Greenpeaces spokesman on the ground Steve Abel told NBR"
Enty- under the neoliberal guidelines America lives under today, even protesting can be considered a form of domestic terrorism. So yes, if this was here and if they were protesting aspects of the govt, there are laws that could warrant them to serve actual jail time.
ReplyDeleteHow interesting that the neoliberalist's ultimate agenda, that of globalization and the degradation of the environment that is inherently results from that, produces instances where things like Arctic drilling are feasible AND laws that would punish people for voicing their very real concerns about it.
Tell me again why aspects of socialism and communism are bad again? lolol
And I wasn't trying to be rude or condescending. No need for the nasty comments (not you, Ida, that was a valid question asked very politely).
ReplyDeleteBridget, i am glad you shared this information.
ReplyDeleteThough I just read last night and didn't post - it definitely made the Oscars more enjoyable. I also saw that people were upset to see one of the regulars gone. She had gotten into a disagreement w/another regular and has been laying low. It is cool to agree to disagree. It is not cool to tear others apart. I might not post much, but I have been a regular reader since the beginning. Keep up the awesome snark towards the "celebrities!" You guys make me laugh on a daily basis, thank you!!
@Snowstorms- not to get into this but you seem to have a few of your 'facts' skewed IMO.
ReplyDeleteRita was not torn apart by another regular. The regular in question and a few others simply stated their opinion on the way the blog had become the Rita Show. I also quietly agreed with this sentiment with no mean words or names thrown, simply understanding what some of these regulars were trying to let Rita know- that constant bombardment of comments and then commenting on comments and interjecting between other commentors that had nothing to do with her was just...too much.
I honestly think she must have just gotten burnt out by being so involved on this site.
No one banished her or asked her to leave but rather said some truths many of us were beginning to feel.
And btw- someone being here for the few weeks Rita was, I dont deem 'a regular'.
Didnt mean to bring this up again but the overexaggerated way your spun that whole Rita thing struck me for some reason and I had to defend those who said their Rita peace.
What truly bugs me about the whole Rita situation is how "Vinbelle" admitted how she specifically changed her user name in order to call Rita out in a way that I, personally, found really cruel and uncalled for. Yeah, Rita posted about 345345 comments in every single thread, but at least she was NICE -- as opposed to Vinbelle, who should have at least grown some fucking ladyballs and used her regular handle if she was going to summon her inner fourteen year-old and act like the biggest beeyotch in the cafeteria.
ReplyDeleteI know I've been given shit for changing my own user name more than a year ago, but at least *I* never did it with the intention of being an asshole to another person.
That was a really nasty thread, and I don't blame Rita one bit if she bailed on this site for good. Life's too short. Who needs that kind of shit?
Jasmine, I was paraphrasing what was written last night w/o naming names. Luckily I missed what happened w/Rita. I hate to see that kind of thing. Last night a few people missed her, and someone stated she left because of trolls. I am not on any side, but I do hate to see people rude to other posters and i hate to see people uncomfortable to post. When I say that I am a regular reader, I meant just that. I have read this column since I found it years ago. I don't always read the comments though, unless it deals w/a blind item reveal or guess. :-)
ReplyDeleteOr a live blog like last night...the posters sincerely made the ceremony enjoyable - and one poster has a great eye for pointing out the JLo nip slip hours before it was posted about and then denied by her stylist - why deny the obvious?!? Lol
DeleteBravo to Lucy for personally getting involved instead of just making a statement or writing a check.
ReplyDeleteSnowstorms (and Ida), no hard feelings either way. I just dont want Rita to become this poor martyred figure which some of the posters almost make her appear to be.
ReplyDeleteYes, she was nice, but annoying can trump niceties, IMO.
Forgot Vinbelle said some cruel things tho, that I am not down for.
Love to you both~
Lucy has every right to protest for what she believes in. It's called freedom of speech, which is slowly being taken away from us.
ReplyDeleteI however disagree with not drilling in the Artic. I'm 100% for it, and I'm entitled to my opinion. The land is desolate and there are no living creatures or plants there that will be affected.
@crila -- you ARE entitled to your opinion...but you're also incorrect about this issue.
ReplyDeleteThe AWNR is chock full of flora and fauna, and it isn't a icy wasteland at all.
http://arctic.fws.gov/wildlife_habitat.htm
I too love Spartacus and am still sad about Andy.
ReplyDeleteLucy bought attention to the fact of this oil company's pursuit of the almighty dollar, if there is another BP type disaster; due to the remoteness, lack of regulation and resources available, as well as the time it would take to respond and fix it would all be to late, it would be catastrophic to the planet.
For the most part I disagree with Greenpeace and some of their tactics, however Lucy and fellow protestors have some very valid and worth worrying about points.