Arrested for praying

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Of course you must know where all this is heading? Satan is working behind the scenes with mailable earthy agents to eventually set up a regime in which it will be impossible for the messengers of God to call a desperately wicked world to repentance without breaking all kinds of oppressive laws designed to shut the mouths of the righteous.  The adversary’s ultimate objective is to silence the voice of warning from Lord’s prophets and missionaries for engaging in so-called “hate speech” if they dare to teach the gospel of repentance and contrition that God has always commanded his servants to preach.

And based on what I’m seeing on this thread, there will likely be many members who will soon pressure the church to teach a false gospel that asserts men can be saved in their sins, rather than saved from their sins through faith in the atoning Savior, genuine contrition and heartfelt repentance. And if there are any here who think they can dismiss me as a crazy alarmist, you will soon enough see I’m right.

But none of this should come as a surprise for the informed faithful because the scriptures abundantly warn that the day of God’s vengeance upon the wicked is inevitable. It’s for very good and fully justifiable reasons that the prophets repeatedly warn that the Lord is going to destroy the rebellious and cleanse the earth by fire at his Second Coming. The world is very obviously ripening in iniquity for those who can are able to discern the crystal clear signs of the times. And if there are any here who can’t see it, there’s not much else left to say. 

So you agree that these horrible and obnoxious protestors are making Christianity, prayer, and preaching in general morally repugnant to others? And that they serve the purposes of the Father of Lies with their incessant lying and could lead to laws against the expression of religion because religious people refuse to reign in or condemn bad actors?

Wow, I actually agree with you on that point.

Or were you saying that the deceptive protestors are the true servants of God? In that case your views are disgusting and anti-Christ.

[The Nehor]

8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

My empathy is toward one who would be hauled off to jail because it is thought she MIGHT be silently praying in her own mind while standing in the street. Not because she was genuflecting or making hand motions or doing anything else outwardly to indicate that she she was communicating with God. Not only do I empathize with such a person, but I find it shocking, as every freedom-living person should. 

She wanted to be arrested! What part of that don’t you grasp?

Were you this credulous when you were a journalist?

[gav]

23 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

She wanted to be arrested! What part of that don’t you grasp?

Agreed, here motives here are plain to see and direct from her own mouth

 

 

[Calm]

For those who have not read the link provoman provided, I would encourage you to do so for more details, such as the below. This is a neighborhood that is mostly homes with a few small businesses embedded. Apparently without the protests the Clinic was quite discreet. 
 

With the protests though…heavy protesting (relative to a small neighborhood) for 40 days twice a year with smaller protests the rest of the year. If you read the complaints earlier you know that residents could not only see the disruption, they would be hearing the loud chanting and prayers even in their homes. This had gone on for 9 years at another clinic before this one was targeted. The approval of the various aspects of the PSPO was between 80 and 90% among the neighborhood.  The committee exploring a possible PSPO also consulted with the protest group.  She was past the 6 week deadline for challenging the PSPO. 

Quote

The BPAS clinic is a health care facility whose services include providing medical and surgical abortion care. Since Autumn 2019 concerns have been raised about protesters outside Robert Clinic, many of whom are part of 40 Days For Life, a pro-life group which campaigns against abortion.

Twice a year in Autumn and over Lent protestors attendthe Clinic between 8am and 8pm every day, for 40 dayswith as many as 8-9 individuals outside including families and small children. Prior to the shift in focus to the Robert Clinic the group were present outside the Calthorpe Clinic in Edgbaston for 9 years. Outside of the organised 40-day campaigns, members of 40 DFL attend regularly, on a twice weekly basis, to continue their protest.

The activities complained of relate to protesters making known their disapproval of the users, visitors and employees of the clinic by handing out leaflets including leaflets with disturbing and graphic images, praying, chanting, singing hymns; harassing and intimidating behaviour including blocking the pathway to the clinic, approaching those entering the clinic, blocking the pavement, making their views known to anyone in theproposed restricted area including children, taking away from those using the clinic their ability to attend in confidence, free from intimidation or judgment. The protests have led to verbal and on occasion physical confrontations between protesters and other members of the public including local residents. Local residents have reported the effect the activities of the protesters and the presence of the protesters have had on theirquality of life, including being unable to enjoy theirhomes and gardens, having to explain the presence and purpose of the protesters to their own young children,and their mental health being affected by the continuing presence of the protest outside their homes or whilst they go about their day to day lives. Residents have felt upset at the effect the protesters’ presence has on those using the clinic.

Any of the neighbors seeing the same woman standing day after day outside the clinic would know she was there to protest. The police asked her why she was there and she was at least straightforward about being there for the abortion clinic. With that history, her action of showing up day after day would read as a silent protest to anyone, imo. Standing there and refusing to leave isn’t much different in my view than chaining oneself to a gate or fence and daring the police to drag you off.  
 

And then whining about being treated to the standard procedure of being searched for contraband and weapons for the safety of both police and herself and any other prisoners…if she was so mortified about being treated that way all she had to do was agree to go down to the station on her own. She had to have known what was coming and since she had been involved in a lot of protests over the years, had likely experienced the same procedure in the past, a procedure that has saved lives because police do it to everyone. She is acting like she deserves special treatment as a victim when it was her choice to knowingly violated the restricted area and refuse to cooperate with the police.

If she hadn’t played victim, but been up front about testing the law, I could admire her. Doing the ‘poor, little old me’ after years of harassing residents in their own homes, being willing to humiliate the employees and clients of the clinic for what she wants does not create any sympathy in me.
 

She wants her own freedom of movement and privacy when she is on public property while refusing to allow the residents the same in their own homes.  I would put more faith in her claim that she was against harassment, etc if her actions weren’t in direct response to the PSPO that was created to keep a group known for such behaviour out of the area.

Edited December 27, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

According to a Catholic website, her bail conditions (which she didn’t have to agree to, but did to avoid jail time) just banned her from performing public prayer…which makes a lot more sense.

Quote

As part of her bail conditions, restrictions have been placed on her participating in public prayer. Another requirement of her bail, later dropped, banned her from contacting a local priest involved in pro-life work.

https://www.ncregister.com/cna/woman-arrested-by-english-police-for-silent-prayer-near-abortion-facility?amp

Also from an acquaintance of hers:

“In a further infringement of her religious freedoms, Isabel Vaughan-Spruce has been banned from participating in public prayer OUTSIDE the buffer zone to “prevent further offences”.”

https://www.sportskeeda.com/amp/pop-culture/not-anything-violent-debate-ensues-uk-police-arrest-pro-life-activist-praying-outside-abortion-clinic

Edited December 27, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

I have found three FB sources that connect Vaughan-Spruce directly with 40 Days For Life, the group that has been creating disruption in the neighborhood leading to the PSPO. A couple of other sites says she is the head of it, but they didn’t provide any more info.
 

If there is a direct connection, I think she is at the very least bending the truth about being against harassment tactics, she just probably doesn’t see loud chanting of prayers, etc as harassment. 
 

Unfortunately I don’t know how to find a specific post on FB…anyone know?

here is the Google result of one of the hits:

Quote

40 Days for Life: Isabel Vaughan-Spruce introduced the upcoming pro-life witness.

Epoch Times also says she is the leader, but it’s behind a subscription requirement. 
 

Quote

Vaughan-Spruce is the leader of the pro-life group 40 Days for Life ...

As the leader, she would have control over the choice of tactics. 

[Calm]

Quote

In a corrective statement attached to the post, they wrote: “The woman in the video, Isabel Vaughan Spruce, was not arrested for silently praying. 

“She was arrested for breaking a temporary Public Space Protection Order on four separate occasions which were used to ban protests outside of an abortion clinic due to safety concerns.” 

Ms Spruce was charged with breaching an exclusion zone and “four counts of failing to comply with a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO)”, according to West Midlands police. 

She was arrested on December 6 and charged on December 15. 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1713603/anti-abortion-arrest-silently-praying-twitter-fact-check-Row-false-information?

[Calm]

I don’t know if this claim is accurate or not, if anyone sees something, pass it on, please.

Quote

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce is purposely breaching a previous banning order that protects abortion clinics. She breached her bail conditions and that is why after refusing to go to the station voluntarily she was arrested

https://www.sportskeeda.com/amp/pop-culture/not-anything-violent-debate-ensues-uk-police-arrest-pro-life-activist-praying-outside-abortion-clinic
 

The police officer mention having cautioned or something her before, which indicates we don’t have all the discussion(s) between Vaughan-Spruce and the police. If from that day, I really want to know what is on them. 

[Calm]

There is apparently a reason to arrest called “intent on previous form”, they can arrest based on similar behaviour in the past before actually breaking the law iirc. They do this frequently at football matches.  Lot of commentators are pointing to this as sufficient reason for the arrest. 

Edited December 27, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

This is so staged in my view. I am not impressed with the emotional appeal, misrepresentation, and victim playing. 
 

Someone else in her organization got charged earlier. It makes it more likely imo that this was all carefully planned by Vaughan-Spruce and her colleagues to take down an inconvenient privacy/harassment law. 

Edited December 27, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

Warning it’s graphic.

Her slipping the abortion stories into her interrogation and into this video tells me she sees boundaries differently than the police and likely the neighbourhood.  This is someone who knows exactly what she was doing and what was going to happen, imo, and it is what she wanted to happen. 
 

 

[Calm]

She says she runs a 40 days for life campaign in Birmingham here, so she was personally responsible for the behaviour that got the PSPO put into place.

https://www.facebook.com/MarchForLifeUK/videos/isabel-vaughan-spruce-march-for-life-uk-2019/406466403541211/

[Hamba Tuhan]

11 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Free speech is a sticky mess.

Very messy.

Quote

In 1837, Missouri banned abolitionist expression of any kind. Within a couple of years, every Southern state had adopted laws that limited the freedom of speech with regard to abolitionist sentiment ...

In parts of Louisiana, strangers could be arrested for conversing with blacks.

[Ragerunner]

This person got what they wanted. Attention by ‘right wingers’ to scream the sky is falling, without taking any time to understand the situation.
Isabel even got a growing 9 page thread on Mormon Dialogue. 

Events like this remind me of a quote by Dallin H Oaks. (Even though this event took place in the UK, I think it applies.)

“But even though the First Amendment obviously guarantees the right to exercise or practice religious beliefs and affiliations, that right is not absolute. As advocates for religious freedom, we must yield to the fact that in a nation with citizens of many different religious beliefs or disbeliefs, the government must sometimes limit the right of some to act upon their beliefs when it is necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of all.”

[SeekingUnderstanding]

3 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Very messy.

Yes indeed. The flyer is a great example of free speech (from both sides). The laws not so much. The more we find certain speech distasteful, the stronger our urge should be to protect it (not platform it, or promote it). Curtailments to speech should be drawn as narrowly as possible. 

[pogi]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1713603/anti-abortion-arrest-silently-praying-twitter-fact-check-Row-false-information?

Just reposting this for emphasis.   Will the false claims that she was arrested and charged with praying please stop once and for all!?

“The woman in the video, Isabel Vaughan Spruce, was not arrested for silently praying. 

“She was arrested for breaking a temporary Public Space Protection Order on four separate occasions which were used to ban protests outside of an abortion clinic due to safety concerns”

“Ms Spruce was charged with breaching an exclusion zone and “four counts of failing to comply with a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO)”, according to West Midlands police.”

She was arrested on December 6 and charged on December 15. 

[provoman]

6 minutes ago, pogi said:

 

Just reposting this for emphasis.   Will the false claims that she was arrested and charged with praying please stop once and for all!?

“The woman in the video, Isabel Vaughan Spruce, was not arrested for silently praying. 

“She was arrested for breaking a temporary Public Space Protection Order on four separate occasions which were used to ban protests outside of an abortion clinic due to safety concerns”

“Ms Spruce was charged with breaching an exclusion zone and “four counts of failing to comply with a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO)”, according to West Midlands police.”

She was arrested on December 6 and charged on December 15. 

What are the four counts? Specifically, what acts had she committed that would permit the police to arrest on "suspicion" of breeching the PSPO? What was the specific act(s), that constituted the breech?   

If you do not know, you do not have a reasonable basis for labeling something a "false claim"

 

[provoman]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

Warning it’s graphic.

Her slipping the abortion stories into her interrogation and into this video tells me she sees boundaries differently than the police and likely the neighbourhood.  This is someone who knows exactly what she was doing and what was going to happen, imo, and it is what she wanted to happen. 
 

 

If I understand a news source correctly, she or an org she works for filed a suit against the Council regarding the PSPO to include silent prayer.

I am not familiar with our cousins legal system, and only have limited knowledge of the US system; but, in the US a case might be dismissed because the court finds a claim unlikely to happen.

Example:

I file a suit on the basis that I "might be arrested and/or charged for "silent prayer"".

The court could say "inconceivable, that is unlikely to happen".

But being able to show it actually happened, could inform the court of how law enforcement is actually applying the law.

[smac97]

17 minutes ago, pogi said:

Quote

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1713603/anti-abortion-arrest-silently-praying-twitter-fact-check-Row-false-information?

Just reposting this for emphasis.   Will the false claims that she was arrested and charged with praying please stop once and for all!?

“The woman in the video, Isabel Vaughan Spruce, was not arrested for silently praying. 

“She was arrested for breaking a temporary Public Space Protection Order on four separate occasions which were used to ban protests outside of an abortion clinic due to safety concerns”

“Ms Spruce was charged with breaching an exclusion zone and “four counts of failing to comply with a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO)”, according to West Midlands police.”

She was arrested on December 6 and charged on December 15. 

Notably absent is any explanation in this "corrective statement" regarding what she did on these "four separate occasions" which constitutes "breaking a temporary Public Space Protection Order."

I wonder why that is.  Meanwhile, here is Ms. Vaughan-Spruce's explanation of what happened:

"I was arrested outside an abortion center in Birmingham for silently praying."

"I had been there three times previously, outside a closed abortion center."

"There's a censorship zone, a PSPO, around this abortion center, which does prohibit certain activities, like protesting."

"When the police came, they asked me if I was protesting, I made it clear to them I wasn't protesting.  They asked me if I was praying, and I said I might be silently praying, and on that basis they arrested me.  They did a full body search on the pavement, including thoroughly searching through my hair, confiscating everything out of my pockets, including my tissues.  And I was then escorted down to the police station, locked in a cell for a few hours, and then interviewed by two police officers.  The officers wanted to know in the interview, was I praying?  And again, I told them I was praying.  They wanted to know what I was praying about.  I remember telling the police officers that I was praying for people like my friend Amy who was raped and became pregnant as a consequence, and was pressured into having an abortion, which she later deeply regretted.  I was praying for people like my friend Natalya, who, after taking abortion pills, ended up passing her child at home down the toilet, which she saw, and is now traumatized for life.  ... The police, I felt, weren't sympathetic to this.  They were maybe more interested in finding out if I was protesting in any way, which clearly I wasn't.  I was not there to protest.  I was then released on bail.  One of the terms of bail was that I was not allowed to go back to the abortion center.  I was then subsequently charged on four counts of breaching the PSPO, and am now due to appear in court in February.   ... There's quite a few of them {PSPOs} springing up around the country, imposed by local councils.  These are prohibiting not just protesting, not just harassing and intimidation, which of course are already prohibited and should be prohibited, not just outside abortion centers, but anywhere, but prohibiting things like prayer, counseling, and as we can see in my case, it's gone even further than this.  It's not just vocal prayer, or prayer that's manifested, but silent prayer inside my own head.  So my own thoughts are now being censored. ... It's unbelievable that police would seriously be trying to clamp down on what people are thinking, to be actually quizzing them, to be asking them 'What were you thinking about?', 'What were you praying about?' as you were standing silently somewhere.  But this is the reality.  This is what's happening.  Thought is becoming a crime."

See also here:

Quote

ADF said authorities confronted the woman after receiving complaints from an observer who suspected that Vaughan-Spruce was praying silently in her mind.
...

Police arrested Vaughan-Spruce on December 6 and subsequently charged her on December 15 with four counts of failing to comply with a Public Space Protection Order in so-called censorship zones, which authorities introduced to criminalize individuals appearing to be “engaging in any act of approval or disapproval or attempted act of approval or disapproval.”

Such acts include “verbal or written means, prayer or counseling” in relation to abortion, according to ADF U.K.
...

Jeremiah Igunnubole, legal counsel for ADF U.K. supporting Vaughan-Spruce, said, “Isabel’s experience should be deeply concerning to all those who believe that our hard-fought fundamental rights are worth protecting.”

“It is truly astonishing that the law has granted local authorities such wide and unaccountable discretion, that now even thoughts deemed ‘wrong’ can lead to a humiliating arrest and a criminal charge,” Igunnubole said.

The Daily Signal reported that Scottish communications officer for ADF U.K. Lois McLatchie said in a statement that “no citizen should be criminalized for legitimate, peaceful activity, even prayer.”

“Isabel’s case demonstrates just how far the state can go if we do not vigilantly guard fundamental rights and freedoms,” McLatchie said.

Vaughn-Spruce posted bail and will appear at Birmingham Magistrates’ Court on February 2.

The arrest follows two other incidents within the last two years where local police told a praying woman in Southern England to leave despite standing outside the local censorship zone, and a grandmother from Liverpool was arrested and fined for praying silently near an abortion facility on a walk during COVID lockdown.

"An observer who suspected that Vaughan-Spruce was praying silently in her mind."

Seems like whether she was arrested for doing nothing more than silently praying (as in praying in her mind) is still an unsettled question.

Thanks,

-Smac

[pogi]

27 minutes ago, smac97 said:

"I was arrested outside an abortion center in Birmingham for silently praying."

Round and round we go.

We all saw your video Ms. Vaugh-Spruce and know that isn't true.  Here is what she was arrested for, and it wasn't "for silently praying". 

On 12/26/2022 at 1:37 AM, pogi said:

Full context, to clear and shatter the smoke and mirrors:

• Officer: What are you here for today?
• Vaughan-Spruce: Physically, I'm just standing here.
• Officer: Okay.  Why here of all places?  I know you don't live nearby.
• Vaughan-Spruce: …this is an abortion center.
• Officer: Okay.  That's why you're here.  Is you standing here part of a protest? [Primary suspicion and good reasonable justification for arrest, despite her response]
• Vaughan-Spruce: No.  I'm not protesting.
• Officer: Are you praying?
• Vaughan-Spruce: I might be praying in my head.

[Note, no arrest immediately following this line of questioning, no arrest for what she’s “maybe” thinking in her head, but they want to question her suspicious behavior over several days and regarding specific allegations of violating the order (no mention of prayer)]

• Officer: I'll ask you once more.  Will you voluntarily come with us now to the police station for me to ask you some questions about today and other days where there are allegations that you've broken the public space protection order?
• Vaughan-Spruce: If I've got a choice, then no.  
• Officer: Okay.  Then you're under arrest on suspicion of failing to comply with the public spaces protection order, which is in the anti-social behavior... 

She was not arrested “for praying”, but “on suspicion of failing to comply with the public spaces protection order” (no mention of prayer), and to question her further about “allegations” and to find out more about her suspicious behavior there over multiple days.
 
To not take her in under suspicion given the unusual behavior over several DAYS, complaints and allegations, and given her testimony that she was specifically targeting the out of the way clinic with her unusual behavior, would have been negligent on the part of the police!  At the bare minimum, some kind of statement/protest?  Praying out loud on other days (hard to tell from”pictures”)?  Something more sinister? they had no idea what it was exactly that was going on - but reasonably suspicious for sure, and questions about praying don’t seem out of line.

She never admitted to praying, so to assume that is why she was arrested is unreasonable given what the police actually said.  Again, was she ever charged with praying, or are y’all going to blindly continue their deception in the name of prayer (weaponizing it without cause) without the facts?  Was she ever charged with anything?

To make this arrest about “prayer” specifically is to completely ignore and distort what the police actually said.   Thanks, and to all a good night.

Quote

 

Nope.  There were “allegations” that she violated the order over multiple days that they wanted to question her about.  Most likely surrounding his VERY FIRST QUESTION to her - “Is your standing here part of a protest”?  Hello!  Bingo! Winter-winner-winner!!!  His very FIRST suspicion, and possibly part of the “allegations” (since that is what he asked first) is that her standing there over 3 days is part of a protest.  

Don’t take her denial as good reason for him to dismiss his natural, obvious, reasonable, and good instinct/suspicion that she is protesting.  No cop is that stupid to believe the suspect every time they deny violating the law.

Lots of things to question her further about with a little more information, “if this is not a protest, why does it appear to be an organized effort with an ambushing camera-man (strange for private prayer) from a pro- life (not religious freedom) organization with a media angle?”   “Wait, you are the President of a pro-life activist group…?  

This all would have been so much more believable that this was actually about prayer and religious liberty if they were from religious liberty organizations and not pro-life organizations targeting their efforts in front of an abortion clinic for crying out loud!  Seems a reasonable suspicion to me - call me crazy for suggesting that “praying” was not “the only” suspicion the police had about this organized effort from pro-life activists when they arrested her!  They knew who she was and where she lived.  The clinic likely knew exactly who she was and what she was doing there, and reported that to the police, aka the “allegations”.

Don’t believe for a second that she was only questioned further about “prayer”,  that is all they intentionally “mirror” back to you, leaving the rest of the context of questioning and charges (as far as I can tell - since nobody can bring it forward) hidden.

They arrested her on reasonable suspicion - not on how “truthfully” she answered his questions.  It is entirely unreasonable to assume that he is arresting her based solely on how she answered his questions.  That’s nonsense.

 

If one of those counts includes "silent praying", then why doesn't she just make it public?   Enough with the smoke and mirrors and show us the proof Ms. Vaughn-Spruce, and all others repeating her claims as facts without evidence.  Clearly she is trying to control the narrative, but it doesn't match the narrative of the police at all. 

 

Edited December 27, 2022 by pogi

[SeekingUnderstanding]

23 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I was not there to protest. 

That is a load of b*ll s*** and undermines everything else she says. She was there to publicly protest against what she sees as an unduly restrictive public order. 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

receiving complaints from an observer who suspected that Vaughan-Spruce was praying silently in her mind.

Was this observer a member of Vaughan-Spruce’s organization? 

[JAHS]

54 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

That is a load of b*ll s*** and undermines everything else she says. She was there to publicly protest against what she sees as an unduly restrictive public order. 

Right. If she was only there to pray, she could have done that at home, or at least walk up and down the street instead of just standing there. 

[pogi]

2 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Right. If she was only there to pray, she could have done that at home, or at least walk up and down the street instead of just standing there. 

Not to mention the ambushing camera man (not from a religious liberty group, but from a pro-life group). 

[provoman]

1 hour ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

That is a load of b*ll s*** and undermines everything else she says. She was there to publicly protest against what she sees as an unduly restrictive public order. 

Ok, lets examine that.

The PSPO only refers to protesting for or against abortion.

If she was there to protest the PSPO itself, she did not violate the PSPO.

And since only protesting for or against abortion is prohibited she was falsely arrested.