Pro-meat protesters fined for eating raw squirrels at vegan stall

Two pro-meat protesters have been fined after eating raw squirrels at a food market.

Deonisy Khlebnikov, 22, and Gatis Lagzdins, 29, ate the still fur-covered dead animals in front of members of the public, including young children, outside a vegan stall in Soho, the West End of London.

The pair were asked to stop by onlookers, including the parent of an upset child, but continued their protest at the Soho vegan food market in Rupert Street on 30 March, the Crown Prosecution Service said.

They were found guilty of a public order offence at City of London magistrates court on Monday.

Natalie Clines, a senior CPS prosecutor, said: “Deonisy Khlebnikov and Gatis Lagzdins claimed they were against veganism and were raising awareness about the dangers of not eating meat when they publicly consumed raw squirrels.

“But by choosing to do this outside a vegan food stall and continuing with their disgusting and unnecessary behaviour despite requests to stop, including from a parent whose child was upset by their actions, the prosecution was able to demonstrate that they had planned and intended to cause distress to the public.

“Their premeditated actions caused significant distress to members of the public, including young children.”

The pair denied using disorderly behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress at a trial but were both convicted.

Khlebnikov, from Westminster, was fined £200 plus costs and a surcharge, while Lagzdins, from Ealing in west London, who did not attend the hearing, was fined £400 plus costs and a surcharge.


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jul/23/pro-meat-protesters-fined-eating-raw-squirrels-vegan-stall?CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium=&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1563886721


The world is truely going mad. Whether you think this is wrong or not, being arrested for this and fined is utterly ridiculous.

I don't agree if there is a law against harassing, alarming or causing distress to other people, so be it, they were asked to stop and didn't.
Why they feel the need to protest at a vegan stall is beyond me, no one is forcing or preventing them eating meat, at least not in a lawful way. If people were protesting against eating meat and harassed, alarmed or caused distress in a similar way, my answer would be the same.

Vintage wrote:I don't agree if there is a law against harassing, alarming or causing distress to other people, so be it, they were asked to stop and didn't.
Why they feel the need to protest at a vegan stall is beyond me, no one is forcing or preventing them eating meat, at least not in a lawful way. If people were protesting against eating meat and harassed, alarmed or caused distress in a similar way, my answer would be the same.

So basically now anyone can get arrested and fined based on a perceived view of being upset by others. Daily Vegan protesters get away with screaming "muderer" to people simple going to a place to eat. If the law is going to be based on a pereceived view of upset, then this must apply universally to all

I will remind myself to break down and get upset the next time I see someone eating a carrot in public

I tred to think how these people would survive if there was a global disaster, because believe me. They would being tucking in the very same as those men were.

phildidge wrote:

Vintage wrote:I don't agree if there is a law against harassing, alarming or causing distress to other people, so be it, they were asked to stop and didn't.
Why they feel the need to protest at a vegan stall is beyond me, no one is forcing or preventing them eating meat, at least not in a lawful way. If people were protesting against eating meat and harassed, alarmed or caused distress in a similar way, my answer would be the same.

I will remind myself to break down and get upset the next time I see someone eating a carrot in public

.

hahahahahahaha

gelico wrote:

phildidge wrote:


I will remind myself to break down and get upset the next time I see someone eating a carrot in public

.

hahahahahahaha

Vintage wrote:I don't agree if there is a law against harassing, alarming or causing distress to other people, so be it, they were asked to stop and didn't.
Why they feel the need to protest at a vegan stall is beyond me, no one is forcing or preventing them eating meat, at least not in a lawful way. If people were protesting against eating meat and harassed, alarmed or caused distress in a similar way, my answer would be the same.

Why does anyone feel the need to protest anywhere?

It's a different angle for me, I don't eat meat, if people want to protest fair enough but there is no need to harass others while doing it. I just don't see the point in protesting like that. Personally I prefer not to eat carrots in public as such nefarious activity should be kept private.

only one thing to say...NO-ONE has the right "not to be offended"
and the parents of that child should be arrested for child abuse, since clearly they are bringing up a wimp, fed on disneyesque anthropomorphism.

get this peoples.. grey squirrels (and given the protected status of reds in thus country (including the human ones) they wouold have been busted to hell for eating one) are the rodent embodiment of evil.

Rodent embodiment of evil?
Where does that leave humans on the embodiment of evil scale, we are supposed to know what and why we do things.

Apologies if I am getting your point wrong, very warm, very tired I'm not sure I'm getting it right.

vicious, disease ridden, wildlife destroying, woodland wrecking monsters they are...there is a permanent state of war declared between them and me in our woodland (and anywhere else i have shooting rights...)

I would exterminate the lot of em.......

personally, I'd send em all back to the third world shit hole they came from ........(sorry Ben...just following Trumpy's lead..... )

I can never understand why people get so upset about eating meat or not eating meat.

Yes, eating too much meat can harm your health, and meat production contributes to global warming, and most of the livestock is treated inhumanely. Those are the only important facts in the debate, really.

Screaming "meat is murder" is idiotic; go scream that at a lion! And eating dead squirrels is just nuttier than squirrel shit.

Erm...why didn’t the parents just walk away with their child? No one forced them to stand there and watch.

It’s like being offended at horror films being too horrific and that their child is scared.

Some people should just fuck right off.

Victorismyhero wrote:vicious, disease ridden, wildlife destroying, woodland wrecking monsters they are...there is a permanent state of war declared between them and me in our woodland (and anywhere else i have shooting rights...)

I would exterminate the lot of em.......

Can I take it you are talking about humans?

eddie wrote:Erm...why didn’t the parents just walk away with their child? No one forced them to stand there and watch.

It’s like being offended at horror films being too horrific and that their child is scared.

Some people should just fuck right off.

Why should they, the most people were going about their lawful business  when these two turned up to deliberately ruin a day out.

WHAT IF THEY WERE EATING A PIECE OF NICE RUMP STEAK???

Would anyone be offended then?

Bit messy with just your fingers and the 'juices' running down your chin. Some people could see it as provocative deliberately doing so right by a vegan stall. No one is preventing them eating meat, its not illegal, they can do so at home and at eateries, or even in the street but ripping into raw furry flesh in public, with an agenda is something else, probably even for many meat eaters.
As Ben stated the eating of meat is probably not the greatest problem its everything that goes with it

Vintage wrote:Bit messy with just your fingers and the 'juices' running down your chin. Some people could see it as provocative deliberately doing so right by a vegan stall. No one is preventing them eating meat, its not illegal, they can do so at home and at eateries, or even in the street but ripping into raw furry flesh in public, with an agenda is something else, probably even for many meat eaters.
As Ben stated the eating of meat is probably not the greatest problem its everything that goes with it

WHAT IF THEY WERE EATING A PIECE OF NICE RUMP STEAK???

Would anyone be offended then?

You said that already.

Vintage wrote:You said that already.

Thought you may have missed it seeing as you didn’t answer.

I did though, maybe I didn't answer very well, or obviously enough.

Vintage wrote:I did though, maybe I didn't answer very well, or obviously enough.

Ah okay vintage, my apologies. It just confuses me that people are offended by people eating meat in public.

Is it:

a) the fact that it’s raw?
b) the fact that it’s a squirrel?
c) the fact that they’re eating meat in public?

Definitely the first - for me anyway.
Eating meat, if people have to, should be done with some compassion and perhaps even reverence, something, be it cow or squirrel or whatever, had to loose its existence to :
1. Fill you up
2. give you the flavour pleasure
I prefer meat eaters remembered that.
There's a lot more to animals than walking rump steaks as is being recognised more and more. As a mother can't you sympathise with the cow chasing the cattle truck that's taking her calf away, even for a brief moment, then there's all the things that become ok because eating another species is ok, so we can also factory farm,(more money sod the animals) use methods of killing that are inhumane (for religious mumbo jumbo) or not (depending what you are and what is wanted of you, want nice fluffy fur hang it - slow strangling so the adrenalin flows and the fur stands up, skinning cats alive perhaps) dog and cockfighting, dogs butchered alive not to mention the conditions they've been kept in and transported in (China) fish farming in crowded pools - so the fish are nearly eaten before you get to them by lice, to name a few.

Okay, so if they’d eaten cooked squirrels that would not have been news-worthy?

No one would probably have noticed if they had a squirrel sandwich but they had raw furry squirrels which they ate in front of a vegan stall to protest what for, none is stopping them eating meat.
What about my other questions?

So vintage ...what about those extremist veggies who vandalise farms, butchers shops, threaten the staff and farm workers.....

what are THEY protesting about? who is stopping THEM from murdering carrots?

All veggies/vegans etc should have to go on a register....we could then save the NHS millions by not treating them with drugs/surgical techniques pioneered on animals.
AD ANY veggie/vegan who uses any makeup and most toiletries should be shot for gross hypocrisy....even if the actual item (say lipstick) hasnt been tested on animals it is a sure bet that the individual components HAVE at some time in the past been tested on animals so

its ALL just another excuse for certain malcontents to have a shouty vandalism orgasm.
Its not even, particularly "green or eco"...

Vintage wrote:No one would probably have noticed if they had a squirrel sandwich but they had raw furry squirrels which they ate in front of a vegan stall to protest what for, none is stopping them eating meat.
What about my other questions?

But that’s why I asked my question: what if it had been a cow? Or a pig? Or a chicken?
Is it just that it’s a squirrel?

eddie wrote:

Vintage wrote:No one would probably have noticed if they had a squirrel sandwich but they had raw furry squirrels which they ate in front of a vegan stall to protest what for, none is stopping them eating meat.
What about my other questions?

But that’s why I asked my question: what if it had been a cow? Or a pig? Or a chicken?
Is it just that it’s a squirrel?

If a couple, or a mob, of rabid protesters were to start in making a deliberately provocative public show of devouring a raw and bloody cow, pig, or chicken carcass on a public street or in a marketplace, in front of families and children...

Then, by rights, they too should be charged and fined for their unruly conduct, disturbing the peace, and/or creating a public mischief --  whatever the offence might be in their location..

And, for all we know, the local council may have their own ordinances/bylaws in place, in regard to the handling, processing and consumption of uncooked meats in public places  ?

“Then, by rights, they too should be charged and fined for their unruly conduct, disturbing the peace, and/or creating a public mischief -- whatever the offence might be in their location..“

Why is it unruly to eat meat in public?

eddie wrote:“Then, by rights, they too should be charged and fined for their unruly conduct, disturbing the peace, and/or creating a public mischief --  whatever the offence might be in their location..“

Why is it unruly to eat meat in public?

Raw and bloody and with the fur still on them ???

A bit of decorum, please !!!

They were clearly doing it to harass vegans, so it's good that they were fined.

eddie wrote:

Vintage wrote:I did though, maybe I didn't answer very well, or obviously enough.

Ah okay vintage, my apologies. It just confuses me that people are offended by people eating meat in public.

Is it:

a) the fact that it’s raw?
b) the fact that it’s a squirrel?
c) the fact that they’re eating meat in public?

all three i think for me eddie

first of all, even as a meat eater the thought of biting into a raw animal, possibly riddled with disease, with all the blood and guts spilling out all over the show makes me want to heave. and what about all the fur in your mouth, oh yuck yuck yuckitty yuck eddie, that's just gross

i'm guessing they have vague local by-laws that cover outraging public decency etc, maybe it was over that

it is well heavy handed, i don't think they should have been arrested,,,,,

in any case, what on earth could they have been protesting? no one told them they can't eat meat

fucking loons

Raggamuffin wrote:They were clearly doing it to harass vegans, so it's good that they were fined.

and why aren,t vegans that harass meat eaters punished?

Victorismyhero wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:They were clearly doing it to harass vegans, so it's good that they were fined.

and why aren,t vegans that harass meat eaters punished?

It depends on what you mean by "harass". Can you give some examples?

The butchers shop that was attacked a couple of years ago
That raid on a restaurant last year
The farm that was raided earlier this year, mentioned on here

Victorismyhero wrote:The butchers shop that was attacked a couple of years ago
That raid on a restaurant last year
The farm that was raided earlier this year, mentioned on here

They are punished if they're caught, or if there are complaints.

Would eating sushi have been alright?

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

eddie wrote:“Then, by rights, they too should be charged and fined for their unruly conduct, disturbing the peace, and/or creating a public mischief --  whatever the offence might be in their location..“

Why is it unruly to eat meat in public?

Raw and bloody and with the fur still on them  ???

A bit of decorum,  please  !!!

So it’s raw meat we are offended by but cooked meat is fine.

Righto.

Maddog wrote:Would eating sushi have been alright?

Yeah, really. Hypocrite alert.

Strange really, everyone is upset because the animal was raw and not cooked.

Can anyone, anyone, see the absolute bullshit in that argument?

Anyone?

I doubt they would have done it that way if they weren't fairly sure people would be offended by it, even meat eaters
I suppose eating raw meat with fur etc on is a tad uncivilised for most people.

Vintage wrote:I doubt they would have done it that way if they weren't fairly sure people would be offended by it, even meat eaters
I suppose eating raw meat with fur etc on is a tad uncivilised for most people.

So...meat is meat as long as we don’t have to see it raw...then it’s offensive.

Righto.

eddie wrote:Strange really,  everyone is upset because the animal was raw and not cooked.

Can anyone, anyone, see the absolute bullshit in that argument?

Anyone?

That's not how I see it anyway, it's more the deliberate nature of the act - designed to upset and harass vegans.

However, where did they get the squirrels from, and how did they kill them?

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:Strange really,  everyone is upset because the animal was raw and not cooked.

Can anyone, anyone, see the absolute bullshit in that argument?

Anyone?

That's not how I see it anyway, it's more the deliberate nature of the act - designed to upset and harass vegans.

However, where did they get the squirrels from, and how did they kill them?

Designed to upset and harass vegans? So what? They’re big-arse adults aren’t they? What if the meat was cooked, would the reason be less offensive?

Mixed messages on this thread. Am I the only one to see it?

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

That's not how I see it anyway, it's more the deliberate nature of the act - designed to upset and harass vegans.

However, where did they get the squirrels from, and how did they kill them?

Designed to upset and harass vegans?  So what? They’re big-arse adults aren’t they? What if the meat was cooked, would the reason be less offensive?

Mixed messages on this thread. Am I the only one to see it?

Whether the vegans are big-arse adults is not the point, the point is that these muppets went out of their way to piss them off, and they did something unspeakable to wild animals just to prove a point.

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

That's not how I see it anyway, it's more the deliberate nature of the act - designed to upset and harass vegans.

However, where did they get the squirrels from, and how did they kill them?

Designed to upset and harass vegans?  So what? They’re big-arse adults aren’t they? What if the meat was cooked, would the reason be less offensive?

Mixed messages on this thread. Am I the only one to see it?

Whether the vegans are big-arse adults is not the point, the point is that these muppets went out of their way to piss them off, and they did something unspeakable to wild animals just to prove a point.

What did they do, eat the animal raw as opposed to cooking it?

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Whether the vegans are big-arse adults is not the point, the point is that these muppets went out of their way to piss them off, and they did something unspeakable to wild animals just to prove a point.

What did they do, eat the animal raw as opposed to cooking it?

You're missing the point. It makes no difference - they did what they did to annoy and harass people.

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Whether the vegans are big-arse adults is not the point, the point is that these muppets went out of their way to piss them off, and they did something unspeakable to wild animals just to prove a point.

What did they do, eat the animal raw as opposed to cooking it?

You're missing the point. It makes no difference - they did what they did to annoy and harass people.

Ah I see. So when you give an opinion is that annoying and harassing a person? When does one consider what annoys and harasses a person? An opinion, an action, a post on a forum?

Don’t be an arse. You annoy and harass others with your opinion but should you stop because they don’t like it???

They obviously wanted to cause upset and they got it....sounds fair to me.

Syl wrote:They obviously wanted to cause upset and they got it....sounds fair to me.

But how is it fair based on criminal charges around being upset?

Seriously, as Eddie says, how is this then going to be the bases for anything around taking offense.

It was after all a protest and was a political protest which is after all and should be protected under free speech

It was not even hate speech, it was to make a point. Whether some people take offense to this is basically irrelevant through the eyes of the law and how such a case will open the door to now anyone. Trying to have people arrested simple based on offense. Its precident to have. Either political protest is protected in law, or then any protest would incur the wrath of the law, if people deemed to be upset and harressed through such protest. Hence do you not see how this opens up a massive can of worms here?

There is no such crime against eating raw meat or a dead animal. Hence the courst have made a really poor decision here and off one single child claimed to be upset. Tht was the bases to claim criminality here. The feelings of one child.

What this shows is that seculariosm is being eroded by the feelings of people and that is dangeroeus. As we are getting intoi the realms, of where people can arrest people basd on ridicule of beliefs. Do you really want the law to take this path?

I can understand people thinking what they did was disgusting, but it was a political protest. That should never be a criminal offense of harrresment. What that is saying is the courst are siding with a political side on this issue.