* Paul Lewis* The Guardian* Wednesday August 20 2008
Singer Pete Doherty has been blocked from performing at a music festival amid fears his band would "gee up" the crowd into a dangerous frenzy.
The decision came after police asked an intelligence officer to research Doherty's band, Babyshambles, who were booked to headline Moonfest festival in Westbury, Wiltshire, next week. They concluded that the band's tendency to "speed up and then slow down the music" could create a "whirlpool effect" and spark disorder. Lawyers acting on behalf of Wiltshire police convinced magistrates to provide a closure order for the festival on the night the band were scheduled to perform.
John Green, Moonfest's organiser, said he was "livid" at the decision and accused police of waging a vendetta against Doherty, who lives locally. But Superintendent Paul Williams said the ban was designed to preserve public safety. "Experts are telling us that the profile of fans that follow Pete Doherty and Babyshambles is volatile and they can easily be whipped up into a frenzy, whereas the profile of someone that would follow around Cliff Richard or Bucks Fizz, for example, is completely different."
Chief Superintendent Julian Kirby, the divisional commander, told Wiltshire's Gazette and Herald: "We carried out an analysis of what Pete Doherty and his band does. What he does as part of his routine is to gee up the crowd. They speed up and then slow down the music and create a whirlpool effect in the crowd. They [the crowd] all get geed up and then they start fighting."
Those present at north Wiltshire magistrates on Monday on behalf of police included a barrister, an acting chief inspector and an "industry expert". It took the court a day to reach its decision to support the force's application, which Green contested. It is believed to be the first court to issue section 160 of the Licensing Act (2003) to stop an act performing.
Green said the revocation had cut the festival a day short. He said Doherty was "absolutely devastated and furious". He added: "He's very kindly offered a free gig for everyone who has bought a ticket and won't be able to see him." Green said police had offered him a deal during a pause in court proceedings to allow the night to go ahead if he agreed to spend more on security and removed Doherty from the lineup but he refused the "offer". "They told me privately they hate the fact he lives in Wiltshire and they don't want him on their patch," he said.
Williams denied his force had offered a deal or had anything against the singer. He had never heard Doherty's music, he said. "Public safety is our primary concern."
The decision came after police asked an intelligence officer to research Doherty's band, Babyshambles, who were booked to headline Moonfest festival in Westbury, Wiltshire, next week. They concluded that the band's tendency to "speed up and then slow down the music" could create a "whirlpool effect" and spark disorder. Lawyers acting on behalf of Wiltshire police convinced magistrates to provide a closure order for the festival on the night the band were scheduled to perform.
John Green, Moonfest's organiser, said he was "livid" at the decision and accused police of waging a vendetta against Doherty, who lives locally. But Superintendent Paul Williams said the ban was designed to preserve public safety. "Experts are telling us that the profile of fans that follow Pete Doherty and Babyshambles is volatile and they can easily be whipped up into a frenzy, whereas the profile of someone that would follow around Cliff Richard or Bucks Fizz, for example, is completely different."
Chief Superintendent Julian Kirby, the divisional commander, told Wiltshire's Gazette and Herald: "We carried out an analysis of what Pete Doherty and his band does. What he does as part of his routine is to gee up the crowd. They speed up and then slow down the music and create a whirlpool effect in the crowd. They [the crowd] all get geed up and then they start fighting."
Those present at north Wiltshire magistrates on Monday on behalf of police included a barrister, an acting chief inspector and an "industry expert". It took the court a day to reach its decision to support the force's application, which Green contested. It is believed to be the first court to issue section 160 of the Licensing Act (2003) to stop an act performing.
Green said the revocation had cut the festival a day short. He said Doherty was "absolutely devastated and furious". He added: "He's very kindly offered a free gig for everyone who has bought a ticket and won't be able to see him." Green said police had offered him a deal during a pause in court proceedings to allow the night to go ahead if he agreed to spend more on security and removed Doherty from the lineup but he refused the "offer". "They told me privately they hate the fact he lives in Wiltshire and they don't want him on their patch," he said.
Williams denied his force had offered a deal or had anything against the singer. He had never heard Doherty's music, he said. "Public safety is our primary concern."
*****
first, let's take a moment to agree that pete doherty is a tosser and babyshambles sucks. ah, that feels good.
next, let's stop and think about the implications of police banning rock bands- any band, from junkie poseur types to heavy metal- from performing at whim. boo, that feels bad!
i don't want to get on a soapbox and scream "fascists!"...ok, maybe i do...instead, i will say this as politely as possible:
these are the actions of a police state!
how else to describe a group of individuals who proceed to ban a public performance on the flimsiest of hypothesis? a band's changing rhythms has become reason enough to label them a danger to public safety.
what a slippery slope. essentially, anytime a police chief in the UK wants to silence a performer he doesn't like, he can use any excuse under the umbrella of public safety. he could object to the lyrics, or complain about too many minor chords. he could be especially puritanical over the mini skirt of lead singer. he could be concerned over the primal influence of the drums. the list is endless.
we must not forget that music, art, theatre, literature and independent thought are sacred privileges of being human. civilization lies dormant without the freedom to experience the beauty, madness, love, revenge, joy and hate of all artforms. when the state makes decisions based on vague assumptions, depriving us all from our rights to be moved by art in public, we run the risk of transforming into a society of dispassionate robots.
next, let's stop and think about the implications of police banning rock bands- any band, from junkie poseur types to heavy metal- from performing at whim. boo, that feels bad!
i don't want to get on a soapbox and scream "fascists!"...ok, maybe i do...instead, i will say this as politely as possible:
these are the actions of a police state!
how else to describe a group of individuals who proceed to ban a public performance on the flimsiest of hypothesis? a band's changing rhythms has become reason enough to label them a danger to public safety.
what a slippery slope. essentially, anytime a police chief in the UK wants to silence a performer he doesn't like, he can use any excuse under the umbrella of public safety. he could object to the lyrics, or complain about too many minor chords. he could be especially puritanical over the mini skirt of lead singer. he could be concerned over the primal influence of the drums. the list is endless.
we must not forget that music, art, theatre, literature and independent thought are sacred privileges of being human. civilization lies dormant without the freedom to experience the beauty, madness, love, revenge, joy and hate of all artforms. when the state makes decisions based on vague assumptions, depriving us all from our rights to be moved by art in public, we run the risk of transforming into a society of dispassionate robots.
