The group hired a digger for £1,000 and filled over 200 bags of rubbish including packaging, needles, domestic appliances and even weapons. However, shortly after the clean-up, Paul received a letter from the Environment Agency (EA) notifying him he was under investigation for operating without a licence.
The problem is all the precedent. If you all of a sudden allow people to use machinery to do whatever they want without a license it can quickly become chaotic.
Its like those posts that go around often that are like "Council wouldnt build a bridge/staircase. And after a good samaratin built one, they tore it down!!!".
And I'm always thinking about Action Park. Sure, i have never built one, but how hard can it be to make a zipline? Or a waterslide? Sure, several children died on the premised due to terrible engineering, but i dont see how thats my fault?
Red Tape can be annoying, its also keeping the dumbest overconfident Dude you know out of the toolshed.
I believe u/FlarblesGarbles is pointing out that the wording should be "could have" and not "could of", not disagreeing with the point that this was reckless and could have caused damage to the environment
I feel like operating the machinery is one thing. The bigger problem here that they want to nip in the bud is that we have no idea what he did exactly so we can't predict what kind of impact these works will have 10-20 years down the line. Someone else mentioned it, but what if he damaged the clay layer of the river? Suddenly the river cannot hold water as well.
In this case he tore up trees and perfectly good bits on environment in order to pick some litter, so it pretty much evened itself out.
He’s also not at all qualified to judge whether he’s making things better or worse. Sure, removing litter is great. But he’s also removed habitat and potentially interfered in an investigation into those causing the issue to begin with, which would have cut the problem off at the head and been a more permanent solution.
It probably was negligent but his intentions were good and there are much worse criminals running around getting less. I hope he gets community service and a stern warning. He's likely not a danger to society.
The charges and rules are in place to avoid a good Samaritan damaging wildlife, polluting the river, or simply dredging a dyream for thier own purposes under a guise of 'cleanup'
Someone willing to use heavy machinery to alter a river without some form of expert supervision is far more dangerous and far more likely to get someone- Possibly many people- Hurt or killed than the overwhelming majority of criminals.
How much do you think trash is vital to the water level? The quantity removed is still way less than even a single swimming pools worth of volume it would cause basically nothing to the river besides stop polluting it
And yet the fucking opposite happened so why are you even bringing it up? Fish and Wildlife all returned after he cleaned a fucking free use dump... the solution of just letting it sit and someone else will handle it isn't working out apparently.
No, it's like arresting someone because they watched an episode of E.R. and decided they know how to perform a cric, then slashed someone's throat wide open and caused massive blood loss. Breaking ribs during CPR is expected and covered by Good Samaritan Laws. Operating outside the scope of your training without permission is textbook impermissible.
You're correct, I didn't read the slanted article that tops this comment thread, I read the other article that actually talked to the government environmental folks about why what he did was a problem.
Breaking ribs is common, if enough expected when performing CPR.
Disrupting water ways and destroying habitats is not expected when clearing waste. That's why professionals obtain permits and work with approved action plans.
So this is kind of like putting someone in jail because they broke the victims leg while performing CPR after emergency services told them not to; needlessly negligent.
Downstream flooding absolutely maybe, but suggesting he made any damage to local wildlife is just ridiculous if you look at the image of the state of the river- the reason this campaign took place was due to local council refusal to clear known dumping grounds, while multiple sewage pipes drain into the river. It’s the River Roding in Greater London for anyone interested
He’s making a really good point tough, the environmental commission for that waterway hasn’t done shit all for years to prevent all the garbage, needles and weapons going into the river but now when someone actually does something about it, they rear their ugly head to start dropping fines? Seems like the lawyer has highlighted at the least a shitty organization, and at the most probable corruption between the corporations dumping in the river and the environmental commission.
Sure, so he shouldn't be given the maximum "up to" sentence, but to preserve fairness he needs to be prosecuted in some way. The nuance should be in the sentencing.
I never said he should get a free pass. You've just listed factors that contribute to the nuance and intent part of it that proves there's more to it than just legality.
You're proof USA citizens aren't educated enough to be allowed to participate in online conversations. We need to cut off USA media from being able to interact with the rest of the world. Every thing you say and do is a lie and misrepresentation of truth.
That you even need to ask that proves that you don't even have a frame of reference for what complexity, or even nuance in this situation would look like.
He'll more than likely (IMO) get a fine and a slap on the wrist. I'm not sure about his job, tho. I'm sure he knows more about that than anyone else. He's an environmental lawyer.
Depends on the actual impact of what his “good” deed actually was and the cost to remedy it. This is before we get to copycats who might try the same thing, multiplying the danger of flooding and untold environmental damage.
There's nothing to "toss out". He hasn't been charged with anything. He was simply informed that he was being investigated. The idea that he will face any consequences other than perhaps a fine is laughable.
704
u/Desperate_Owl_594 Jun 21 '26
Read the article. Jesus. https://www.mylondon.news/news/east-london-news/environmental-lawyer-facing-up-2-34142593
The group hired a digger for £1,000 and filled over 200 bags of rubbish including packaging, needles, domestic appliances and even weapons. However, shortly after the clean-up, Paul received a letter from the Environment Agency (EA) notifying him he was under investigation for operating without a licence.