The problem with putting all these “filters” to distort the issue, is that they do exactly that: they distort the issue.
This is a story about a protestor, using a non-violent method to send a powerful message, whilst mocking the violent tactics commonly deployed by riot police. Before she was charged with sexual assault this is what she said of the event: “I wanted that policeman to remember what happened to Marta from Pisa. Last July, she was beaten, with no consequences for the officers.”
The move by the police to charge her with sexual assault is nothing more than a petty hissy-fit aimed to remind protestors “who is in charge”. The language of the dickhead in charge of the police union makes that perfectly clear: “We’re tired of taking blows from the No TAV group – and not just from them. Today, protesting is a sacred right, but when they overstep the line of legality, there can be no flexibility.”
Throwing in hypothetical scenarios doesn’t make this case clearer, it only blurs the issue around the actual scenario. That scenario is a bully of a police union acting like they’re victims when the truth is obviously very different.
