While I appreciate the sentiment of wanting the police to be held accountable, in this case it was proper imprisonment, the only false thing here was the reason. No one is arguing that false imprisonment doesn't exist, but that *your* example of false imprisonment somehow being applicable to street protest or to imaginary threatening signs is bonkers and doesn't hold up to scrutiny, even if you believe it to be true.
I’m afraid that as far as UK law is concerned, the court decided otherwise and the magistrate’s word outweighs yours. The imprisonment was not “proper” because the reason for said imprisonment was false… which makes it… false imprisonment. As for my scenario being “bonkers” (it’s not, it’s actually pretty textbook, and purposed so) you’ll see protest-related penalties pop up more often now with the Public Order Act 2023 in force. Guess what it’s primarily about? Blocking traffic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Order_Act_2023
Is it concerning in regards to the right to protest? Yes, somewhat. Does it finally allow the public to retaliate against being unlawfully imprisoned by protestors in the middle of the street, which is also egregious? Yes.
I strongly suggest that you don’t hold people up against their will for any amount of time or any reason unless you are confident you have a legitimate legal justification (shopkeeper’s privilege, perhaps citizen’s arrest, but be careful with both). You are opening yourself to criminal charges, civil liability or both, as I stated previously.
False imprisonment isn’t even the only crime you might be committing if you’re part of an illegal protest in the middle of the road either - there are many jurisdictions in which impeding flow of traffic alone is a crime. It’s a crime in the UK now (see link above), it’s a crime in Ontario, I’m sure it’s a crime in many other places.
Now, *most times* the police won’t act upon such protests because freedom of speech/expression and freedom to protest are a strong defense which opens the state itself to serious litigation which they *may or may not win*, but depending on the circumstances a court *can* rule that you are protesting in a completely unreasonable manner that either endangers others or inconveniences others to an unreasonable extent. Like holding someone against a wall for no reason whatsoever, for instance. That’s pretty unreasonable.
In my completely hypothetical scenario there is *no doubt* that a crime was being committed. Me holding a sign and protesting is not contingent on you being held against a wall. I *should* let you go. Me not letting you go makes me an asshole, not to mention a criminal. All you had to do was say that, and I’m surprised you didn’t as most people would find that conclusion self-evident. I can’t just elect to become your jailer, unless I want to get sent straight to jail myself, and rightfully so.
