Transcript of Tony Miano's Interrogation after being arrested for preaching in Lomdon

Why exactly is this being promoted as persecution?

Before you jump on the band wagon of presuming to know what I have intended by my words I would respectfully suggest you connect all the dots. Watch the video, read the contemporaneous transcript, and then see Tony's own original post which is listed on another OP. For your assistance I make all them available here in one place. Really listen and then listen some more. Start with the first link and give some thought to the implications of the words between the 4.5 and 5.15 min mark of the first link. Then see the original post second link and then read the transcript. Then remind yourself that this is a police officer formerly and so he understands the nature of evidence. I could connect all the dots but why should I. I'd be hung drawn and quartered before I got to explain it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2vu9CI5Ij4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZjwYfGXzVo&feature=youtu.be

http://www.crossencounters.us/2013/07/police-interrogation-of-tony-miano.html

This is definitely a persecution. People have an image that persecution means someone torturing you. They think, Since the police officer is so gentle in this case, there is no persecution here. But the lack of freedom to share the Gospel to a Nation which was once flooded with Gospel messages is a clear sign of persecution.

To me the answers given by the preacher is clear, sound and biblical. I find nothing wrong with what he has done. I do not find any need to examine his preaching by looking into videos. God is his witness. Preaching Homosexuality as sin is not an offence of any kind. To me the women who complained got convicted and disturbed, hence decided to take action against him. Gospel preaching should disturb those who listen, else Gospel is not shared in the way it should be. sree

There were two formal interviews in this instance of Mr Miano's arrest. The first is on video and has to do with the arresting officer. The second is a transcript and is conducted in a police station. Regardless as to the so-called gospel content of the preaching itself it is these interviews which form the basis for understanding intent in law. The transcript of the contemporaneous interview at the police station shows clearly that once the words used in a public place had been established, the remainder of the interview has to do with establishing intent. The police do not have a direct link into peoples hearts. Their thoughts and therefore their intentions are established evidentially.

The specific legal element of this preaching cited as a basis for arrest was, comments spoken in a public place which are likely to give rise to distress. The term is homophobia, and it has to do with inciting in a public place other persons to hate or else despise an individual or individuals by identifying them as belonging to a specific group. In this instance homosexuals. Mr Miano went beyond even this definition when he stated clearly that the women was "probably a lesbian". This was done in the full hearing of hundreds of people. Any one of which could have reacted to this comment and directly targeted this women with abuse and possible violence. Despite what we imagine, this is not the gospel nor is it the purpose of the gospel. It is an abuse and it was too far.

Apart from that Mr Miano states in the pre arrest interview that he had consulted with lawyers before the preaching began and established that he could in fact speak words which would be taken as insulting by those who heard them. Mr Miano even went as far as to declare this intent in his opening address at the 4:04 to 5:30 mark of the video through a public address system where no one could have misunderstood his intent.

Whether the answers given by Mr Miano were clear sound and biblical is irrelevant. It is a formal interview under caution and therefore amounts to evidence. If you cannot see any of this it is because your eyes are blinded by a false sense of persecution. As a matter of reality if the woman who was accused of being a lesbian in the preaching video were to refer this matter back to the police and they saw this tape they would have plenty of grounds for seeking advice from the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service). Mr Miano was not "dealt with" in Law as to the complaint but was released with no further action. This means that the possibility of it being referred back remains. We need wisdom in the way we deal with those in authority which must include respecting the law. If in the end we must say that which is against the law then we ought to say it and not complain that we are having our "thoughts controlled" by the "though police". It is as usual an apostate mix of politic and truth. It is unfruitful and in the end it is doing the gospel no good whatsoever.

My own understanding of what really constitutes persecution would be when governments directly and systematically seek to remove from believers the ability to live in peace, eat their bread and practise their faith in private. I wouldn’t see anything in the public domain as a proof of persecution unless it takes the form of the persecution which Paul and the apostolic father’s experienced when the public domain was used as a theatre for the government to involve those members of the public who are against Christ to participate in and direct the hatred and suffering of the saints.

In short a preacher cannot claim to being persecuted because he preaches the gospel and as a consequence he is insulted, ridiculed and hated by unbelievers. Neither is a police officer a persecutor when he seeks to uphold the Law which he is sworn to uphold for the benefit of all persons in the public domain. I have no doubt that others will say that being arrested or the like is a disturbing event. I would say then stop preaching the gospel in public. If being arrested is disturbing you ought not to be preaching the gospel because you are not called to it. Its as simple as that. Do we read of anyone in the scriptures complaining that they were mistreated? On the contrary it was an opportunity. Let’s get real and stop playing at being something we are not. Being arrested, hated and ridiculed is an opportunity to bear witness of Christ in circumstances which mark the true evangelist out because in it he is able to exercise true authority and where necessary true compassion despite the circumstance.

I learned these lessons on the streets preaching and being attacked, threatened with death, bottled and even told by people in real authority that they would incite an arrest on the grounds of a probable public disorder. In contrast when we stood our ground, spoke with authority in the power of the Holy Spirit we saw police officers defending our position and moving others on. In one instance a police sergeant upon arrival at a deteriorating situation singled the only member of the preaching team out who had a criminal record and asked him directly "what do you want me to do?". It was said to him equally directly, remove these men and women from this ground in order that we might preach Christ crucified for sin. That he did and it was finished.

Resisting spiritual wickedness is a matter of authority in Christ and has nothing whatsoever to do with resisting persecution. Persecution is more general and is against all those who truly believe. Which is why when it does come it will finally make for a separation and those who take the name of Christ, yet are not truly His will fall away. Those who are in Christ will learn how to stand. And they will stand because He is able to make them stand even in a wicked day. Our attitude was always "take the ground" in prayer and fasting, in praise of God and in proclamation of Christ. We never ever singled out individuals by sin or by any other measure. Conviction of sin is a matter for the Holy Spirit. The homosexual man or woman knows very well what their sin is when the Lord is present. Just as the thief knows that he is a thief and so on.

I agree that naming individual sins is necessary. What I said however was that naming an individual's sins isn't. Especially in a public place with a public address system. The woman so named was the same women who phoned the police afterwards. Go figure!