How to verify police search warrant
Discussion
Nigel Worc's said:
And the biggy, his loss of travel status , along with the all the grief this is going to cause him, forever ?
IF this is the only thing Eclassless has ever come to note for then it's wrong it affects his travel status and I totally agree there should be a more efficient and effective way of resolving and appeasing. Nigel Worc's said:
They appear to have detained an innocent man according to the letters posted, the "grounds" most certainly didn't seem to be there, but they still did it.
The letters suggest the exact opposite when it comes to grounds. The part which says, "I have explained arrest procedures, and powers police have when conducting investigations. It is regrettable you have been implicated in this matter, but as I have explained to you, another company have with an identical name was responsible for the crime. This could only be known following investigation with you and the manager...", gives this away.
Nigel Worc's said:
How do you compensate him for the time in custody, the loss of liberty?
You don't unless it's unlawful detention. carinaman said:
Meanwhile couldn't all those involved been doing something productive and more beneficial to society given the cuts and all that?
The 2005 cuts? You don't know the severity of the allegations / investigations. Nigel Worc's said:
And the biggy, his loss of travel status , along with the all the grief this is going to cause him, forever?
No different from the drink drive example or any other people who aren't charged. We can't alter immigration policy for other countries.
Nigel Worc's said:
So you can legally lock people up at will, and as long as your rules say its lawful, that's ok ?
I think not.
That is awful, and I fail to see how you could support it.
Who said anything like that? You can make an arrest when there's reasonable suspicion based on objective fact of an offence and there's a necessity to arrest. I think not.
That is awful, and I fail to see how you could support it.
You make it sound like an feckless, unregulated process using words like "at will" and clearly have no appreciation as to the realities and safe-guards surrounding it.
What system should be in place then?
La Liga said:
Nigel Worc's said:
So you can legally lock people up at will, and as long as your rules say its lawful, that's ok ?
I think not.
That is awful, and I fail to see how you could support it.
You can make an arrest when there's reasonable suspicion based on objective fact of an offence and there's a necessity to arrest. I think not.
That is awful, and I fail to see how you could support it.
You make it sound like an feckless, unregulated process using words like "at will" and clearly have no appreciation as to the realities and safe-guards surrounding it.
Nigel Worc's said:
They got it very wrong in the posted case, didn't they?
Decisions are made based on the information available at the time. The only valid judgement of those decisions is to consider the information and circumstances that were available at the time and whether the decisions were reasonable and right at the time they were made. Hindsight bias is a demonstration of poor thinking.
This is a clear example: If a car has its numbers plates cloned and the cloned car commits a crime, would you say the police got it "very wrong" if they stopped the original vehicle? As up until they stopped the original vehicle they didn't know the plates were cloned.
Mk3Spitfire said:
Nigel Worc's said:
They got it very wrong in the posted case, didn't they ?
No...I don't think they did. By your own admission, it was an understandable mistake given the information available to them.I can understand a mistake like that, but, why would you just knock the door in ?
Wouldn't you talk to the person ?
The company name may have been the same, there is an american company with exactly the same name as mine, but I doubt I'd accept a swat team dropping in.
You'd be very unlucky to have the same name as the person they're looking for.
It all seems a bit heavy handed to me, "look at me, I'm a Police officer and our rules say I can do this ".
I would be personally, seriously pissed off.
La Liga said:
Nigel Worc's said:
They got it very wrong in the posted case, didn't they?
Decisions are made based on the information available at the time. The only valid judgement of those decisions is to consider the information and circumstances that were available at the time and whether the decisions were reasonable and right at the time they were made. Hindsight bias is a demonstration of poor thinking.
This is a clear example: If a car has its numbers plates cloned and the cloned car commits a crime, would you say the police got it "very wrong" if they stopped the original vehicle? As up until they stopped the original vehicle they didn't know the plates were cloned.
Nigel Worc's said:
I can understand a mistake like that, but, why would you just knock the door in ?
Wouldn't you talk to the person ?
The company name may have been the same, there is an american company with exactly the same name as mine, but I doubt I'd accept a swat team dropping in.
You'd be very unlucky to have the same name as the person they're looking for.
It all seems a bit heavy handed to me, "look at me, I'm a Police officer and our rules say I can do this ".
Total speculation with no idea of the circumstances which led to the actions taken. Wouldn't you talk to the person ?
The company name may have been the same, there is an american company with exactly the same name as mine, but I doubt I'd accept a swat team dropping in.
You'd be very unlucky to have the same name as the person they're looking for.
It all seems a bit heavy handed to me, "look at me, I'm a Police officer and our rules say I can do this ".
Nigel Worc's said:
Stopping the vehicle wouldn't be an issue, arresting the innocent driver would, for me at least.
The point of the example was to highlight how flawed hindsight bias was. Nigel Worc's said:
I don't know the circumstances, I'm not sure if you do.
I can understand a mistake like that, but, why would you just knock the door in ?
Wouldn't you talk to the person ?
The company name may have been the same, there is an american company with exactly the same name as mine, but I doubt I'd accept a swat team dropping in.
You'd be very unlucky to have the same name as the person they're looking for.
It all seems a bit heavy handed to me, "look at me, I'm a Police officer and our rules say I can do this ".
I would be personally, seriously pissed off.
I certainly do not know the circumstances, and that is as I have said all along, the problem we have on forums. I can understand a mistake like that, but, why would you just knock the door in ?
Wouldn't you talk to the person ?
The company name may have been the same, there is an american company with exactly the same name as mine, but I doubt I'd accept a swat team dropping in.
You'd be very unlucky to have the same name as the person they're looking for.
It all seems a bit heavy handed to me, "look at me, I'm a Police officer and our rules say I can do this ".
I would be personally, seriously pissed off.
As for kicking the door in...again depends on the circumstances. What evidence were they searching for? Was it documents that could be destroyed? If so...."knock knock, its the police, would you mind awfully letting us in to search for some evidence which we think might be inside, and will help put you in prison"....isn't normally the most effective way of securing evidence.
Were they searching for a person to arrest, with reasonable grounds to believe they were in the property? If so..."knock knock, please can you open he door so we can arrest you?"...also doesn't work all that often.
Nigel Worc's said:
And what were the exact circumstances?
Exactly. Which is why it's pointless to say whether or not something was right / wrong / heavy-handed etc. One thing is for sure, if the police are found to act unlawfully it takes little effort to find legal representation to obtain compensation. I dare say with the apparent frequency and determination of complaining Eclassy did, he would have considered this.
Eclassy said:
They gave me an address to write to but my landlord couldn't be bothered so he just fixed the door himself. They only apologized after I complained. I wasn't that much upset about being arrested although it has limited some of my life's choices. I started an application for Canadian Permanent Residency but seeing all the questions about 'brushes' with the law made me abandon the idea. I also have to apply for a visa when I am visiting the US.
My treatment after arrest was completely unacceptable. I was taunted whilst in custody and when I was released after 8 hours and even after realizing the error, not one person said sorry. When I went to collect my seized property, my money was missing and no one had any idea of what I was talking about as it wasn't on the property list.
Thank you for posting this. It's been beneficial, and I can relate.My treatment after arrest was completely unacceptable. I was taunted whilst in custody and when I was released after 8 hours and even after realizing the error, not one person said sorry. When I went to collect my seized property, my money was missing and no one had any idea of what I was talking about as it wasn't on the property list.
The real big point is an innocent chap had his door kicked in, and was arrested, and held in custody.
La Liga seems to think that is somehow acceptable.
Although mistakes do and will happen, I don't believe that can ever be acceptable, and those that made the mistakes should be held to account.
La Liga seems to think that is somehow acceptable.
Although mistakes do and will happen, I don't believe that can ever be acceptable, and those that made the mistakes should be held to account.
La Liga said:
Nigel Worc's said:
And what were the exact circumstances?
Exactly. Which is why it's pointless to say whether or not something was right / wrong / heavy-handed etc. One thing is for sure, if the police are found to act unlawfully it takes little effort to find legal representation to obtain compensation. I dare say with the apparent frequency and determination of complaining Eclassy did, he would have considered this.
If it is lawful to kick in the wrong door, in the wrong Town/City, arrest and hold an innocent chap for eight hours, what the hell would the Police have to do to be unlawful ?
Nigel Worc's said:
The real big point is an innocent chap had his door kicked in, and was arrested, and held in custody.
La Liga seems to think that is somehow acceptable.
So the police are only able to the above to people who are guilty? La Liga seems to think that is somehow acceptable.
If so, how will that be achieved given evidence needs to be proven beyond reasonable doubt?
This'll be an interesting answer.
Nigel Worc's said:
Although mistakes do and will happen, I don't believe that can ever be acceptable, and those that made the mistakes should be held to account.
How is it a mistake if reasonable decisions at the time? That isn't "misguided" or "wrong". Nigel Worc's said:
If it is lawful to kick in the wrong door, in the wrong Town/City, arrest and hold an innocent chap for eight hours, what the hell would the Police have to do to be unlawful?
I don't think you've quite got what I've taken the time to write. Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff