Handbag theft is not a crime
Discussion
Report in yesterday's (London) Evening Standard that a lady (a former criminal barrister) who had her handbag stolen was told by police that it was not a crime because she had subsequently accosted the thief and recovered the bag. It was only "attempted theft" despite the victim having to pursue the thief through the shopping crowds (the thief was some 6' tall so somewhat easy to identify, locate and track) and struggle with her to recover the bag, which had been concealed inside a rucksack the thief was carrying. There was no mention in the article as to whether the thief was apprehended or escaped or was let go.
A PCSO took the victim to Hammersmith Police Station where the desk officer took the barest of details and said that, as the victim had recovered the bag it was obviously not a crime. The victim explained that it was a crime and asked to speak to a senior officer [the Standard did not comment on whether she did].
The desk officer called the victim about one hour later to agree that it was a crime, but only "attempted theft". As the thief had appropriated the bag, concealed it and made something of a getaway, her intention was clearly to permanently deprive the victim of the bag and its contents, it's difficult to agree with the desk officer's revised assessment; and certainly to disagree with her previous opinion that it was not a crime at all.
A spokesman for the Met said that an investigation had been launched, saying that the "member of staff" had reflected on the incident and completed a crime report "within an hour".
Then came the classic comment - the like of which is becoming all too familiar to many victims who receive less that ideal and expected attention from the police (what they tend to refer to as "service to the customer"
... "A member of the borough's senior management team appologised to the victim."
So that's all right then!
Streaky
A PCSO took the victim to Hammersmith Police Station where the desk officer took the barest of details and said that, as the victim had recovered the bag it was obviously not a crime. The victim explained that it was a crime and asked to speak to a senior officer [the Standard did not comment on whether she did].
The desk officer called the victim about one hour later to agree that it was a crime, but only "attempted theft". As the thief had appropriated the bag, concealed it and made something of a getaway, her intention was clearly to permanently deprive the victim of the bag and its contents, it's difficult to agree with the desk officer's revised assessment; and certainly to disagree with her previous opinion that it was not a crime at all.
A spokesman for the Met said that an investigation had been launched, saying that the "member of staff" had reflected on the incident and completed a crime report "within an hour".
Then came the classic comment - the like of which is becoming all too familiar to many victims who receive less that ideal and expected attention from the police (what they tend to refer to as "service to the customer"
... "A member of the borough's senior management team appologised to the victim."So that's all right then!
Streaky
lol i just love the way a lot of police seem to make up their own laws nowadays. They dont understand the full elements of the laws they do know, would liked to have seen an officer try to argue with a criminal barrister on that one! I think they hope that the person they are talking to (usually in their authoratative,im so important, manner) doesnt understand and just takes what the police say as correct.
see the 'stopped for not speeding' thread which i cant find at the mo to link!
see the 'stopped for not speeding' thread which i cant find at the mo to link!
Hmmmmm
>>>>>>>where the desk officer took the barest of details <<<<<
I doubt the cash strapped Met could afford to have an all bells ringing lights flashing REAL Bib behind the desk so must likely a civvy........
My book it was THEFT bordering on Robbery depending on what violence was used before or at the time.
dvd
>>>>>>>where the desk officer took the barest of details <<<<<
I doubt the cash strapped Met could afford to have an all bells ringing lights flashing REAL Bib behind the desk so must likely a civvy........
My book it was THEFT bordering on Robbery depending on what violence was used before or at the time.
dvd
bigdods said:
So if your car is stolen, but then later recovered by the police no crime has been committed. That explains why we have so many car thefts...um..I mean attempted thefts in the uk, no one gets locked up !
Awesome.Free transport, nick a car from down the road, drive it to whereever you want, park it up, call the police and tell them where the car is and go along on your way and walk off scot free.
Job's a goodun.
In sentencing, the courts don't differentiate between attempted and completed offences and nor should the police. Breaking into an empty safe is just as wrong as breaking into a full one. Incompetence is no mitigation.
I once caught a man that had broken into my garage (he had jemmied the side door). I was subsequently informed by some shiny ars* that the case been closed, because there was insufficient proof of an 'attempted burglary'. I asked him how he reached that conclusion. His reply was, that nobody could prove that the person intended to steal anything. When I explained that the tresspass in conjunction with the criminal damage constituted a burglary, he 'begged to differ'.
I once caught a man that had broken into my garage (he had jemmied the side door). I was subsequently informed by some shiny ars* that the case been closed, because there was insufficient proof of an 'attempted burglary'. I asked him how he reached that conclusion. His reply was, that nobody could prove that the person intended to steal anything. When I explained that the tresspass in conjunction with the criminal damage constituted a burglary, he 'begged to differ'.
KenP said:
In sentencing, the courts don't differentiate between attempted and completed offences and nor should the police. Breaking into an empty safe is just as wrong as breaking into a full one. Incompetence is no mitigation.
I once caught a man that had broken into my garage (he had jemmied the side door). I was subsequently informed by some shiny ars* that the case been closed, because there was insufficient proof of an 'attempted burglary'. I asked him how he reached that conclusion. His reply was, that nobody could prove that the person intended to steal anything. When I explained that the tresspass in conjunction with the criminal damage constituted a burglary, he 'begged to differ'.
You would have to prove he entered as a trespasser with intent to cause criminal damage as well for it to be burglary.I once caught a man that had broken into my garage (he had jemmied the side door). I was subsequently informed by some shiny ars* that the case been closed, because there was insufficient proof of an 'attempted burglary'. I asked him how he reached that conclusion. His reply was, that nobody could prove that the person intended to steal anything. When I explained that the tresspass in conjunction with the criminal damage constituted a burglary, he 'begged to differ'.
flyinyam said:
Apologies as i don't know how to 'quote'
VH said 'you would have to prove he entered as a trespasser with intent to cause criminal damage aswell for it to be burglary.'
If it looks like dog sh*t,
an smells like dog sh*t.... chances are...!
That's not good enough for a court.VH said 'you would have to prove he entered as a trespasser with intent to cause criminal damage aswell for it to be burglary.'
If it looks like dog sh*t,
an smells like dog sh*t.... chances are...!
You've got to prove beyond reasonable doubt it is & career criminals have a lot of practice at introducing reasonable doubt. They've also got their brief to help them with it.
They use your freedoms & safeguards to their advantage, then laugh in your face.
Edited by vonhosen on Monday 17th September 21:50
FishFace said:
The Courts do differentiate between attempts and completed acts. Take a look at sentencing between murder and attempt murder.
Here's a quiz question for anyone who isn't a lawyer type/BiB:Is there such a thing as "Attempted Manslaughter"? If not, then why not? If so, then why? etc
I know, i've had similar experience...
Frustrating for all concerned.
Probably even more so for police!!!!
It's a shame very few receive appropriate consequences for they're criminal behaviour.
Reminds me of the American spray can wielding vandal in Philipines a few years back..(50 lashes)
Hee Hee just deserts.
Fy
Frustrating for all concerned.
Probably even more so for police!!!!
It's a shame very few receive appropriate consequences for they're criminal behaviour.
Reminds me of the American spray can wielding vandal in Philipines a few years back..(50 lashes)
Hee Hee just deserts.
Fy
RichBurley said:
FishFace said:
The Courts do differentiate between attempts and completed acts. Take a look at sentencing between murder and attempt murder.
Here's a quiz question for anyone who isn't a lawyer type/BiB:Is there such a thing as "Attempted Manslaughter"? If not, then why not? If so, then why? etc
Vipers said:
It would be so nice if some of these dodering old bastards, ie Judges, were on the receiving end of crime, like muggins, attacks, burglery, maybe then they may change their tune a little
They'd still have to apply the law & adhere to the sentencing guidelines.Sentiment can't come into it, it's applied dispassionately.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff