How to verify police search warrant
Discussion
Nigel Worc's said:
YOUR rules do impact on peoples travel, you know this, but still continue to not care.
No, we have an investigatory system which a lot of countries have copied and operate in a similar manner. Each country can choose its immigration rules and regulations. That's not our problem and hardly a driver to change something that fundamentally works. Nigel Worc's said:
I think it is down to other countries requiring some proof before arrest, and sadly our police don't seem to.
No different to here, then. Which work dramatically differently?
Nigel Worc's said:
And of course it says the powers are reasonable, anyone with the power will think that!
Or the actions adhered to the law. La Liga said:
Nigel Worc's said:
YOUR rules do impact on peoples travel, you know this, but still continue to not care.
No, we have an investigatory system which a lot of countries have copied and operate in a similar manner. Each country can choose its immigration rules and regulations. That's not our problem and hardly a driver to change something that fundamentally works. Nigel Worc's said:
I think it is down to other countries requiring some proof before arrest, and sadly our police don't seem to.
No different to here, then. Which work dramatically differently?
Nigel Worc's said:
And of course it says the powers are reasonable, anyone with the power will think that!
Or the actions adhered to the law. I have been detained in the USA (for the crime of being British), but they did it without arresting me, pity we don't seem to be able to do the same, it allowed them to investigate their fears that I came from somewhere outside of the USA.
Nigel Worc's said:
In my eyes you cannot defend a system that leaves an innocent person disadvantaged.
Agreed. I would never try and defend the immigration policies which place the innocent at a disadvantage. Nigel Worc's said:
I have been detained in the USA (for the crime of being British), but they did it without arresting me, pity we don't seem to be able to do the same, it allowed them to investigate their fears that I came from somewhere outside of the USA.
We don't really do "detention" - you're free unless the state has evidence to deprive you of your liberty and clearly begin a process where you legal rights are clear and heavily legislated for. La Liga said:
Nigel Worc's said:
In my eyes you cannot defend a system that leaves an innocent person disadvantaged.
Agreed. I would never try and defend the immigration policies which place the innocent at a disadvantage. Nigel Worc's said:
I have been detained in the USA (for the crime of being British), but they did it without arresting me, pity we don't seem to be able to do the same, it allowed them to investigate their fears that I came from somewhere outside of the USA.
We don't really do "detention" - you're free unless the state has evidence to deprive you of your liberty and clearly begin a process where you legal rights are clear and heavily legislated for. No, it's not OK the US has an unsophisticated, blanket approach. Who knows what information provided the circumstances for arrest here.
Let's try something less convoluted. Someone is breathalysed at the roadside and blows 35. They are arrested and provide an evidential breath test which comes in at 39. The are wholly innocent of any offences, in the same way Eclassy was, and are released.
So what do we have instead? A system of "detention" that has to have all the same practicalities and legal protections as an arrest, but we call it something else just to appease another country's immigration policies? So we rewrite lots of our legislation?
Or are we making judgements as to degrees of innocence? Someone who triggers reasonable suspicion for consuming alcohol (which is ultimately within the legal limit) is OK to be arrested, but not someone caught up in a business name coincidence?
Let's try something less convoluted. Someone is breathalysed at the roadside and blows 35. They are arrested and provide an evidential breath test which comes in at 39. The are wholly innocent of any offences, in the same way Eclassy was, and are released.
So what do we have instead? A system of "detention" that has to have all the same practicalities and legal protections as an arrest, but we call it something else just to appease another country's immigration policies? So we rewrite lots of our legislation?
Or are we making judgements as to degrees of innocence? Someone who triggers reasonable suspicion for consuming alcohol (which is ultimately within the legal limit) is OK to be arrested, but not someone caught up in a business name coincidence?
I think you should only be arrested when the system has enough information to charge you, until then you should be detained, like I was.
The system here however disagrees with me.
I don't think the possible drink driver should be arrested at the roadside, as the officer doesn't actually have any evidence against him, you should detain him until you have the evidence, then arrest him.
The system here however disagrees with me.
I don't think the possible drink driver should be arrested at the roadside, as the officer doesn't actually have any evidence against him, you should detain him until you have the evidence, then arrest him.
The point is they can't detain you (stop and search and a couple of other bits otherwise). They need to have reasonable suspicion based on objective fact to deprive you of your liberty. Lots of legal rights and protections are triggered upon an arrest being made.
Arrest powers were modified in 2006 so there needs to be additional criteria for them to occur. This has resulted in fewer arrests. I'd say that's going the other way to "too much power now".
Arrest powers were modified in 2006 so there needs to be additional criteria for them to occur. This has resulted in fewer arrests. I'd say that's going the other way to "too much power now".
That's rather naive. Police can't detain you "whenever they like". The grounds have to be there. If they aren't, then no arrest can be made, and if it is, should be rightly appealed.
I also agree that essentially changing the word arrest to detain would be a pointless exercise. If the system is flawed, which it probably is, I don't think it's the police's fault, it's the HO. Too few powers and people would complain the police can't do enough.
I also agree that essentially changing the word arrest to detain would be a pointless exercise. If the system is flawed, which it probably is, I don't think it's the police's fault, it's the HO. Too few powers and people would complain the police can't do enough.
Mk3Spitfire said:
That's rather naive. Police can't detain you "whenever they like". The grounds have to be there. If they aren't, then no arrest can be made, and if it is, should be rightly appealed.
I also agree that essentially changing the word arrest to detain would be a pointless exercise. If the system is flawed, which it probably is, I don't think it's the police's fault, it's the HO. Too few powers and people would complain the police can't do enough.
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.I also agree that essentially changing the word arrest to detain would be a pointless exercise. If the system is flawed, which it probably is, I don't think it's the police's fault, it's the HO. Too few powers and people would complain the police can't do enough.
I don't think it is the Polices fault either, they are a disciplined service and follow orders.
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.
I think it's debatable re there being sufficient grounds. Company with exact same name based at the address given. I would argue it was a mistake, but an understandable one. As to Eclassless suffering as a consequence. Regrettable, but there are avenues to make good any harm done. Mk3Spitfire said:
I think it's debatable re there being sufficient grounds. Company with exact same name based at the address given. I would argue it was a mistake, but an understandable one. As to Eclassless suffering as a consequence. Regrettable, but there are avenues to make good any harm done.
I agree with you regarding the mistake.However the "avenues" don't seem to have appeased the poster, and I doubt they'd have appeased me either.
Nigel Worc's said:
I agree with you regarding the mistake.
However the "avenues" don't seem to have appeased the poster, and I doubt they'd have appeased me either.
Possibly not. But we are not privy to the details of the compensation/correctional process. I don't know. I know nothing we do or say will ever change how it works though. However the "avenues" don't seem to have appeased the poster, and I doubt they'd have appeased me either.
In the posters circumstances, the very first thing that would annoy me, after being released, is "ring this number to get the damage sorted".
Errrr, no, YOU broke the door, I'm innocent, YOU sort it !
How do you compensate him for the time in custody, the loss of liberty ?
How do you reinstate his travel status ?
Errrr, no, YOU broke the door, I'm innocent, YOU sort it !
How do you compensate him for the time in custody, the loss of liberty ?
How do you reinstate his travel status ?
Nigel Worc's said:
In the posters circumstances, the very first thing that would annoy me, after being released, is "ring this number to get the damage sorted".
Errrr, no, YOU broke the door, I'm innocent, YOU sort it !
How do you compensate him for the time in custody, the loss of liberty ?
How do you reinstate his travel status ?
At the time it was a legitimate arrest so one isn't entitled to any compensation. The travel status can't be reinstated but maybe that isn't much of a big deal. There are now codes of conduct to prevent someone in the situation I found myself from being arrested (necessity test) but unfortunately some officers are either deliberately or ignorantly still making unlawful arrests.Errrr, no, YOU broke the door, I'm innocent, YOU sort it !
How do you compensate him for the time in custody, the loss of liberty ?
How do you reinstate his travel status ?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff