39 arrests for attempted murder of a single person
Discussion
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-46719...
39! I'm sure there must be a reason, but really?
Sure, if nobody is saying anything then arresting gives time to sort stuff out and to try to get to the truth of what happened, but surely 39 arrests on the same charge is excessive. That can't be true, can it? I can understand if some of them were for affray, or resisting arrest (lets not go there about that one!), or breach of the peace, but 39 attempted murder arrests of a single person?
Arrests aren't just a thing that you can shrug off, they have tangible consequences for the rest of your life.
39! I'm sure there must be a reason, but really?
Sure, if nobody is saying anything then arresting gives time to sort stuff out and to try to get to the truth of what happened, but surely 39 arrests on the same charge is excessive. That can't be true, can it? I can understand if some of them were for affray, or resisting arrest (lets not go there about that one!), or breach of the peace, but 39 attempted murder arrests of a single person?
Arrests aren't just a thing that you can shrug off, they have tangible consequences for the rest of your life.
Centurion07 said:
Surely those found to have nothing to do with it will be de-arrested, thereby nullifying the consqeuences you're talking about?
That can only happen if they haven't been processed. If you are processed into the system then you can only be released without charge.Good question though, were they processed?
It's a murder. Reasonable grounds, proportionality and necessity will consider how serious the offence is. It was always the case that there was never it is a 1 in x chance they did the crime. The Benchmark is incredibly low for reasonable grounds to suspect proportionality is more often the limiting facto. If only 1 person goes in a room during which time a watch was stolen then I think everyone is happy the grounds exist. What about 2, what about 3, 4 ,5 6,7 at what point is it unreasonable and is it proportionate and necessary..Now what about if a bomb is planted or someone murdered and the people don't cooperate.
Eddieslofart said:
“Whilst it is unusual for so many people to be arrested in the early stages of an investigation such as this, due to a lack of co-operation and the necessity of securing essential evidence following a serious assault this action was appropriate," he said.”
Pretty much explains it ?
The article has a lot more detail in it now, than when I first shared it.Pretty much explains it ?
Pica-Pica said:
The suspects ran inside a house to a nearby house-party. Police arrived, party-goers were not co-operating, so they arrested the lot. In time the least suspicious will be de-arrested and maybe bailed.
De-arrested and bailed? How does that work? What are you bailed for if you haven't been arrested?trooperiziz said:
Pica-Pica said:
The suspects ran inside a house to a nearby house-party. Police arrived, party-goers were not co-operating, so they arrested the lot. In time the least suspicious will be de-arrested and maybe bailed.
De-arrested and bailed? How does that work? What are you bailed for if you haven't been arrested?Edited by Pica-Pica on Monday 31st December 11:14
Graveworm said:
It's a murder. Reasonable grounds, proportionality and necessity will consider how serious the offence is. It was always the case that there was never it is a 1 in x chance they did the crime. The Benchmark is incredibly low for reasonable grounds to suspect proportionality is more often the limiting facto. If only 1 person goes in a room during which time a watch was stolen then I think everyone is happy the grounds exist. What about 2, what about 3, 4 ,5 6,7 at what point is it unreasonable and is it proportionate and necessary..Now what about if a bomb is planted or someone murdered and the people don't cooperate.
It’s an attempted murder.trooperiziz said:
Pica-Pica said:
The suspects ran inside a house to a nearby house-party. Police arrived, party-goers were not co-operating, so they arrested the lot. In time the least suspicious will be de-arrested and maybe bailed.
De-arrested and bailed? How does that work? What are you bailed for if you haven't been arrested?ED209 said:
vonhosen said:
They aren't going to be de-arrested now, they have arrived into custody & booked in. They'll either be released without charge NFA, bailed to return, bailed to court or in custody to court.
Or realised "under investigation"I'd imagine most of them will be NFA'd, hopefully a life lesson for being obstructive w
kers. Imagine calling custody 'Hi, can you accept 39 for attempted murder please?'
.......phone gets put down
OpulentBob said:
Nasty thing to have on your record for the rest of your life. Maybe they're sending a bit of a message to the bad elements?
Maybe but there's always the 'fk the fedz' type that won't give a st that someone at their house party has just nearly killed someone. They won't care one bit about their record as long as they keep that wall of silence up.Greendubber said:
Yep.
I'd imagine most of them will be NFA'd, hopefully a life lesson for being obstructive wkers.
Imagine calling custody 'Hi, can you accept 39 for attempted murder please?'
.......phone gets put down
I was thinking that! I'd want to be the first at the door as well! Thats a long wait otherwise.I'd imagine most of them will be NFA'd, hopefully a life lesson for being obstructive w
kers. Imagine calling custody 'Hi, can you accept 39 for attempted murder please?'
.......phone gets put down
OpulentBob said:
Nasty thing to have on your record for the rest of your life. Maybe they're sending a bit of a message to the bad elements?
No message, simply that if you have a serious offence and those who reasonably could have committed it won’t assist in narrowing down a suspect/s then it’s resonable to treat them all as suspects. Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff