Arrestable for any offence ... regardless of sentencing
Discussion
wef 1 Jan 2006, another provision of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (a serious misnomer if ever there was) comes into effect.
This has the effect of making almost all (if not all) offences arrestable. It used to be that only those carrying a minimum tariff of five years imprisonment were "arrestable offences".
Once arrested - for even a trivial offence - your DNA and fingerprints will be taken and stored.
Yet another step toards totalitarianism courtesy of Nu Labia.
A "Home Office spokesperson" (notice how they don't like to be named when it's bad or contentious news) said yesterday (28Dec05) that "arrests would not soar". I wonder which universe they inhabit. Clearly not one where they refer to their own figures.
Mark my words, as with the Terrorism Act 2000, this clause of SOCPA will be routinely abused. Expect increased arrests - if for no other reason that that it will help the broad statistics and provide rich data to pre-populate the National Identity Register.
Streaky
This has the effect of making almost all (if not all) offences arrestable. It used to be that only those carrying a minimum tariff of five years imprisonment were "arrestable offences".
Once arrested - for even a trivial offence - your DNA and fingerprints will be taken and stored.
Yet another step toards totalitarianism courtesy of Nu Labia.
A "Home Office spokesperson" (notice how they don't like to be named when it's bad or contentious news) said yesterday (28Dec05) that "arrests would not soar". I wonder which universe they inhabit. Clearly not one where they refer to their own figures.
Mark my words, as with the Terrorism Act 2000, this clause of SOCPA will be routinely abused. Expect increased arrests - if for no other reason that that it will help the broad statistics and provide rich data to pre-populate the National Identity Register.
Streaky
Streaky,
As im sure you are aware, its not as simple as just arrest for any offence.
For those that arn't aware S110 of Serious and Organised Crime Act (SOCA) means rather than having arrestable offences, serious arrestable offences and summary offences, there are now 2 categories.
All offences are now arrestable provided the arrets passes the necesity(sp) test.
We have always been able to arrest for any offence provided a set of criteria have been met.
ie any of the below (which form general powers of arrest)
Child or vunerable person (to protect)
Obstruction of highway (to prevent)
Prevent physical injury or harm.
Prevent offence against public decency
Loss or damage to property (prevent)
Address (not known, not believed or cannot be ascertained)
Name (not known, not believed or cannot be ascertained)
The new test to arrest has the same as the above but with 2 additions.
To aid in the promt and effcient investigation of the person whom is suspected of commiting the offence.
or becasue it is believed that the person in question will not attend court.
Again it has to be justified that it was necessary to arrest that person.
I think that arrests will fall as a result of the new laws due to the fact it has to be necessary rather than because there was a power of arrest. Alot of people are getting arrested because there is a power of arrest but it wasnt actually necessary to arrest the ie, they were compliant, proved who they were etc etc where an appointment could be made.
As im sure you are aware, its not as simple as just arrest for any offence.
For those that arn't aware S110 of Serious and Organised Crime Act (SOCA) means rather than having arrestable offences, serious arrestable offences and summary offences, there are now 2 categories.
All offences are now arrestable provided the arrets passes the necesity(sp) test.
We have always been able to arrest for any offence provided a set of criteria have been met.
ie any of the below (which form general powers of arrest)
Child or vunerable person (to protect)
Obstruction of highway (to prevent)
Prevent physical injury or harm.
Prevent offence against public decency
Loss or damage to property (prevent)
Address (not known, not believed or cannot be ascertained)
Name (not known, not believed or cannot be ascertained)
The new test to arrest has the same as the above but with 2 additions.
To aid in the promt and effcient investigation of the person whom is suspected of commiting the offence.
or becasue it is believed that the person in question will not attend court.
Again it has to be justified that it was necessary to arrest that person.
I think that arrests will fall as a result of the new laws due to the fact it has to be necessary rather than because there was a power of arrest. Alot of people are getting arrested because there is a power of arrest but it wasnt actually necessary to arrest the ie, they were compliant, proved who they were etc etc where an appointment could be made.
The police have stopped investigating a lot of offences before arrest, mostly the politically correct ones - offences that is, not BiB. The actual stated policy of my local constabulary for one of these PC priorities is 'arrest, charge, and let the Court decide' in 100% of cases. Custody suite entertainment, cell with en suite, mughsot, prints, DNA, and all this for folk who have never committed a crime nor are ever likely to, and so the national DNA database by stealth grows, the ends justfy the means. Of course this doesn't all happen purely on the say-so if PH's trafpol BiB so nothing personal guys.
jamesson said:Hope so, but we'll see.
Depending on their criminal record, of course. Persistant offenders are likely to find their collar being felt just as before, but suspects elligible for cautions will undoubtedly not need to stay in a cell for most of the day and that will free us up to spend more time on more serious matters.
bbc said:
Here are the key points of the Home Office consultation document Modernising Police Powers to meet Community Needs.
Powers of arrest:
Allow police to arrest people for all offences, including minor ones such as graffiti and litter. At present - with exceptions - people can only be arrested for offences which carry sentences of at least five years.
Set clearer criteria for citizens' arrests - including a clear legal requirement to hand over the arrested person to the custody of a constable "as soon as practicable".
Abolish the ability for police to arrest people for breach of the peace.
Search warrants:
The scope of search warrants to cover not just on a specific property, but to focus on the person and cover any premises occupied or controlled or accessible by them.
Scrap the one month time limit automatically placed on search warrants.
Scrap the rule limiting entry to one occasion only.
The time-consuming system of getting search warrants could be speeded up by allowing them to be applied for and granted by e-mail or fax.
Community Support Officers:
New powers to direct traffic.
Take on the role of custody officers in police stations.
Powers to issue warnings to beggars.
Powers to enforce byelaws.
Powers to search people they have detained.
Allow designated investigating officers to operate in plain clothes on occasions.
More powers considered to tackle alcohol related anti-social behaviour.
Drugs:
Testing people for drugs on arrest rather than when charged.
Enhancing the ways of encouraging drug-misusing offenders to undergo appropriate treatment on leaving custody.
Allowing courts to remand a person into police detention for up to 12 days if they are suspected of swallowing drugs.
Courts to be directed to draw inferences from a suspect's refusal to submit to an intimate search.
Road offences:
Create a new offence of using or keeping an incorrectly registered vehicle.
Give powers for fixed penalty money to be used to fund expansion of automatic number plate recognition technology.
Fireworks:
Create a new power of stop, search, seizure and confiscation in relation to possession of fireworks by under-18s in a public place.
Protests outside homes:
Create a new offence of protesting outside homes, where the protest is in such a way as to cause harassment, alarm or distress to residents.
Amend existing laws to make it an offence for someone ordered to leave the vicinity of a home to return within three months for the purposes of persuading the resident or another that he should do something he is not obliged to do.
Parliament protests:
Ensure that the law to deal with demonstrations outside Parliament is effective - possibly to ban long-term protests.
Identification:
Allow police to take DNA samples, fingerprints or foot/shoeprints covertly - for example, by undercover officers - to determine identification of suspects and their possible involvement in an offence, although such material would be for intelligence use only and not for use as evidence in court.
Police powers to take suspects' fingerprints should be extended to any public place, not just at the police station.
Officers should also be able to photograph suspects outside the police station, and use moving images such as video.
^Slider^ said:The wording of S110 of SOCPA is:
Streaky,
As im sure you are aware, its not as simple as just arrest for any offence.
For those that arn't aware S110 of Serious and Organised Crime Act (SOCA) means rather than having arrestable offences, serious arrestable offences and summary offences, there are now 2 categories.
All offences are now arrestable provided the arrets passes the necesity(sp) test.
We have always been able to arrest for any offence provided a set of criteria have been met.
ie any of the below (which form general powers of arrest)
Child or vunerable person (to protect)
Obstruction of highway (to prevent)
Prevent physical injury or harm.
Prevent offence against public decency
Loss or damage to property (prevent)
Address (not known, not believed or cannot be ascertained)
Name (not known, not believed or cannot be ascertained)
The new test to arrest has the same as the above but with 2 additions.
To aid in the promt and effcient investigation of the person whom is suspected of commiting the offence.
or becasue it is believed that the person in question will not attend court.
Again it has to be justified that it was necessary to arrest that person.
I think that arrests will fall as a result of the new laws due to the fact it has to be necessary rather than because there was a power of arrest. Alot of people are getting arrested because there is a power of arrest but it wasnt actually necessary to arrest the ie, they were compliant, proved who they were etc etc where an appointment could be made.
110 Powers of arrest
(1) For section 24 of PACE (arrest without warrant for arrestable offences) substitute-
24 Arrest without warrant: constables
(1) A constable may arrest without a warrant-
(a) anyone who is about to commit an offence;
(b) anyone who is in the act of committing an offence;
© anyone whom he has reasonable grounds for suspecting to be about to commit an offence;
(d) anyone whom he has reasonable grounds for suspecting to be committing an offence.
(2) If a constable has reasonable grounds for suspecting that an offence has been committed, he may arrest without a warrant anyone whom he has reasonable grounds to suspect of being guilty of it.
(3) If an offence has been committed, a constable may arrest without a warrant-
(a) anyone who is guilty of the offence;
(b) anyone whom he has reasonable grounds for suspecting to be guilty of it.
(4) But the power of summary arrest conferred by subsection (1), (2) or (3) is exercisable only if the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that for any of the reasons mentioned in subsection (5) it is necessary to arrest the person in question.
(5) The reasons are-
(a) to enable the name of the person in question to be ascertained (in the case where the constable does not know, and cannot readily ascertain, the person's name, or has reasonable grounds for doubting whether a name given by the person as his name is his real name);
(b) correspondingly as regards the person's address;
(c) to prevent the person in question-
(i) causing physical injury to himself or any other person;
(ii) suffering physical injury;
(iii) causing loss of or damage to property;
(iv) committing an offence against public decency (subject to subsection (6)); or
(v) causing an unlawful obstruction of the highway;
(d) to protect a child or other vulnerable person from the person in question;
(e) to allow the prompt and effective investigation of the offence or of the conduct of the person in question;
(f) to prevent any prosecution for the offence from being hindered by the disappearance of the person in question.
(6) Subsection (5)(c)(iv) applies only where members of the public going about their normal business cannot reasonably be expected to avoid the person in question.
So, pray explain how this is not "arrest for any offence" and significantly different from that which previously applied under PACE s24?
Having said all that, no-one (including myself) has yet pointed out that there is distinction between "arrestable offences" - now discarded, and "recordable offences" - for which DNA may be taken. FWIW, these latter include any offence for which an adult may be imprisoned (a goodly number, including many "nodded through" Parliament in implementing EU Directives) and:
1. section 5 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933[7] (offence of giving intoxicating liquor to children under five);
2. section 11 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (offence of exposing children under twelve to risk of burning[8];
3. section 12 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (offence of failing to provide for safety of children at entertainments)[9];
4. section 91 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967[10] (offence of drunkenness in a public place);
5. section 139(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988[11] (offence of having article with blade or point in public place);
6. section 2 of the Crossbows Act 1987[12] (offence of purchasing or hiring a crossbow or part of a crossbow by person under the age of seventeen);
7. section 3 of the Crossbows Act 1987 (offence of possessing a crossbow or parts of a crossbow by unsupervised person under the age of seventeen);
8. section 5(6) of the Firearms Act 1968[13] (offence of failing to deliver up authority to possess prohibited weapon or ammunition);
9. section 22(3) of the Firearms Act 1968 (offence of possessing an assembled shotgun by unsupervised person under the age of fifteen);
10. section 22(4) of the Firearms Act 1968 (offence of possessing an air weapon or ammunition for an air weapon by unsupervised person under the age of fourteen);
11. section 22(5) of the Firearms Act 1968 (offence of possessing in a public place an air weapon by unsupervised person under the age of seventeen);
12. section 2 of the Football (Offences) Act 1991[14] (offence of throwing missiles);
13. section 3 of the Football (Offences) Act 1991[15] (offence of indecent or racialist chanting);
14. section 4 of the Football (Offences) Act 1991 (offence of unlawfully going on to the playing area);
15. section 30 of the Game Act 1831[16] (offences of trespassing in daytime on land in search of game, etc.);
16. section 31 of the Game Act 1831 (offence of refusal of person trespassing in daytime on land in search of game to give his name and address);
17. section 32 of the Game Act 1831 (offence of five or more persons being found armed in daytime in search of game and using violence or refusal of such persons to give name and address);
18. section 12 of the Licensing Act 1872[17] (offence of being drunk in highway or public place);
19. section 45 of the Licensing Act 1964[18] (offence of obstructing a constable or local authority official inspecting premises which are the subject of an application to be registered as a club);
20. section 172 of the Licensing Act 1964 (offence of licensee permitting drunkenness, etc. on licensed premises);
21. section 174(2) of the Licensing Act 1964 (offence of failing to leave licensed premises when requested to do so);
22. section 175 of the Licensing Act 1964 (offence of allowing prostitutes to assemble on licensed premises);
23. section 176 of the Licensing Act 1964 (offence of permitting licensed premises to be a brothel);
24. section 178 of the Licensing Act 1964 (offence of allowing constables to remain on licensed premises while on duty, supplying liquor or refreshments to constables on duty or bribing a constable);
25. paragraph 21 of Schedule 3 to the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982[19] (offence of making false statement in connection with an application for a sex establishment licence);
26. section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988[20] (offence of sending letters etc. with intent to cause distress or anxiety);
27. section 13 of the Nurses, Midwives and Health Visitors Act 1997[21] (offence of falsely claiming a professional qualification);
28. section 1 of the Night Poaching Act 1828[22] (offence of taking or destroying game or rabbits by night, or entering any land for that purpose);
29. section 90(2) of the Police Act 1996[23] (offence of wearing police uniform with intent to deceive);
30. section 90(3) of the Police Act 1996 (offence of unlawful possession of article of police uniform);
31. section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986[24] (offence of causing harassment, alarm or distress);
32. section 11 of the Public Order Act 1986 (offence of failing to give advance notice of public procession);
33. section 12(5) of the Public Order Act 1986 (offence of failing to comply with conditions imposed on a public procession);
34. section 13(8) of the Public Order Act 1986 (offence of taking part in a prohibited public procession);
35. section 14(5) of the Public Order Act 1986 (offence of failing to comply with conditions imposed on a public assembly);
36. section 14B(2) of the Public Order Act 1986[25] (offence of taking part in a prohibited assembly);
37. section 14C(3) of the Public Order Act 1986[26] (offence of failing to comply with directions);
38. section 6 of the Road Traffic Act 1988[27] (offence of failing to provide specimen of breath);
39. section 25 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (penalisation of tampering with vehicles);
40. section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 1985[28] (offence of kerb crawling);
41. section 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 1985 (offence of persistently soliciting women for the purpose of prostitution);
42. section 1(2) of the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol Etc.) Act 1985[29] (offence of allowing alcohol to be carried on public vehicles on journey to or from designated sporting event);
43. section 1(4) of the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol Etc.) Act 1985 (offence of being drunk on public vehicles on journey to or from designated sporting event);
44. section 1A(2) of the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol Etc.) Act 1985[30] (offence of allowing alcohol to be carried in vehicles on journey to or from designated sporting event);
45. section 2(2) of the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol Etc.) Act 1985 (offence of trying to enter designated sports ground while drunk);
46. section 5B(3) of the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol Etc.) Act 1985[31] (offence of consuming or taking alcohol at designated sports ground while unauthorised);
47. section 5C(4) of the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol Etc.) Act 1985 (consuming or obtaining alcohol during designated sporting events other than at registered premises);
48. section 5C(5) of the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol Etc.) Act 1985 (offence by officials of club in relation to supplying alcohol at designated sports ground);
49. section 5D(3) of the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol Etc.) Act 1985 (offence of consuming or obtaining alcohol during designated sporting event other than when sold by retail);
50. section 1 of the Street Offences Act 1959[32] (offence of loitering or soliciting for purposes of prostitution);
51. section 43 of the Telecommunications Act 1984[33] (offence of improper use of public telecommunications system); and
52. section 12(5) of the Theft Act 1968[34] (offence of taking or riding a pedal cycle without owner's consent).
From Statutory Instrument 2000 No. 1139 - The National Police Records (Recordable Offences) Regulations 2000 - there may be others in addition I haven't found yet.
BTW - my local landlord is guilty of #24 above, but I presume he can only be arrested off the premises
. Watch out for #52 as well - a heinous offence well-deserving of having your DNA recorded for posterity. Others found whilst compiling the above include:
section 167 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994[3] (offence of touting for hire car services);
article 44 of the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001[4] (offence of falsely claiming a professional qualification etc.);
section 3 of the Vagrancy Act 1824[5] (offence of begging);
section 4 of the Vagrancy Act 1824[6] (offence of persistent begging);
Streaky
jamesson said:
Turbobloke - trust me, if I can get out of spending a day in the custody centre, I will!
Likewise which would also hopefully mean more effective investigations because at the moment you are missing appointments for weeks on end because of being tied up in custody when its not really needed.
Lets face it there are alot of offences which carry a power of arrest, and alot of officers excise this regardless of the offence. For example current system : 13yo punches a sign damaging it, power of arrest is there. Youth is nicked (no previous convictions, not known PNC) arrested and taken to police station and booked into the system (maybe 45 mins so far spent). contact parents and get them to come to the nick (possibly an hour before parent arrives) maybe get a solicitor (add another hour till he arrives), disclosure is conducted and the solcitor has a consultation with said youth (45 mins ish) ready for interview and conduct said interview (say 30 mins) speak to custody skipper and get a decision (15 mins) get CPS advice if needed (30 mins) Bail for RJU intervention document and fingerprint etc (30 mins) go back to the nick and do the file (1 hr ish)
total time =5hrs 45 mins on a good day leaves me 2hrs 15 to do my own enquiries or deal with another job.
possibly under new system:Youth spoken to and taken home to his parents (30 mins) a contemp interview is conducted at home (45 mins) youth street bailed (20 mins), file is sent to cps or RJU for a decision (1hr). Decision made fingerprint and document at an arranged time at a police station (30 mins)
Total time = 3hrs 15 spread over 2 visits.
Leaving me with just under 5 hrs left on shift to do my own enquiries or deal with another job.
That is all simplified as each job is different but i know which option i will be doing come the new year!
That would enable me to complete my allocated crimes and outstanding work and deal with other crimes meaning i can handle more work quicker, spend more time on patrol and actually managing to give a decent service to the public rather than sorry mr bloggs i cant come around today as promised as im stuck in custody yes and im sorry i havent been able to do so for the last 3 weeks because we dont have enough staff on shift to cover.
streaky said:
Streaky,
As im sure you are aware, its not as simple as just arrest for any offence.
For those that arn't aware S110 of Serious and Organised Crime Act (SOCA) means rather than having arrestable offences, serious arrestable offences and summary offences, there are now 2 categories.
All offences are now arrestable provided the arrets passes the necesity(sp) test.
We have always been able to arrest for any offence provided a set of criteria have been met.
ie any of the below (which form general powers of arrest)
Child or vunerable person (to protect)
Obstruction of highway (to prevent)
Prevent physical injury or harm.
Prevent offence against public decency
Loss or damage to property (prevent)
Address (not known, not believed or cannot be ascertained)
Name (not known, not believed or cannot be ascertained)
The new test to arrest has the same as the above but with 2 additions.
To aid in the promt and effcient investigation of the person whom is suspected of commiting the offence.
or becasue it is believed that the person in question will not attend court.
Again it has to be justified that it was necessary to arrest that person.
I think that arrests will fall as a result of the new laws due to the fact it has to be necessary rather than because there was a power of arrest. Alot of people are getting arrested because there is a power of arrest but it wasnt actually necessary to arrest the ie, they were compliant, proved who they were etc etc where an appointment could be made.
So, pray explain how this is not "arrest for any offence" and significantly different from that which previously applied under PACE s24?
Having said all that, no-one (including myself) has yet pointed out that there is distinction between "arrestable offences" - now discarded, and "recordable offences" - for which DNA may be taken. FWIW, these latter include any offence for which an adult may be imprisoned (a goodly number, including many "nodded through" Parliament in implementing EU Directives) and:
BTW - my local landlord is guilty of #24 above, but I presume he can only be arrested off the premises
Others found whilst compiling the above include:
Streaky
Streaky,
I never said it wasnt an arrest for any offence, i said the power is there provided the new COPPLAN+ ammendments are satisfied which there are 2 additional to the original general arrest conditions.
We can arrest for any offence anyway provided the general arrest conditions are met.
The new law makes no real difference to that just gives it the additional 2 conditions that can be met to make an offence arrestable.
Meaning whereas originally (as in some forces) where there is a power fo arrest it must be executed.
Now we have actually been given the discression not to arrest, but we have the option to if any of the general arrest conditions are met.
It will be a testing time this year because no one knows really what the hell to do and ultimately the custody skipper can autherise detention and i can see alot of people being refused detention under the new laws!
edited to add, sorry for the post edit, i needed some points for referance and not all the SOCAP legislation.
>> Edited by ^Slider^ on Thursday 29th December 16:22
voyds9 said:
Do we still have the right to see our fingerprints, DNA destroyed if no case was proven.
Are they routinely destroyed or do we specifically have to request it.
I think its destroyed automatically if you are not charged or summonsed but you can request to witness its destruction. If you are charged it is retained.
Im not 100% sure on this as i dont get involved in that side of it.
^Slider^ said:Mugshot only is destroyed and then only on request, this can eb witnessed. Prints and DNA retained not just if found not guilty but also if no offence / no evidence offered / case dropped.
I think its destroyed automatically if you are not charged or summonsed but you can request to witness its destruction. If you are charged it is retained.
voyds9 said:
Do we still have the right to see our fingerprints, DNA destroyed if no case was proven.
Are they routinely destroyed or do we specifically have to request it.
No - all fingerprints, the DNA sequence and the actual sample the DNA sequence was taken from (hence allowing any future scientific technique to be applied retrospectively) can be stored indefinetly once taken. You do not have to be found guilty you do not even have to be charged (in the sense of taken to court). You just need to be arrested and later released. Since 2004 under another step towards New Labia dream of a totalitarian state the law was changed again in respect of the DNA database to allow the samples to be taken forceably without your consent.
The DNA database has now sampled approx 1 in 30 people in this country. It is the largest database of its kind in the world and no other police force in the world has more extensive powers to take and store samples. Further the database is allowed to be accessed for the purposes of research - for example is there a "crinimal" gene?. The research does not require the permission of the people who the DNA belongs to nor does it need any kind of government approval such as an Ethics Standards Committee.
I'm sure there are many of the "nothing to hide" bridgade who are happy with this state of affairs blindly trusting the "infallibility" of DNA testing. Unfortunetly, the database only stores 10 markers belonging to your DNA sequence which even the father of DNA fingerprinting Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys says this is inaquadete.
Why do I feel like I should be very very worried about this. It's not as if I'm a criminal or the like. Mark my words, I propose that those in the know, i.e. professional criminals, will be less affected by this than the general public. As with all ill thought through laws brought in by this bunch of medling half wits (which could be said of nearly all of the main ones in the last 8 years it so happens). It hasn't been thought through any deeper than it took the original chattering classes to discuss over dinner one night with ones like minded freinds 
.
I really dispair at the direction this bunch of tossers are taking my beloved and once the only truely free country. If you were to write a book about it, it would be quickly dismissed as a work of right wing fiction.......sorry thats already been done, 21 years out on the date though 
.
Harry
. I really dispair at the direction this bunch of tossers are taking my beloved and once the only truely free country
. If you were to write a book about it, it would be quickly dismissed as a work of right wing fiction.......sorry thats already been done, 21 years out on the date though . Harry
matchless said:Try it! On those 'PC' offences mentioned a few posts ago - especially involving women - the police will pursue the case on their own, partly because the (usually male) wrongly accused can't pursue a malicious prosecution so easily whenn it all goes t1t5 up due to some BFH trying for a bit of leverage or revenge. Wasting police time? Forget that too, remember the police don;t need a victim for these PC crimes, obvious innit. And this after a grand total of zero investigation, but hey that's social justice in f
will the Police be able to afford to pay all those innocent people though when they are sued for wrongfull arrest?
g Bliar's Britain.Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff