A little insight into what we deal with ..
Discussion
Also a little clue as to why we are fighting a losing battle.
All names are changed as are the objects involved.
Today I was at work.. Brought in a chap known previously for handling and theft etc etc. Said chap had been arrested after going into (lets say a garden shop) with an expensive gnome. Garden shop tad suspicious of chap ring us and we attend quickly. Guy has left and is seen entering an alley. Officers stop chap who denies any knowledge of a garden gnome. Officers (not having been born yesterday - despite what the chap said) decided that he was a little fibber and arrested the chap. You see a garden gnome like that had been stolen just the night before. He comes to the police station and is thoroughly searched (despite still denying having the gnome on him) and its found supprise supprise in his pants.
Now said chap bang to rights you may think. Job nearly done. Well some hours and a quick chat with a solicitor and it seems he had only just found said gnome and was making his way as soon as he had done what he needed to do down to the police station. Now I know he's not being honest and should be no money and straight to jail. No enquiries and bail. Many more hours of paperwork some cctv to be siezed of him in the town centre and the garden centre and many statements before we can put him maybe before a court.
just wonder as members of the jury what your thinking on this one? ITS NOT A GNOME BY THE WAY
All names are changed as are the objects involved.
Today I was at work.. Brought in a chap known previously for handling and theft etc etc. Said chap had been arrested after going into (lets say a garden shop) with an expensive gnome. Garden shop tad suspicious of chap ring us and we attend quickly. Guy has left and is seen entering an alley. Officers stop chap who denies any knowledge of a garden gnome. Officers (not having been born yesterday - despite what the chap said) decided that he was a little fibber and arrested the chap. You see a garden gnome like that had been stolen just the night before. He comes to the police station and is thoroughly searched (despite still denying having the gnome on him) and its found supprise supprise in his pants.
Now said chap bang to rights you may think. Job nearly done. Well some hours and a quick chat with a solicitor and it seems he had only just found said gnome and was making his way as soon as he had done what he needed to do down to the police station. Now I know he's not being honest and should be no money and straight to jail. No enquiries and bail. Many more hours of paperwork some cctv to be siezed of him in the town centre and the garden centre and many statements before we can put him maybe before a court.
just wonder as members of the jury what your thinking on this one? ITS NOT A GNOME BY THE WAY
chrispy porker said:
Is it normal, members of the jury, to carry found property to the POlice station in your underwear?
Now, devils advocate..
IF, the item of property was say a nice expensive watch/ring and the area was rough, then he could be hiding it in case he is mugged.........
But, with the full facts I reckon I could nail him to the wall...
No I am not, for petty crimes such as this take up far to much of the Police and Courts time.
For the Police to offer the offender a caution, in some cases against an admission of guilt, but an admission does not always have to apply. Whilst a caution is not a criminal conviction through the courts, a caution is a criminal record that will last for ever, so therefore much worse than a criminal conviction. So any later sensitive employment, visa applications, credit and insurance checks through the Police will always bring up the “caution”, together with possibly raising itself in any subsequent criminal or civil case.
I am very much pro Police, and therefore consider that the valuable time and finances should not be taken up on petty crimes but on more serious crimes.
For the Police to offer the offender a caution, in some cases against an admission of guilt, but an admission does not always have to apply. Whilst a caution is not a criminal conviction through the courts, a caution is a criminal record that will last for ever, so therefore much worse than a criminal conviction. So any later sensitive employment, visa applications, credit and insurance checks through the Police will always bring up the “caution”, together with possibly raising itself in any subsequent criminal or civil case.
I am very much pro Police, and therefore consider that the valuable time and finances should not be taken up on petty crimes but on more serious crimes.
Wings said:
No I am not, for petty crimes such as this take up far to much of the Police and Courts time.
For the Police to offer the offender a caution, in some cases against an admission of guilt, but an admission does not always have to apply. Whilst a caution is not a criminal conviction through the courts, a caution is a criminal record that will last for ever, so therefore much worse than a criminal conviction. So any later sensitive employment, visa applications, credit and insurance checks through the Police will always bring up the “caution”, together with possibly raising itself in any subsequent criminal or civil case.
I am very much pro Police, and therefore consider that the valuable time and finances should not be taken up on petty crimes but on more serious crimes.
For the Police to offer the offender a caution, in some cases against an admission of guilt, but an admission does not always have to apply. Whilst a caution is not a criminal conviction through the courts, a caution is a criminal record that will last for ever, so therefore much worse than a criminal conviction. So any later sensitive employment, visa applications, credit and insurance checks through the Police will always bring up the “caution”, together with possibly raising itself in any subsequent criminal or civil case.
I am very much pro Police, and therefore consider that the valuable time and finances should not be taken up on petty crimes but on more serious crimes.
You did actually read the post? You did get that I said 'gnome' and lets call it a garden centre. That this is in no way a gnome? That a gnome hidden in somones pants would stand out?
Garden centre = jewellers.. work the rest out.
Oh well there goes me trying to be clever and avoid getting in trouble
But if it's not a gnome, it might not be so petty, gnomes were changed to allow the story to go up on here remember?
Surely the 'I just found it' story is wearing thin by now? Does anyone believe it? If so they shouldn't be serving as magistrates or judges. Playgroup supervisor would be more in keeping with the quality of their critical faculties.
Edited to add, pity I type so slow, beaten to it by the OP
Surely the 'I just found it' story is wearing thin by now? Does anyone believe it? If so they shouldn't be serving as magistrates or judges. Playgroup supervisor would be more in keeping with the quality of their critical faculties.
Edited to add, pity I type so slow, beaten to it by the OP
Edited by Turbobloke on Thursday 30th November 10:26
Turbobloke said:
But if it's not a gnome, it might not be so petty, gnomes were changed to allow the story to go up on here remember?
Surely the 'I just found it' story is wearing thin by now? Does anyone believe it? If so they shouldn't be serving as magistrates or judges. Playgroup supervisor would be more in keeping with the quality of their critical faculties.
Edited to add, pity I type so slow, beaten to it by the OP
Surely the 'I just found it' story is wearing thin by now? Does anyone believe it? If so they shouldn't be serving as magistrates or judges. Playgroup supervisor would be more in keeping with the quality of their critical faculties.
Edited to add, pity I type so slow, beaten to it by the OP
Edited by Turbobloke on Thursday 30th November 10:26
Sorry TB off late but up early (ish).. why aren't you a magistrate!
grumbledoak said:
jasandjules said:
But, with the full facts I reckon I could nail him to the wall...
The full facts don't seem to be enough these days, sadly.
But think what you could do with a nail-gun...
You're really a member of the Bronson family and I claim the spotter's ten shillings reward
Mr_annie_vxr said:
Turbobloke said:
But if it's not a gnome, it might not be so petty, gnomes were changed to allow the story to go up on here remember?
Surely the 'I just found it' story is wearing thin by now? Does anyone believe it? If so they shouldn't be serving as magistrates or judges. Playgroup supervisor would be more in keeping with the quality of their critical faculties.
Edited to add, pity I type so slow, beaten to it by the OP
Sorry Mr_annie_vxr I obviously need more sleep, up too early.
Surely the 'I just found it' story is wearing thin by now? Does anyone believe it? If so they shouldn't be serving as magistrates or judges. Playgroup supervisor would be more in keeping with the quality of their critical faculties.
Edited to add, pity I type so slow, beaten to it by the OP
Sorry Mr_annie_vxr I obviously need more sleep, up too early.
Edited by Turbobloke on Thursday 30th November 10:26
Sorry TB off late but up early (ish).. why aren't you a magistrate!
Wings said:
No I am not, for petty crimes such as this take up far to much of the Police and Courts time.
For the Police to offer the offender a caution, in some cases against an admission of guilt, but an admission does not always have to apply. Whilst a caution is not a criminal conviction through the courts, a caution is a criminal record that will last for ever, so therefore much worse than a criminal conviction. So any later sensitive employment, visa applications, credit and insurance checks through the Police will always bring up the “caution”, together with possibly raising itself in any subsequent criminal or civil case.
I am very much pro Police, and therefore consider that the valuable time and finances should not be taken up on petty crimes but on more serious crimes.
For the Police to offer the offender a caution, in some cases against an admission of guilt, but an admission does not always have to apply. Whilst a caution is not a criminal conviction through the courts, a caution is a criminal record that will last for ever, so therefore much worse than a criminal conviction. So any later sensitive employment, visa applications, credit and insurance checks through the Police will always bring up the “caution”, together with possibly raising itself in any subsequent criminal or civil case.
I am very much pro Police, and therefore consider that the valuable time and finances should not be taken up on petty crimes but on more serious crimes.
But it was my gnome! I feel horrified that my gnome was down the pants of said scrote, so much so that I can't enjoy my garden again. The monetary value has been affected by his handling of my gnome but this pales into insignificance knowing that the scrote now knows that I've got gnomes worth knicking on my property.
I, being an honest + taxpaying citizen, would like justice to be done so that I can be safe to enjoy my garden for a few years with the knowledge that the scrote has been put away and is unlikely to pay me a second visit. I don't want him/her to be just told off like a naughty schoolkid.
The problem is that as of last night a total of about.. say 12 officer hours had been spent on this matter (3 officers statements case file etc) the OIC now will have to under disclosure look to sieze the cctv in and about the area the chap says he found the gnome. The oic will need statements from the gnome owner (made myself chuckle at that) the garden shop. The officer will have to still complete a full file, transcribe the interview put it in on advice to cps who will ask for other things before deciding possibly that as he is having theft by finding lets charge him with that. We also took his shoes as they showed prints matching to other gnome thefts that we are having. He was upset that we entered his house (that he does not live in as he is no fixed abode,despite being clean and sleeping somewhere) that his kids think he is a thief, that we would not pay 40 quid for a new pair of trainers. So upset he will complain. That will see all the officers involved get complaints lodged that cannot be dealt with until the criminal matter is dealt with. The officers will then all be interviewed or provide statements again. At which point we may or may not be disciplined in some way.
He may eventualy get to court. Now you get 14 years for one domestic burglary according to statute.. I wonder what he'll get.. did I say burglary I mean gnome theft. (seven years for theft- burglary where did I get that from).
He may eventualy get to court. Now you get 14 years for one domestic burglary according to statute.. I wonder what he'll get.. did I say burglary I mean gnome theft. (seven years for theft- burglary where did I get that from).
How did we get to the point of every criminal in the UK being a victim. I could never be a BiB because this kind of crap would get me down.
Do all magistrates think these people are the downtrodden unfortunate "its not my fault its society that dun it" or are there some that actually lock these creeps up.
If we carry on down this road surely people will start taking the law into their own hands. Wonder if the magistrates will be as sympathetic to them.
Do all magistrates think these people are the downtrodden unfortunate "its not my fault its society that dun it" or are there some that actually lock these creeps up.
If we carry on down this road surely people will start taking the law into their own hands. Wonder if the magistrates will be as sympathetic to them.
Mr_annie_vxr said:
Also a little clue as to why we are fighting a losing battle.
All names are changed as are the objects involved.
Today I was at work.. Brought in a chap known previously for handling and theft etc etc. Said chap had been arrested after going into (lets say a garden shop) with an expensive gnome. Garden shop tad suspicious of chap ring us and we attend quickly. Guy has left and is seen entering an alley. Officers stop chap who denies any knowledge of a garden gnome. Officers (not having been born yesterday - despite what the chap said) decided that he was a little fibber and arrested the chap. You see a garden gnome like that had been stolen just the night before. He comes to the police station and is thoroughly searched (despite still denying having the gnome on him) and its found supprise supprise in his pants.
Now said chap bang to rights you may think. Job nearly done. Well some hours and a quick chat with a solicitor and it seems he had only just found said gnome and was making his way as soon as he had done what he needed to do down to the police station. Now I know he's not being honest and should be no money and straight to jail. No enquiries and bail. Many more hours of paperwork some cctv to be siezed of him in the town centre and the garden centre and many statements before we can put him maybe before a court.
just wonder as members of the jury what your thinking on this one? ITS NOT A GNOME BY THE WAY
All names are changed as are the objects involved.
Today I was at work.. Brought in a chap known previously for handling and theft etc etc. Said chap had been arrested after going into (lets say a garden shop) with an expensive gnome. Garden shop tad suspicious of chap ring us and we attend quickly. Guy has left and is seen entering an alley. Officers stop chap who denies any knowledge of a garden gnome. Officers (not having been born yesterday - despite what the chap said) decided that he was a little fibber and arrested the chap. You see a garden gnome like that had been stolen just the night before. He comes to the police station and is thoroughly searched (despite still denying having the gnome on him) and its found supprise supprise in his pants.
Now said chap bang to rights you may think. Job nearly done. Well some hours and a quick chat with a solicitor and it seems he had only just found said gnome and was making his way as soon as he had done what he needed to do down to the police station. Now I know he's not being honest and should be no money and straight to jail. No enquiries and bail. Many more hours of paperwork some cctv to be siezed of him in the town centre and the garden centre and many statements before we can put him maybe before a court.
just wonder as members of the jury what your thinking on this one? ITS NOT A GNOME BY THE WAY
Ok as you all know I am in Scotland so I am not best placed to comment on this if its an English thing but we have case law of recent possession and he would have got done with theft or reset. It would have (and does) go to court (no jury) and the Sheriff decides. Usually guilty by the way.
Yet another occassion when I feel sorry for my English/Welsh friends. What a load of toss that is you have to deal with.
This type of thing is always mentioned on the wright stuff (sad I know), but it boils my blood that we have a society that refuses to accept any kind of responsibility for their actions. As Wrighty says quite often, we should adopt the type of law that they have in Dubai where theves get their hands chopped off. It would certainly provide 1) Entertainment for those affected and 2) A good deterrant for other gnome thieves. Apparently (how true this is I can't guarantee) but Wrighty says that crimes like this hardly ever occur in Dubai. Therefore I can only conclude that, whilst slightly barbaric, it appears to have the desired affect. Granted, its not a nice thing to have ones hands chopped off, but for the law abiding amongst us, who the hell cares as we have nothing to worry about
D
D
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff