when is a FPN not a FPN
Discussion
There is this daft story on the beeb concerning North Wales police and a couple of girls given Fixed penalty notices for writing/drawing on the pavement with chalk.
The bit that made me want to post and ask the folks here was about the offer to reduce it to £40 when one of the fathers complained.
This seems to make a complete mockery of the fixed penalty scheme that the penalty part can be reduced at a forces whim and I suppose it could also be increased if the officer felt that this would be a better penalty.
The bit that made me want to post and ask the folks here was about the offer to reduce it to £40 when one of the fathers complained.
This seems to make a complete mockery of the fixed penalty scheme that the penalty part can be reduced at a forces whim and I suppose it could also be increased if the officer felt that this would be a better penalty.
viggen114 said:
There is this daft story on the beeb concerning North Wales police and a couple of girls given Fixed penalty notices for writing/drawing on the pavement with chalk.
The bit that made me want to post and ask the folks here was about the offer to reduce it to £40 when one of the fathers complained.
This seems to make a complete mockery of the fixed penalty scheme that the penalty part can be reduced at a forces whim and I suppose it could also be increased if the officer felt that this would be a better penalty.
The bit that made me want to post and ask the folks here was about the offer to reduce it to £40 when one of the fathers complained.
This seems to make a complete mockery of the fixed penalty scheme that the penalty part can be reduced at a forces whim and I suppose it could also be increased if the officer felt that this would be a better penalty.
It sounds like they've been issued adult £80 PNDs in error, and they should have been issued with juvinile PNDs which are £40. It seems a bit excessive to me, but we all know how these things can be distorted by the press.
If they were only drawing on the pavement with chalk, I think there would be some doubt as to whether they've actually caused damage, and they're quite right to take it to court.
what amuses me is that there is aways a po-faced spokesperson who can keep a straight face whiole trotting out some justification for police behaviour that is clearly absurd or inappropriate.
The result is while measures are used in an inappropriate and massively heavy handed way by police and other authorities and spokesfools compound the issue everyone withdraws behind a totally polarised position. The involvement of spokesfools highlights the issue and most of us who adopt the commonsense viewpoint see the police in general in an absurd/unacceptably heavyhanded/totalitarian way.
Of course I hope that for everyone of these inexperienced-cops-go-OTT incidents that hit the headlines 99 others are solved by a senior saying "....don't be so stupid in future..." and cancelling the process there and then. I'm not so sure anymore.
The result is while measures are used in an inappropriate and massively heavy handed way by police and other authorities and spokesfools compound the issue everyone withdraws behind a totally polarised position. The involvement of spokesfools highlights the issue and most of us who adopt the commonsense viewpoint see the police in general in an absurd/unacceptably heavyhanded/totalitarian way.
Of course I hope that for everyone of these inexperienced-cops-go-OTT incidents that hit the headlines 99 others are solved by a senior saying "....don't be so stupid in future..." and cancelling the process there and then. I'm not so sure anymore.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff