Discussion
Found a slightly better source: http://www.kentonline.co.uk/medway/news/clothing-t...
Woman quoted in local rag said:
About 15 minutes later when I was walking back past Debenhams, he told me they had been confiscated by a police officer because he didn’t have the receipt to prove they had been paid for.
...
I’ve complained to the force and they’ve invited me to review the footage but I know what happened. I was there.
<scratches head>...
I’ve complained to the force and they’ve invited me to review the footage but I know what happened. I was there.
Plod spokesman as quoted in definitely not biased in any way online rag said:
Once it was established they had been purchased legitimately, the items were returned to the person who bought them
So everybody's happy. Lovely.Edited by TooMany2cvs on Monday 15th January 10:50
The nurse bought the homeless man 4 pairs of gloves (and some other stuff) from Primark.
The officer knew the man as a shoplifter so it seems reasonable to check that the 4 pairs of gloves were not stolen. i.e. who has 4 pairs of (new) gloves, presumably still with the labels attatched ?
The officer knew the man as a shoplifter so it seems reasonable to check that the 4 pairs of gloves were not stolen. i.e. who has 4 pairs of (new) gloves, presumably still with the labels attatched ?
Edited by Red 4 on Monday 15th January 12:12
mickmcpaddy said:
So I can have everything I own confiscated by the police if I don't have a receipt for it? I wasn't aware it was compulsory to keep receipts for ever, you live and learn.
Do you have rafts of previous for shoplifting in your local area and are well known to local police for doing so? Then yes. Are you law abiding? Then no.
I’m happy that’s how it is. Especially if I own a shop/business or shop in one.
Faz50 said:
mickmcpaddy said:
So I can have everything I own confiscated by the police if I don't have a receipt for it? I wasn't aware it was compulsory to keep receipts for ever, you live and learn.
Do you have rafts of previous for shoplifting in your local area and are well known to local police for doing so? Then yes. mickmcpaddy said:
So I can have everything I own confiscated by the police if I don't have a receipt for it? I wasn't aware it was compulsory to keep receipts for ever, you live and learn.
What a ridiculous comparison, if you can't fathom it out from the reports I won't waste my time explaining how stupid you're being. Edited by Greendubber on Monday 15th January 18:19
La Liga said:
Don't call the homeless man a mindless oaf. He might be a nice chap.
Perhaps she was referring to having "been there" when she purchased the fNurse said:
“I’ve complained to the force and they’ve invited me to review the footage but I know what happened. I was there."
Except for the parts you weren't there for.
king clothing for the homeless guy, rather than during the subsequent brilliant sleuthing, masterful interrogation, forceful confiscation, triumphant returning, stupid looking, responsibility denying, apology refusing and grudging return parts?The article states that temperatures were 'near sub-zero'. So not sub-zero then. Sounds like this piece is being spun for political effect.
It sounds as though the police have been judicious, diligent and fair in this case. They dont always get it right but I am pleased to see them actively tackling these criminal beggars.
It sounds as though the police have been judicious, diligent and fair in this case. They dont always get it right but I am pleased to see them actively tackling these criminal beggars.
a.lex said:
La Liga said:
Nurse said:
“I’ve complained to the force and they’ve invited me to review the footage but I know what happened. I was there."
Except for the parts you weren't there for.king clothing for the homeless guy, rather than during the subsequent brilliant sleuthing, masterful interrogation, forceful confiscation, triumphant returning, stupid looking, responsibility denying, apology refusing and grudging return parts?Loyly said:
Sounds like this piece is being spun for political effect.
<considers source>No, it can't be!
a.lex said:
La Liga said:
Don't call the homeless man a mindless oaf. He might be a nice chap.
Perhaps she was referring to having "been there" when she purchased the fNurse said:
“I’ve complained to the force and they’ve invited me to review the footage but I know what happened. I was there."
Except for the parts you weren't there for.king clothing for the homeless guy, rather than during the subsequent brilliant sleuthing, masterful interrogation, forceful confiscation, triumphant returning, stupid looking, responsibility denying, apology refusing and grudging return parts?When she says she, 'knows', what she actually means is she 'partially knows' at best. Knowing what interaction / conversation occurred between the officer and the man would be fundamental to making an objective judgement.
Her quote doesn't say 'forcibly'. It says 'confiscated'. The writer has used 'forcibly' without evidencing why.
I suspect that's to make things more dramatic and take advantage of those who don't read properly / critically.
My speculation is the nurse doesn't understand process vs outcome with how she's talking about what is 'wrong'. Just because the outcome is that items weren't stolen doesn't mean that the process undertaken to establish that was unjust or wrong.
All news outlets use superlatives, but that does not change the fact that an ambient temperature below 5℃ represents significant danger of hypothermia. As a nurse she is very likely to know this and is the one being diligent.
The Police officer was not, they must observe a presumption of innocence, a duty of care and operate by fair play. The Police officer did none of those things, it sounds like he was biased from the off and hostile as a result of being being caught out. That reaction makes him a very poor police officer.
La Liga said:
When she says she, 'knows', what she actually means is she 'partially knows' at best.
WOW, did you never learn the theory of mind? Did it never occur you that she will know stuff you do not?She was there, so there are only two people that 'know', the police officer and the nurse, the body cam evidence is only useful to a third party like you and I.
4x4Tyke said:
WOW, did you never learn the theory of mind? Did it never occur you that she will know stuff you do not?
She was there, so there are only two people that 'know', the police officer and the nurse, the body cam evidence is only useful to a third party like you and I.
Was she there when the Police Officer confiscated the items?She was there, so there are only two people that 'know', the police officer and the nurse, the body cam evidence is only useful to a third party like you and I.
rewc said:
Was she there when the Police Officer confiscated the items?
Irrelevant, read her comments carefully, her initial complaint was direct to the officer involved, his behaviour has escalated the complain and is now concerning the officers interactions with her. nurse said:
He was talking about him to me in a derogatory manner. They’d made an easy presumption.
The officer was arrogant and defensive. He would not accept he had been mistaken and refused to apologise to me or the homeless man.
He just reiterated he was a known shoplifter.
I’ve complained to the force and they’ve invited me to review the footage but I know what happened.
I was there.
Kent police defended the actions of its officer, saying that:The officer was arrogant and defensive. He would not accept he had been mistaken and refused to apologise to me or the homeless man.
He just reiterated he was a known shoplifter.
I’ve complained to the force and they’ve invited me to review the footage but I know what happened.
I was there.
Kent Police said:
... is aware of a member of the public’s concern regarding items of clothing purchased for a man in Chatham High Street on 14 December 2017.
An officer on patrol, who knew the man, wanted to make sure the items of clothing had been purchased legitimately and this was explained to both the man and the store from where they came. Once it was established they had been purchased legitimately, the items were returned to the person who bought them.
The incident has been reviewed at the request of person who bought the clothes and they have been invited to visit the station to view the body worn video captured by the officer at the scene.
The police are trying to use footage of the officers interactions with the 'beggar' to defend his behaviour with the nurse.An officer on patrol, who knew the man, wanted to make sure the items of clothing had been purchased legitimately and this was explained to both the man and the store from where they came. Once it was established they had been purchased legitimately, the items were returned to the person who bought them.
The incident has been reviewed at the request of person who bought the clothes and they have been invited to visit the station to view the body worn video captured by the officer at the scene.
Why do so many people have trouble with what each person knows.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff