Thwaites Brewery trashed by travellers
Discussion
Looks like Thwaites in Blackburn had an invasion over the weekend.
100k of damage and ‘contamination’ ... but no arrests. On site over the bank hol weekend.
WTF - no arrests for breaking and entering and criminal damage?
... doubt anyone else would get away with breaking and entering and criminal damage. .. and most likely s
tting everywhere.
100k of damage and ‘contamination’ ... but no arrests. On site over the bank hol weekend.
WTF - no arrests for breaking and entering and criminal damage?
... doubt anyone else would get away with breaking and entering and criminal damage. .. and most likely s
tting everywhere.I saw that, absolutely awful.
Not sure what happened but it does seem to be a theme, despicable act and more brazen than the usual fly tipping and rendering any site uninhabitable and requiring expensive decontamination, perhaps we are just geared up as humans not to st on our own doorstep, so it doesnt mater if you dont have one.
Not sure what happened but it does seem to be a theme, despicable act and more brazen than the usual fly tipping and rendering any site uninhabitable and requiring expensive decontamination, perhaps we are just geared up as humans not to s
t on our own doorstep, so it doesnt mater if you dont have one.La Liga said:
The Mad Monk said:
La Liga said:
skyrover said:
No f*cking arrests after that?
They'll be ID issues. You can't arrest 100 people.However for everybody calling for stronger action against these people, there is always one who knows a traveller who is a lovely person .....
La Liga said:
hey'll be ID issues. You can't arrest 100 people.
The Police could have had the lot in on suspicion of causing the damage - whether any charges would have resulted is a different matter.If theyd caught a bunch of pissed up local teenagers in there you can bet they'd have all been in custody smartish.
Logistical nightmare I know.
La Liga said:
Awful situation for the brewery. I expect they picked a bank holiday deliberately.
Chief exec can't expect police statutory powers to be used any more quickly with the numbers.
No problem if they arrest all the drivers to start with - they must be able to prove who they are for insurance / license / permission to drive the vehicle purposes .Chief exec can't expect police statutory powers to be used any more quickly with the numbers.
skyrover said:
No f*cking arrests after that?
They'll be ID issues. You can't arrest 100 people. 55palfers said:
La Liga said:
Awful situation for the brewery. I expect they picked a bank holiday deliberately.
Chief exec can't expect police statutory powers to be used any more quickly with the numbers.
No problem if they arrest all the drivers to start with - they must be able to prove who they are for insurance / license / permission to drive the vehicle purposes .Chief exec can't expect police statutory powers to be used any more quickly with the numbers.
skyrover said:
No f*cking arrests after that?
They'll be ID issues. You can't arrest 100 people. Any county force would realistically struggle to transport, process and house 100 suspects. They certainly wouldn’t all be lodged at one police station. Most designated stations (those with cells) would have about 30, tops. I’d guess Lancashire would have capacity, over the whole county, for 150 detainees, maximum. Some cells will be out of use for repair or expel remanded for court or already in custody.
It would take at least the same number of officers to start with. Then you have the gaolers, custody officers, statements to take, scenes to examine, suspects to interview, cctv to get... it can take me all day and often an extended tour of 12 hours plus to deal with one suspect. This would be on top of everyone else who was already in custody.
It would be an absolute logistical nightmare to arrest and deal with 100 people. Some of the arrests would be unlawful. You can’t arrest people just because they were there.
Throw in some kids, then you’ll be needing social services, appropriate adults. No doubt some detainees will “need” to suddenly see a doctor too. I’d expect the majority would want a solicitor, so you’d need to find 100 solicitors. Or ten solicitors for every ten detainees, which slows the process down even further.
And all to be potentially dealt with in 24 hours. 36 if a superintendent can be persuaded to extend the custody clock. Then you need to go to court to apply for warrants of further detention, meaning the detainees have to be taken to and from court, legally represented, yada yada yada.
It needs properly investigating and those responsible dealing with. A knee jerk “arrest all of them” is not going to work - or happen.
Bigends said:
La Liga said:
hey'll be ID issues. You can't arrest 100 people.
The Police could have had the lot in on suspicion of causing the damage - whether any charges would have resulted is a different matter.If theyd caught a bunch of pissed up local teenagers in there you can bet they'd have all been in custody smartish.
Logistical nightmare I know.
s?Greendubber said:
Bigends said:
La Liga said:
hey'll be ID issues. You can't arrest 100 people.
The Police could have had the lot in on suspicion of causing the damage - whether any charges would have resulted is a different matter.If theyd caught a bunch of pissed up local teenagers in there you can bet they'd have all been in custody smartish.
Logistical nightmare I know.
s?At least have a bit of a go at enforcing the Law.
55palfers said:
Greendubber said:
Bigends said:
La Liga said:
hey'll be ID issues. You can't arrest 100 people.
The Police could have had the lot in on suspicion of causing the damage - whether any charges would have resulted is a different matter.If theyd caught a bunch of pissed up local teenagers in there you can bet they'd have all been in custody smartish.
Logistical nightmare I know.
s?At least have a bit of a go at enforcing the Law.
They'd just blame the others who have since f
ked off never to be seen ever again.If there were facilities to take 100 people into custody at once then it wouldn't be a problem, you'd need about 250 police officers to do it though.... which you won't have.
Dibble said:
Identifying who is responsible, rather than the identity of the individuals.
Any county force would realistically struggle to transport, process and house 100 suspects. They certainly wouldn’t all be lodged at one police station. Most designated stations (those with cells) would have about 30, tops. I’d guess Lancashire would have capacity, over the whole county, for 150 detainees, maximum. Some cells will be out of use for repair or expel remanded for court or already in custody.
It would take at least the same number of officers to start with. Then you have the gaolers, custody officers, statements to take, scenes to examine, suspects to interview, cctv to get... it can take me all day and often an extended tour of 12 hours plus to deal with one suspect. This would be on top of everyone else who was already in custody.
It would be an absolute logistical nightmare to arrest and deal with 100 people. Some of the arrests would be unlawful. You can’t arrest people just because they were there.
Throw in some kids, then you’ll be needing social services, appropriate adults. No doubt some detainees will “need” to suddenly see a doctor too. I’d expect the majority would want a solicitor, so you’d need to find 100 solicitors. Or ten solicitors for every ten detainees, which slows the process down even further.
And all to be potentially dealt with in 24 hours. 36 if a superintendent can be persuaded to extend the custody clock. Then you need to go to court to apply for warrants of further detention, meaning the detainees have to be taken to and from court, legally represented, yada yada yada.
It needs properly investigating and those responsible dealing with. A knee jerk “arrest all of them” is not going to work - or happen.
Dibble, Any county force would realistically struggle to transport, process and house 100 suspects. They certainly wouldn’t all be lodged at one police station. Most designated stations (those with cells) would have about 30, tops. I’d guess Lancashire would have capacity, over the whole county, for 150 detainees, maximum. Some cells will be out of use for repair or expel remanded for court or already in custody.
It would take at least the same number of officers to start with. Then you have the gaolers, custody officers, statements to take, scenes to examine, suspects to interview, cctv to get... it can take me all day and often an extended tour of 12 hours plus to deal with one suspect. This would be on top of everyone else who was already in custody.
It would be an absolute logistical nightmare to arrest and deal with 100 people. Some of the arrests would be unlawful. You can’t arrest people just because they were there.
Throw in some kids, then you’ll be needing social services, appropriate adults. No doubt some detainees will “need” to suddenly see a doctor too. I’d expect the majority would want a solicitor, so you’d need to find 100 solicitors. Or ten solicitors for every ten detainees, which slows the process down even further.
And all to be potentially dealt with in 24 hours. 36 if a superintendent can be persuaded to extend the custody clock. Then you need to go to court to apply for warrants of further detention, meaning the detainees have to be taken to and from court, legally represented, yada yada yada.
It needs properly investigating and those responsible dealing with. A knee jerk “arrest all of them” is not going to work - or happen.
An informed and helpful post, as always. Thanks.
What do you think should have been done, taking into account the logistics of the situation as well as the fact that it appears that some crimes have been committed, that has a chance of providing justice for the victims (brewery owners) and publically shows that offences like this will not be tolerated?
Or do you think it is right that the crowd of people who almost certainly include the perpetrators are allowed to walk away without prosecution (I use 'prosecution' in the wider and non-legal sense of the word) and are highly unlikely to have provided details that allows them to be traced should a 'proper investigation' take place?
Genuine question and I'm curious to read your answer. Thanks.
Dibble said:
Identifying who is responsible, rather than the identity of the individuals.
Any county force would realistically struggle to transport, process and house 100 suspects. They certainly wouldn’t all be lodged at one police station. Most designated stations (those with cells) would have about 30, tops. I’d guess Lancashire would have capacity, over the whole county, for 150 detainees, maximum. Some cells will be out of use for repair or expel remanded for court or already in custody.
It would take at least the same number of officers to start with. Then you have the gaolers, custody officers, statements to take, scenes to examine, suspects to interview, cctv to get... it can take me all day and often an extended tour of 12 hours plus to deal with one suspect. This would be on top of everyone else who was already in custody.
It would be an absolute logistical nightmare to arrest and deal with 100 people. Some of the arrests would be unlawful. You can’t arrest people just because they were there.
Throw in some kids, then you’ll be needing social services, appropriate adults. No doubt some detainees will “need” to suddenly see a doctor too. I’d expect the majority would want a solicitor, so you’d need to find 100 solicitors. Or ten solicitors for every ten detainees, which slows the process down even further.
And all to be potentially dealt with in 24 hours. 36 if a superintendent can be persuaded to extend the custody clock. Then you need to go to court to apply for warrants of further detention, meaning the detainees have to be taken to and from court, legally represented, yada yada yada.
It needs properly investigating and those responsible dealing with. A knee jerk “arrest all of them” is not going to work - or happen.
And the message is, if there are enough lawbreakers, the law doesn't apply. Which is a bit concerning.Any county force would realistically struggle to transport, process and house 100 suspects. They certainly wouldn’t all be lodged at one police station. Most designated stations (those with cells) would have about 30, tops. I’d guess Lancashire would have capacity, over the whole county, for 150 detainees, maximum. Some cells will be out of use for repair or expel remanded for court or already in custody.
It would take at least the same number of officers to start with. Then you have the gaolers, custody officers, statements to take, scenes to examine, suspects to interview, cctv to get... it can take me all day and often an extended tour of 12 hours plus to deal with one suspect. This would be on top of everyone else who was already in custody.
It would be an absolute logistical nightmare to arrest and deal with 100 people. Some of the arrests would be unlawful. You can’t arrest people just because they were there.
Throw in some kids, then you’ll be needing social services, appropriate adults. No doubt some detainees will “need” to suddenly see a doctor too. I’d expect the majority would want a solicitor, so you’d need to find 100 solicitors. Or ten solicitors for every ten detainees, which slows the process down even further.
And all to be potentially dealt with in 24 hours. 36 if a superintendent can be persuaded to extend the custody clock. Then you need to go to court to apply for warrants of further detention, meaning the detainees have to be taken to and from court, legally represented, yada yada yada.
It needs properly investigating and those responsible dealing with. A knee jerk “arrest all of them” is not going to work - or happen.
Maybe a couple of forces could get together, pool resources and make a concerted effort.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff