Arrested, caged and DNA tested - for using MP3
Discussion
A commuter was arrested at gunpoint and had his DNA and fingerprints taken simply for listening to his MP3 player while waiting for a bus.
Darren Nixon was surrounded by armed police after his music player was mistaken for a gun.
When a passer-by saw the 28-year-old get out his black Philips machine to change tracks, she panicked and dialled 999
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_articl...
Darren Nixon was surrounded by armed police after his music player was mistaken for a gun.
When a passer-by saw the 28-year-old get out his black Philips machine to change tracks, she panicked and dialled 999
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_articl...
Argh, conflict 
The Libertarian part of me is outraged at the over-reaction, and the ridiculous following of process that means that an arrest for the wrong reason stays with someone for the rest of ever.
And the PH side of me says he looks like a scrote, was on the bus, and therefore deserves it
The Libertarian part of me is outraged at the over-reaction, and the ridiculous following of process that means that an arrest for the wrong reason stays with someone for the rest of ever.
And the PH side of me says he looks like a scrote, was on the bus, and therefore deserves it
I don't understand, why, when they realised just after he got off the bus that he didn't have a gun on him, why did they not just let him go at that point and say sorry for troubling you ??
Why did they have to take him back to the station and fingerprint him and take DNA? No gun therefore no offense?
Why did they have to take him back to the station and fingerprint him and take DNA? No gun therefore no offense?
yaaay way to go... modern policing.. you either love it....
Once it was realised at the scene that there was no crime then he should have been released or not even arrested.
There is obviously a policy now to bring all arrested persons back to the nick so DNA samples can be taken and stored. It must be a policy the police are pushing through.
Arrest someone . . even if guilty or not their DNA can be taken.
Then they can be released but at least you have hit another target of x more people on the DNA database this month.
I was arrested and bailed three times and each time it got to the charging phase I refused to cooperate pointing out to the desk sergeant that they hadn't even investigated wether I had commited a crime or not. There was video coverage of the alledged incident which they agreed they hadn't viewed.
I knew I was innocent but they couldn't be bothered to view the most basic evidence but rather charge me and have another 'detected' crime listed.
Target based policing.
Being charged wether found guilty or not would still impact the ability to emigrate to NZ for example.
It was bad enough being arrested in the first place. There was no attempt whatever to find out what had happened at the scene before handcuffing me. No potential witness details were taken. The whole action was taken based on believing the words of the person who had rang in and reported the alledged crime.
The desk sergeant agreed and told me it was his inspector who was pushing him.
When the IPCC made the Inspector apologise to me in writing he said something about charging rules having changed between me being arrested and bailed , new regulations.
Once it was realised at the scene that there was no crime then he should have been released or not even arrested.
There is obviously a policy now to bring all arrested persons back to the nick so DNA samples can be taken and stored. It must be a policy the police are pushing through.
Arrest someone . . even if guilty or not their DNA can be taken.
Then they can be released but at least you have hit another target of x more people on the DNA database this month.
I was arrested and bailed three times and each time it got to the charging phase I refused to cooperate pointing out to the desk sergeant that they hadn't even investigated wether I had commited a crime or not. There was video coverage of the alledged incident which they agreed they hadn't viewed.
I knew I was innocent but they couldn't be bothered to view the most basic evidence but rather charge me and have another 'detected' crime listed.
Target based policing.
Being charged wether found guilty or not would still impact the ability to emigrate to NZ for example.
It was bad enough being arrested in the first place. There was no attempt whatever to find out what had happened at the scene before handcuffing me. No potential witness details were taken. The whole action was taken based on believing the words of the person who had rang in and reported the alledged crime.
The desk sergeant agreed and told me it was his inspector who was pushing him.
When the IPCC made the Inspector apologise to me in writing he said something about charging rules having changed between me being arrested and bailed , new regulations.
Edited by mark69sheer on Sunday 24th February 07:29
streaky said:
splitter / judas said:
Apparantly he was pointing it like a gun hence the call.
Where did you see that? Not reported as such in the link - StreakyI understand all the police action and have no problems with any of it..up to the point they knew he was innocent but then continued to dna test him and handcuff him.
The stage where he had to hold out his hands , lay on the floor..in full public humiliation , and his pockets were turned . . should have been the stage where red faces were shown , apologies were made and the man left to go about his business.
Can someone find a Philips MP3 player on here that looks like a 'gun' (except, perhaps from Star Trek)?
The 'booking' of Mr Nixon is idiotic behaviour by the police. Apologies were required, not the taking of his DNA.
Those on here who argue that we are not increasingly living in a police state should think very hard about this case (and others like it). If they support the subsequent police action, they should present themselves at their local nick (if they have one and it's open) and surrender their DNA.
There is no question about it, this will have blighted Mr Nixon's life for ever. He will now be one of the "usual suspects", highlighted whenever there is a firearms offence in his area and if/when there is another terrorist attack. In an increasingly pro-active policing future (think 1984 and Minority Report) he could well be picked up 'on sus' simply for using a music player.
An abject apology, in person, by a senior officer, with the press present, is the least that is now required; together with removal of Mr Nixon's DNA from the database and an assurance that the record of the incident is clearly annotated to indicate it was a totally false report.
Streaky
I can't wait for the fire brigade to follow the police line of actions...
Scenario....
What the heck are you doing...my house is flooded..its ruined..
'We are putting out the fire'
But it isn't on fire and it hasn't even been on fire...
'Someone rang us to tell us there was a fire...'
.....
Scenario....
What the heck are you doing...my house is flooded..its ruined..
'We are putting out the fire'
But it isn't on fire and it hasn't even been on fire...
'Someone rang us to tell us there was a fire...'
.....
"record of arrest and charge, even if not convicted, affects the ability to emigrate"!!!
Now THAT is something worth bearing in mind - if you're thinking of emigrating do it before this police state either:-
a) Mistake you for a terrorist;
b) Find a trumped-up charge to help their stats; or
c) Push you into breaking one of their 10,000 new laws in protest at the injustice of the new laws.
Now THAT is something worth bearing in mind - if you're thinking of emigrating do it before this police state either:-
a) Mistake you for a terrorist;
b) Find a trumped-up charge to help their stats; or
c) Push you into breaking one of their 10,000 new laws in protest at the injustice of the new laws.
And yes, I do mean 'police state' - we have greater powers of detention without charge, more CCTV, more pointless laws and more cases of this sort of thing than ANY other Western nation...how would you describe us?!?
Don't know what the big fuss is about here.
Report says "A memeber of the public saw a man take a gun from his pocket, grip it with both hands and aim it"
Because he wasn't in possesion of a gun when stopped by the police doesn't mean he didn't have one when the initial report was made, yet it's been decided here that the man is totally innocent and the member of the public who reported it and the police are idiots.
The police, with the evidence available to them obviously deemed it worthy of further enquiry, that's why he would be arrested rather than given a grovelling apology.
They would also be failing in their duty if they didn't record this type of incident on an intelligence system, for future reference.
Report says "A memeber of the public saw a man take a gun from his pocket, grip it with both hands and aim it"
Because he wasn't in possesion of a gun when stopped by the police doesn't mean he didn't have one when the initial report was made, yet it's been decided here that the man is totally innocent and the member of the public who reported it and the police are idiots.
The police, with the evidence available to them obviously deemed it worthy of further enquiry, that's why he would be arrested rather than given a grovelling apology.
They would also be failing in their duty if they didn't record this type of incident on an intelligence system, for future reference.
M5Dave said:
Don't know what the big fuss is about here.
Report says "A memeber of the public saw a man take a gun from his pocket, grip it with both hands and aim it"
Because he wasn't in possesion of a gun when stopped by the police doesn't mean he didn't have one when the initial report was made, yet it's been decided here that the man is totally innocent and the member of the public who reported it and the police are idiots.
The police, with the evidence available to them obviously deemed it worthy of further enquiry, that's why he would be arrested rather than given a grovelling apology.
They would also be failing in their duty if they didn't record this type of incident on an intelligence system, for future reference.
Bull. I reported gunshots from the local park area to the cops while it was happening, but were they interested? nah.Report says "A memeber of the public saw a man take a gun from his pocket, grip it with both hands and aim it"
Because he wasn't in possesion of a gun when stopped by the police doesn't mean he didn't have one when the initial report was made, yet it's been decided here that the man is totally innocent and the member of the public who reported it and the police are idiots.
The police, with the evidence available to them obviously deemed it worthy of further enquiry, that's why he would be arrested rather than given a grovelling apology.
They would also be failing in their duty if they didn't record this type of incident on an intelligence system, for future reference.
Still, at least i know where to go if i ever needed to shoot someone and get away with it......
Deltaf01 said:
M5Dave said:
Don't know what the big fuss is about here.
Report says "A memeber of the public saw a man take a gun from his pocket, grip it with both hands and aim it"
Because he wasn't in possesion of a gun when stopped by the police doesn't mean he didn't have one when the initial report was made, yet it's been decided here that the man is totally innocent and the member of the public who reported it and the police are idiots.
The police, with the evidence available to them obviously deemed it worthy of further enquiry, that's why he would be arrested rather than given a grovelling apology.
They would also be failing in their duty if they didn't record this type of incident on an intelligence system, for future reference.
Bull. I reported gunshots from the local park area to the cops while it was happening, but were they interested? nah.Report says "A memeber of the public saw a man take a gun from his pocket, grip it with both hands and aim it"
Because he wasn't in possesion of a gun when stopped by the police doesn't mean he didn't have one when the initial report was made, yet it's been decided here that the man is totally innocent and the member of the public who reported it and the police are idiots.
The police, with the evidence available to them obviously deemed it worthy of further enquiry, that's why he would be arrested rather than given a grovelling apology.
They would also be failing in their duty if they didn't record this type of incident on an intelligence system, for future reference.
Still, at least i know where to go if i ever needed to shoot someone and get away with it......
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff