"Have-a-go" Tories
Apparently the Tories are going to make life easier for people who intervene in crime in good faith.
The Conservatives claim "there is evidence that the police and prosecutors are too ready to accept allegations made by criminals against people who try to apprehend them". So they want to amend the Crown Prosecution Service's code, as well as Health and Safety laws, to encourage people to "have-a-go".
This all sounds great. Except that there are already plenty of laws protecting people acting in good faith to prevent crime. Certain powers of arrest under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 apply to the general public as well as the police. There is s.3 Criminal Law Act 1967, which enshrines the right to self-defence. There is Common Law: oodles of case law in which people acting in good faith were protected by courts.
So the law/code/H&S isn't the issue.
The fact is, the police are not "ready to accept" allegations made by criminals. We are forced to accept them by the National Crime Recording Standards, which state we must record an allegation as a crime within 24hrs of it being reported. If we then decide to file it without bringing anyone to justice for it, it will count as a negative slice of our violent crime pie chart.
This situation is the same whether the allegation is one by a criminal against someone trying to detain him, a drunk who thinks he might have been assaulted but might have just fallen down, someone trying to claim robbery to swindle the DSS out of more cash, etc. The government doesn't believe the police will investigate these claims unless we are forced to, the idea being that some genuine allegations will get dismissed in the same bundle, hence NCRS.
So it's the rules on crime-recording which need addressing.
But all that said, if the Tories think that Health and Safety law, and the fear of prosecution, are the main reasons why the public won't get involved in street crime, they need to think again:
The Conservatives claim "there is evidence that the police and prosecutors are too ready to accept allegations made by criminals against people who try to apprehend them". So they want to amend the Crown Prosecution Service's code, as well as Health and Safety laws, to encourage people to "have-a-go".
This all sounds great. Except that there are already plenty of laws protecting people acting in good faith to prevent crime. Certain powers of arrest under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 apply to the general public as well as the police. There is s.3 Criminal Law Act 1967, which enshrines the right to self-defence. There is Common Law: oodles of case law in which people acting in good faith were protected by courts.
So the law/code/H&S isn't the issue.
The fact is, the police are not "ready to accept" allegations made by criminals. We are forced to accept them by the National Crime Recording Standards, which state we must record an allegation as a crime within 24hrs of it being reported. If we then decide to file it without bringing anyone to justice for it, it will count as a negative slice of our violent crime pie chart.
This situation is the same whether the allegation is one by a criminal against someone trying to detain him, a drunk who thinks he might have been assaulted but might have just fallen down, someone trying to claim robbery to swindle the DSS out of more cash, etc. The government doesn't believe the police will investigate these claims unless we are forced to, the idea being that some genuine allegations will get dismissed in the same bundle, hence NCRS.
So it's the rules on crime-recording which need addressing.
But all that said, if the Tories think that Health and Safety law, and the fear of prosecution, are the main reasons why the public won't get involved in street crime, they need to think again:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Diary of an On-Call Girl' is available in some bookstores and online.
posted by PC Bloggs at 22:53
22 Comments:
Are you seriously saying if a member of the public performs a citizen's arrest, and the scrote complains, it's the pressure over detection rates that will get the scrote's complaint turned into a detection?
Would your inspector seriously push this through and ruin a good person's life for the sake of a statistic?
If the police in Britain are willing to prosecute an innocent member of the public who commits a citizen's arrest because of the crime reporting standards, then they deserve to be utterly detested.
01 October, 2008 01:44
anon
I don't think you read the post properly. Bloggs said we HAVE to record it as a crime, not ARE WILLING to record it as a crime.
Also (how many times do we have to say this) the police DO NOT PROSECUTE in the UK. We don't even make the DECISION to prosecute. That is the CPS. An entirely different organisation, outside our control.
01 October, 2008 08:19
This problem would not exist if the police etc. actually made the streets safe.
Why not give it a go?
01 October, 2008 08:49
Anon 08:49,
Now that the nail has been perfectly struck on the head, listen to the silence.
01 October, 2008 09:43
Anon, Melvin, you've not been paying attention, have you?
It's not that difficult, either.
The police can't make the streets safe because they are all inside the nick filling in reams of forms associated with nonsense 'crimes' reported to them which have to be investigated under NCRS.
Of course, sometimes they do get to arrest proper criminals... and what happens then?
Either someone else (the CPS) decides not to prosecute them or someone else (the courts) sends them back onto the streets. The cops have no involvement in either of these ever so slightly key elements of the process (so the first anon's comment - "If the police in Britain are willing to prosecute an innocent member of the public who commits a citizen's arrest because of the crime reporting standards, then they deserve to be utterly detested." - makes no sense whatsoever.
Beyond the normal laziness and incompetence which some police officers show because they are human beings and some people in all walks of life exhibit these characteristics, this actually isn't the police's fault. Look at the government, not the Old Bill.
01 October, 2008 09:51
dr melvin ...
remember the rotten borough election in the episode ,Dish and Dishonesty ,Black Adder the third.
NO VOTES
Well almost 65 votes (4750 electorate 36 % turnout ) wasn't it ?
That's what the Kirklees council ,ALMONDBURY,electors gave you when you stood on the hustings.
lets remind ourselves of that:
http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/local-west-yorkshire-news/2008/05/02/kirklees-council-election-results-86081-20855252/
Rather like the running joke in Private Eye, where contributors call for the re-printing of the Andrew Neil and dusky lady pic , surely we can never tire of this electoral tibit.
Here's a tip ,when looking for a populist vote; actually take the time to cultivate a popular personality.
01 October, 2008 10:22
It's a nonsense to say that it is the police's fault if they mindlessly go after government targets. If your "employer" - ie the person in control of your money (in this case the government) - gives you targets and you get more funding/money if you meet them, this is not a simple pressure to ignore. The government made a decision some time ago about what kind of police force they wanted, and they are gradually getting it.
01 October, 2008 10:29
I can swiftly hold my hand up in acknowledgment of error on my part.
My statement should have read 'listen to the excuses' and not 'listen to the silence'.
01 October, 2008 10:33
What are these 'excuses', Melvin?
The CPS prosecutes, not the police. It's quite simple. And so are you.
Ps I LOVE that link, Uniform, and to make it easier still here it is with html so people can click through and see what the good burgers of Kirklees think of our loopy friend, 'Dr' Gray.
I'm amazed that Melv found even 65 people who would vote for him. Perhaps just to get him to go away...? Ha ha ha ha ha ha.
01 October, 2008 10:46
Dear Uniform (aka Peeping Tone),
A good police officer needs the protection of anonymity on a blog such as this, in order to safely post honest thoughts and an officer with integrity will not abuse the privilege. I cannot justify anonymity for my own views and that is a self imposed rule; the price for doing so being known to me at the outset.
Yobs throw stones for reaction and mindless cowards throw insults in lieu of reasoned argument. This does not surprise me. What does surprise me is to find you here so early when you are normally hiding in the village with a couple of bottles of 'free' Marks and Spencer wine.
01 October, 2008 11:21
Calm down now calm down....
The problem is that once a crime is recorded then many "Guvnors" (90% I would say) expect to see a detection and it is here where the problem lies- Many Inspectors and above hate to make decisions-they might get criticised-and that would never do would it- so all these nonsense crimes that are recorded could be knocked on the head straight away by a guvnor with a bit of ability-
that of course is another problem.
When my team recorded nonsense crimes I would make it clear on the crime that in my opinion it should be "No Crimed" and produce a reasoned arguement as to why and
on the vast majority of times it would be knocked on the head-sometimes it wasnt but I always ensured that the Insp responsible for time wasting was kept fully in the picture-with everything copied to his or her supervisor by mistake.They loved me working for them....not the guvnors the public that is...
01 October, 2008 15:30
The saddest part of the NCRS is the letter 'S'.
In bygone days we would hold the standard high. It was tangible, visible, and gave heart to the troops on the battlefield.
Nowadays I look at this so-called 'standard' and shake my head in despair at how shambolic it has all become.
Our 'standards' have been set by politicians who know nothing of anything, and who would give anything for nothing.
02 October, 2008 00:38
Hmm, and what actually leads the detested Tories to even consider that they might be in the position to form a government at some (any?) time in the near future?
If I don't vote Labour, I don't vote. I would never give my vote to a bunch of over-privileged upper middle class twats. Except the ones in the Labour Party, of course...
02 October, 2008 09:40
Actually didn't SOCA rather reduce the citizen's power of arrest?
02 October, 2008 15:49
Well, the Tory policy is ellected police chiefs....
Reminds me of a story a Texan friend told of a lady in his home town who had shot a burglar the week before (neighbours). The police chief came round and explained that he would have to take the gun for evidence. There was quite a bit of muttering from the assembled crowd about that. So, he ducked out to his patrol car, and came back with his *personal* handgun - a Casull. For those who don´t know it, it´s twice as powerful as a .44 and costs alot of money. Lending it would be like lending your Ferrari. Guess who everyone in that street votes for now....
Now that it is a clear message from the forces of law and order.
03 October, 2008 02:18
Melvin,
If I complain about the gas board to the electricty board and they tell me they have no control over the gas board's actions, is that an 'excuse' or a statement of the bleedin' obvious?
Over the months/years you have been told the difference between the CPS, courts and the police so many times on the various police blogs that the fact you still don't seem to get it means either a)you are thick, b) just like the sound of your own voice,c)are just plain arguementative or d)lazy and rather than take up your issues with the relevant organisations, you just post on police blogs.
Either way, what use are you for the greater good of society?
Retired Sgt,
I'll tell you what, if you stop generalising about Inspectors I won't tar every Constable and Sergeant with the same brush as the (extremely few) lazy ones who know enough about the system to prevent me doing their legs.
I am perfectly capable of making c**p go away and 90% of my working life is spent trying to keep all the rubbish IG so eloquently describes off the backs of my officers so they can do what they joined to do.
In the 'citizen's arrest' scenario I can and have made these 'go away' but when I have, I am actually sticking my nose in the process where it shouldn't be. Between arresting officer, Custody Officer, Gateway officer and CPS, I actually don't actually have any status. The conributors above who mentions the NCRS hit the nail on it's head. However even when good sense prevails, the 'Good Citizen' gets a raw deal. Unfortunately 99% of arrests in these cases take place at the scene with two people making counter allegations. Therefore arrests are made with the intention of sorting things out quickly at the nick. That then means under NCRS a crime report is created. The 'good citizen' is now officially a 'suspect'. Also, under NuLabour's back door way of getting everyones DNA and fingerprints the 'good citizen' now has them on record forever regardless of the outcome. When'no longer a good citizen and will never get involved again' is released after good sense prevails the crime report will say 'undetected' (which I can live with) not 'load of crap in the first place, give the man a medal. Also, because of the afrementioned number of people involved in the decision making process, the 'good citizen' will have spent a good few hours in the cells for their trouble.
The only part of that scenario I find acceptable is the 'undetected' but even that is wrong.
BTW, as IG and Bloggs have pointed out numerous times, most of the bureaucratic nightmare and removal of discretion that comtemporary PCs and Sgts have to put up with came about because of the dodgy practices of their (now mostly retired) predecessors. Did you retire before or after the implementation of NCRS? It makes a difference.
(I have 20 years in - 18 as PC and Sgt. Long enough to have heard all the war stories going back 50 years and having a few of my own). Current officers pay for the 'sins of the fathers' every day.
06 October, 2008 11:59
MAC MAN,
Unfortunately, most public services are riddled with MAC men.
MOP MAN
07 October, 2008 08:39
Dear 'Mac':
Thick is a specific insult and an adjective used by the imprecise. Conclusions can be drawn about those using the word in either context, particularly when additional information is offered in the form of 'tells' as to education and reasoning power.
You rant that no matter how many times you repeats yourself, others cannot understand you or will not accept your argument. How vindicated you are to insist that constant play backs add not an atom's width to reason.
If MAC can foresee a future criminal offence committed when a citizen is deliberately insulted by a public servant, he might just be smart enough to deduce his own style made such legislation inevitable.
07 October, 2008 12:52
Melvin,
It's not me repeating myself. You have been told by many different posters about the different functions of different organisations.
As you only object to being called thick, you have no quarrel with the other 3 options?
Anon @ 08.39,
Why the insult? I explained why I always try and stop the prosecution of 'good citizens' and then explained why even if I do they still get shafted by the system.
07 October, 2008 21:06
Dear Mac,
We have now concluded our psychometric tests and provide the following results herewith :-
1. By the time you reached 9yrs, lots of children had mistakenly called you 'bully'.
2. You would have done far better at school if at least one of your Teachers had not been a moron.
3. You enjoy unsupervised work and detest being told what to do at other times.
4. You would have secured promotion had anyone been capable of recognizing real talent.
We are currently recruiting folk matching your profile for important overseas work. Have you previously considered a police appointment in Iraq?
EPQ Labs
08 October, 2008 19:18
成人電影,情色,本土自拍, 一夜情, 辣妹視訊, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊, 視訊美女, 美女視訊, 視訊交友, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, 情人視訊網影音視訊聊天室, 視訊交友90739, 成人影片, 成人交友, 本土自拍, 免費A片下載, 性愛,
成人交友, 嘟嘟成人網, 成人電影, 成人, 成人貼圖, 成人小說, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人遊戲, 微風成人, 愛情公寓, 情色, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 做愛, 色情聊天室, 美女交友,
嘟嘟成人網, 成人貼圖, 成人電影, A片, 豆豆聊天室, 聊天室, UT聊天室, 尋夢園聊天室, 男同志聊天室, UT男同志聊天室, 聊天室尋夢園, 080聊天室, 080苗栗人聊天室, 6K聊天室, 女同志聊天室, 小高聊天室, 情色論壇, 色情網站, 成人網站, 成人論壇, 免費A片, 上班族聊天室, 成人聊天室, 成人小說, 微風成人區, 色美媚部落格, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人論壇, 情色聊天室, 寄情築園小遊戲, AV女優,成人電影,情色,本土自拍, A片下載, 日本A片, 麗的色遊戲, 色色網, ,嘟嘟情人色網, 色情網站, 成人網站, 正妹牆, 正妹百人斬, aio,伊莉, 伊莉討論區, 成人遊戲, 成人影城,
ut聊天室, 免費A片, AV女優, 美女視訊, 情色交友, 免費AV, 色情網站, 辣妹視訊, 美女交友, 色情影片 成人影片, 成人網站, A片,H漫, 18成人, 成人圖片, 成人漫畫, 情色網, 日本A片,
愛情公寓, 情色, 舊情人, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 情色交友, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 色情遊戲, 情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 色情a片, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 寄情築園小遊戲, 色情遊戲情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 言情小說, 愛情小說, 色情A片, 情色論壇, 色情影片, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊美女, 視訊交友, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, a片下載, aV, av片, A漫, av dvd, av成人網, 聊天室, 成人論壇, 本土自拍, 自拍, A片,成人電影,情色,本土自拍,
03 April, 2009 21:33
爆爆爽a片免費看, 天堂私服論壇, 情色電影下載, 成人短片, 麗的線上情色小遊戲, 情色動畫免費下載, 日本女優, 小說論壇, 777成人區, showlive影音聊天網, 聊天室尋夢園, 義大利女星寫真集, 韓國a片, 熟女人妻援交, 0204成人, 性感內衣模特兒, 影片, 情色卡通, 85cc免費影城85cc, 本土自拍照片, 成人漫畫區, 18禁, 情人節阿性, 做愛的漫畫圖片, 情色電影分享區, 做愛ㄉ影片, 丁字褲美女寫真, 色美眉, 自拍俱樂部首頁, 日本偷自拍圖片, 色情做愛影片, 情色貼圖區, 八國聯軍情色網, 免費線上a片, 淫蕩女孩自拍, 美國a片, 都都成人站, 色情自拍, 本土自拍照片, 熊貓貼圖區, 色情影片, 5278影片網, 脫星寫真圖片, 粉喵聊天室, 金瓶梅18, sex888影片分享區, 1007視訊, 雙贏論壇,
免費成人影音, 彩虹自拍, 小魔女貼影片, 自拍裸體寫真, 禿頭俱樂部, 環球av影音城, 學生色情聊天室, 視訊美女, 辣妹情色圖, 性感卡通美女圖片, 影音, 情色照片 做愛, hilive tv , 忘年之交聊天室, 制服美女, 性感辣妹, ut 女同聊天室, 淫蕩自拍, 處女貼圖貼片區, 聊天ukiss tw, 亞亞成人館, 777成人, 秋瓷炫裸體寫真, 淫蕩天使貼圖, 十八禁成人影音, 禁地論壇, 洪爺淫蕩自拍, 秘書自拍圖片,
aaaa片, 免費聊天, 咆哮小老鼠影片分享區, 金瓶梅影片, av女優王國, 78論壇, 女同聊天室, 熟女貼圖, 1069壞朋友論壇gay, 淫蕩少女總部, 日本情色派, 平水相逢, 黑澀會美眉無名, 網路小說免費看, 999東洋成人, 免費視訊聊天, 情色電影分享區, 9k躺伯虎聊天室, 傑克論壇, 日本女星杉本彩寫真, 自拍電影免費下載, a片論壇, 情色短片試看, 素人自拍寫真,
15 April, 2009 10:49
Post a Comment
<< Home