24 Hours In Police Custody

bluemick1 said:
Agree to some point, but working in a prison, 4 out of every 5 who are being released openly tell you that they are going to spend their £86 discharge grant on drugs, then are going to commit more crime, to either get their drugs or come back to a comfy stay in prison.
Years ago there used to be rehabilitation courses and help to get people into work on release, but due to cut backs there is nothing like that now.
We used to joke in Reception on release “we will see you next week” but nowadays it’s a certainty that we will.
Click to expand...
This is what austerity means in reality though. They can’t get jobs because of their record and if they could, it’d be for peanuts unless they had their own legit business.

It‘s a vicious cycle that they can’t get out of, with some not even wanting to. That’s just a sad indictment of society.

I wouldn’t do your job in this day and age either.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
Interim injunction?
Click to expand...
One of the American Cyanamid principles is to only award an interlocutory injunction if damages aren’t an adequate remedy, which they plainly would be here. In the absence of any proof they are going to spunk the award of damages up the wall, not sure it meets the test.

en.wikipedia.org

American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

It would arguably be proceeds of crime, I guess. Not sure what the rules are around pursuing that privately.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
This is what austerity means in reality though. They can’t get jobs because of their record and if they could, it’d be for peanuts unless they had their own legit business.

It‘s a vicious cycle that they can’t get out of, with some not even wanting to. That’s just a sad indictment of society.

I wouldn’t do your job in this day and age either.
Click to expand...
When I joined the job 28 years ago, we made differences in peoples lives with lots of help to rehabilitate them back into society to live law abiding lives. Help with getting off drugs, housing and helping with employment. There is nothing like that now.
Austerity affects us all, I and many other people are struggling to make ends meet, but I still feel sorry for law abiding citizens when they become victims,when some people leach off the system and are out for what they can get, despite making innocent people suffer.
 
bluemick1 said:
When I joined the job 28 years ago, we made differences in peoples lives with lots of help to rehabilitate them back into society to live law abiding lives. Help with getting off drugs, housing and helping with employment. There is nothing like that now.
Austerity affects us all, I and many other people are struggling to make ends meet, but I still feel sorry for law abiding citizens when they become victims,when some people leach off the system and are out for what they can get, despite making innocent people suffer.
Click to expand...
Me too. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not on criminals side, I just see they have no way out of their cycle without change somewhere in the system.

If you leave prison with £85, no house or family, what are they supposed to do?

We need long hard discussions about how to change the country across the board. At the moment, we still have a government asset stripping what is left of our services.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Me too. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not on criminals side, I just see they have no way out of their cycle without change somewhere in the system.

If you leave prison with £85, no house or family, what are they supposed to do?

We need long hard discussions about how to change the country across the board. At the moment, we still have a government asset stripping what is left of our services.
Click to expand...
Agree with what you are saying, but a lot of them do have families and somewhere to live, in many cases paid for by us as we pay taxes to house them and their families, as they’ve no intention of trying to get into work, would interfere with their criminal activities
 
Nethermoor said:
I get that and to an extent I agree. But he said he didn't know what they'd taken (if anything) and he's a sparky, so all his equipment was in the garage.

He obviously just lost it and went, we all lose it at some point. I'm not sure how it was in the public interest to charge him. I don't feel safer... or want people to feel like they have no power or any rights if they get broken into.

Yes he was silly, but I would bet that half of us on here would do similar.

I had my car broken into the other week and photography stuff taken. But before that my car and house has been attempted 4 times in 18 months. Once I went out with a pool cue i have next to the bed.... If i catch one and smash it over their back/head as they're running away with whatever they've taken, would you say that's wrong? I wouldn't
Click to expand...

Not saying either way mate.

Just make sure you don’t speak to the dibble if you do.
 
paulchapo said:
Typical of somebody with no experience of dealing with them. He wrongly thought he'd done the right thing stopping two thieves getting away and they'd overlook he'd smashed his car into them nearly killing them in the process. Everytime he opened his mouth he screwed himself more.
Click to expand...

His solicitor should’ve had his back and shut him the fuck up but was a **** and literally watched him jail himself.
 
Stoned Rose said:
His solicitor should’ve had his back and shut him the fuck up but was a **** and literally watched him jail himself.
Click to expand...

In his head he'd done nothing wrong so he was happy to chat away. If he'd watched any reality shows involving police interviews he'd know the police chat all pally to most people, even murderer's, unless they're being arsey with them. All the time they're building a case.
 
paulchapo said:
In his head he'd done nothing wrong so he was happy to chat away. If he'd watched any reality shows involving police interviews he'd know the police chat all pally to most people, even murderer's, unless they're being arsey with them. All the time they're building a case.
Click to expand...
My Grandad was a DI in the met, he told me never to talk to cops clear back in the 70's. He said that it's their job to find out the info, don't ever say a word
 
I was talking to my mate last night who's a DC in the dibble.

He said it was up to the coppers to decide to charge the guy. He said they could have just let him go with a warning instead of dragging him into court and sending him to prison as that's not in public interest.
 
One thing that puzzles me; When the guy admitted to speeding and crashing it seemed to be on a bodycam of someone other than a copper. This would mean that he'd not been cautioned or arrested first. Was this evidence used in court?
 
Nethermoor said:
I was talking to my mate last night who's a DC in the dibble.

He said it was up to the coppers to decide to charge the guy. He said they could have just let him go with a warning instead of dragging him into court and sending him to prison as that's not in public interest.
Click to expand...
He is either talking complete shit or you hsve misunderstood what he told you
 
bluemick1 said:
Agree to some point, but working in a prison, 4 out of every 5 who are being released openly tell you that they are going to spend their £86 discharge grant on drugs, then are going to commit more crime, to either get their drugs or come back to a comfy stay in prison.
Years ago there used to be rehabilitation courses and help to get people into work on release, but due to cut backs there is nothing like that now.
We used to joke in Reception on release “we will see you next week” but nowadays it’s a certainty that we will.
Click to expand...
I said to one only this morning, "shall i flip your mattress, ready for next week when you are back" He smiled politely, but we both know its only a matter of time before he and many, many more return
 
Nethermoor said:
I was talking to my mate last night who's a DC in the dibble.

He said it was up to the coppers to decide to charge the guy. He said they could have just let him go with a warning instead of dragging him into court and sending him to prison as that's not in public interest.
Click to expand...

Not correct. The police build the case and refer it to the CPS. They decide if they think there is a case to prosecute. He isn't walking away from a crash seriously injuring two people by reckless driving with a warning.
 
I disagree with the death penalty for the practical reason that in the past too many innocents have been wrongly convicted. I also believe strongly in the rule of law, because the alternative is barbarism.

However, what we have now does not work. We have a substantial class of habitual criminals who (one way or another) parasite off us all their lives. It costs big bucks to keep these people banged up in jail. Probably as much as to lodge them in a five-star hotel.

So we need to change the system. The question is - how? Simplistic solutions don't work and anything else will cost money.
 
BrianW said:
I disagree with the death penalty for the practical reason that in the past too many innocents have been wrongly convicted. I also believe strongly in the rule of law, because the alternative is barbarism.

However, what we have now does not work. We have a substantial class of habitual criminals who (one way or another) parasite off us all their lives. It costs big bucks to keep these people banged up in jail. Probably as much as to lodge them in a five-star hotel.

So we need to change the system. The question is - how? Simplistic solutions don't work and anything else will cost money.
Click to expand...
It is cheaper to keep someone in prison for life than to put them to death though. I don't know if that was part of your thinking. But there's a big gap in costs too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top