CRIME

Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
 

A former criminal barrister who had her handbag snatched was told by police it was not a crime. Sam McAlister was queuing at Starbucks with her 10-month-old son, when her bag was taken off the back of the pushchair. Leaving her son in the care of the coffee shop's staff, who she knew well, she ran out of the café searching for the man who had pushed in front of her and the woman he had been with.

Ms McAlister said, “The woman was dressed in a way that made her very obvious to spot. I spotted her about four shops away with a backpack, and I just thought 'I'm not having this'. I grabbed her backpack and shouted at her 'you've got my bag'. We were struggling and grappling, but I wasn't having it. I was yelling 'give me my bag', yelling for dear life. Eventually the woman opened her rucksack and threw my bag at me and that's when the public got involved. I picked up the contents and as soon as I learnt someone had caught her I went back to my son.”

A police community support officer attended the scene and took Ms McAlister to the local police station, where she was told no crime had been committed. She said, “I assured her it was a crime and left my details, saying I would like to speak to a superior officer. She called me about an hour later to say it was a crime, but it was an attempted theft, even though I knew it wasn't. It was theft at the very least.” She later received a call from a senior officer who Ms McAlister said was “very helpful” and took her “very seriously”. (Source: Daily Mail, Sep/07)

A police website for crime tip-offs has been axed because officers failed to check it out. The site, www.police.uk, was launched so people could post intelligence about yobs and anti-social behaviour. Reports would be sent for action and "crime maps" drawn up. But the £3million service was ignored by forces nationwide. Project leader Chief Constable Peter Neyroud admitted, "Only a handful used it to any significant degree. Expenditure of such a large sum on a narrowly distributed service could not be justified." It is believed officers were reluctant to use the site because they did not want more crimes reported, so pushing up crime rates. (Source: Daily Mirror, May/07)

According to Labour's Police Minister, Tony McNulty, witnesses to violent street crime should try to 'distract' attackers by honking their car horns or even 'jumping up and down'. The standard police advice to people who witness violent behaviour is that they should not get involved and immediately call 999 but Mr McNulty said concerned citizens should 'try some distractive activities' instead. The Minister, who is the deputy to Home Secretary John Reid, suggested that 'simply shouting' at would-be muggers or 'blowing your horn' at them could act as a deterrent. And he said that people who witness an attack in the street should 'jump up and down' while waiting for the police to arrive. (Source: Mail on Sunday, Feb/07)

Freedom from crime? - not if the "do-gooders" have their way. Their rhetoric always starts with the same spin: they never had a chance in life, they come from a deprived background, poor education, it's not their fault, they are victims of unemployment, poverty and social injustice. Not so, according to the Government's own statistics. In the year 1900, there were 2.4 indictable crimes per thousand population. In the year 1954, this had risen to 9.7 indictable crimes per thousand population. And today, this figure is 10 times that of 1954.

From 1900 to 1939, they were the "good, old days", when we had real poverty, social injustice, unemployment and a very poor educational system of the three Rs. The 1920s and 1930s were very bad for the working classes. Yet, with all this genuine grief and trauma, our country had a very low crime rate. Why? Well, for one thing, we had bobbies on the beat with good street intelligence. They knew who the villains were. You could see and talk to the bobby, he was well liked and a very much respected member of the community.

We had punishments that fitted the crime and the cane was used in school to punish those who behaved badly. So what has happened to change all this? Well, the "do-gooders" have taken over with their watered-down punishments, no canes in schools, smack your children at your peril, and verbal punishments - "You naughty boy, don't do it again, be off with you". A very good example of paying lip service to fighting crime is Tony Blair when he was seeking election. "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime."

Well, what has he done for us? In 1963, there were 148 cases of murder in England and Wales. In October, 2002, the Sunday Times reported that, in the first eight months of 2002, there were 135 murders in the Metropolitan police area alone. In 1980, London had 7,600 reported robberies. In the first two months of 2003, London had 7,300 reported robberies. According to Civitas, Institute for the Study of Civil Society, there were 1.7 million crimes in 1972. But, in 2002, there were 5.8 million reported.

In 1972, there were 8,900 robberies in England and Wales. In 2001-2, there were 6,500 robberies in one London borough. The causes of crime are criminals and "do -gooders" for their mischief. We are suffering from their activities, not social injustice, unemployment and poverty of the 1920s and 1930s. Are Blair's policies working? I don't think so.

The do-gooders have got such a stranglehold on our country with the help of this Labour Government that, when it comes to bringing criminals into court, the police are just wasting their time. Once again we witness Blair's "tough on crime" policy in action. Stuart Newton was arrested and found guilty of burglary and numerous other offences. He was given a slap on the wrist via a community rehabilitation order and turned loose on the community. Within hours of his release he had committed eight offences, six of which were burglaries. So much for the good intentions of leniency.

Do you think the victims of his crime thank the powers that be for their actions in letting him loose on the community? What about the terror and trauma and violation of the home that the victim suffers? Does this count for nothing? These people are now prisoners in their own homes, too afraid to go out for fear of the do-gooders turning more burglars free and having their houses burgled again and again. Eventually, the police caught him in a car stolen from his last burglary, just 24 hours after being given his community order and turned loose into the public.

He has now received a five-year custodial sentence. Too late for his last victims. It should never have been allowed to happen. He will be back on the streets in less than two years. Why? Frank Leeming

An alcoholic who subjected an 83-year-old woman to a violent sexual attack had his sentence reduced by two years by the Court of Appeal in London. Russell Clifford was jailed for eight years by Judge John Burgess at Derby Crown Court who told him, "I hope you haven't ruined the last years of her life completely. The sentence I pass must reflect the utter revulsion of society for what you did." But Appeal Court judges said Judge Burgess had not made enough allowance for Clifford's early guilty plea, and added the indecency the pensioner suffered 'was not the worst' Clifford, who admitted indecent assault and inflicting grievous bodily harm, had previous convictions for indecent assault and violence. He had been battling alcoholism since the age of 12 and had become obsessed with the Atkins diet, which made him dehydrated and decreased his tolerance to alcohol, the court heard. He claimed he could not remember anything about the attack. So there we have it. Plead guilty and say you can't remember, and you'll be treated leniently. Remember that the next time you're caught in a speed trap!

Former D-Day veteran commando Tom Roberts, called police after youths smashed windows and daubed his home in Merseyside with obscene graffiti. After police made a brief visit to his home on the night of the attack, two officers returned two days later saying they had been given information that Mr Roberts had been posing as a war hero and asked him to provide evidence. Rather than telling them to 'F*** Off!', Mr Roberts showed them his war records and medals after which, the two officers left without so much as an apology. A police spokesman said the youths responsible for the attack were still on the loose and added, "There were no witnesses and there was very little for the officers to investigate so there is nothing more we can do." Oh well, back to the speed traps then.