ANTI-POLICE FEELINGS

Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
 

Two criminals caught on CCTV vandalising cars were not prosecuted because police said they were unemployed foreigners and to bring them to justice would cost too much. One victim received a letter from Norfolk police saying the pair would not be prosecuted because they were both foreign nationals with no jobs and no income and the case was “not in the public interest to pursue due to the expenses incurred in having a trial”.

Barry Ferguson, one of the victims of the vandals, who are in the country legally, said, “Even though these people were caught in the act they are getting away with wanton vandalism. I can’t believe the police have spent all this money on CCTV and then have not bothered to charge them. There would be outrage if a British person got away with this but it is being justified in this instance because these people are foreign with no income.”

A police spokeswoman said, “Any decision is tested against the attorney-general’s guidelines. It has absolutely nothing to do with their ethnicity or level of income. This caution, whilst not a conviction, is added to their police record and can be cited in court should they reoffend. The victims, if they wish to do so, can pursue compensation through the civil courts.” (Source: Times Online, Jan/07)

I was recently caught by a speed camera on Burton Road opposite the Crest Motel. I was proceeding at 37mph in a 30mph zone and was duly fined. I, like many law-abiding citizens, have paid my fine as I would prefer to maintain some form of clean police record. I understand that I am in the minority as less than 50% of fines are actually collected. Had I caused an affray, criminal damage or been involved in public disorder, I would, no doubt, have been cautioned, perhaps given a formal warning and sent on my way. Even had I been involved with something more serious, the chances are that, with no "previous", I would have been cautioned but not prosecuted.

On Saturday, July 19, on my way home, I passed the mobile camera back in its regular position. This location has a number of schools local to it and I guess that the argument is that we need to ensure that children going to and from school are protected. However, I do not understand why the camera was in position on the first Saturday of the school holidays and why (some months ago) I was caught on a Saturday. I can only guess that there is more chance of catching unsuspecting law abiding citizens at weekends and that it is more attractive to the police officers involved as they will, no doubt, be paid enhanced rates for working on Saturdays. As I continued on my journey home, driving through the estate on which I live, I noticed a police van marked "Scientifics".

I am familiar with this vehicle as it is the surest indication that yet another neighbour has been burgled. Since this estate was built in the late 1980s, 50% of all houses have now been burgled. I know of no prosecutions as a result of burglars being caught. I know of no retrieved property as a result of police enquiries. I see no reduction in the incident rate of burglaries. I never see a beat bobby. I am informed that the police "know who is carrying out the burglaries" but are unable to do anything. I also know that it is just a matter of time before I suffer a similar fate regardless of how well I have protected my property.

Michael Todd, Manchester's chief constable, this month told his officers to stop targeting speeding drivers and start catching hardened criminals. He has warned staff that "continuing to pressure motorists... will see many law-abiding citizens develop anti-police feelings". Too late. I have already developed these sentiments and they are strengthening by the day. I feel under attack from burglars and I now feel under attack from the very people who are supposed to be protecting me. I do not care that a substantial percentage of crime is drugs related. I do not care that the prisons are overcrowded. I do care about my family, my property and the few possessions that I have worked all of my life to accumulate. Tony Kniveton

I was stopped for speeding at Pride Park. I was in a works' van so had to obtain documents from my employers to show to the police. After producing my licence and insurance at St Mary's Wharf, I was told that my licence was too old and tatty for the endorsements to be put on it and I needed to send for a new licence. A form was filled in by the duty officer to the effect that I had not produced my licence and, I assume, was sent to the summons office.

The duty officer assured me it was just a formality and a note would be added in mitigation. I received a summons to appear in court and filled in the paperwork sent to me. Instead of a £60 fine, I was fined £100 plus £35 costs. When I called the court office, I was told to write to the court to appeal with all the information. This I did, only to be told that I needed to get a solicitor, would need time off work and would be fined more if I lost. This made me cancel the appeal. It seems the system is geared to ripping off the motorist for as much as possible with little regard for the consequences. Richard Barry

Can anyone remember committing a misdemeanour at school, and having a clip around the ear? I can remember having a clip around the ear from the local bobby for riding two on a bike. I can also remember a time when you would be pulled over by a patrol car, and be told the error of your ways for committing a misdemeanour. If you can you are of a generation that knows respect, how to treat others and elders, as well as the law. Nowadays, it is possible to drive into a town, at a slower speed than the local bus, and end up with a £60 fine and three points towards a ban.

Be careful where you stop, as in some areas, CCTV footage is now being used to issue parking fines. In other areas, a father reported that his teenage daughter had just been assaulted by a gang of youths, and when he went to confront them, he was assaulted. It took three days for an officer to attend, and the Chief Constable stated that no officers were available, as they were all out catching speeding motorists. Regrettably, they don't seem to be reducing the numbers of real nutters on the roads.

Now the Chief Constable of Warwickshire is advising the public to make their own arrests. Now we read that on the odd occasion a drug-addicted burglar is brought before the courts, the judge decides to take a risk, and not to put him in secure accommodation. What risk is the judge taking? What of the risk to the public, and speaking as a victim, what of the mental scars that are left for his victims to live with? And we are told it's progress. Anon

Some years ago I received a written commendation when I went to the assistance of police officers, one of whom was injured attempting to arrest a violent man while surrounded by a mob. It will never happen again. In recent weeks, my family have been threatened with violence, been harassed, suffered criminal damage and had insulting notices placed outside our house, all by the same person who, incidentally, holds a firearms licence.

Rather than arrest him, police eventually decided to make him sign their notebook promising not to harass us again on pain of arrest. He broke this promise by driving past our house a couple of days later. I reported it but was he arrested? No, just "spoken to" and he is still in possession of his guns. I was told to call 999 if there were further problems.

So, why won't I go to the police's aid again? Because there is no guarantee the person they are dealing with has done anything wrong. He might have even taken the law into his own hands after being failed by police. If that were the case I would know how he felt. Anon

Next >>>--