Police video

[Her Ivory Tower]

Well I don't know who you are, I think you look dodgy cos you look different to me, and I dont own a generator so how can you own one? Rights, thats enough for me, you're coming down the nick. Reg will book you in and you will get one phone call. When it turns out that you own the generator we will laugh it off and the waste of police time and resources will be laughed off because i was following a hunch. RESPECT MY AUTHORITAH

And woe betide you if you are carrying said generator INSIDE a carrier bag of shopping, along with a laptop, at 3 in the morning. That means you're a nailed on crim and deserve min 15-30 years porridge in Sing Sing.

 

[Az*]

As I have said, it depends entirely upon circumstances that are not evident from that video. If i saw a lad carrying a jenny, in an area where they do get nicked, he can't prove it's his or give me enough details to identify him, yeah, I am definitely nicking hi because I SUSPECT, not believe, but SUSPECT it might be stolen. You'd be well chuffed if it was your tele that had been burgled I had just seized. All part of the job Sir.



Yes. Hmmmm. And no though.

Bikes are often stolen from Durham, you'd stop everyone riding a bike and ask for details?

That bloke was profiled: skin head, tatts, combats. That was the reason he was stopped.

 

[Deleted member 22590]

But they didn't arrest him because they obviously weren't in an area where Jenny's get nicked or they hadn't had a report of one being nicked.

Of course I'd be very happy if Police stopped someone who had burgled my house but that doesn't give them the right to stop everyone within a 3 mile radius of my house and make them identify themselves and prove that the possessions they carry are their own.

Aye, I would have though. If you got burgled and rang the Police, if I stopped someone within a 3 mile( your example) radius of your house with possessions they couldn't account for, the very least I'd be doing is seizing said possessions and getting absolute confirmation of the person I'm seizing them from. I'm sure you'd want that too.

 

[Flash Gordon]

Aye, I would have though. If you got burgled and rang the Police, if I stopped someone within a 3 mile( your example) radius of your house with possessions they couldn't account for, the very least I'd be doing is seizing said possessions and getting absolute confirmation of the person I'm seizing them from. I'm sure you'd want that too.

So once a crime has been committed, everyone is a suspect that has to prove their innocence?

 

[Deleted member 22590]

If as you say, that there has been a report of items been stolen or if the location is a theft hot spot then that it is a totally different scenario. That is assumptions again though. Simply stopping people on the street and asking questions without any grounds of suspicion is not a reason to detain, and when they refuse to give their name it is not enough grounds to find them suspicious, as is shown in that video. Police do not have a duty to protect property when they have no evidence that is stolen im afraid.

Nee bother mate. I don't do that sort of work anymore but tbh I'm thankful you never will because you'd be crap at getting stolen stuff back to people. I'm sure your job is much more rewarding anyway so it's largely hypothetical.

Bikes are often stolen from Durham, you'd stop everyone riding a bike and ask for details?

That bloke was profiled: skin head, tatts, combats. That was the reason he was stopped.

Why not?

Bikes are often stolen from Durham, you'd stop everyone riding a bike and ask for details?

That bloke was profiled: skin head, tatts, combats. That was the reason he was stopped.

Profiling criminals is not something I 've ever had a course on. Maybe it's my personal agenda.
I'm white, skinhead and have tats btw.

 

[Her Ivory Tower]

Love you to be able to find a post where I said that. You inferred an awful lot. But you keep bumping that line

The thread was deleted after you started accusing everyone on it of wanting to have sex with children. Here is one of your gems. Heaven knows what you would have accused me of if I'd been carrying a generator at the time.


Today, 05:07 PM


#210

gavinmcant

Midfield


Join Date: Nov 2009

Location: springwell


Re: Human Rights Lawyer defends people who touch children

Quote:



Er, not suggesting you have, but if you have any such images of girls under the age of 18 - not 16, but 18 mind, you have images of a child and commit an offence.

 

[Lefty Frizzell]

Nee bother mate. I don't do that sort of work anymore but tbh I'm thankful you never will because you'd be crap at getting stolen stuff back to people. I'm sure your job is much more rewarding anyway so it's largely hypothetical.



Why not?

Spat the dummy out and taken your ball home? No need to be like that. I have already said that I respect the police and the work they do, but there is a difference between good police work and police abusing powers. I do have a rewarding job and I like to think that I go about my job in a way that does not infringe on peoples civil liberties. If that makes me a loser then so be it.

 

[Deleted member 22590]

The thread was deleted after you started accusing everyone on it of wanting to have sex with children. Here is one of your gems.


Today, 05:07 PM


#210

gavinmcant

Midfield


Join Date: Nov 2009

Location: springwell


Re: Human Rights Lawyer defends people who touch children

Quote:

Originally Posted by Her Ivory Tower

But the law does not protect them all, it's applied retrospectively. It rarely works as a deterrent. And some girls are more than keen and willing at that age - in fact some girls go out of their way to encourage attention from boys, even emailing/texting naked pics of themselves. As I said before, it is not a one way street - trust me - I was a teenage girl myself once. Some girls are gagging to have sex at that age (not me though!) If it's with a lad their own age I don't see a problem, it's a natural part of growing up. And it's a world away from adults abusing children.


Er, not suggesting you have, but if you have any such images of girls under the age of 18 - not 16, but 18 mind, you have images of a child and commit an offence.

Try again? Appears I point out that possessing photos of girls under 18 in sexually explicit scenarios is an offence. And I specifically say I am not suggesting you do..... Time for an apology for all the " accusing you of being a paedophiles" allegations? If that's the best you can come up with, well. None taken I can assure you.

 

[Beaker]

Wouldn't fancy any cop seizing any goods from me like.

From what i know of a certain Police station, it's harder to get back your own property from the Police evidence lock up than anywhere else.

 

[Az*]

Nee bother mate. I don't do that sort of work anymore but tbh I'm thankful you never will because you'd be crap at getting stolen stuff back to people. I'm sure your job is much more rewarding anyway so it's largely hypothetical.



Why not?



Profiling criminals is not something I 've ever had a course on. Maybe it's my personal agenda.
I'm white, skinhead and have tats btw.

Why not? Because I suspect you'd be in the job about 15 minutes before being dismissed.

What is you having a baldy head got to do with him being stopped?

 

[Her Ivory Tower]

Try again? Appears I point out that possessing photos of girls under 18 in sexually explicit scenarios is an offence. And I specifically say I am not suggesting you do..... Time for an apology for all the " accusing you of being a paedophiles" allegations? If that's the best you can come up with, well. None taken I can assure you.

You really want me to post all your comments on that thread? Where you accused over 10 people on here of being child abusers? Think carefully now.

 

[Deleted member 22590]

Spat the dummy out and taken your ball home? No need to be like that. I have already said that I respect the police and the work they do, but there is a difference between good police work and police abusing powers. I do have a rewarding job and I like to think that I go about my job in a way that does not infringe on peoples civil liberties. If that makes me a loser then so be it.

I think you've interpreted that in a way that was not intended. I think it was only you that's referred to yourself as a loser? I certainly didn't. If you are calling yourself a loser then give over, you come across as bright and enthusiastic, chin up man you'll be fine.

 

[Her Ivory Tower]

Wouldn't fancy any cop seizing any goods from me like.

From what i know of a certain Police station, it's harder to get back your own property from the Police evidence lock up than anywhere else.

This. They charge you storage when they recover your stolen property. My colleague was charged £300 for the pleasure of getting his own stolen motorbike back from the Police after they found it. I say found, they were not even looking for it, it was just dumped at the side of the road and someone reported it so the Police went and picked it up, took it back to where ever, called my colleague to come and collect it and charged him £300 for the privilege.

 

[Deleted member 22590]

You really want me to post all your comments on that thread? Where you accused over 10 people on here of being child abusers? Think carefully now.

Yup. Crack on. Find one if your feeling lucky. Pretty sure I would have been banned had I made any such allegation. I wasn't because I didn't but your obsessed with perpetuating that myth. It's not becoming of you to be honest.

This. They charge you storage when they recover your stolen property. My colleague was charged £300 for the pleasure of getting his own stolen motorbike back from the Police after they found it. I say found, they were not even looking for it, it was just dumped at the side of the road and someone reported it so the Police went and picked it up, took it back to where ever, called my colleague to come and collect it and charged him £300 for the privilege.

Insurance company pay that sweetie. Unless it wasn't insured of course.

 

[Her Ivory Tower]

Yup. Crack on. Find one if your feeling lucky. Pretty sure I would have been banned had I made any such allegation. I wasn't because I didn't but your obsessed with perpetuating that myth. It's not becoming of you to be honest.

Originally Posted by gavinmcant
Crux of this is that I can't understand that some people think that it's ok to have sex with a 12 year old as one poster made quite clear was her opinion.
Others have said its ok if your 15 but the girl is 13. The law says its not as bad but let's keep an eye on this lad.
And yet, some people think these rules are shite.
Why n earth would they think think that laws specifically designed to protect children are wrong
The mind boggles.

 

[Deleted member 22590]

Originally Posted by gavinmcant
Crux of this is that I can't understand that some people think that it's ok to have sex with a 12 year old as one poster made quite clear was her opinion.
Others have said its ok if your 15 but the girl is 13. The law says its not as bad but let's keep an eye on this lad.
And yet, some people think these rules are shite.
Why n earth would they think think that laws specifically designed to protect children are wrong
The mind boggles.

Still waiting for this accusation.... Is that it? What, really? Clutching at dry bits of grass aren't we?
As said, you inferred way too much.

 

[Lefty Frizzell]

I think you've interpreted that in a way that was not intended. I think it was only you that's referred to yourself as a loser? I certainly didn't. If you are calling yourself a loser then give over, you come across as bright and enthusiastic, chin up man you'll be fine.

Chins up you mean I think it was your comments when you inferred that I may not have as much of a rewarding career as that of a member of the police. came across quite bitter. Good hustle anyway, hope I don't have to citizens arrest you anyway when im walking back from Halfords with my new generator

 

[Her Ivory Tower]

Still waiting for this accusation.... Is that it? What, really? Clutching at dry bits of grass aren't we?
As said, you inferred way too much.

Re: Human Rights Lawyer defends people who touch children
Quote:
Originally Posted by gavinmcant
Yeah genius mate. You have nothing to say other than its ok to fuck kids. If you can also claim to be a kid mind...

 

[Deleted member 22590]

Originally Posted by gavinmcant
Crux of this is that I can't understand that some people think that it's ok to have sex with a 12 year old as one poster made quite clear was her opinion.
Others have said its ok if your 15 but the girl is 13. The law says its not as bad but let's keep an eye on this lad.
And yet, some people think these rules are shite.
Why n earth would they think think that laws specifically designed to protect children are wrong
The mind boggles.

How's the increasingly frantic, forlorn search going? No joy? Taps fingers......

Chins up you mean I think it was your comments when you inferred that I may not have as much of a rewarding career as that of a member of the police. came across quite bitter. Good hustle anyway, hope I don't have to citizens arrest you anyway when im walking back from Halfords with my new generator

Touché mate. No hard feelings. Incidentally, I imply, you infer

Re: Human Rights Lawyer defends people who touch children
Quote:
Originally Posted by gavinmcant
Yeah genius mate. You have nothing to say other than its ok to fuck kids. If you can also claim to be a kid mind...

Again, the allegation about you being a paedophile?

 

[Her Ivory Tower]

Again, the allegation about you being a paedophile?

I'm not going to post all the vile things you said to decent people on here that day, like telling them that they "obviously wanted to fuck children" which you concluded must be the case simply because they were discussing the age of consent. Most of the child abuse accusations you made were not even made at me, and I'm not going to spend a weekend searching for them. I've already posted one of your heinous remarks, is saying that I think it's ok to have sex with 12 year olds when I never said anything of the sort not enough for you? I think that amounts to "accusing someone of being a Paedophile".