Police constantly quoting “diminishing resources” as reason for rising crime statistics

Discussion in 'SMB' started by Papa Smurf, Oct 9, 2018 at 6:15 PM.

  1. duff_man

    duff_man Striker

    That is evidence relating to the offence, that is completely different to having grounds to arrest someone. Unfortunately you don’t know much about the law, you and your mrs should just let those who do get on with doing their jobs.
     
  2. jackynutmeg

    jackynutmeg Winger

    Both policeman that came to the house said they had enough to press charges.
     
  3. Hull_Mackem

    Hull_Mackem Winger

    To address just a few of your points.

    CCTV- a lot has been turned off or broken with no budget to repair it since budget cuts to both police and local authority.

    DNA- only helps with a limited number of crimes and also new rules mean some gets deleted from the database.

    Internet- causes far more crimes than it would ever help solve.

    Plus prisons are full, the police do solve lots of crimes compared to your nostalgia view.
     
  4. bryc1

    bryc1 Striker

    If they spent a bit less time harassing Tommy Robinson and his family they might be available to do some proper graft and catch some baddies..
     
  5. Hull_Mackem

    Hull_Mackem Winger

    If Robinson stopped committing and inciting crimes and disorder the police might be able to catch some other baddies.

    You spelt that a bit wrong there mate.
     
  6. Invictus

    Invictus Central Defender

    As @duff_man says even if there is enough evidence to potentially charge someone with an offence it doesn’t mean you have the grounds to arrest them. They would normally be allowed to come in a as voluntary attender under these circumstances it’s only when that doesn’t work would you have the grounds to arrest someone.
    Don’t blame the cops for this, blame the government who changed the rules a couple of yrs ago.
     
  7. jackynutmeg

    jackynutmeg Winger

    He'll not be able to walk in to a police station when I get hold of the cvnt
     
  8. Hull_Mackem

    Hull_Mackem Winger

    And then that's another crime to add to the stats and take police away from being pro-active
     
  9. Invictus

    Invictus Central Defender

    :D:lol::lol:
     
    the dark one likes this.
  10. duff_man

    duff_man Striker

    Like I said, having enough evidence to run with a prosecution has no baring on if a person should be arrested. The two things are completely different aspects of an investigation.

    It’s as if I know about this sort of thing.
     
  11. Boris Bear

    Boris Bear Striker

    Let me help you then. Cyber security is winning. Another case of technology making life better
     
  12. duff_man

    duff_man Striker

    Cyber security is winning what? Cyber crime is the fastest growing crime type, cyber security breaches are happening more regularly. Doesn’t sound like it’s winning.
     
  13. the veteran

    the veteran Central Defender

    Falling on deaf ears with these wankers that are in power, the front line services are getting shafted big time..
     
    BlackOps likes this.
  14. Boris Bear

    Boris Bear Striker

    There was also no car crime before there was cars
     
  15. the dark one

    the dark one Winger

    So let's get this right. The police know they have enough evidence to charge someone of a crime, but they can't go and arrest them?. Do they have to sit and wait till they walk into a station and confess ffs? The mind boggles with laws. See, if anyone harmed my daughter and the police wouldn't or should I say couldn't arrest them I'd kill the bastard.
     
  16. Invictus

    Invictus Central Defender

    There are circumstances where arresting someone immediately is fine like if you catch someone committing a burglary or see someone assaulting a person in front of you. It also matters how serious the offence is and if evidence can be lost by not arresting someone.
    The police Officer has to justify why that person has been arrested and arrests can be refused if there are insufficient grounds for the arrest.
    In the case above on the face of it it looks like a relatively minor assault and there is no evidence going to be lost so it makes it difficult to justify the arrest.
    As I said don’t blame the cops they would probably rather lock the lad up and get it done and dusted but the government decided that’s wrong.
    If the governments decision had anything to do with massaging the arrest figures to show crime was down I wouldn’t really know:rolleyes:.
     
    duff_man likes this.
  17. BlackOps

    BlackOps Winger

    Who checks on far right groups?

    Thats not grounds for arrest. Thats evidence. A necessity to arrest needs to be given. IMO the officer in case will be trying to arrange a voluntary interview with him as i know a custody sgt wouldnt accept that based on basic info youve given
     
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2018 at 8:59 PM
  18. duff_man

    duff_man Striker

    This is why people who know fuck all about a subject shouldn’t comment.
    To arrest someone you need to suspect them of comitting an offence, based upon reasonable grounds, you also need to satisfy code G of PACE, but I am sure you knew that anyway didn’t you?

    If I was custody sergeant it would be a detention refused based on what he has told us so far
     
  19. jackynutmeg

    jackynutmeg Winger

    So what does it mean when the police say someone is 'wanted by them' ?
     
    the dark one likes this.
  20. the dark one

    the dark one Winger

    Now now officer.I'm just repeating what's been said on here, including yourself. Do you not find it strange that the police have sufficient evidence to charge soneone yet can't arrest them ffs? Ya fucking tail end.
     

Share This Page