Woodman gets arrested for the first time ever

Discuss issues relating to the Police Force.

Re: Woodman gets arrested for the first time ever

Postby Hooplescat » Thu May 28, 2009 10:38 pm

woodman wrote:
Hooplescat wrote:
woodman wrote:
Hooplescat wrote:assuming you didn't swear, tell them to fuck off, wave your arms at them aggressively or tell them you were going to spark them out I can't see what angle they are coming from. What was the final thing you said immediately before they told you that you were under arrest? Seems like a bit of a cheap shot. :puzz:


I never swore, told them to FO, or was I in any way aggressive. I said, why have you stopped me? and then I said that I shouldn't have to give my name yet, as I had not been informed as to why I was stopped and I hadn't committed any offence. I was then told that I was coming with them, dragged off and pushed into the van.


The road traffic act covers them for demanding your name - they are allowed to demand it of a car driver, unlike if you are just walking along. But they still have to demonstrate that someone would be likely to be caused harassment alarm or distress to nick you under s5, and by your account you didn't do that. You might have been better not accepting the PND, but I understand why you did.


Aren't you jumping ahead there Hoops, it's polite for a Police Officer to explain who he is, show ID if necessary, explain the reasons for the stop and treat the "person" with respect. Once that had been covered, I would have given my name. In any case, I provided my name and address and date of birth when the Officer asked me a 2nd time, he then said a number of things, before saying he did not believe I was, who I said I was, and slapped on the handcuffs.

After various abuse, I was put in a cell for 4 hours and I wanted out!

I acknowledged reciept of a notice requesting that I must pay £80 or request a hearing and they let me go. Well, I'm not going to pay £80 and I am not going to stand for this legalised terrorism.

I apologise for the tone here, but I'm angry, and right now there are two of the same Police vans parked a few yards away from my house, and I'm not sure why. :grr:



Hello mate...I am very much just commenting on the law, not the conduct - It is more than just a point of manners, it is a point of professionalism that the officers should speak to you respectfully, give you their details when asked for them, and generally deal with the situation appropriately - and though they are entitled to check your validity to drive (I know the view on this, I just mean under the RTA) once those details are checked they should thank you for your time and your cooperation. They should have a good reason to disbelieve you before they go dragging you in IMHO :peace: :police:

as someone else said, only a traffic car will have video evidence, if it was a plain old ford focus panda it won't have it
Hooplescat
Newbie
Newbie
 

Re: Woodman gets arrested for the first time ever

Postby woodman » Thu May 28, 2009 10:44 pm

Well Hoops, they had no valid reason to do what they did to me,it was 7.35pm, I was heading home for the match, minding my own business and got surrounded by 3 Police cars. I just wanted to sort it out, whatever the reason was and get home in time for kick off. Why on earth would someone like me want to stop and behave in a disorderly manner?

If the Police had not stopped me, none of this would have happened, they caused the whole incident and the subsequent loss of my freedom for 4 hours, I'm disgusted. :peace:
‘Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, no one but ourselves can free our minds’- Robert Nesta Marley (1945 - 1981)

‘All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing’ - Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)
User avatar
woodman
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 1307
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 3:17 pm
Location: Two Dogs Fightin'

Re: Woodman gets arrested for the first time ever

Postby Hooplescat » Thu May 28, 2009 11:27 pm

yep, I can understand why.

:peace:
Hooplescat
Newbie
Newbie
 

Re: Woodman gets arrested for the first time ever

Postby Veronica » Fri May 29, 2009 7:58 am

The Road Traffic Act is a Statute and therefore utterly irrelevant. As they will find out if this ever happens to me. They will have 10 years in jail to consider this.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.

(1) There is no general legal duty to assist the police or to obey police instructions. Rice v Connolly [1966] 2 QB 414.
Freedom's just another word for: "Nothing left to lose" (Janis Joplin)
"There is no path to peace, peace IS the path" (Mahatma Ghandi)
"There is no path to freedom, freedom IS the path" (Veronica Chapman)
User avatar
Veronica
Founder
Founder
 
Posts: 4537
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:28 pm
Location: Feltham, Sovereign Republic of England

Re: Woodman gets arrested for the first time ever

Postby BaldBeardyDude » Fri May 29, 2009 8:24 am

Blimey! - I have a few quiet days, kickin back, relaxing...mmmm...........to come back and find Woody has been ARRESTED!! :gasp:

So, first of all Woody - all the best mate - go get em!

Secondly, how many cars, vans and police were there for this? Did you put up THAT big a fight, Woody? Didn't think so, but you asked them questions, didn't you? I wonder why they get so angry when asked questions? - mebbe it's the same for us civvies, eh? Some strnger comes over and barks questions at you - it's bound to put your back up, eh?

Well, even with just my two affidavits to Elizardeath, I have 'lawful excuse' to disobey ALL statutes and withhold ALL taxes. It would seem prudent for the police to learn this one quickly, should they not want to see their pension pot smaller, by way of fines levied from peeps like us. I suppose that you just 'happened' to meet these stalwarts of professionalism by chance? - strange how there are more bad 'uns reported than good 'uns on the forum, if the so-called 'low' numbers of 'bad' policymen is right - I think Hoops is a mere aberration in those figures, with the attitude he displays (I disregard his 'beliefs' and rely on his work attitude, which is reasonable, save for upholding statutes).

I can only come to the conclusion that we must all be biased against these fine people. I think it's terrible that a man can't go about his job without being asked questions all the time, by people who should just shut up and do as they are told. Sorry to all policymen - not all civvies are as inflammatory as Woody is, most will still just roll over and pay the fine or just do as you tell them. As for you Woody, I hope you've learned your lesson my friend. The cheek, the unmitigated gall - to ask policymen questions! Where will it end? Do you think that there is some global conspiracy by a cabal of top knobs, wanting to take over the world? Oh! and I suppose the queen is in on it, too? and all of her family?

Sarcasm IS the lowest form of wit, but when dealing with policymen of this particular ilk, we must use our least powerful weapons. After all, in a battle of wits, we ALWAYS fight those who are unarmed..... don't we? Be gentle with them, as they are mushrooms, people. They are kept in the dark and fed on shit, so we get these events happening. Should they be told the 'truth', we would not. Ergo, they will forever be mushrooms grown by TPTB.

Sort it, Woody m8 - make them pay in their fake la-la-land money, for it is all that will get their attention. Make it a BIG number....... :rotfl:
They must find it hard to take Truth for authority who have so long mistaken Authority for Truth - Gerald Massey
User avatar
BaldBeardyDude
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:42 am
Location: Telford, Shropshire

Re: Woodman gets arrested for the first time ever

Postby markie b » Fri May 29, 2009 8:30 am

woodman did you say you were gay for before the strip search :rotfl: you may of gotten a couple half decent women in uniform instead searching you :exercise:
on a tougher note it seems that it could just be a tightening down on getting finger prints and dna samples on the data base after all once your on your on!
and thats why they've gone after 1.1million childrens prints.do a men in black and singe the buggers off :phew:
when injustice becomes law
rebellion becomes duty
markie b
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:42 am

Re: Woodman gets arrested for the first time ever

Postby Catnap » Fri May 29, 2009 9:47 am

Woody I am new to all this and cant offer advice like the others here.

I can only say that I am completely and utterley horrified at the way you have been treated by the police. I am still very naive and never thought our own police force would treat the people in this way.

Good luck Woody - wipe the floor with them.
Namaste

Claire

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security shall deserve neither and lose both. Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
Catnap
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 3:11 pm
Location: Essex, Britain

Re: Woodman gets arrested for the first time ever

Postby Catnap » Fri May 29, 2009 9:48 am

Hoops are you a ploice officer or am I getting the wrong end of the stick?

***Edited - further posts have answered my question - sorry but I am still fairly new.
Last edited by Catnap on Fri May 29, 2009 10:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Namaste

Claire

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security shall deserve neither and lose both. Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
Catnap
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 3:11 pm
Location: Essex, Britain

Re: Woodman gets arrested for the first time ever

Postby Hooplescat » Fri May 29, 2009 9:55 am

Hello mate

Again, please do not think I am drawing conclusions or picking sides, just commenting on the law as it stands - Rice v Connolly 1966 does not apply as you were driving a vehicle at the time of being stopped and that case pertained to a pedestrian.

I know your views on statutes, but it is the RTA statute that has enabled them to stop you without reason.

On the other hand, I was reading up on this last night, and the police law books clearly state that they must have an 'OBJECTIVE REASON, NOT JUST GENERAL SUSPICION that your identity has not been properly established.

Hooplescat :peace:
Hooplescat
Newbie
Newbie
 

Re: Woodman gets arrested for the first time ever

Postby markie b » Fri May 29, 2009 10:08 am

also if your found innocent by the courts then do them for faulse arrest,sexual assault,negligence of duty and faulse imprisonment oh slander and deflemation of character :wink: big pay out for that id imagine
when injustice becomes law
rebellion becomes duty
markie b
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:42 am

PreviousNext

Return to Police Jurisdiction

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron