Another lying, uninformed, oppressive bully in a uniform.

Discuss issues relating to the Police Force.

Re: Another lying, uninformed, oppressive bully in a uniform.

Postby woodman » Sat Apr 02, 2011 1:31 pm

greg wrote:Nice soundtrack Woody! I see you resisted the temptation to sing along on camera!
It's a good job there wasn't an MJ oooooooh, ow or hee hee, otherwise I mightn't have been able to help meself :wink:

greg wrote:I must admit when I see one of those big riot vans stacked full, or potentially stacked full (note they have tinted windows in the back) of burly blokes in uniform I don't feel safer, far from it.
This is something I've said myself to many Police Officers, that I feel safer when I don't see them and that's no lie. I fear them much more than the local criminals.
‘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: 1295
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 3:17 pm
Location: Two Dogs Fightin'

Re: Another lying, uninformed, oppressive bully in a uniform.

Postby greg » Sat Apr 02, 2011 1:46 pm

woodman wrote:
greg wrote:Nice soundtrack Woody! I see you resisted the temptation to sing along on camera!
It's a good job there wasn't an MJ oooooooh, ow or hee hee, otherwise I mightn't have been able to help meself :wink:

greg wrote:I must admit when I see one of those big riot vans stacked full, or potentially stacked full (note they have tinted windows in the back) of burly blokes in uniform I don't feel safer, far from it.
This is something I've said myself to many Police Officers, that I feel safer when I don't see them and that's no lie. I fear them much more than the local criminals.


Cha'mon!

Unfortunately I agree completely. I think the majority know they're out to rip us off, not protect us. I was walking on a nearby field the other night, common land. Some teenagers were messing about on a little motorbike in the middle of the field, miles from anywhere. Two 'community support' officers were walking around 'keeping people safe'. The lad on the bike crapped his pants when he saw them and consequently fell off the bike. (Their presence caused harm.) Which the two 'officers' delighted in, laughing so loudly I could hear them from about 400 metres away. As I passed them I asked why they were there, they gave me some bull about 'complaints'. Ok fair enough I said

"So you're here to see that no one is harmed?"

"That's right"

"So why were you laughing when that lad came off his bike? Do you want to see him harmed?"

They had no answer. It's just a little power game to these people. Sadly I think as someone posted above, the minute that uniform goes on, things change. I myself have seen a number of lads I knew go from normal everyday lads to paranoid, suspicious bullies after joining the force. One of them eventually got kicked out for beating up some lad whilst on duty!
greg
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 1:36 pm

Re: Another lying, uninformed, oppressive bully in a uniform.

Postby Hoops » Sat Apr 02, 2011 5:03 pm

woodman wrote:Here's some short footage of me driving around the block where I live, back in Sept 2009, (in between my first and second arrest and recorded in the same location as my first arrest) at a time when it was really difficult not to get stopped and searched by Police.

The footage allegedly shows me (at around 1:06) travelling through a red light, there were roughly eight Police Officers in the area at the time, (oooh I was playing with fire), Hoops, let me ask you, if you had been one of those Officers about who had seen me, what would your course of action have been?

Incidentally, I make no apologies for listening to Michael Jackson whilst driving :grin:

http://www.youtube.com/v/OeeF7hCzcDc


Had I been witness to the events of this video you would have been arrested, there and then.

I would have cautioned you that your taste in music outrages public decency and that for your outrageous lifechoices there would be a penalty of £15 which you would hand over at the nearest HMV for the new radiohead album. You would then have been sentenced summarily to 6 weeks of listening to the album on repeat, at which time I would be entirely confident that you would not reoffend. You would be bound over not to indulge your 80's roots for a period of not less than 1 year.

Now that is justice.

In all seriousness - I would not have been likely to pull you over, certainly not issue a ticket. At most, and this is honesty not propoganda, I would either have wagged my finger at you in a faux stern 'naughty naughty, I saw that kind of way', which I find if delivered right normally has people smile and raise a hand in acknowledgement. I find it often is suitable for just clipping the red light or someone who sees you and then quickly reaches for their seatbelt. I am not sure that translates well to text, but I find it a gentle interaction that people respond to positively without being too anal. IF you had then drove off like an idiot, or behaved like a general ass with your car then I might take the offence more formally. If there had been traffic and the light had been red for a minute or two, and it was a blatant decision to run the light in spite of traffic conditions, then I would consider dealing with it as a formal process too. If I thought there were a series of indications that your driving was below the generally accepted standard, but not dangerous, I would pull you over and give the dreaded policeman's lecture on why you need to drive more carefully.
Hoops
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:41 pm

Re: Another lying, uninformed, oppressive bully in a uniform.

Postby woodman » Sun Apr 03, 2011 2:07 pm

Hoops wrote:Had I been witness to the events of this video you would have been arrested, there and then.
You would have had to catch me first, I know the streets of Huyton like the back of me hand :wink:

Hoops wrote:I would have cautioned you that your taste in music outrages public decency and that for your outrageous lifechoices there would be a penalty of £15 which you would hand over at the nearest HMV for the new radiohead album. You would then have been sentenced summarily to 6 weeks of listening to the album on repeat, at which time I would be entirely confident that you would not reoffend. You would be bound over not to indulge your 80's roots for a period of not less than 1 year.
I love analysing people's sense of humour, many a true word is spoken in jest.

Yours, albeit quite funny, shows a disturbing side. Your mindset seems to be one of attempting to take control and resolve problems that are not there in reality, giving the reasons based on what you think the general public's collective opinion may be, when in reality it is likely to be just you that thinks that and not the general public. As Michael Jackson's album Thriller, the highest selling album ever proves, the majority of people like him more than any other artist/s. :grin: hee hee! Hey Hoops, have you seen my pic of me teaching the kids Thriller in front of a Matrix (boogie bus as we in Huyton call em) carrier. :-)

Hoops wrote:At most, and this is honesty not propoganda, I would either have wagged my finger at you in a faux stern 'naughty naughty, I saw that kind of way', which I find if delivered right normally has people smile and raise a hand in acknowledgement.
Yes, I think that is acceptable. However, on an individual basis, I am at a time in my life with much life experience, when I am simply not prepared to be patronised or lectured by someone younger and less experienced than me, someone who may have had crashes of their own fault, who because they are wearing a uniform, think they have the authority to lecture me (a driver with 28 years of accident free driving) simply because their mindset and training tells them my actions, "may", "could", "possibly" cause some kind of problem that may be illegal.

Hoops wrote:IF you had then drove off like an idiot, or behaved like a general ass with your car then I might take the offence more formally.
And there's what is wrong with the Policeman mindset these days, of which I also found evident in Koko's comments, such as "what about the cyclists attitude". The attitude of whoever has been stopped, should make absolutely no difference to the way a Police man deals with them. A Police man should be professional and treat everyone equally and the same way regardless of what they say.

Thinking "right, I'll have this bastard", simply cos you do not like his attitude, is immature, unprofessional and in the long run does the Police no favours. Heres the correct way :wink:


http://www.youtube.com/v/o_JtFBnFS1Y


Incidentally the cyclist has now removed his video and similar other ones, as he fears for his safety Danny Shine Blog
‘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: 1295
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 3:17 pm
Location: Two Dogs Fightin'

Re: Another lying, uninformed, oppressive bully in a uniform.

Postby knightron » Sun Apr 03, 2011 9:59 pm

I would like to buy this Police constable a beer.. :yes: :shake: Just goes to prove even on a bad day, Humanity can shine through.. :sun: :shake:
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ
User avatar
knightron
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 319
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 12:51 pm

Re: Another lying, uninformed, oppressive bully in a uniform.

Postby Hoops » Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:38 am

woodman wrote: I love analysing people's sense of humour, many a true word is spoken in jest.

Yours, albeit quite funny, shows a disturbing side. Your mindset seems to be one of attempting to take control and resolve problems that are not there


No really, your taste in music is a problem...I am sure there is a statute that will cover it if I dig deep enough.... :clap:

in reality, giving the reasons based on what you think the general public's collective opinion may be, when in reality it is likely to be just you that thinks that and not the general public. As Michael Jackson's album Thriller, the highest selling album ever proves, the majority of people like him more than any other artist/s. :grin: hee hee! Hey Hoops, have you seen my pic of me teaching the kids Thriller in front of a Matrix (boogie bus as we in Huyton call em) carrier. :-)
Yeah, saw it. If you did it by my van I would join in.

Yes, I think that is acceptable. However, on an individual basis, I am at a time in my life with much life experience, when I am simply not prepared to be patronised or lectured by someone younger and less experienced than me, someone who may have had crashes of their own fault, who because they are wearing a uniform, think they have the authority to lecture me (a driver with 28 years of accident free driving) simply because their mindset and training tells them my actions, "may", "could", "possibly" cause some kind of problem that may be illegal.

Unfortunately I doubt I am much younger than you, and probably have many more driving miles under my belt. But irrespective of that, as I say, I don't think translates well to a forum text - it is not a patronising thing, it is friendly and done with a smile. In truth people take little liberties they know they probably shouldn't (all people at some time or another), and this is a proportionate and gentle way to promote them not doing it again without being officious - it's not treating them like a child

Hoops wrote:IF you had then drove off like an idiot, or behaved like a general ass with your car then I might take the offence more formally.
And there's what is wrong with the Policeman mindset these days, of which I also found evident in Koko's comments, such as "what about the cyclists attitude". The attitude of whoever has been stopped, should make absolutely no difference to the way a Police man deals with them. A Police man should be professional and treat everyone equally and the same way regardless of what they say.

Thinking "right, I'll have this bastard", simply cos you do not like his attitude, is immature, unprofessional and in the long run does the Police no favours. Heres the correct way :wink:


no no, you misunderstand - not the 'attitude test', the temptation of applying it should be avoided. I said 'behaved like an ass with your car, i.e. if I thought the red light was one of a number of indicators that your driving was not of a safe and decent standard, then I may treat it formally. I did not refer to what was said, but rather standards of driving.
:peace:
Hoops
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:41 pm

Re: Another lying, uninformed, oppressive bully in a uniform.

Postby woodman » Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:37 pm

Hoops wrote:
woodman wrote: I love analysing people's sense of humour, many a true word is spoken in jest.

Yours, albeit quite funny, shows a disturbing side. Your mindset seems to be one of attempting to take control and resolve problems that are not there


No really, your taste in music is a problem...I am sure there is a statute that will cover it if I dig deep enough.... :clap:
:giggle: seeeeee, you're still doing it. No problem exists, only in your mind. More people prefer my taste than yours, it's an undeniable fact mate. You know all the facts and you are still in denial :giggle: Even if you deem it NOT cool, it's most certainly cool to me :wink:

Hoops wrote:
woodman wrote:in reality, giving the reasons based on what you think the general public's collective opinion may be, when in reality it is likely to be just you that thinks that and not the general public. As Michael Jackson's album Thriller, the highest selling album ever proves, the majority of people like him more than any other artist/s. :grin: hee hee! Hey Hoops, have you seen my pic of me teaching the kids Thriller in front of a Matrix (boogie bus as we in Huyton call em) carrier. :-)
Yeah, saw it. If you did it by my van I would join in.
and so would have I, had I been a Policeman on seeing this. In reality, the Matrix Police carrier drove on once we'd stepped out of the road. All the stern faces of the several Police Officers inside staring blankly ahead, no comments, no smiles, no kind of positive relationship with young people (and one old one). Therein lies the major problem!

Hoops wrote:
woodman wrote: Yes, I think that is acceptable. However, on an individual basis, I am at a time in my life with much life experience, when I am simply not prepared to be patronised or lectured by someone younger and less experienced than me, someone who may have had crashes of their own fault, who because they are wearing a uniform, think they have the authority to lecture me (a driver with 28 years of accident free driving) simply because their mindset and training tells them my actions, "may", "could", "possibly" cause some kind of problem that may be illegal.

Unfortunately I doubt I am much younger than you, and probably have many more driving miles under my belt. But irrespective of that, as I say, I don't think translates well to a forum text - it is not a patronising thing, it is friendly and done with a smile. In truth people take little liberties they know they probably shouldn't (all people at some time or another), and this is a proportionate and gentle way to promote them not doing it again without being officious - it's not treating them like a child
I'm 46 Hoops, been driving since age 18. Most of my employment has involved a lot of driving, 10 years as a Taxi driver, never crashed, never made an insurance claim. Is your record as good? I wouldn't be happy being lectured by some wet behind the ears kid, who's been driving five minutes and thinks he know better as he has been trained by the Police.

Hoops wrote:no no, you misunderstand - not the 'attitude test', the temptation of applying it should be avoided. I said 'behaved like an ass with your car, i.e. if I thought the red light was one of a number of indicators that your driving was not of a safe and decent standard, then I may treat it formally. I did not refer to what was said, but rather standards of driving.
:peace:
That's fair enough, it's just that I see every day where I live and on TV, the jobsworth attitude of many Police Officers and the lack of commonsense and the ignorant way people are treated in order for the officer to get another notch, (fine, arrest or whatever) under his belt.

Incidentally, I notice from my video that my driving style changed for the simple reason of the presence of Police. At the previous set of lights, my usual procedure on arriving at lights just changing to green would be to continue at the same speed, this would have took me past the Police carrier who was just setting off from standstill, therefore I would have got to the next set of lights on green anyway.

But taking into account that I'd previously been arrested for nothing by Police in that same kind of vehicle, I resisted the chance to go past and purposely slowed down. If I'd drove in my usual way there would have been a very high possibility of being arrested again.

: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: 1295
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 3:17 pm
Location: Two Dogs Fightin'

Re: Another lying, uninformed, oppressive bully in a uniform.

Postby Shinkansen » Mon Oct 24, 2011 3:32 pm

I have read this thread out of great interest and registered purely to post, as it applies to a current situation I find myself in.

I am very much an atheist libertarian and discovered the Freeman movement some years ago. After doing much homework and reading I find this real approach to living, human rights, freedom, love and law to resonate deeply within me. I am not a criminal. I am simply a human being, born equal who wishes nothing more than to be treated the way I treat others. I am a law-abiding citizen with a clean criminal record AND clean driving license. I am quite simply, a "model" citizen (except maybe lawful rebellion with regards to taxes on moral grounds of illegal wars!). When I get treated like this, I get angry. I have in the past stuck up for the Police, but after a previous incident of being bullied, detained and intimated for asking questions by a "hi-vis team", once again, I find myself having been bullied and intimidated for asking questions. I will admit to being very well read on the intricacies of common law (I recently assisted my ex with an illegal private clamping incident which hinged on tort law! Needless to say the goons were clueless) but not very well "experienced" in applying my knowledge. I'm not into attracting Police attention to conduct law experiments, so I may have made some schoolboy errors here... Adrenaline is a horrible thing.

I was recently pulled over for "speeding", despite being absolutely adamant that I was sticking to the limit. It's pretty obvious when you pass a Police car on a roundabout and they begin to follow you, you know? I would like to point out that my car does tend to "stick out" a bit. It was also dark. I decided to pull over as they persisted in following me rather than ring the blues'n'twos and pull me over themselves. They boxed me in and and began the usual Cop-jargon "Do you know how fast you were going back there?". Standard response... "No?". It was at this point I really should have demanded to see evidence as they bragged about the fact they had a "fully-calibrated speed camera" in their car. Then the fun began.

I was asked for my name and address to which I replied "I'm not legally obliged to give you that information am I?". The beta-copper then chipped in with "Have you got your drivers' license on you?" to which I replied "Am I legally obliged to carry one?". He didn't like this response and alpha-Cop took back over the questioning. I repeatedly asked the Constables what law I had broken which gives them the authority to demand my personal details; I asked them if they had witnessed me breach the peace. They ignored that. The best they could do was "Speeding's against the law" and "Speeding is an offence." to which I continued to ask "But what LAW have I actually broken?". Eventually the alpha-Constable muttered something about the Road Traffic Act to which out loud I said "THANK YOU. The Road Traffic Act. Is that a law? It's an Act of Parliament isn't it?". The alpha-constable then stated that I needed to clean my ears out and listen more carefully as he had said it four times. This was an unequivocal lie and unsettled me, perhaps on purpose? They didn't seem to like this line of questioning and started to tell me that they have powers under the PACE Act to arrest me if I refused to give them my name and address. I would like to point out that at no point did I refuse to give my details, I was simply asking questions about the Constable's actions to try and determine their authority in this situation. I believe they asked me for my details one last time; I replied with another question "What's the difference between common law and a statute then constable? I'm quite concerned that you don't seem to know the difference. Surely they train you and teach you about the differences in law?"

At this point I was physically turned around and informed I was being arrested under some section of PACE and I was actually handcuffed. I don't understand the reasoning or justification for the handcuffs... there were two male officers attending to me. I had not been violent or agitated, or aggressive in any way... I had simply been asking questions. There was no reasonable suspicion for anything. The alpha-cop said as he was cuffing me "Right. As you have refused to provide me with your details I now have reasonable grounds to suspect that either you have ingested an illegal substance or you are not the registered keeper of this vehicle." As I was being cuffed I informed the constables that "Constables, I am a peaceful man and there will be absolutely no violence, however I am certain this is unlawful and I will remain under protest and duress at all times." From this point on I kept my mouth pretty much shut. I would like to point out that my rights were not read to me and at this point the Police had still not identified themselves to me.

Alpha-cop then delved straight into my pockets and spread the contents all over the bonnet of the police car. By this point the entire staff of the local shop, and the customers, had gathered to watch the show. There were some derogatory and inflammatory comments made by this crowd. Note, no action was taken against them. (A genuine breach of the peace through verbal abuse) My drivers license was in my pocket along with my mobile phone. In hindsight, I wish I had recorded everything on my phone from the start. Now, I didn't have that option. I advise ANYONE in ANY contact with Police to record it all, it is for YOUR protection AND theirs.

The beta-cop then approached me saying that he wanted to search my vehicle. I stated in no uncertain terms that "I do not consent to any searches of my private property." This didn't seem to matter. My car keys were physically removed from my handcuffed hands and the beta-cop then proceeded to search my car with a torch. God knows what they were expecting to find. Deep down I think I was simply profiled as a drug-dealer due to driving a relatively-nice car at night-time in an "underprivileged" area. I believe the cops were desperately trying to find something, anything, to make my detention and search lawful. As it stood right now, I was positive it wasn't.

Now, in my job, I work with children and young adults. At this point, as if by fate, a teenager I had worked with in the past drove into the same car park!!! I smiled and said "Hello" as he drove in. Alpha-cop spotted this and asked him who I was. The name he gave corroborated with my license. He also asked in what capacity he knew me. When he replied, I'm hoping the cop felt about an inch tall.

The handcuffs were then removed as they had established my identity without my assistance whatsoever. The other cop was still finishing off the search of my vehicle. They found nothing of course. I was informed half-heartedly by Alpha-cop 5 minutes later that I had been "De-arrested" and "Sorry, I almost forgot to tell you that." Yeah, funny.

We than had a discussion as I smoked a cigarette (I asked if I could smoke, of course. I'm a polite man.) about my insurance premiums for my car, and whether or not 3 points would help that. I informed the constable that I had fantastic insurance through a group discount scheme. He guessed at my premium, he was well off the mark and I smiled. I revealed to the Constable in the "wash-up" that I have been undertaking study around law and I work with individuals that have practised law and study it further. His response? "Well, that's the problem, a little knowledge can lead to a lot of trouble".

During the vehicle search, all beta-cop found was a letter with the address of my new premises on. This did not tie up with my driving license. They then informed me that this also, was an offence under the Road Traffic Act. I said that I had only recently moved. They strongly recommended that I update this as soon as possible. My belongings were returned and the constables seemed to be happy. They then said that I could go and that I should watch my speed in future!? I was not charged with anything. I received no paperwork of any kind or any points.

Now, at the time, I was pretty content with the outcome. No victim no crime and no voluntary consent. However, things didn't sit right with me about the way I had been treated at all. I went home and did some homework on the PACE Act, as after this incident I realised that I really didn't know it well enough and the Constables that evening weren't exactly willing to enlighten me.

I understand that the Road Traffic Act essentially strips you of most of your rights. However, the Police acted far too prematurely and I am certain rendered my arrest and search unlawful? If I had refused then of course I appreciate I could be detained. In some ways, it may have been fortunate I had my driving license in my pocket? However, doesn't producing this card actually create joinder and therefore consent to the Act? Maybe I was lucky, but, I still am not happy with my treatment.

Here are my gripes...

1. Why did the cop decide to arrest me whilst I was still asking questions? I had not refused to give my details. (Why I wish I had recorded EVERYTHING)
2. The police said they originally detained me for speeding. I was shown no proof of this AND the constable said he had reasonable suspicion to believe that I had ingested an illegal substance yet they DIDN'T BREATHALISE ME?! Isn't that standard practice for a speeding pull?
3. I received no notice from the Police about the search of my vehicle, what station they were attached to and what they intended to find upon search.
4. The Police did not identify themselves to me.
5. Handcuffs?! No reading of my rights?!

Formal complaint via the IPCC lodged and acknowledged. Interview is some point this week. Will keep you all posted if interested?

Peace

*Shinkansen*
Shinkansen
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Another lying, uninformed, oppressive bully in a uniform.

Postby pedawson » Mon Oct 24, 2011 7:50 pm

What was the point that was raised regarding 'the registered keeper?'
I drive a vehicle and the owner is in Australia, so I am NOT the registered keeper. I am a traveller in a none commercial mode of transport, fully insured, taxed licensed and mot'ed.
Are they in some way saying I am NOT lawfully allowed to travel in a motorised form of transport as the driver?

Their reference to this is somewhat confusing. What did they mean by it?

Namste, rev;
Don't be surprised to discover that luck favours those who are prepared
User avatar
pedawson
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Another lying, uninformed, oppressive bully in a uniform.

Postby Shinkansen » Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:43 pm

Well, that was his justification for arresting me under the PACE Act... as they couldn't establish my identity and/or address in order to send a summons.

Great point though, I remember clear as day him reciting the "registered keeper" line to me. I can lawfully drive a vehicle not being the registered keeper. By this point though I was already cuffed and gave him my "protest and duress" line. They'd made their mind up obviously.

I will raise this point at my IPCC interview though, many thanks for your assistance.

Peace

*Shinkansen*
Shinkansen
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:17 pm

Previous

Return to Police Jurisdiction

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests