• Home
  • About Inspector Gadget
  • Online Shop
  • Ruralshire
  • The Book

POLICE INSPECTOR BLOG

Doughnuts & Diversity in riot-torn England, 2012.

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« “Sally Forth You Rotter”
‘Five Year’ Police To Get Diamond Jubilee Medal »

High Court – PACE Clock – OMG – HELP!

June 27, 2011 by inspectorgadget

Mad Hatter
No wonder you’re late. Why, this watch is exactly two days slow.

Is anyone else running around like crazy maniacs trying to find out what the recent High Court decision on the PACE clock actually means?

Here in Ruralshire, we have decided to go for our favourite option, bury our heads in the sand and hope it’s all a horrid mistake. Other Forces have told their officers to stop bailing suspects immediately. Meanwhile, most of the remaining police budget for 2011 will now be spent on hugely expensive legal advice about what to do next.

For the uninitiated, it seems that the PACE clock on a magistrates extension will now run into any bail time a suspect is given. This effectively means that if we have to delay the investigation for any reason, like the victim is unconscious and can’t speak to us or the CCTV cannot be downloaded, or the victim is a child who requires a specialist interview, or we need something translated, or we need a computer or phone diagnosed and checked for child sex images, then it’s tough luck.

We will have only the initial police PACE hours to get the whole investigation done, or rather the bits of it we want to speak to the suspect about, or we have to go it alone without a suspect interview. The other option is to leave the suspect at large, possibly giving them time to commit further offences or flee.

Before I joined the police I would have thought this a clear mistake, or maybe an oversight, or that we have misunderstood something that people far cleverer than us have said. Now I’m ready to believe anything. As with most CJ decisions these days, there are only two groups people who will gain from this. One group are the criminals themselves and the other? Well, just follow the money (Clue – they will be the ones charging huge sums of money to sort it all out).

Advertisement

Share this:

  • Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Posted in Perverting the Course of Justice, published by Monday Books, is available in all good bookstores, at amazon.co.uk and as an e-Book. | 210 Comments

210 Responses

  1. on June 27, 2011 at 7:39 pm No Duff

    first


    • on June 28, 2011 at 9:45 pm Frustrated PS

      My interpretation is that anything up to the supernintendo’s 36 hours is as it was but if a magistrate authorises say a further 12 hours detention then the investigation must be complete 12 hours after “the time the warrant was issued”. Its all about the wording on the warrant which says “You, the constables of blah blah Police Force, are hereby authorised to keep the above named defendant in police detention for XX hours from the time of issue of this warrant. Interpreting this literally means the scrotes clock runs out 12 hours after the warrant was issued and bailing has no effect at all. I think McCoombe has dropped a rather large bollock and has made his decision without looking at the consequences. However we stll have the power to re-arrest with new evidence, which presumably is not already available hence the reason for bail in the first place. Also might of done us a favour because whilst out commiting further offences the scrotes wont be on police bail so we cant be criticised for not dealing with them expeditiously and letting them out to commit crime in the meantime!


    • on June 29, 2011 at 5:15 pm fonsat

      great to b first,congratz


  2. on June 27, 2011 at 7:40 pm A Polis Man

    first


    • on June 27, 2011 at 7:45 pm A Polis Man

      Damn and I read the post first to!!!

      The advice I saw was that it applies to extensions granted by Magistrates, (as in the 36 hr and 96 hr extensions) as they are only applicable from the relevant time, i.e. arrival at the police station. So the extension only applies from the absolute date – (how it was written not how it was meant, Zander has a good comment piece on it).

      The actual effect is that there is no bail possible on a magistrates extension and some farces have decided this applies to Supt extensions as well.


      • on June 27, 2011 at 7:47 pm No Duff

        I didn’t read it first.

        A better man might feel guilty at a cheap victory, but it’s a ruthless game, being “first”


        • on June 27, 2011 at 7:50 pm A Polis Man

          No complaints amateur mistake really!


      • on June 27, 2011 at 7:50 pm inspectorgadget

        OK, this makes the madness clearer, I have amended the original post, but it’s still slightly odd?


  3. on June 27, 2011 at 7:40 pm feral

    Ok, somewhere near the top but I haven’t read the post properly.


    • on June 27, 2011 at 7:41 pm feral

      3rd is good. Would’ve been 1st if Lightyear hadn’t distracted me. :)


      • on June 27, 2011 at 8:02 pm feral

        Forgive my ignorance, has this ‘new’ thing just been/or is likely to be brought in now/soon?


  4. on June 27, 2011 at 7:41 pm BeePee

    Turd??….


  5. on June 27, 2011 at 7:42 pm No Duff

    Any link to the actual court report or story with the reasons/background behind this astoundingly ridiculous idea?


    • on June 27, 2011 at 7:46 pm inspectorgadget

      Can’t find any but I have checked with several other police Bloggers and they all say the same information has come down to them in their Forces.


      • on June 27, 2011 at 7:55 pm No Duff

        Believe this may be it.

        http://www.crimeline.info/

        Top Word Doc: GMP V Hookway.

        Found it via criminalsolictor dot net……

        I feel so dirty.


        • on June 27, 2011 at 8:05 pm GPC

          The Detention Clock – An Unhelpful Decision Which Surely is Wrong Print E-mail
          Written by Criminal Law and Justice Weekly
          Saturday, 18 June 2011 00:00
          Michael Zander considers a ruling holding that the detention clock continues to run while a suspect is on bail from the police station

          Sometimes one asks oneself, how did the Judge manage to arrive at that result? The question is raised by Mr Justice McCombe’s Divisional Court decision on May 19, in R (Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police) and City of Salford Magistrates Court and Paul Hookway, not yet reported. The decision affects any case in which the police want to detain a suspect for questioning after having given him bail to enable them to make further inquiries.

          GMP are having “Gold meetings” about this – and seem to think it applies to Magistrate and Supers extensions….


          • on June 27, 2011 at 8:07 pm GPC

            GMP also believe that the clock runs on these extensions when the offender is at hospital too…

            Judge McCombe really has dropped a bollock here – what was the daft th’awd bugger thinking ????

            GMP considering an appeal but there is a question mark over whether they can


          • on June 27, 2011 at 9:35 pm Met DC

            There was also a notice on the Met Police intranet regarding this. It was all very cagey and avoided saying anything that might put the cat among the pigeons, but this is all being discussed at a very senior level in the force.

            Like everyone else, I can’t understand the reasoning behind it – and it must surely be the subject of an appeal.


  6. on June 27, 2011 at 7:42 pm Mjolinir

    First to start the clock on all claims


  7. on June 27, 2011 at 7:42 pm Yesyes

    So close again!


  8. on June 27, 2011 at 7:43 pm Arphamoe

    Lunatics, asylum? Who’s got the keys?? Top something!!


  9. on June 27, 2011 at 7:43 pm BeePee

    This has got to be April fools??
    So everyone is going to have to go to court for an extension?, someones gotta be making some cash out of this little beauty!


  10. on June 27, 2011 at 7:45 pm Mung Daal

    Top 20!


  11. on June 27, 2011 at 7:51 pm Deano

    Forgive my ignorance, how many hours could I ‘use up’ by claiming I need an interpretor, then a psychiatrist (PTSD caused by an incident a number of years ago that has recently come back to haunt me due to…Ken Clark being on TV), then requiring special assistance (handicapped), & so on. It appears as if the ‘powers that be’ are spending more time thinking of ways to stop the police rather than stopping the criminals.
    For the amusing game…….somewhere!


  12. on June 27, 2011 at 7:52 pm inspectorgadget

    it applies to extensions granted by Magistrates, (as in the 36 hr and 96 hr extensions) as they are only applicable from the relevant time, i.e. arrival at the police station. So the extension only applies from the absolute date.

    The actual effect is that there is no bail possible on a magistrates extension and some farces have decided this applies to Supt extensions as well.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 7:45 pm Anon

      Some go further and are interpreting this to mean ALL cases. If that is right then farewell police bail. This is what happens when a civil court judge meddles in criminal matters.


  13. on June 27, 2011 at 8:00 pm pj21

    Top 20, okay then.


  14. on June 27, 2011 at 8:04 pm The Sultan

    You don’t have to deal with your suspect within 24 hours at all and you can still apply for an extra 12 hours from the Superintendent. If the situation warrants it, further time up to 96 hours can be applied for from a Magistrates Court. What this ruling does mean is that the suspect should not be released on police bail whilst they they are on an extended period of detention granted by the Magistrates. This shouldn’t have any effect on most, if not all, investigations; if you were prepared to release them on bail in the first place then you don’t have sufficient evidence to charge them. When you get the extra evidence they can then be arrested on new evidemce and the 24 hour clock starts again. To be on the safe side some forces have also applied this to a Super’s extension.


    • on June 27, 2011 at 8:09 pm feral

      Oh ok. That wraps this blog up.

      What’s next Gadge? :)


    • on June 27, 2011 at 8:44 pm GPC

      Unfortunately it will be “kerching” time for the lawyers and criminals in prison who had an extension, were bailed. then reinterviewed and charged !!!!

      Standby for loads of custody record requests off the criminal solicitors ….. this will be as big as payment protection insurance (ppi) and coal miners injury claims !


      • on June 29, 2011 at 10:38 pm Alistair Sloan

        If that happens I can very well see the Government rushing through emergency legislation that either reverses the decision entirely or blocks retrospective claims.

        However, those recent convicted having been bailed following a magistrates extension and then interviewed upon answering bail may very well have grounds of appeal, especially if anything said in any interview post-bail was relied upon by the Crown in evidence.

        This may well be England’s Cadder v HM Advocate.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 10:47 am CP

      The Sultan has summed it it correctly. As usual there is a load of knee jerking going on (in particular here in GMP). Basically someone took the pi** getting a mags extension before bailing them. We didn’t have a leg to stand on in court. When the dust settles it won’t be as bad as it initially seems.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 6:55 pm Ruralplod

        You want to see knee-jerk? I (and my prisoner), got royally shafted by the misinterpretation of this ruling. It turns out our force thought it applied to the first 24 hours in custody as well as any subsequent, so over the weekend, our official position was that all investigations (however complex) should be completed within 24 hours of arrest.
        I discovered this after requesting someone was street-bailed to me. Rather than do that, someone decided to take him into custody and call me at home. Simple, I thought – just bail him back to me, so I can deal when I’m on duty. I was surprised to find that I wasn’t allowed to bail him. After much arguing, the solution was to waste the first 7 hours of his PACE clock, then drive him to a different police station, where the custody sergeant’s brain hadn’t dribbled out of their ear, and bail him from there (leaving him to make his own way back to the station he had just been transported from). I try not to use the phrase ‘broken Britain’, but there are occasions when it’s appropriate…


  15. on June 27, 2011 at 8:16 pm paper shuffler

    top 20 !!!!! omg i have finally made something out of my life !!!

    Anyway, I am glad you cleared that up for me boss. I read about the decision in the paper and could not make head nor tail of the leagalise goblydygook. However i tis now as clear as a bell.
    And ffs how on earth is this going to play out in practice? This is yet more sheer lunacy from the judicary. I only wish the mop would realise what a stinking mess the criminal justice system in this country is in . I recently gave evidence re a s5 and assault police on myself and a colegue. The dp was a cage fighter, 6ft 3 and 17 stone. I am 6ft 2 14 stone and response bobby who plays a bit of rugby. My collegue is 5ft 6 female and around 9 stone piss wet through. WE got criticised for cuffing the monster before he eventually kicked off, kicking us both in the head !!!! The cps asked us to drop the assault police and accept a resist. ( They where told by us both where exactly they could get off) This despite there being cctv of me taking him to the ground whist he was cuffed as he attenpted to headbutt me. once on the ground he plain as day kicks me full on in the face all on cctv !!!! I was explaining to some family and friends over the weeknd what the cjs was all about. they couldnt pick their jaws off the floor by the end. A FARCE from start to finish !!!!


  16. on June 27, 2011 at 8:28 pm Ecky "3 Milestones" Thump

    My force have said that’s it going for a Judicial Revue (i think that’s what it said), and it’s business as normal until the decision comes through.


    • on June 27, 2011 at 11:04 pm Angrymet

      I would love to see a Judicial Revue. All that red velvet and ermine flapping around!


      • on June 27, 2011 at 11:10 pm PC Lightyear

        HA! Kin wet meself there bud


  17. on June 27, 2011 at 8:32 pm MetNugget

    You’ll be pleased to know that the Met has set up an emergency ‘Gold Team’ headed by some deputy assis commish (or similar rank) with a bunch of legal geniuses to figure this out.

    *sigh*


  18. on June 27, 2011 at 8:34 pm Anotherblackrat

    Thank God I’m not a custody officer and have to sort this one out (and by God, I mean whoever your deity is, or not, I can hear the diversity trainers shiny ar$e turning in his lumbar supported swivel chair now). In my defence it has been a long time since my last course and the old “I’ve just had a Court warning for that day” still works.
    I know it’s off topic but would someone please have a word wth the Dog Section and point out that this sort of thing
    ( news.aol.co.uk/main-news/story/police-dogs-die-after-car-ordeal/1866318/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cuk-ws-bb%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk1%7C69000 )
    really does shoot us in the foot. It’s only been on AOL 2 hours and already it’s got over 350 comments and none are good.


    • on June 27, 2011 at 9:05 pm Jack Regan

      That officers actions do defy belief. If it had been some Chav shutting his pitbull in his jamjar whilst nipping into Asda to do the weekly shop/nicking then into weatherspoons for a bevvy, waylaid by some offensive text sending and a punch up…….I could almost make some sense of such a tragedy.
      But this was a trained Met Police Dog handler……..A Professional, I am staggered by his utter stupidity, when he parked his vehicle he also parked his brain.


    • on June 27, 2011 at 9:15 pm inspectorgadget

      turning in his lumbar supported swivel chair

      LOL LOL LOL so true


    • on June 27, 2011 at 10:20 pm Frankie

      God that is sad…and ridiculous, FFS, it was so hot today how could they let that happen? That said, I can only imagine how terrible that officer is feeling now.

      Must say all the dog handlers I work with are so good with their dogs – back of vans always left open, fans on etc.

      I don’t understand any of this bail/extension decision thing, sounds crazy, have a headache now trying to work out if it makes any sense. Should have known better!


    • on June 28, 2011 at 9:33 am Pocket Notebook Boy

      Re the dog deaths – some ‘interesting’ comments from JuliaM at the bottom of Gadget’s previous post.

      You may wish to peruse and comment on her blog (click on her name) where she describes Sgt Craven’s suicide attempt as ‘tactical’. How lovely.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 11:24 am No Duff

        Melvin agrees with her posts.

        ‘Nuff said.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 11:24 am feral

        I wouldn’t bother. The person (JuliaM) is obviously a loony. Actually making suggestions that the officer concerned should have tried harder at attempting suicide?

        Christ all friday, what is the bloody world coming to?


        • on June 28, 2011 at 7:44 pm Mjolinir

          Probably ‘bad manners’ to reproduce here what I have sent to the “JuliaM” blog (but IMHO, there has been plenty of THAT already on the subject of Sgt Craven)

          //Julia – I have NOT read any of the other comments on here, and do not intend to.

          You ‘believe in’ freedom of speech – so do I.

          I also believe your posting about Sgt Craven making a //tactical ‘suicide bid’// was crass, mistaken, hurtful, and unworthy – but it’s your blog, and you can post whatever you like.

          And I can stop reading it.//


          • on June 28, 2011 at 8:40 pm feral

            Mj, You are right. But I could think of far better words to describe what some have written on that blog.

            To come across someone that has attempted suicide ( for whatever reasons) is heartbreaking.

            To initiate that the person could have made a better attempt at killing themselves rather than the ‘feeble’ way they did is just diabolical.

            I despair at this lack of compassion. I am so full of disbelief, I don’t know what else to say.


  19. on June 27, 2011 at 8:41 pm Colin

    You Cops in Englandshire are spoilt anyways. Us poor buggers North of the border used to only have 6 hours although it’s been extended to 12 now we have to let suspects get legal advice..

    Can you image, 6 hours of custody time before you had to charge them or let them go. And none of that bail to return malarky.


    • on June 27, 2011 at 8:46 pm GPC

      If you’re in Nothern Constabulary let me know and I will swop for a posting in a major Northern City


      • on June 28, 2011 at 3:43 pm Colin

        I left South London for the Scottish Highlands…. You think i’d ever swop….?

        Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.


    • on June 27, 2011 at 9:16 pm inspectorgadget

      Yes, but don’t you feed them deep fried mars bars to kill them off early up there?


      • on June 27, 2011 at 9:48 pm retiredtothesun

        ooooooh Inspector, isnt that a stereotypical racist reply? The diversity bod will fall off his twirling lumbar suporting chair….


        • on June 28, 2011 at 12:12 am Agent Zig Zag

          And why do stereotypes exist, racial or otherwise? Is is because so many of them have more than an element or two of truth? I have never seen deep fried mars bars or deep fried haggis on a chip shop menu other than in Caledonia.


          • on June 28, 2011 at 12:17 am PC Lightyear

            they do deep fried mars bar in Blackpool.

            dis-fkin-gusting


          • on June 28, 2011 at 7:01 am Stonehead

            It’s not just deep-fried Mars Bars and haggis. Our chippy—we’re in Aberdeenshire—also does deep-fried puddings (black, white and red), deep-fried pizza (take two slices of frozen pizza, batter, and drop in hot fat), deep-fried pies (thaw a frozen pie in the microwave, drop it in hot fat), deep-fried burgers (yes, batter a burger and drop it in hot fat) and the list goes on. And if you gob off about the lack of healthy alternatives, they’ll even batter your coupon! ;-)


          • on June 28, 2011 at 12:02 pm Agent Zig Zag

            Stonehead,

            My word I never knew half of these things existed! Deep fried pies and pizza? FFS . The Scots cannot be that stupid to be eating this rubbish, can they? Or is it only after a few bottles of buckie?

            And as for Blackpool, I’ve never been there.


        • on June 28, 2011 at 12:10 pm GPC

          “”"PC Lightyear

          they do deep fried mars bar in Blackpool.

          dis-fkin-gusting”"”

          That’s because loads of Jocks go to Blackpool for their summer holidays….


  20. on June 27, 2011 at 9:09 pm Jimmy

    We got an email from the bosses which clearly explained it. It said BALLS!


  21. on June 27, 2011 at 9:27 pm Ex-RUC

    This ruling is utterly bizarre. What on earth was the Judge thinking of?


  22. on June 27, 2011 at 9:30 pm the quiet one

    To The Sultan,i have been informed that any evidence that you were already aware of but could not gather at the time would not be considered as new evidence,therefore no power to arrest.i know this is all new and subject to change.


  23. on June 27, 2011 at 9:46 pm Barney Rubble

    Top 30 ish???? Woohoo a seasons best….

    Once again the handcuffs are applied to the cops. But lets not restart that topic……..

    This country is now nothing short of a joke. Its being lead by totally incompetent fools, that would struggle to run a bath. The Great British judicial system has more holes in it, than one of them dutch cheese thingys.

    The world is laughing at us …………. and who can blame them??


  24. on June 27, 2011 at 9:49 pm Met DC

    There was also a notice on the Met Police intranet regarding this. It was all very cagey and avoided saying anything that might put the cat among the pigeons, but this is all being discussed at a very senior level in the force.

    Like everyone else, I can’t understand the reasoning behind it – and it must surely be the subject of an appeal. The murder squad will be up in arms.

    The basic effect will be, in murder investigations, that you will in all likelihood either have to bail within the first 36 hours (or 24 if they decide that this applies to Supt extensions) because you won’t be able to do it if you have to extend detention through the courts. Either that, or you’ll have to release on bail and then re-arrest as soon as you get fresh evidence to reset the clock – but all of this is likely to see suspects spending more time in custody – as that “reset clock” could then, itself, be extended.

    A clear ruling is needed to stop this getting silly.


  25. on June 27, 2011 at 10:08 pm PTT

    I don’t think it’s as bad as people are panicking about…

    It only effects warrants of further detention, and says that once an extra 36 hours (or however many) are granted, the extension expires from when the warrant is granted i.e. the clock on the detention warrant does not stop when the suspect is bailed like with the basic 24 hour clock.

    In other words, you can’t use up the remaining hours of the warrant when they answer bail. The only unlikely exception would be if they answered bail before the warrant expired.

    Ultimately if you get new evidence that wasn’t available when they first in detention you can lock them up again anyway.

    There’s panic in custody offices all over the land and some sergeants in my force have been NFA’ing people left, right, and centre because they have insufficient evidence to charge and for some reason believe that they can no longer bail people for further enquiries. Madness.

    It does need some clarification though, especially with regards to superintendent extensions.


    • on June 27, 2011 at 11:38 pm PC Lightyear

      “I don’t think it’s as bad as people are panicking about”

      agreed

      but it’s another chip away at us and policing effectiveness

      everyday someone’s trying to make the job a bit harder.

      F’ck em – let them have anarchy.

      Fop haired pasty thin lawyers will be the first to be devoured by the predatory scum they keep out of gaol.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 9:29 am Met DC

      It depends where you are in the system. For the majority of offences, yes – it won’t make much difference – but with serious crimes it will have a significant impact.

      If the principle is extended to Supt extensions as well, it will end up having far greater impact; it is certainly not uncommon with a lot more “serious volume” (if that’s the word) offences, such as Robbery, to have to get that extra 12 hours to avoid bailing somebody.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 6:19 pm HatedbytheDailyMail

      yep, that’s about right. I am told my force has binned street bail, and the use of ALL 47(3) bail. I can only pray this is some horrible mistake………..


  26. on June 27, 2011 at 10:33 pm Onceaplod

    No doubt you`ll do a separate headline on this skanky bitch but I just wanted to mention this

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-13925127

    The fact that she turned up in court dressed like that says everything you need to know about the thick skank.

    And once again the defending brief trots out the same defence (is it a defence) that “she feels dreadful and is sorry”. No Judith Curry (defending) she`s not sorry and she doesn`t feel one little bit dreadful. She`s probably pissing up her dole tonight down the local cause it was all a bit of a laugh and she got on the news so now she`s famous innit.

    Seriously, I`ll buy the beers if she goes inside for 12 weeks.


    • on June 27, 2011 at 10:52 pm jimmy

      Strangely they have put the photo of a future police commissionaire on that story. strange.


    • on June 27, 2011 at 11:05 pm tattyfalarr

      “She said she had since written a letter of apology to Mr Rathband.”

      Warning…perhaps offensive rant incoming…no offence intended. I really can’t quite believe I read that…it defies belief and common-sense.

      Firstly…Oh no she didn’t write an apology off her own bat…some stinking dipshit twerp of a defence lawyer advised her judges are very very stupid, will believe such acts of false contrition are entirely genuine and it will absolutely go in her favour to lie as much possible.

      “Shake and cry if you have to but look and act sorry..it works, love, trust me…seen it a thousand times.” Utter wanker.

      And secondly…really now…and please tell me I can’t be the only one who is thinking this….what the fuckity fuck is this braindead subhuman DNA experiment doing WRITING A FRICKING LETTER to a BLIND MAN ?!

      Could there BE anything LESS appropriate ? Totally taking the piss in my book and should earn her extra time for Disability Hate Crime. It’s sick.

      /rant over


      • on June 27, 2011 at 11:35 pm PC Lightyear

        She shouldve dictated it on a tape….. at least then she couldve given David a laugh at her chavvish ways


        • on June 28, 2011 at 12:43 am tattyfalarr

          http://riot2011frontlines.tumblr.com/post/6682186192/a-e-r-nurses-thoughts-on-an-instigators-apology

          http://riot2011frontlines.tumblr.com/post/6860088383/please-stop-apologizing-a-police-officers-letter-to

          I know this is stretching the O/T to be even more so but the above are great examples of appropriate responses to inappropriate “apologies”.

          The police officer in the second link sums all 3 scenarios ‘ere mentioned nicely though… “Actions speak louder than words. What are you going to do about that?”


          • on June 28, 2011 at 12:06 pm Agent Zig Zag

            My respect to that officer.


          • on June 28, 2011 at 7:41 pm Tony F

            I agree with Zig Zag.


  27. on June 27, 2011 at 10:48 pm Reacher

    All a load of bollouex. Recommend head in sand best way forward.
    Suppression is a great emotion regulator.

    Sirens on C4 showing what Ambo guys and gals get up to. Top notch if you like black humour. Up, y h***y and down. Classic.


  28. on June 27, 2011 at 11:08 pm DB

    In other news, Grahame Maxwell, North Yorks’ top cop, comes out with all pop guns blazing in defence of his gross misconduct, which, incidentally, cost council tax payers £200,000.

    “I’m the right man for the job”, he says, “it’s time to put this behind us and it’s business as usual.”

    North Yorks has announced plans to ‘forcibly retire’ 210 police officers during the four-year period to 2015, including 105 constables, 58 sergeants, 33 inspectors, seven chief inspectors, four superintendents and three chief superintendents

    “Business as usual”.

    Quite.


    • on June 27, 2011 at 11:10 pm DB

      If you (really) want to see CC Maxwell in ‘action’ defending decision to stay on, despite his gross misconduct, then fill yer boots: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01265lt/Look_North_(Yorkshire)_27_06_2011/


      • on June 28, 2011 at 7:21 am Ex-Peeler

        He called it a police “Force”. Surely he meant “Service”.


  29. on June 27, 2011 at 11:32 pm PC Lightyear

    Is it me, or does every week or so someone come up with a policy, law, stated case etc that makes policing that little bit more impossible?


    • on June 28, 2011 at 12:10 am Jack Regan

      You are right Buzz, if it’s. Not the Govt or the judiciary screwing you over it stories about the criminals otherwise known as CC’s who somehow manage to cling onto their jobs when any PC or skipper would have been dismissed for doing the same. …..then just when you think it’s safe to come out of the bunker, the Lib/scams announce that Throbber Paddick , who came. 3rd at the last Mayoral elections is their preferred candidate next time around……….but only to prevent the equally throbbing Lemsip Oatcake from having a go.
      It’s not just the plod………whole countries f***ed


      • on June 28, 2011 at 12:15 am Agent Zig Zag

        Lemsip Oatcake! Thanks for that Jack, it has made me chuckle.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 12:16 am PC Lightyear

        Long live Mayor Boris – met him once and he shook my hand so hard he almost pulled my arm off the mad b’stard


  30. on June 28, 2011 at 12:38 am Oceanexplorer

    I had a bail to return this week and was told that in order to further interview him I would need to re-arrest under section 47(2) of PACE and to use the term new in the loosest sense possible, even though sec 47(7) quite clearly states that we cannot further arrest them on new evidence if they have turned up at the station answering to bail. Surely they would still be under arrest and my PACE clock continues from the initial arrest.

    I think the case Richardson v West Midlands now means we can’t nick people who attend a police station voluntarily and that we should caution plus there. I’m led to believe this is common practice in the home counties but not in the metropolis.

    But I’ve been told we have sought legal advice……that makes me feel better…..ahem!


    • on June 28, 2011 at 9:33 am Met DC

      You can still arrest, so long as it’s necessary. Richardson v CC West Midlands didn’t change anything significant; Richardson was simply arrested in order to be interviewed. His fingerprints, etc, were not required for evidential purposes in this case. As such, the judge did not agree that his arrest was “necessary” for a “prompt and effective investigation”, as Richardson had voluntarily turned up at two different police stations, and was apparently cooperating with police requests.

      A lot of officers forget the Caution +3, when all they really want to do is interview somebody.

      All that Richardson v CC West Midlands does is remind officers of s24 PACE criteria when dealing with voluntary attenders.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 12:18 pm PC Lightyear

        I think part of the problem is that nicks in the Met aren’t geared up for caution plus 3.

        You have to go through custody to get to interview rooms, everything is set up for arrest and custody numbers, even simple things like getting a URN for non arrested jobs. No one seems to know how to do it on an average borough


        • on June 28, 2011 at 4:02 pm Met DC

          I certainly agree with you there. My station is rather unique in that you can get to the interview rooms by going through a back door without having to travel through custody.

          Getting a URN should just be a case of getting one out of the 45000-series binder – if anyone knows where to find it! :)


          • on June 28, 2011 at 4:37 pm PC Lightyear

            “Getting a URN should just be a case of getting one out of the 45000-series binder – if anyone knows where to find it!”

            Say what?


    • on June 28, 2011 at 9:40 pm MPS asnt

      Let’s not forget that an arrest is a figure and that is often all we are judged on generally. Forget all the other ‘stuff’ we do day to day, if an “easy body” comes to the front office they will be nicked and booked in……..Caution 3..huh!!!


      • on June 30, 2011 at 2:00 pm oldwilliam

        Re-read what the man said… “Richardson v CC West Midlands”… easy body or not, it’s unlawful, and the going rate for unlawful detention is currently £5,000/hour… please tell me which nick you are referring to, and I will be there faster than the first comment on posts to this blog… :)


  31. on June 28, 2011 at 1:04 am Frustrated copper

    ‘It appears as if the ‘powers that be’ are spending more time thinking of ways to stop the police rather than stopping the criminals.’

    A lot of things seem that way. It makes ‘being a good copper’ very hard, and being a bit of a robot very easy.


  32. on June 28, 2011 at 3:45 am Mjolinir

    @DB (11:10pm) – Mr Maxwell’s ‘piece to camera’ –

    “I’m the best man for the job” – worrying (if true).

    Incidentally – I suggest everybody ‘bookmark’ that link – and carefully transcribe his comments- it may come in handy next time YOU find yourself in the frame for naughtiness –

    “I didn’t realise at the time I was doing anything wrong, but since then what I do accept is is that should have really seen how other people would view it ..”


  33. on June 28, 2011 at 5:52 am coppers son

    This is lunatic- should I ever transgress I have just been handed a get out of jail free card.

    Correct me if I am wrong-
    I have a demonstble permanent inoperable back condition 5 veratbrae long.
    It periodically induces intense spasmodic pain.
    If arrested I would clearly require a doctor and would be unable to be interviewed until seen.
    One look at me and my medical record and he is going to pump me full of pain killing medication which also makes me drowsey and unable to drive or as my solicitor will inform you – answer questions.
    Bang goes the 24hrs
    Let us hope that CC’s are the only criminals who follow this blog.

    Good job I am not.


  34. on June 28, 2011 at 5:53 am coppers son

    demonstrable- damn fingers


  35. on June 28, 2011 at 6:55 am metcountymounty

    You’re all tossers!!!!!!!!!

    Brian, where are you honey? I’m sorry I didn’t make it home for that lovely chicken dinner which you made for me, you litte Paddick you.


  36. on June 28, 2011 at 7:00 am shijuro

    Metcounty – fancy a sleepover ?

    I do planetary sciences and I know a “heavenly body” when I see it


    • on June 28, 2011 at 10:35 am Pocket Notebook Boy

      Why are you talking to yourself (check your avatars) and pretending to be other people?

      You freakish twunt.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 10:41 am feral

        LOL! That’s what I thought. Worrying how many schizo’s there seem to be.


        • on June 28, 2011 at 1:30 pm ALondonMOP

          that’s the problem, you can never tell how many of them there actually are…….


  37. on June 28, 2011 at 7:54 am Pocket Notebook Boy

    The only clock I care about now is the one that tells me I have 33 shifts left and then I am out of this madness.

    Job and country are fooked.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 11:22 am No Duff

      pfff, try 40 years, homes!!

      That’s how I roll.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 12:14 pm PC Lightyear

      lucky bastard


      • on June 28, 2011 at 1:23 pm Pocket Notebook Boy

        I shall mention you in my memoirs Buzz…


        • on June 28, 2011 at 4:36 pm PC Lightyear

          Thanks awfully – I’ll read it at work!


    • on June 28, 2011 at 1:36 pm soud1

      Jealously doesn’t even begin to describe how I felt when I read that.
      Brilliant


  38. on June 28, 2011 at 8:59 am Conor

    There’s a third group who will benefit. Total innocent people like Jo Yeates’ landlord who was kept as long as possible.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 9:42 am Pocket Notebook Boy

      Yes, in order to question him and investigate fully, because if we hadn’t done so and he turned out to be responsible the media would have chewed us a new asshole.

      And it wasn’t us who splashed his name all over the front pages and revealed his identity to the world, so try your little tantrum elsewhere.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 10:23 am Special Dibble

        Told!


  39. on June 28, 2011 at 10:06 am BeePee

    Off topic but made me larf!
    Cop Squad Sky 1

    Cop to scrote after flattening him during scrap:
    ” Do you have anything on you, you shouldnt have?”
    Scrote:
    ” er yeah, Cops….”

    Classic!


    • on June 28, 2011 at 8:45 pm Reacher

      Hah! bit heavy mind since there is more than one.


  40. on June 28, 2011 at 10:49 am Bewildered in NZ

    Man I was just sharing with a colleague today about some of the ‘good’ things that British Police does…yes there are some. Now I read this and breathe a sigh of relief that down here ’tis a lot simpler. Arrest and before the next available court, arrest and 19A summons to Court for a day in teh next two moths or arrest, court, release (Bail conditions) gather further evidence etc. Easy. The only clock we have is the one on the wall that sometimes works…


  41. on June 28, 2011 at 11:51 am larry

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2008691/Sergeant-Ian-Craven-suicide-bid-police-dogs-die-heat-car.html

    More pressing matters, the sarge has made a massive mistake, but needs help


    • on June 28, 2011 at 12:10 pm Agent Zig Zag

      The TV news has reported that that ‘handler’ is in hospital with hand wounds. Perhaps another dog bit him?


    • on June 28, 2011 at 12:26 pm JuliaM

      A massive mistake? Aren’t they reporting that it’s his SECOND massive mistake?


      • on June 28, 2011 at 12:31 pm feral

        Don’t you think he knows it?!?

        Perhaps you should pop down the hospital, borrow a scalpel or something sharp edged and encourage him to finish the job!!!

        FFS.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 12:43 pm PC Lightyear

        Suggestions on how to stop this happening in the future then O Queen of all Police knowledge?

        Come on then let’s have it?

        and more than just “Should’ve sacked him and gaoled him first time round” crap….

        Proper constructive input:

        Policy?

        Equipment?

        Training?

        Funding?

        Supervision?

        Facilities?

        Mental health monitoring?

        Length and pattern of shifts?


        • on June 28, 2011 at 12:56 pm Agent Zig Zag

          PC Lightyear,

          You have missed out that vital component that Gadget and many of you keep coming back to and posting on this blog. That being ‘common sense’ and completely lacking by this officer on two occasions now.


        • on June 28, 2011 at 12:57 pm Ex Chief Inspector

          Can I suggest you pop over to her blog where she gives us the benefit of her obviously considerable experience? Her latest quote regarding the whole sad affair is ‘Sack him (when he recovers from his tactical ‘suicide attempt’), and sack the men responsible for failing to sack him the first time…’
          Still, she does seem to have all the qualities to be an armchair gold. Bet she’s an absolute joy to be near….


        • on June 28, 2011 at 1:19 pm JuliaM

          You made a sensible suggestion on the other thread – force policy that dogs be unloaded into air-conned secure kennels when attending police stations.

          If extra funding is required to do this, then sack a few of the chair-polishers that you claim infest your HQs to pay for it…


        • on June 28, 2011 at 2:20 pm The Sybarite

          This is a sad story but I am sick of people in this country who seem to care more for animals than their own species. I feel sorry for the dog handler and I hope he can sort himself out. I would imagine he would not want to be responsible for any more dogs anyway so when is recovered maybe he could be moved to ther duties.


        • on June 28, 2011 at 3:03 pm PC Lightyear

          JuliaM says:
          June 28, 2011 at 1:19 pm
          You made a sensible suggestion on the other thread – force policy that dogs be unloaded into air-conned secure kennels when attending police stations.

          If extra funding is required to do this, then sack a few of the chair-polishers that you claim infest your HQs to pay for it…”

          Yes. Hence my call for a review of policy, resources, accommodation, vehicles etc

          I don’t know how dog bases work or are kitted out or what policies they have. I’ve been to a few of them but never worked on the Dog section.

          But surely if the policy was: as soon as you get here you must put your dogs in the transit kennels whilst here then it would make this kind of incident much less likely


  42. on June 28, 2011 at 12:02 pm Colin

    A bad mistake, a real bad mistake. We all make them but his is particularly newsworthy and as he’s not CC Maxwell, he’ll probably get hung out to dry.

    When I say we all make them, I’ve never left two dogs in a hot car resulting in their death… but you get the idea.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 12:16 pm Agent Zig Zag

      Colin,

      We do all indeed make mistakes but personally I have never made one that has led to the death of my dogs. I recall one year going to an agricultural show and because of a foot and mouth outbreak I couldn’t take my dogs into the showground, although I had on previous years. I managed to find shade under an oak tree and tied my dogs up to the bumper of my car. With plenty of water left out for them. I returned to the car every 2 hours to reposition it in the shade. There is NO excuse for leaving those dogs to die.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 12:21 pm feral

        Stupid the officer may be, but he certainly does not deserve people saying he should have tried harder at suicide.

        If he did try suicide, then he knows all he needs to know.

        From the various reports, I understand he informed fellow officers as soon as possible to try to prevent the tragic occurance.

        Not everyone can be perfect all the time. God help anyone who judges and then makes a serious mistake. I think the conscience he has is enough for the officer.


        • on June 28, 2011 at 12:45 pm Agent Zig Zag

          @feral “Stupid the officer may be, but he certainly does not deserve people saying he should have tried harder at suicide.” – I am aghast at people saying such things. And i hope that as your reply to my posting has mentioned this, I hope you are not implying that I advocate such a thing? Because I most certainly do not. I advocate that he stand up and face the consequences like a man.


        • on June 28, 2011 at 12:55 pm feral

          Thank you for balancing out your comment. Where you put there is NO excuse for leaving those dogs to die, evidently this officer has made a grave mistake, however, we do not know all of the story and cannot judge.

          I never said you supported the comments about suicide.

          I am sure when there has been a full investigation, the right action will be taken.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 12:47 pm Agent Zig Zag

        @Minimumcover “I don’t think any sane person would intentionally did this to their animals, so we need to look for the reason rather than just passing judgement on the officer. – I agree entirely with this sentiment. But I think you will find that the reason is stupidity. After all this is the second time this ‘handler’ has killed a dog in such a way.


  43. on June 28, 2011 at 12:35 pm Jack Regan

    Tragic incident, which no doubt will have the media seeking answers to the following:

    1) Having arrived at Keston en route to the Olympic stadium and parked his car, did he simply ‘forget’ that he had left the dogs in the car in 80 degrees ?
    2) Having caused the death of a police dog in 2004 in similar circumstances, why was he still a dog handler ?
    3) If he does he have a genuine mental health problem, why was it not picked up by his line managers ?
    4) Was his wrist slashing incident a deliberate & cynical way of deflecting the mood of the incident away from the dogs and onto him ?
    5) Why did no one at Keston notice the dogs earlier, what security patrols/observation exist at Keston ?
    The original incident happened at Kenley in 2004, what changes to procedure were made as a consequence of that incident?

    RSPCA, the Met’s DPS and the IPCC are all investigating
    I’m struggling to understand how PS Craven allowed the incident to occur


    • on June 28, 2011 at 12:38 pm PC Lightyear

      “I’m struggling to understand how PS Craven allowed the incident to occur”

      Im hoping for his sake it was due to circumstances beyond his control.

      If not, he’s in the brown stuff


      • on June 28, 2011 at 12:50 pm Agent Zig Zag

        “Im hoping for his sake it was due to circumstances beyond his control.” – Pray tell what circumstances they might be? No excuses here thank you. If this was one of the swamp dwellers you would all be condemning him in no uncertain terms.


        • on June 28, 2011 at 1:09 pm JuliaM

          Yes, indeed. That’s the main thing to remember here.

          And to those assuming that I’m an anti-police blogger, because three out of today’s posts show police idiocy, well, that’s just the way it’s turned out today…


        • on June 28, 2011 at 1:21 pm feral

          Swamp dwellers don’t usually work all the hours under the sun at god damn awful times. They probably don’t have highly pressurised jobs where you get your arse kicked for the most minor – let alone major- of mistakes.
          Swamp dwellers usually only face hostile situations if someone’s selling drugs on their ‘patch’.
          Swamp dwellers do not consider the lives of Joe Public before their own. Swamp dwellers don’t give a shit about what you think of them, because they don’t care. Swamp dwellers are not in the same league as police officers.

          Don’t judge them as the same.


        • on June 28, 2011 at 2:57 pm PC Lightyear

          As in we don’t KNOW what circumstances there could be- swamp dweller or PC…

          Rendered suddenly Ill?

          Air con was on in the car and suddenly failed?

          As I said for his sake it’d better be something along these lines or it’s inexcusable and he’s for it big time.

          I expected more balance from you Eddie


        • on June 28, 2011 at 3:03 pm feral

          Um Buzz, that’s not Presuming Eddie, that’s ZigZag isn’t it? ;)


        • on June 28, 2011 at 4:34 pm PC Lightyear

          “Um Buzz, that’s not Presuming Eddie, that’s ZigZag isn’t it? ”

          Eddie Chapman – the original Agent Zig Zag?


        • on June 28, 2011 at 5:05 pm feral

          Ok. That I did not know.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 2:25 pm Shafted

      If no 2 is correct I have to agree.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 4:57 pm Jackson

        I have wondered why he didnt leave the engine running with the air con on if he was leaving them. This is what officers do where i am if there is no kennel facilities where they are stopping off.


        • on June 28, 2011 at 7:05 pm Uncivilised Servant

          I guess that and many other things are running through his mind – but what he is really needs now is some understanding and a little forgiveness. We all mess up at times.


        • on June 28, 2011 at 10:41 pm The Sybarite

          We need to cut this chap some slack. x


        • on June 29, 2011 at 12:18 pm feral

          Totally relate to what you are saying Sybarite ;)


  44. on June 28, 2011 at 2:11 pm PC Bloggs

    Just to drag it back to the original topic, Blandshire’s lawyers are adamant that this ruling applies to all prisoners, not just those extended, and that we must immediately act on it to avoid compensation claims. The bail manager’s job just got a lot easier.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 4:33 pm PC Lightyear

      And the lawyers’ job a lot easier


    • on June 28, 2011 at 4:40 pm state12

      Sorry, forgive me for being thick and perhaps not understanding this (for someone who don’t deal with this much) but is it that you get the 24hrs to do everything (bits of bail thrown in there, say rebail twice with an interview 6hrs added to the initial 12hrs) and then once the clock runs out you go for a supts extension. 4hrs into the supts extension the decision is then to bail again – if I get this right then the 36hr clock does not stop at the point of bail – and you therefore cannot have them back in custody on the bail date? What then? report for summons?

      Not that I deal with Supts extensions at all, even slightly, but still another two steps backwards.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 6:17 pm PC Lightyear

        er yes that sounds about it


  45. on June 28, 2011 at 4:35 pm DC Donuts

    This is a classic example of our over complicated legal system which simply exists to give offenders every chance to avoid conviction whilst lining the pockets of Ken Clarke QC, Cherie Blair QC et al.

    As for the ruling, surely the clue is held within the word “detention” as in 24 hrs detention from relevant time etc. Once bailed a “customer” is no longer in “detention” and the clock stops. Simples!

    i undetstand why the “36 hrs after wfd” had been questioned, but surely the wording meant to provide a start point of the 36 hrs wfd as opposed to an absolute limit.


  46. on June 28, 2011 at 5:44 pm MarkMyWords

    Their email address is on their website


    • on June 30, 2011 at 7:41 am MarkMyWords

      http://www.mondaybooks.com/contact/contact.html


  47. on June 28, 2011 at 5:51 pm blueboy

    My Farce is running scared of being sued for false imprisonment so we are basically getting rid of the bail option, including for those already on bail.

    Tha latest email missive is not to arrest anyone until the oic has every shred of evidence possible. So potentially we could be waiting days/ weeks for cctv while Wayne goes off committing more offences.

    There also appears to be a very wide definiton being given to what will constitute ‘new evidence’. In other words we will be NFA/ Refuse charging having arrested Wayne for violenced on the night; then re-arresting and starting a whole new custody clock once the cctv comes in. So potentially the scrotes could spend even longer in custody in some cases, no harm there then.

    What planet is this judge on? Meanwhile we await ACPO’s wisdom this evening.


  48. on June 28, 2011 at 6:13 pm HatedbytheDailyMail

    What an unmitigated disaster. I am told by my colleagues on duty today that my Force has scrapped the use of street bail, cancelled the use of 47(3) entirely and is working to cancel bail for all suspects currently on 47(3).

    A lot of very nasty people are rubbing their hands together right now (criminals and solicitors). The decent public should surely be warned about this. They are the ones who are going to suffer. What in gods name was this judge thinking???????????????????


    • on June 28, 2011 at 6:32 pm Given Up (almost)!

      Same in my force. Apparently ACPO legal advice says this affects ALL bail.
      Street Bail cancelled. Those returning on bail have to be charged within minutes, otherwise reported for summons at the front counter. All those arrested and booked into custody HAVE to be dealt with to charging standards within 24 hours or released.

      Suspects will give false accounts, knowing it will take days to check out. Overtime through the roof when there is no overtime around. Complete chaos all over the nick. Just another day in the mad world of the British Police and the CJS.


      • on June 28, 2011 at 7:26 pm Jimmy

        We have never been allowed street bail, so i cant miss it. But i will miss being able to bring someone in for the night for something which could have other inquiries.
        This is a giant screw you to victims, bail conditions are done for. Getting people in for a first interview will be done for. I feel a bit squiffy and dont speak english reports will be up and so with hospital watches.

        Im sure it will all work out, it will cost a fortune in money and trust in the police. Hopefully no one will die because we couldnt get that charge in time. But they probably will


    • on June 28, 2011 at 11:07 pm state12

      i’m coming back of rest days tommorow so can’t wait for surprises that my force has got to resolve this situation…if we are arresting on fresh evidence then its going to be minutes before an unlawful arrest claim finds its way through.

      What ever next – murder all on a voluntary interview and report for summons?


  49. on June 28, 2011 at 8:22 pm Wired!

    Have a look at this link, which is a two page review of the Hookway decision by Michael Zander. He is looked on as a guru on PACE 1984 and is the author of numerous books on the subject. The irony of this is Mr Justice McCombe makes reference to Zander during his summing up.

    http://policeinspectors.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/47-3-criminal-justice-article.pdf

    Clearly, if you follow the judge’s thinking, we will not be able to ‘stop the clock’ on any form of police detention, be it 24 hours, 36 hours or 96. Obviously any D’s going to hospital will, according to the judge’s logic, have their clock running all that time. Although WFD’s are not a frequent occurrence, Supt’s and Insp’s extensions are.

    The judge also critiscised the police and Magistrates for failing to send anyone to speak to him! I think the reason there is so much panic is no one can get their heads round Mr Justice McCombe’s logic. He clearly has no understanding of criminal law, which may be what Mr Zander is suggesting in the above report.


  50. on June 28, 2011 at 8:35 pm sonofgenehunt

    I’ve read the judgement in this today ( working on something regarding extensions for a training package that has now been blown out the window, bastards!)

    Mr Justice McCombe was sitting alone, in an emergency Judicial Review brought by the CPS and it was undefended by the Mags Court ( as the defendant)

    It won’t surprise anyone who spends any time in Mags Ct that the original objection to the extension to the warrant for further detention ( s.44 PACE) application was made not by the District Judge but, by the Clerk/Legal Rep….and its snowballed.

    Its like the fundamentalist Christians, McCombe is taking a literal reading of PACE, a piece of legislation so old that the High Court have made several calls for it to be updated.

    I swear, he gets down the Lodge Bar that night and says ‘ Gentlemen, you’ll never get what I did today….’


  51. on June 28, 2011 at 8:36 pm sonofgenehunt

    BTW: Zander stated the thought of this never even crossed his mind….


    • on June 28, 2011 at 8:45 pm Wired!

      To be fair sonofgene I don’t think he has any idea what he has done!

      I’ve got visions of him sat in front of the court clock trying to add up those frustrating extra hours and minutes and, on running out of fingers and thumbs, decreed, “It’s 96 (calendar) hours and that’s that and I’M REFUSING YOU LEAVE TO APPEAL!!”


  52. on June 28, 2011 at 8:41 pm GPC

    It just gets fookin worse….

    From the Daily Wail … although no reason to believe it untrue !!!

    “Undesirable and dangerous’ immigrant criminals can not be deported from Britain, say Euro judges

    * More than 200 foreign criminals could now be granted right to stay following test case
    * Somali Abdisamad Adow Sufi convicted of burglary and robbery
    * Avdiaziz Ibrahim Elmi guilty of robbery and supplying Class A drugs

    ‘Undesirable’ and ‘dangerous’ immigrants who have committed serious crimes in Britain cannot be deported if they face ‘ill-treatment’ at home because it is against their human rights.

    European judges ruled today that regardless of how bad their crimes are the convicts can never be sent back

    “


  53. on June 28, 2011 at 8:49 pm wmidplod

    Another bizarre decision by the “liberal (*completely out of touch) elite ”
    To think for all these years we have been bailing people for further enquiries,and parliament didn’t intend this???
    For gods sake even a complete halfwit would realise that if parliament weren’t happy with this,there is a chance they would have noticed and told the home office??????
    The judiciary appear to think they make laws..someone needs to get a grip and remind them THEY ARE THERE TO ENFORCE LAWS,NOT MAKE THEM.

    Or am I wrong and they are Judge Dredd??

    Rant over.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 9:07 pm PC Lightyear

      Ministers and judiciary hate each other and Judges think they know best. Most of the overfed golf course dwellers haven’t a clue about the practicalities of policing. We’re going to lose a lot of cases because of this, more bad people will avoid gaol and more victims will suffer.

      I’m wondering if people are better of catching people themselves and dishing out summary justice, just don’t leave any links to yourself…


    • on June 29, 2011 at 2:46 pm Agent Zig Zag

      Why are you referring the them as the ‘elite’? I’d say that the evidence is counter to that assumption.


  54. on June 28, 2011 at 9:37 pm Reacher

    I am going to stick my head out over the parapet on this one.
    I am extraordinarily amazed at “empathy-lacking” comments on this story made by the judgmental masses that abound the internet. I am writing this in a very simplistic way so that I can be easily understood.
    The report about the incident was very brief with few details as it is early days. The officer involved went AWOL and was found later and had to be taken to hospital after a suspected suicide attempt.
    It seems that if we brought back public executions there would be the same braying-for-blood masses that we had not so long ago turning up for the spectacle. To me (as a relative newcomer) the internet is very revealing as to how thin the veneer of civilization has really become. It seems that the anonymous cloak allows a true sight into the actual nature of most people and it is not a pretty sight. We all f**k up to one degree or another.
    Some pay their whole lives as they have a conscience….some never pay as they have none and so it is for society to inflict a punishment…..for some it’s a combination of both. It appears that some people are so keen to jump on other people and condemn them and I wonder at times if this is only a projection to deflect attention from their own failings.
    It was two dogs and at some point we have to get a grip as a nation. As more public sector workers are put under stress and made to do more for less I predict the f**k ups to happen more not less. This will be particularly true for cops if what is proposed goes ahead.
    One job at a time and work to rule when all the cuts are made would be the only advisable route to take for self preservation of sanity.
    The internet makes me feel dirty nowadays as the voices of reason seem to be drowned out more often than not. This is not a judgement on this blog and its many contributors as this happens rarely here.
    Pah! Hate having to write this stuff.
    Dammit!


    • on June 29, 2011 at 11:03 am MarkMyWords

      Well said. I was shocked with the lack of empathy.
      With so many people’s lives affected at some time by mental health problems, it’s fortunate that the diagnosis and treatment is determined by trained professionals and not the “braying-for-blood masses” !


    • on June 29, 2011 at 12:08 pm feral

      Well done Reacher.
      You said everything that needed to be said. Good stuff.


    • on June 29, 2011 at 12:48 pm The Sybarite

      Reacher I totally agree. x


      • on June 29, 2011 at 9:39 pm feral

        I miss the zany humour that gets one through the day.


        • on June 29, 2011 at 10:04 pm feral

          Thank you Reacher. You are one in a million. x


  55. on June 28, 2011 at 10:00 pm Frustrated PS

    If it applies to everyone from the word go then S.37 (1) and (2)PACE must have been abolished as well!?

    (1)Where—.
    (a)a person is arrested for an offence—.
    (i)without a warrant; or.
    (ii)under a warrant not endorsed for bail, F1. . ..
    (b). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
    the custody officer at each police station where he is detained after his arrest shall determine whether he has before him sufficient evidence to charge that person with the offence for which he was arrested and may detain him at the police station for such period as is necessary to enable him to do so.
    (2)If the custody officer determines that he does not have such evidence before him, the person arrested shall be released either on bail or without bail, unless the custody officer has reasonable grounds for believing that his detention without being charged is necessary to secure or preserve evidence relating to an offence for which he is under arrest or to obtain such evidence by questioning him..

    Typical over reaction, metrocity has effectively said “keep calm and carry on” until your told otherwise!


    • on June 29, 2011 at 4:14 am PC Lightyear

      “Typical over reaction, metrocity has effectively said “keep calm and carry on” until your told otherwise!”

      Er not as today they haven’t- it’s ‘no more bail- charge or NFA’


  56. on June 28, 2011 at 10:18 pm Dog Lover

    Sorry to hijack this threat gadget, but I think this warrants discussion.

    In a recent case a police constable callously left two dogs to die in a car on the hottest day of the year. This constable had previous killed a dog in identical circumstances three years ahttp://inspectorgadget.wordpress.com/2011/06/27/high-court-pace-clock-omg-help/#commentsgo.

    The constable was sectioned shortly after the latest incident after attempting suicide.

    Can some of the police posers here tell us if they are submitted to regular psychiatric evaluation, and if so why this constable was allowed to continue in his post, and indeed promoted?

    If there is no regular psychiatric evaluation how can police employees, such as constable Gadget, support the arming of unstable officers and what do they think would have happened if the constable, sectioned under mental health laws, had been armed with a police issue firearm?


    • on June 28, 2011 at 10:35 pm RedStorm

      Can some of the police posers here tell us if they are submitted to regular psychiatric evaluation?

      > Not routinely, no.

      If there is no regular psychiatric evaluation how can police employees, such as constable Gadget, support the arming of unstable officers?

      > 1. That’s Crown servant & INSPECTOR Gadget to you, thanks.
      2. I think you’ll find we don’t.

      ..what do they think would have happened if the constable, sectioned under mental health laws, had been armed with a police issue firearm?

      > You’re asking for us to indulge in a lot of speculation & conjecture. How about waiting for the investigation rather than the usual Daily Heil-fashion of get em on the gallows & then do an investigation.

      PS Your Tweet entitled “Inspector Gadget Kills Dogs” is one of the most disgusting loads of bollocks I’ve ever read & you should be fcuking ashamed of yourself.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 10:39 pm presuming ed

      Laugh or feel pity, or just ignore the dumb troll? You decide.


    • on June 29, 2011 at 4:07 am PC Lightyear

      Dog lover? Dog botherer more like. Troll


    • on June 29, 2011 at 9:38 am Special Dibble

      I think you’ll find its ‘Inspector Gadget!


    • on June 29, 2011 at 12:15 pm feral

      @ Dog Lover

      Try this as a psychiatric evaluation.

      You have to be formal and address as ‘Inspector’ Gadget.

      Nur-nur-nur-nur-nur!

      From a police ‘poser’!

      *Pills now please.*


  57. on June 28, 2011 at 10:37 pm Not Good Enough

    To put a lighter side on this, can anyone else see a sort of comedy sketch with Police officers running around collecting evidence and typing up pre-charge case files with the split screen effect that Jack Bauer has on 24?

    I know of three forces that are NFA-ing people for serious offences because they don’t think they can bail them to appear when forensic evidence, CCTV trawls etc is ready…
    Who will get the blame when someone dies as a result of these people being released without conditions?

    I don’t get it. I just don’t get it.


  58. on June 28, 2011 at 11:16 pm Lance Manley- former STAB PROOF SCARECROW

    What happened to the new post? Got my 4th “first” too.

    It’s now showing 404 Error from the link.


    • on June 28, 2011 at 11:18 pm Yesyes

      Can’t see it anymore either. Maybe IG thinks you have too many firsts and is giving us a second chance!


    • on June 28, 2011 at 11:23 pm presuming ed

      thanks for the tip-off ;)


  59. on June 29, 2011 at 12:06 am Spoon

    My force are treating it as the 24 hour PACE clock from relevant time onwards, for all arrests, not just extentions. Hospital apparantly doesn’t count unless under questioning. It is a wrench in the works and we will be rapidly starting to use the new evidence re-arrest power. Thanks GMP for getting this clarified with a judicial review by the judiciary’s biggest fool, just because a magistrate upset you. Not aimed at GMP Officers, just the particular bunch of allegedly trained ACPO Chief Clownstables running your Farce.


    • on June 29, 2011 at 8:27 pm Met DC

      Not sure what you’re driving at here. The DJ stated that the PACE clock had expired, thus becoming the first person to apply this new ruling. GMP rightly took it to the High Court – where, against anybody’s predictions – it has gone very pear-shaped and is now a Stated Case.

      GMP aren’t at fault for taking this to judicial review.


      • on June 30, 2011 at 12:21 am Spoon

        I read the original wording of the warrant extending the detention time, the decision by the high court is actually consistent with how it’s written. If they were serious about preserving Police practice / legality around the Pace Clock they should have left it and asked for modified wording of future warrants. They took the high risk / high reward route of judicial review. Now we have this abortion foist upon us.


  60. on June 29, 2011 at 9:47 am Kev

    If you read the judgement the decision was based on the warrant time and date of issue. When the detainee appeared in court for a further warrant of detention the legal rep noticed that the warrant stated the detainee could only be held for 36 hours from the time & date of the warrant being issued. This had expired when the detainee appeared in court. When he answered bail the decision should have been charge or release NFA. The only time a person can be re interviewed is when there is new evidence since the time of release which the detainee should be given the opportunity to give an account. The judge mentioned in this case that the person could be arrested however other parts of PACE are still in play ie time previously in detention. All investigations must be planned effectively to ensure that when a person is in detention all possible enquiries are carried out which can be put to the detainee duing interview. In other cases the detainee can be bailed and re interviewed when the enquiries are completed. A further interview may well be required.


    • on June 29, 2011 at 5:00 pm PC Lightyear

      “If you read the judgement the decision was based on the warrant time and date of issue”

      Then why do forces insist it applies to the initial 24 hours too?

      It’s baffling


  61. on June 29, 2011 at 10:11 am Sgt Mooman

    This little email grenade settled in my custody office yesterday. I still cant believe the magnitude and stupidity of this interpretation.
    we will have to be very careful about EXACTLY what is told to suspects who are NFA’d because the evidence isnt in place YET as we will be headed for potential abuse of process issues. (unless the suspect is a cop then its ok).


    • on June 29, 2011 at 11:15 am Darby

      It is the same in my force with new e mails going off all the time this will prove to be an interesting week !!!


    • on June 29, 2011 at 5:25 pm state12

      pleasantly surprised this end, no chaos and mayhem – normal bail rules and supts extensions still apply, only mags court warrants are in play, on that note i’m not in the ez-wash suits department so don’t need to worry about it and can put my fingers in my ears and just sing to myself.

      And chatting to an insp today he said this issue was discussed to him in 2001 by a barrister so he’s not quite sure why its taken this long to really hit the headlines.


    • on June 30, 2011 at 12:17 am Mp9000

      I remember thinking it a pain in the arse when we stopped referring to cases as NFA’d and moved over to the NPW’d. In light of all this it makes a lot of sense now, “we’re not proceeding with a case against you at this time….”
      Will this affect whether the sweats still lock people up for the weekend any more!?


  62. on June 29, 2011 at 4:38 pm Thethinblueline

    Lol typical


  63. on June 29, 2011 at 4:40 pm Thethinblueline

    Lol typical – the term is npw not proceeded with – can we all please drop nfa :-) thank you


    • on June 29, 2011 at 4:45 pm PC Lightyear

      The phrase is NFI….

      Not F’kin Interested


  64. on June 29, 2011 at 5:14 pm mary

    There was also a notice on the Met Police intranet regarding this. It was all very cagey and avoided saying anything that might put the cat among the pigeons, but this is all being discussed at a very senior level in the force.

    Like everyone else, I can’t understand the reasoning behind it – and it must surely be the subject of an appeal.


  65. on June 29, 2011 at 5:17 pm lit

    tahnks


  66. on June 29, 2011 at 5:19 pm mary

    Damn and I read the post first to!!!

    The advice I saw was that it applies to extensions granted by Magistrates, (as in the 36 hr and 96 hr extensions) as they are only applicable from the relevant time, i.e. arrival at the police station. So the extension only applies from the absolute date – (how it was written not how it was meant, Zander has a good comment piece on it).

    The actual effect is that there is no bail possible on a magistrates extension and some farces have decided this applies to Supt extensions as well.


  67. on June 29, 2011 at 5:30 pm Given Up (almost)!

    The Essex chief and ACPO lead says that this one (dodgy) court ruling overturns 25 years of policing, yet lots of court ruling upholding a constable’s discretion is often completely ignored when the use of that discretion is at odds with force policy.

    I seem to remember that in the 80s a court ruled (I can never remember the case) that an officer who was ‘slave’ to policy was not acting in accordance with their duty. They never seem to mention that!


  68. on June 29, 2011 at 7:36 pm Mjolinir

    PACE SHOCK! Agreement between the Home Sec, her ‘Shadow’, the ACPO spokesman, AND Gadget! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13957873

    ["They're all of the same opinion. Never knew such unanimity on a point of law in my life! point of law in my life! " - WS Gilbert - 'The Mikado']

    //Police are urgently reviewing the cases of thousands of suspects after a court ruling restricted their powers to bail them for further questioning.//

    //Mrs May said the Home Office was considering whether to appeal against the ruling or introduce emergency legislation. She said: “We’re working with Acpo at the moment and looking at a number of possibilities as to how we can advise the police on this issue. “We are conscious of the concerns this judgment has brought in terms of operational policing.”//

    //Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said it was “a matter of grave concern”…”Because it seems this has immediate effect, it will disrupt vital ongoing investigations and hugely hamper the police in their job,” she said.//

    The item also “Quotes” comments by W Yorks CC, Norman Bettison “It’s on the verge of a disaster now because the question being asked by my custody sergeants is, ‘What do we do, boss?’ “I cannot countenance turning people away from the charge office and telling them all bets are off and they are free to go.”

    He added: “We are running round like headless chickens this morning wondering what this means to the nature of justice.”My holding position with my officers is that I can’t believe this is what was envisioned.”

    He has told his officers to continue working to their usual guidelines until further advice is issued.//


  69. on June 29, 2011 at 7:38 pm Mjolinir

    Sorry – too much ‘law & life’ in that post (Sticky keyboard from excessive pasting)


  70. on June 29, 2011 at 8:04 pm WhothefckamI

    Having read the ruling I have tried my best to make sense of it and there needs to be a clear message from the powers that be. IMHO (and the problem is there are too many opinions and no clear guidance) The ruling applies to warrants of further detention. I believe the confusion arises when discussing when the detention time starts as overall this is relevant to the PACE clock, 24 hrs 36 hrs extension and therefore relevant to the timing of any subsequent WFD applications. The ruling seems to suggest that if they are not charged within this time ie WFD there must not be sufficient evidence so the defendent should be released NFA as the warrant is only valid for a specific period and the PACE clock does not stop if the suspect is bailed within the time frame of the WFD. However if further evidence is then found they can be rearrested and the PACE clock starts from the begining again. I see problems of suspects disappearing never to be seen again in serious offences.

    If I’ve got this wrong please feel free to put me right as it is just my interpretation.

    ps no mention of this in my force area, YET


    • on June 29, 2011 at 9:42 pm redgoat

      I agree with ‘Whothe’ that the ruling appears to relate to WFD.
      However, my Force true to form has panicked and has issued a general guidance outlining their panic. The panic has spread to all 47.3 decisions.

      Panic measures include not worrying about having a positive arrest policy and dumping the resulting panic onto Sgt’s shoulders.

      All 47.3 bail decisions post Court ruling are now deemed illegal. Oops.

      Coincidentally there is nothing in the ‘Hurriedly Put Together Post Panic Document’ that indicates that the Force is allowing ‘The Panic’ to affect Performance. Now that truly would be a reason to Panic!


  71. on June 29, 2011 at 10:09 pm 28/30

    I think I remember from my training in 1984 you can’t police bail in a Magistrates extention. If you are willing to bail do it in the first 24hrs. If you go for Supt or Mags extentions you are on the road to charge or NFA. In those days it was a decision to charge for the police or our tame lawyer ( think The Stig in a gown and wig in a cupboards somewhere upstairs. Nice old guy, could be found on the golf course most weekends but would come in for a Crown Court job. No CPS direct time-wasting.)
    . But the current reports of the SMT reaction of the loss of street bail and bail in the first 24hrs is madness.
    We knew in 1983 that PACE Would result in more criminals getting away because we would not have the time to investigate properly. Bailed badies will have time to destroy evidence or intimidate witnesses before we could get the evidence together. Time limits were introduced to stop arrests of Friday afternoon being left in cells to ‘think it over’ and for CID to sort it out on Monday. If permitting bail and clock stopping in Supts and Magistrates extention is the practical way which has grown up and used for the past 25 years without legal question. Then the Act needs to be ammended to say that – FAST.


  72. on June 29, 2011 at 10:43 pm 28/30

    Thought I posted but its missing.
    Anyway I think the judge interprettion of the law is right. You can’t bail after the first 24hrs. Supt and court extention is charge or NFA only.
    we knew in 1984 that PACE would mean more criminals getting away with it. If this has been avioded by bailing in Supt. & mags extensions for ages without courts questioning it before then. The PACE act need to be amended to say that – FAST.
    Farces reacting by not using street bail or S47 bail in first 24hrs of detention is Madness.


  73. on June 30, 2011 at 4:48 pm state12

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-13975256

    Front page news on the BBC website, but I struggle to see how this is news, its more of just a fact. 175 people on bail for murder? I’m not really surprised, as previously stated i’m the lowest of the low and i’ve got bailers coming out of my arse. I don’t think 175 people on bail for murder is particularly out of the ordinary, public might be surprised but hey thats CPS for you.


  74. on June 30, 2011 at 5:44 pm Mjolinir

    BBC News on line – 16:56

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13970159

    //Emergency laws are to be brought forward to overturn a High Court ruling limiting police bail in England and Wales to a maximum of four days.

    Policing Minister Nick Herbert told MPs the move was necessary to allow officers to do their jobs without “one hand tied behind their back”.

    He said there was not enough time to wait for a Supreme Court appeal.//


  75. on June 30, 2011 at 5:49 pm Mjolinir

    Timeline on above webpage -

    19 May: Judge rules orally against Greater Manchester Police. GMP informs officials at Home Office soon after

    17 June: Written version of judgement circulated to Home Office officials, Crown Prosecution Service lawyers and police chiefs. Full scale of the problem becomes clear

    24 June: Ministers informed about the situation. Association of Chief Police Officers commissions further legal advice

    [27 June - Gadget Acts!]

    30 June: Acpo recommends emergency legislation. Ministers say it will be introduced “as soon as possible”


  76. on June 30, 2011 at 6:40 pm TheBinarySurfer

    So, just to be clear; the way to get away with a crime now is to not speak English, DOS attack your local county-council/police camera service provider (or call in a bomb threat to the building they’re based in), be a minority, or simply commit a crime too complex to be solved within the time-constraints of PACE?

    Nice to see that those budget cuts won’t affect crime and punishment (which logically should have been ring-fenced surely? It’s the one proven trend in every single recession ever studied worldwide; employment goes down, crime levels go up.


  77. on June 30, 2011 at 7:27 pm Unlucky Alf

    I have 2 bail responders coming in for bail tomorrow. All the paperwork is done and it is ready to go. Knowing my luck there will be a court ruling which deems the bail to be unlawful and their bail will be cancelled.

    Ohhhhhhhh bugger.


  78. on June 30, 2011 at 10:50 pm feral

    Dear Inspector Gadget.

    Thank you for this post. I have learnt an awful lot from it and it has made me realise a lot of things that I should acknowledge.

    Your blog is a very much a learning curve from me and although I am a mop and not a copper, I am gaining a lot of insight into other people’s worlds and gaining a lot of wisdom.

    You have done great. x


  79. on July 1, 2011 at 5:16 pm feral

    And thank you for your protection.


  80. on July 1, 2011 at 7:15 pm Yesyes

    Last to say first ;)


  81. on July 1, 2011 at 7:23 pm feral

    You’re a good ‘un.


  82. on July 1, 2011 at 11:17 pm feral

    Sorry, I take my comments back. If you are going to let everyone take the piss out of me as well as I suspect, yourself, then you can bloody well forget my support for good. Too much sometimes., Too f*cking much.


  83. on July 1, 2011 at 11:59 pm feral

    It’s funny isn’t it. People think they are trying to be supportive and really they are wasting their time.

    It’s what makes good numbers and a good game isn’t it.

    I don’t think there is morality any more. I think everyone is just concerned about money and power.

    It is no wonder that so many are demoralised and see no hope.

    Here’s to the great british public.



Comments are closed.

  • Blog Stats

    • 8,989,013 police pay cuts
  • Gadget Twitter

    • @GlennCameron TASER 5 hours ago
    • Whoever invented ‘big wing’ ops forgot to read the chapter about crime displacement. Ruralshire never really recovered from the last ones. 21 hours ago
  • Gadget Bargains

    • Ruralshire Supplies
    • Ruralshire Supplies 002
  • Gadget Books

    • Available fro Amazon, Waterstones, Borders and Monday Books.
    • Wasting More Police Time
  • Gadget Media

    • A Guardian review
    • A Sun review
    • A Times Top 40 Blog
    • Daily Mail article
    • Daily Mirror (2007)
    • New Statesman
    • Telegraph article
  • Gadget Minds About

    • Blue Lamp Foundation
    • Help For Heroes
    • Police Memorial Trust
    • Royal British Legion
    • RUC Widows Assn.
  • Gadget Reads

    • 200 Weeks
    • A Blog from rural England
    • Alice the Architect
    • Area Search No Trace
    • Big Fella In Blue
    • byways by railway
    • Dan Collins
    • DCI Gene Hunt
    • Frank Chalk – Teacher
    • Freelance Photographer
    • Gadget's Other Blog
    • Lurcher Blog
    • mental health cop
    • Not George Dixon
    • Pensions petition
    • Prague Tory
    • Randon Acts of Reality
    • Special Dibble
    • Stonehead
    • The Last Ditch
    • Theodore Dalrymple
    • Thin Blue Line
    • Which End Bites?
    • Winston Smith
    • WPC Bloggs 21st Century
  • Recent Posts

    • When practitioners are not consulted….
    • I do not discuss these things at home.
    • More nonsense from the keyboard-rattlers SHOCK
    • UK Police – Mission Accomplished.
    • Policing Through The Looking Glass
  • Meta

    • Register
    • Log in
    • Entries RSS
    • Comments RSS
    • WordPress.com

Blog at WordPress.com.

Theme: MistyLook by Sadish.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,995 other followers

Powered by WordPress.com