My mother had a spy network that makes the KGB look like amateurs
Morning after a party and she knew who was there, who you had been chatting to, if you had been chatting anyone up or even kissed a girl!
Bored cops bully kids
- Thread starter swee'pea99
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
My mother had a spy network that makes the KGB look like amateurs
Morning after a party and she knew who was there, who you had been chatting to, if you had been chatting anyone up or even kissed a girl!
vernon
Harder than Ronnie Pickering
- Location
- Meanwood, Leeds
The wild times that I had with Jack Dent and Jim (Rod) Moir and others in Darlington were innumerable and I'm reluctant to itemise the damage caused at such parties. It was a rite of passage.
I could hardly be cross with my boys when I've had to peel them off the pavement outside of parties and pour them into the car to ferry them home. It would have been hypocritical.
Helicopter beds.
Who remembers those?
summerdays
Cycling in the sun
- Location
- Bristol
Parents have to be open and reasonable, one of my eldest's friends mother basically treated her as a 10 year old and so she would lie through her teeth about where she was all the time, sometimes involving us in her lies which made me cross when it happened. If anything I think my kids are almost too straight laced, certainly in comparison to my teenage years and I wasn't a wild child just not an angel either. Kids are experimenting at that age, you would be wrong to believe it does happen. Next will come the question: do they get illegal ID? so they can get into clubs and pubs.
Tia Sharp. Just googled and they found it after the 4th attempt.
CopperCyclist
Veteran
In other news today "Police fail at protecting children again after child
stabbed/beaten at North London address. 'I rang them ten minutes earlier' said neighbour Mrs Muggins. 'I told them there was drugs and violence, but they turned up and didn't even bother going in.'
It's a brave, brave officer that makes a decision to walk away from a call about violence happening in an address without checking that address.
OP
OP
swee'pea99
Squire
I have never seen any report that even vaguely resembled that.
Let's be clear: the police have no business invading anyone's home on the uncorroborated say-so of any Mrs Muggins, or any legal basis for doing so. Which is what they would certainly say if they were ever faced with any such accusation. Unless they have good reason - not a phone call from Mrs Muggins, but screams, say, or other actual evidence of someone being at risk of violence, they have no right to enter a private property without a warrant. They had nothing even approaching that in this case. They had the exact opposite. They had call from a member of the public, and the evidence of their own eyes, which showed that call to be unfounded. They had every reason to believe that no-one was in any danger whatsoever.
They didn't do what they did out of concern for anybody, or anybody's property. They did it to throw their weight around. And I'm disappointed by anyone in uniform trying so determinedly to defend their indefensible actions.
Profpointy
Legendary Member
Whilst I've heard enough reliable stories of the police throwing their weight around or even being outright hooligans, the bookcase incident knocking a lad unconscious does need a bit of explaining in an otherwise sedate party and does suggest there's a bit more too it in this case.
OP
OP
swee'pea99
Squire
The 'bookcase incident' would never have happened had the police not invaded. I don't know exactly what happened or how; what I do know is that no-one was hurt at any point except as a direct result of the police action.
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
Reminds me of an incident in which a copper was called to a house after reports of a woman screaming.
Giving evidence in the resulting court case, the officer said: "I knocked on the door, a man opened it and said: 'You can eff off, it's only a domestic'."
Fair to say some lads in the North East are still a bit, er, behind the times in their attitudes.
Giving evidence in the resulting court case, the officer said: "I knocked on the door, a man opened it and said: 'You can eff off, it's only a domestic'."
Fair to say some lads in the North East are still a bit, er, behind the times in their attitudes.
CopperCyclist
Veteran
1. Here's your report that 'vaguely resembles that'.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-reported-hearing-shouting-middle-night.html
Note carefully how the report puts no failure on the parents for allowing their 15 year old to be over twice the drink drive limit, or for going to bed when he said he was on his way home - nope, all the police, should have searched better. Yes - no power was needed for the search here, but the essence is the same - a call that someone is in danger, police attendance, a search took place - just the difference being that search wasn't thorough.
2. That's exactly what we do. Every day. If someone makes an uncorroborated complaint, then it is acted upon. If there were significant evidence that the call was rubbish then it's different, but just one call saying "sometimes getting hurt" is enough for us to check that someone isn't getting hurt, and for us to lose our jobs and potentially gave criminal charges of we call to do so without good reason. We do have the power to enter homes to do so (Section 17 of Police and criminal evidence act 1984), and it does get used regularly. If you dislike this, we live in a democracy and you can write to your MP and suggest it be repealed.
3. As I've said a number of times, in your specific case you may well be correct. You may well be completely incorrect. I don't know and neither do you. But to suggest that we shouldn't act on uncorroborated calls is simply wrong, as is (on the basis of what we KNOW) describing their actions as indefensible.
Seriously, if you care this much go to the local station or the IPCC to make a complaint and get it investigated proudly. And I'm disappointed by any parent taking the word of a group of drunk and possibly drugged 15-16 year olds as gospel and trying so determinedly to defend their behaviour that required a neighbour to call the police.
OP
OP
swee'pea99
Squire
I don't acknowledge the parallel. I hadn't seen the report, and I certainly wouldn't quibble with the gist, that the police failed to do their job properly, whatever the failures of the parents. Nor, according to the report, would they. But I don't see the cases as in any way comparable.
I have never suggested that the police should not act on uncorroborated reports. Probably 90% of the reports they receive are uncorroborated, and a high proportion probably prove to be well-founded. The question is, how should they act. In this case, as I suggested earlier, the appropriate way to have acted would have been like this:
The first cop at the door, once it was answered by a 16 year old girl dressed as a bunny rabbit and in no obvious distress other than that caused by the sudden and unexpected arrival of a mob of police, could have seen very quickly that nothing dangerous or sinister was in progress. No shooting, no screaming, no signs of anything untoward - just one frightened teenager, and music playing in the background. At that point, the 'policing' thing to have done would have been to ask if everything's ok, point out the importance of not causing a nuisance, and leave.
Do you not agree?
I have also suggested that before even thinking about despatching one of your 'night time economy' units, a sensible first step would have been to have sent a car with a couple of cops to check it out, have a word with whoever answered the door, and use a little discretion in deciding whether, say, seven officers were likely to be needed. And then perhaps got back to the caller and asked them about this 'violence' they had reported. Given that the police had attended, and not found anything but a teenagers' fancy dress party, which seemed to be entirely violence-free. No screams. No gunshots. No signs of harm or distress.
Do you not agree?
I have made it clear on more than one occasion that I do not regard the version of events presented to me by my daughter as 'gospel'. I do, however, believe it to be a fair representation of what took place.
I have the admitted advantage over you of knowing my daughter, and of knowing that she would not have hesitated to tell me if there had been so much as a scuffle at this party, let alone anything constituting real violence. But I object to being accused of 'taking the word of a group of drunk and possibly drugged 15-16 year olds'. I am not. I am taking the word of my daughter, who had indeed had a drink - she had after all been at a party, however short-lived - but was sane, sober and coherent, and perfectly capable of telling me what had happened.
Which was this: seven police suddenly turned up, came into the house, and went on a fishing expedition, scaring the crap out of a bunch of nice kids who were doing no-one any harm whatsoever. Then ordered everyone out, despite having found nothing even vaguely illegal. At 9 o' clock on a Saturday evening.
I call that bad policing. I call that bullying.
Apparently, you don't agree.
I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.
Oh, one last thing: apparently this group of drunk/drugged kids whose word I take as gospel behaved in a way that 'required a neighbour to call the police'. Isn't that rather begging the question, given that by your own admission you 'don't know' what actually happened? Or, more to the point, didn't.
Yea I did go to parties BUT if I came home and told my mother seven cops were called she wouldn't be so gullible to believe that we were gentle 16 year olds behaving ourselves.
The OP made out like her daughter had gone to nothing worse than a scrabble evening and then admitted she knew alcohol and probably drugs were there. So I'm guessing as the mom has a tendency to leave minor details out so probably does the daughter. And those fruity drinks contain high alcohol levels.
If you allow your kids to go to a party with drugs and alcohol, don't be surprised if 7 cops turn up when it gets out of hand and blame the cops. Get real. That's my point.
CopperCyclist
Veteran
Yes.
I must say I am impressed how much detailed knowledge you have of an event at which you were not actually present
