Massive Walt? You decide...

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by chicken1, Jul 16, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Hope G4S are more security conscious than the Met.
     
  2. This puzzled me:
    "Herts police said on Friday they were investigating claims that Ward impersonated a police officer, as well as allegations of theft and kidnap. The kidnap claim is understood to relate to giving someone a lift while posing as a police officer."


    How the feck is that "Kidnap"? So he took someone to where they wanted to go? But because he was pretending to be a cop its Kidnap?
    "Giving a lift", doesn't exactly sound like he jammed a knife up someones nostril and dragged them into the car, took them to an isolated spot and mailed pieces of their Ears and finger to their Mums with a note asking for a huge bag of dosh and a chopper to Cuba.
     
  3. Who of any import (or reason) reads the bloody Guardian anyway?
     

  4. Circumstances.

    If he had picked up a hitchhiker and during the course of the journey he claimed to be plod then its not kidnap....if however, he offered a lift to someone and they accepted on the pretence that he was one of the boys in blue, that is kidnap, especially if they were a victim of a crime or injury at the time and he was (edit to add: falsely) acting in the capacity of a constable.
     
  5. Jarrod 248 Indeed. it is the fact he also allegedly posed as an Army Officer.
    SauceDoctor. Noted. That is why I said there were other such references, not only the Guardian but it was a generic and readily available report. Others may be pay to view.
    Pebbles015 You have it right.

    Best to all
     
  6. In criminal law, kidnapping is the taking away or transportation of a person against that person's will, usually to hold the person in false imprisonment, a confinement without legal authority. This may be done for ransom or in furtherance of another crime.
    Not
    Walt "I'm going now, see ya"
    PersonbelievingWalttobeplod "You going anywhere near (Insert location)?"
    Walt "Right by it yeah, want a lift?"
    PersonbelievingWalttobeplod "Awesome, you're a star mate. I'll be home in time for the Bill"

    Kidnap? My arrse someones over egging the pudding to cover up the fact they've been made to look daft.
    Lets face it the Police were a tad over stretched at the time Biting their shields in frustration at having to stand and watch towns burn as the chief constables dithered uselessly to check out the ID of every body coming through the door appearing to help. Officers from all over the country were sent to London no wonder there was some confusion. He saw an opportunity and took advantage, Twat he may be, but a kidnapper he isn't.
     
  7. Whats the matter, pretending to be a squaddie not trendy enough anymore?
     
  8. Sinner...again, circumstances, had the person accepted the lift on the false belief that the said person was a constable and would have not accepted the lift otherwise, it is kidnap.

    If you get into someones van willingly believing that your looking at puppys and there are some wothers original for you to munch on...then it turns out its bollocks, you did it willingly but under false pretences, hence its still kidnap see???
     
  9. Obviously not. I'm going to Walt as a homeless bloke. I've already got the looks.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. The second ingredient of the offence : by force or fraud!
     
  11. He knows he is not plod, he knows what he is doing is wrong. the hutchins test does not apply. That case was one of basic intent rather than culpable intent and the appeal was dismissed.

    In kidnapping the following 4 ingredients of the offence apply:

    (1) the taking or carrying away of one person by another; (2) by force or fraud; (3) without the consent of the person so taken or carried away; and (4) without lawful excuse

    In the case of by force, consent is obviously lacking but if it is by fraud then consent would have possibly not been given had the victim been aware of the factual circumstances. The fact that they gave consent is not enough for a defence.
     
  12. To be fair, we dont know what the circumstances are. Its a fine line which I'm sure the courts will establish.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Almost touche but not quite. The law is clear but we cant comment unless we have the facts :)