Plod gets bit

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by delberto, Jul 18, 2008.

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. I don't know whats worse, the chavs attacking the police or this;

    'A Metropolitan Police spokesman said the officers, aged 34 and 29, were on sick leave suffering from bruising and knee injuries'

    Can you imagine our boys bedding themselves down after a bit of recreational violence in Basra/Belfast?!?!?

    Wheres the outrage bus when you need it?!?!
     
  2. Was this real Plod or Plastic Plod?
     
  3. Pedant says: "gets bit of what?"
     
  4. Unfortunately a lot of the young blacks in the inner cities seem to think it is there right to act in an anti social and, it is fair assume, racist manner. They have massive chips on their shoulders that have been created by the politically correct nonsense introduced to address their supposed oppression. Consequently as a nation of people we have become too scared to confront them, for fear of being labelled a racist, where the truth is that such actions would be those of a realist. When the hell are the policy makers going to fully appreciate that the majority of law abiding citizens have had enough. Lock them up, get them working on chain gangs doing amenity repair work (it works in America, why not here) or send them back to the culture they try so hard to mimick, seeing as they so despise the English rule of law.
     
  5. The problem is that the Police encourage officers to go sick after an incident like this. They are scared of people coming back to work when they are injured, making things worse then taking the police to court because they haven't exercised "duty of care". In addition to that, a bit of time on the sick always helps when the application goes into the criminal injuries compensation panel!
     
  6. I know the Riot Act is repealed, but the common law offence remains - more than two, disorderly manner. Hopefully the CPS will grow some balls, take them for riot, jury does the necessary and 7-8 stretches all round. If we let this nonsense get established it really is the end.
     
  7. I dunno... Something smells a bit.
    Listening to the news heads on the BBC, reporters describe a crowd of 30-ish 'of all ages' confronting the Police, not just kids or young hoodies or whatever the current description of our youth is..
    No real mention of what led to the incident, except that a teenage girl was asked to pick up some litter which she apparently did, then dropped it again.
    Is this area really so bad that the police got attacked by a mob of all ages?
    I wouldn't condemn people out of hand without hearing both sides of this incident personally......
     
  8. Public Order Act will do!

    Public Order Act 1986
    Section 1 - Riot

    (1) Where 12 or more persons who are present together use or threaten unlawful violence for a common purpose and the conduct of them (taken together) is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his personal safety, each of the persons using unlawful violence for the common purpose is guilty of riot.

    (2) It is immaterial whether or not the 12 or more use or threaten unlawful violence simultaneously.

    (3) The common purpose may be inferred from conduct.

    (4) No person of reasonable firmness need actually be, or be likely to be, present at the scene.

    (5) Riot may be committed in private as well as in public places.

    (6) A person guilty of riot is liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or a fine, or both.

    Section 2 - Violent Disorder

    (1) Where three or more persons who are present together use or threaten unlawful violence and the conduct of them (taken together) is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his personal safety, each of the persons using or threatening unlawful violence is guilty of violent disorder.
    (2) It is immaterial whether or not the three or more use or threaten unlawful violence simultaneously.

    (3) Same as Section 1

    (4) Same as Section 1

    (5) A person guilty of violent disorder is liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or a fine, or both, or on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both.

    Section 3 - Affray

    (1) A person is guilty of affray if they use or threatens unlawful violence towards another and his conduct is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his personal safety.

    (2) Where two or more persons use or threaten the unlawful violence, it is the conduct of them taken together that must be considered for the purposes of subsection (1)

    (3) For the purposes of this section words cannot be made by the use of words alone.

    (4) Same as Section 1

    (5) Same as Section 1

    (6) A constable may arrest without warrant anyone he reasonably suspects is committing affray

    (7) A person guilty of affray is liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or a fine or both, or on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both.
     
  9. Quite a good description here http://news.uk.msn.com/Article.aspx?cp-documentid=8933884

    and the place is a shit hole, I know I work there.
     
  10. From your link........A colleague who raced to the officers aid was pulled to the ground and kicked by others as several older men and women joined the fracas in a shopping precinct.

    From another....... Two men aged 34 and 38, both from South Norwood, were arrested on suspicion of assault and violent disorder on Thursday.



    I'll take your word for it.
     
  11. Come now, no self respecting chief constable would allow anybody to be charged with rioting, they would lose their chance of a knighthood.

    However sec2. Public order act. Violent disorder would be fine.
     
  12. A successful CICA claim will result regardless, all they need is a crime reference number (given by...the police!) and to co-operate with any investigation. As it is a set tariff scheme, the number of days sick will be irrelevant, payment is based on injuries alone (unlike a common law claim) Ergo - no F excuse.
     
  13. I know a bloke who was seriously assaulted and the hearing consisted of three old tw*ts saying to him, "We've so many really seriously assaulted people, don't you think you should just p*ss off and let us concentrate on the worst cases?"

    He got some dough at the end of it, but the process was disgraceful. The assault might not have been the reason why he killed himself by standing in front of a train 6 months ago, but it didn't help.
     
  14. Well I blame the parents :roll: