Want to swear at plod? No problem!

Well, in fairness he was using it as part of normal speech rather than using it to be abusive to the Police.

The 20-year-old told officers: "---- this man. I ain't been smoking nothing."

When the search revealed no drugs, he continued: "Told you, you wouldn't find ---- all."

Asked whether he had a middle name, he replied: "No, I've already ------- told you so
I think the Judge made the right call. As the chap was not in possession of any drugs could it be that he felt harrassed?

More a victory against Political Correctness by Common Sense.

If this were a crime you would have to arrest most of the British Army by NAAFI break on a Monday :)
The guy is clearly a liar though.

When Denzel Cassius Harvey was asked if he had a middle name, he replied: "No, I've already ------- told you so."
Swear at the Filth? Oh good.

You, Sir, are a ****!

Context? If I was to lift everybody who swore while talking to me, every cell in the country would be full by lunch time.
What I mean is, how far can people now push it with plod before they have actually crossed the line, given that the line has now been moved?
It will be decided by case law when someone else gets fined for harassment etc and the appeal court upholds the conviction.

However I suspect that the CPS will now decline to prosecute people for gobbing off at plod, lowering in a stroke both the 'costs of justice' and the crime rate.
It is a quite simple one

The offence is created by section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986:

"(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he:
(a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby."
This offence has the following statutory defences:

(a) The defendant had no reason to believe that there was any person within hearing or sight who was likely to be alarmed or distressed by his action.
(b) The defendant was in a dwelling and had no reason to believe that his behaviour would be seen or heard by any person outside any dwelling.
(c) The conduct was reasonable.
The appeal concluded that the teenagers and Police Officers present were not limp wristed fannies and therefore would not be likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress by the word ****.
The appeal concluded that the teenagers and Police Officers present were not limp wristed fannies and therefore would not be likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress by the word ****.
And also, it would seem, has given the cnuts a message that, should they wish to gratuitously charge somebody after they have failed to achieve what they set out to in the first place (ie do the little ****** for drugs), then they are on a hiding to nothing.
I read this that Mr Harvey was swearing in the context of his speech and not aimed at or directed to the officers.

So what exactly did they arrest him for? Swearing at police officers or swearing in public? Obviously Mr Bean (for it is he) decided that it wasn't aimed at them?

Perhaps the title of the Torygraph's peice (and this thread) should be:

Judge: it's no crime to swear in the presence of police, they are used to it

Non story really
I've not read the reportage on this but this was old news when I joined plod back in 2001. I don't understand why its suddenly such a big deal.
Isn't it an old principle ? That an officer of the Queen's Peace cannot be provoked or offended to occasion a breach of the peace.
That was discussed on Arrse by a couple of the resident coppers a few years ago. It seemed that they believed that someone had to be offended by the sweary words and coppers wouldn't be so easily shocked. The other copper commented that the SOP was to say that an approaching mother had been so shocked and had hurried her child to the other side of the street.

I was so impressed by (what appeared to be) two coppers exchanging tips on committing perjury on a public forum, that i looked it up on Google, which directed me to some police forum, where it had also being discussed. It seems that someone being offended was an urban myth. The Section 5 Public Order Act (or whatever) simply says it is an offence to swear on a public street where someone could be offended. Swearing in a building wasn't an offence.

If it was the Section 5 thingy he'd been charged with, I think you'll find it is an offence, whatever Mr Judge might decide. I can't be arsed to look it up. It could probably be overturned if the CPS wanted to appeal. They probably won't.


I wonder if the rest of his shift called him 'Trigger':

November 21, 2011 by inspectorgadget

"This will soon arrive in the classroom, the local housing office, the benefits office, local swimming pool, the library ( if the Tories have left any in your area) and all areas of public life..."

And he's the man with his finger on the pulse?
Would the Judge be offended if a scroat in the dock continually told him to **** off?

And even he wasn't actually offended, or even personally bothered, I bet the scroat would receive some sort of punishment.


The salient point seems to be missed.
I'm not particularly offended by swearing, however when someone is outside your house, or in your ward, dole office etc swearing like a trooper and doing their dinger, surprisingly enough people phone the police and expect them to deal with it as professional witnesses. The sticky point comes(over the boarder, where smith vs Docherty concluded that the police can't be offended by "such truculent language") when no one wants to give a statement and we walk away leaving said person continuing their behaviour, whilst the phonee, calls us all the useless bastards under the sun, despite it now being enshrined in law.

The issue with law and order lies with sheriffs and judges who have no conception of the problems in the country at street level.


And before some smart arse picks up on the spelling of border in that last post, I'm aware. I can't edit it from the phone!

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads