Police priorities: Motorists > Blind man

dmpoole said:
CAN SOMEBODY POINT ME TO THE BIT IN THE STORY WHERE THE BLIND MAN SAID HE WAS GOING TO DAMAGE THE CARS PLEASE
Click to expand...

He said: "I said all right, if you're not going to do anything I'll do something myself, I'll let the tyres down and I'll write 'no parking' on the windscreen.
Click to expand...

Both acts would be considered criminal damage I believe.
 
scorza said:
Councils have been negligent by allowing (maybe even encouraging) planning applications for new housing developments with insufficient parking space, in the hope that by punishing car drivers we'll all give up our motors and use ethnic peace bicycles instead.
Click to expand...


A rule imposed by central government means all new housing must have a maximum of two spaces/garages etc for each house, no matter how many bedrooms it is.


M
 
It's not a rule it's a guideline, and I thought it was 0.5 spaces per house? Unless, of course, they've changed them again.

Of course cheapskate property developers just do the minimum they have to.
 
Another victimless crime enforced by the automatons of the Pembrokeshire constabulary, the UK is safe from this maniac for another day (although the man never actually threatened criminal damage in the article).
 
Energize said:
Deflating tyres is not damage.
Click to expand...

Yes it is, as is writing on a windscreen, comparable to graffiti on a wall. Letting down tyres could be very dangerous as well if the driver didn't notice immediately & had to stop quickly. Driving with a flat tyre can damage a number of bits of the car.
 
Cemetery said:
Yes it is, as is writing on a windscreen, comparable to graffiti on a wall. Letting down tyres could be very dangerous as well if the driver didn't notice immediately & had to stop quickly. Driving with a flat tyre can damage a number of bits of the car.
Click to expand...

Pen can be wiped off, comparing it to graffiti is a straw man. The fact is he threatened an action that would in all likelyhood not cause any damage, if he had done it and it had caused damage then that would be a different situation, but being arrested for threatening to do something that could possibly cause damage in the event of the planets aligning is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
Round here, the police station is directly opposite the football stadium, and there's only one road for the police to get out on. When a football game is on, there are tons of cars (illegally) parked around and blocking the road, which makes it very hard, if not impossible, for a police car to get in or out, yet the police don't seem to give a damn.
 
If somebody let me tyres down it would in all likelyhood cause damage to them. He threatened criminal damage, it's that simple.
 
No, but that has not happened in many thousands of tire slashings that occur every year. There is no mens rea as no doubt he did not consider the action damage.
 
criminal damage that could be very dangerous.

A load of people setting off with half flat tyres could end badly.
 
Energize said:
No, but that has not happened in many thousands of tire slashings that occur every year
Click to expand...

Hang on are you suggesting that many thousands of tyre slashings that occur every year result in no damage :confused:

I'm not particularly bothered what your opinion is - rest a 1.5 tonne car on compeltely deflated tyres for a period of time and it's time for new tyres.
 
To all those saying its ridiculous to have arrested him would you still say that if it was some loud mouth chav instead of a blindman?
 
Energize said:
Another victimless crime enforced by the automatons of the Pembrokeshire constabulary, the UK is safe from this maniac for another day (although the man never actually threatened criminal damage in the article).
Click to expand...

He didn't ?

Assuming the article is correct, he threatened to deflate tyres. When tyres are deflated they are rendered useless pretty quickly as Fox has mentioned.

If you wish to discount that one then consider this. To threaten to write on peoples' windscreens is threats to cause criminal damage and the Criminal Damage Act of 1971 states very clearly that this is an offence, specifically section 2.

2 Threats to destroy or damage property

A person who without lawful excuse makes to another a threat, intending that that other would fear it would be carried out,—

(a) to destroy or damage any property belonging to that other or a third person; or

(b) to destroy or damage his own property in a way which he knows is likely to endanger the life of that other or a third person;

shall be guilty of an offence.
Click to expand...

The man made the threat to let down tyres, which I will discount for the sake of argument, and also threatened to write on windscreens.

When that threat is made to a police officer, why would they not believe it would not be carried out ?

Couple that with a prime directive of the police to protect property then I fail to see how your argument of automatons and victimless crimes holds any water at all ? Note the term ' third person ' in the act of which a police officer can be if a threat is made in his presence and it need not be his property where the threat is directed to.

To say that he will write something on windscreens of cars that don't belong to him, and for which he wouldn't get permission to deface, is a threat to cause criminal damage. If he carried this out and used a marker that washed off easily it would not dismiss a case of criminal damage as the damage need not be permanent and as such the mens rea is there whether he likes to admit it or not.

Would you or I get his permission to write anything on any property of his ?

The man was clearly miffed at parking issues and as a result he saw red mist and decided to try and be clever. It has bitten him on the derriere and what better way to deflect attention from that then getting the press involved that invariably sucks in people like yourself that seem to dismiss the finer points of the Criminal Damage Act.

The arrest was lawful as was his detention and he was given a caution for which an admission must be made. Mens Rea ?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom