Today is the day I lost respect for the British police

SexyGreyFox · 16 Aug 2014 at 23:20

andi said:
Because some people aren't capable of adult relationships.

It's the equivalent of telling your children to go play separately.

This is not the same.
Person A did not harass Person B but still got a PIN.

It seems that because the OP started the thread quite immaturely that most posters actually think he did harass the person.

Tefal · 16 Aug 2014 at 23:42

Dimple said:
It seems that because the OP started the thread quite immaturely that most posters actually think he did harass the person.

or maybe its indicative of the worrying attitude of "no smoke without fire" or "the police wouldn't have done something if they didn't have some proof" which most have

andi · 17 Aug 2014 at 00:19

Dimple said:
This is not the same.
Person A did not harass Person B but still got a PIN.

If he'd harassed her, he wouldn't be getting a PIN. He'd be getting locked up probably.

A PIN is way of stepping in before that happens.

It is not saying that you've committed a crime. If you'd committed a crime, that crime would be recorded and investigated and you'd be treated as a suspect.

Meridian · 17 Aug 2014 at 07:46

Tefal said:
or maybe its indicative of the worrying attitude of "no smoke without fire" or "the police wouldn't have done something if they didn't have some proof" which most have

To be fair, when you go back and read the original post, there's an interesting use of language: he doesn't say "I didn't make them", he says

matdom said:
yet there is no proof that I made them

I don't know about you, but if I was wrongly accused of contacting an ex and posted on a BBS, I'd say "it wasn't me".

estebanrey · 17 Aug 2014 at 08:21

Sliver said:
I'm calling fake on this video. He has a bag in his hand, the cop grabs his hands instantly then the bag is gone. Not possible. Fake.

It's called a magic trick :rolleyes:

Whilst I'm not sure it isn't a set up, the disappearing part is certainly possible using something like a TKO...

godinman · 17 Aug 2014 at 10:03

Dimple said:
This is not the same.
Person A did not harass Person B but still got a PIN.

It seems that because the OP started the thread quite immaturely that most posters actually think he did harass the person.

The PIN is in response to the difficulties found in detecting early stage, low level harassment. It's (as far as I can see) simply the police saying, "We don't know if you've been harassing this person, but we've had a complaint so be aware that they do not want contact with you and future contact will be investigated for harassment."

It seems fair enough to me tbh.

Robosapien · 17 Aug 2014 at 10:37

godinman said:
The PIN is in response to the difficulties found in detecting early stage, low level harassment. It's (as far as I can see) simply the police saying, "We don't know if you've been harassing this person, but we've had a complaint so be aware that they do not want contact with you and future contact will be investigated for harassment."

It seems fair enough to me tbh.

Well yes that would be fair enough. Were it not for the slight issue of it apparently showing up on an eCRB.

Potentially a great example of labeling theory.

SexyGreyFox · 17 Aug 2014 at 11:16

andi said:
A PIN is way of stepping in before that happens.

Even when there is zero proof, this doesn't make sense.
If you get a PIN then surely it's the Police thinking there is something going on otherwise they wouldn't bother.

Dave M · 17 Aug 2014 at 11:43

Dimple said:
Even when there is zero proof, this doesn't make sense.
If you get a PIN then surely it's the Police thinking there is something going on otherwise they wouldn't bother.

Because if out of 100 cases 99 are made up and 1 is real - you have possibly offended 99 innocent people and prevented 1 case of real harm.

If 1 in 100 cases of that real harm went onto serious assault or even death/suicide then the police have saved them selves the question of 'why did you ignore the complaint' by sending this pretty basic letter (PIN).

Considering your job I'd expect you to understand the principle of covering your backside!

godinman · 17 Aug 2014 at 11:51

Robosapien said:
Well yes that would be fair enough. Were it not for the slight issue of it apparently showing up on an eCRB.

Potentially a great example of labeling theory.

I suppose the eCRB bit is a difficult point, I guess it could depend on the weighting given to it by the person doing/receiving the check, I wonder if there is any training given etc.

Labeling theory, meh.

SexyGreyFox · 17 Aug 2014 at 13:45

Dave M said:
Because if out of 100 cases 99 are made up and 1 is real - you have possibly offended 99 innocent people and prevented 1 case of real harm.

If 1 in 100 cases of that real harm went onto serious assault or even death/suicide then the police have saved them selves the question of 'why did you ignore the complaint' by sending this pretty basic letter (PIN).

Considering your job I'd expect you to understand the principle of covering your backside!

So you agree, the Police are covering their backsides because they think there is something in it and for that very fact if I got one I'd be doing something about it if I hadn't done anything.

RDM · 19 Aug 2014 at 20:06

Robosapien said:
Well yes that would be fair enough. Were it not for the slight issue of it apparently showing up on an eCRB.

Potentially a great example of labeling theory.

Allegations show up on an eCRB so I don't think the PIN makes any difference in that regard.