police powers

Burnsy2023 · 27 May 2010 at 16:23

rypt said:
How is wilful damage not criminal damage, they failed to follow the generally understood procedures with handling electronics, as such they wilfully damaged the hardware as they knew this would be the possible outcome due to their actions.

There was no intent, it is the dictionary definition of negligence.

rypt · 27 May 2010 at 16:27

Burnsy2023 said:
There was no intent, it is the dictionary definition of negligence.

They PURPOSELY did not use anti static bags and the like, it goes beyond negligence.
Negligence is when you are unaware of what might happen when you do something.

If you pull the trigger on a gun while pointing it at someone, can you claim negligence? No, because it is the expected/understood outcome that the person will get shot when you pull the trigger.
Same here, it is the understood outcome that electronics may get damaged if not handled correctly.

Burnsy2023 · 27 May 2010 at 16:29

rypt said:
They PURPOSELY did not use anti static bags and the like

What evidence do you have for that exactly? What? None? Really?

rypt · 27 May 2010 at 16:31

Burnsy2023 said:
What evidence do you have for that exactly? What? None? Really?

Read the analogy, damage to electronics is the expected outcome and the fact that it may occur is common knowledge.

G-MAN2004 · 27 May 2010 at 16:31

rypt said:
They PURPOSELY did not use anti static bags and the like, it goes beyond negligence.

They didn't not use them, to purposely damage your stuff though.

Regardless though, absolutely disgusting lack of care towards your stuff, even more so that computer parts are very delicate. I'd be so ****** off. :/

PhillyDee · 27 May 2010 at 16:31

rypt said:
They PURPOSELY did not use anti static bags and the like, it goes beyond negligence.
Negligence is when you are unaware of what might happen when you do something.

If you pull the trigger on a gun while pointing it at someone, can you claim negligence? No, because it is the expected/understood outcome that the person will get shot when you pull the trigger.
Same here, it is the understood outcome that electronics may get damaged if not handled correctly.

So they told you they didn't use anti-static bags intentionally? Seriously?
You need proof with allegations like that.

rypt · 27 May 2010 at 16:33

G-MAN2004 said:
They didn't not use them, to purposely damage your stuff though.

Regardless though, absolutely disgusting lack of care towards your stuff, even more so that computer parts are very delicate. I'd be so ****** off. :/

Aint my stuff, I aint the OP for the record.

And as I said, it is common knowledge that pulling the gun trigger will result in a bullet being fired where the gun is pointing - just as it is common knowledge that electronics will get damaged if not handled properly

G-MAN2004 · 27 May 2010 at 16:35

rypt said:
Aint my stuff, I aint the OP for the record.

Ah yeah.

rypt said:
And as I said, it is common knowledge that pulling the gun trigger will result in a bullet being fired where the gun is pointing - just as it is common knowledge that electronics will get damaged if not handled properly

But there is a difference between doing it on purpose, and not.

Burnsy2023 · 27 May 2010 at 16:35

rypt said:
Read the analogy, damage to electronics is the expected outcome and the fact that it may occur is common knowledge.

Common knowledge on this forum perhaps, not to Joe Public though.

Burnsy2023 · 27 May 2010 at 16:36

rypt said:
And as I said, it is common knowledge that pulling the gun trigger will result in a bullet being fired where the gun is pointing - just as it is common knowledge that electronics will get damaged if not handled properly

Ever heard of a negligent discharge?

PhillyDee · 27 May 2010 at 16:38

Burnsy2023 said:
Common knowledge on this forum perhaps, not to Joe Public though.

Agreed. People laugh at you when mentioned about static.

However, if the person has the skills to strip a pc down and is in a position where that is there job, then they should know too!

But it certainly wasn't on purpose.

rypt · 27 May 2010 at 16:39

Burnsy2023 said:
Common knowledge on this forum perhaps, not to Joe Public though.

I disagree, I think it is common knowledge to most people, and surely common knowledge to anyone tasked with dealing with seizures of electronics

Burnsy2023 said:
Ever heard of a negligent discharge?

Not the same though is it, it is the accidental firing of a weapon

robbiemc · 27 May 2010 at 16:43

Burnsy2023 said:
Common knowledge on this forum perhaps, not to Joe Public though.

SO you're saying that the Police don't have any formal procedure for confiscating computer components such as these? I find that hard to believe, and completely unacceptable.
To treat someone's personal property in this way is utterly appalling.

OP, were the components removed from your house in the same manner? As this was initially evidence I would have expected them to take more care of sensitive and fragile components - they want to be able to get access to the data after all.

Burnsy2023 · 27 May 2010 at 16:43

rypt said:
I disagree, I think it is common knowledge to most people, and surely common knowledge to anyone tasked with dealing with seizures of electronics

Seizures of electronics isn't done by a specialist officer, otherwise they wouldn't have seized the RAM.

rypt · 27 May 2010 at 16:46

Burnsy2023 said:
Seizures of electronics isn't done by a specialist officer, otherwise they wouldn't have seized the RAM.

The fact that something "looks" like RAM does not mean that it really is RAM, only way to be sure what it really is is to take it to check.

As for not specialists, then I would expect it to be part of the general training for the officers. For instance, if the officers find a knife that they suspect may have been used for a stabbing I'm sure they are taught to wear some gloves and not stick the knife in water/acid/etc.

matt_fsr · 27 May 2010 at 16:49

Burnsy2023 said:
Ever heard of a negligent discharge?

Yeah, usually involves a Brazilian....

Seizures of electronics isn't done by a specialist officer, otherwise they wouldn't have seized the RAM.

No **** sherlock! (not aimed at you personally)

I'd hate to think how much average PC Plod gets wrong on a daily basis if on a computer siezure they remove RAM - I mean computers have only been around for how long?

Shockingly badly treated kit. I'd be extremely upset and filing a full complaint listing all damaged equipment.

No1newts · 27 May 2010 at 16:50

Von Smallhausen said:
You weren't informed by the arresting officer as to why you were being arrested ?

While in custody, you weren't there while the arresting officer gave his circumstances of arrest to the custody sergeant ?

You asked for someone to be informed that you were arrested and you say it wasn't done ?

I find that difficult to take onboard.

Agree.

Whilst they can be a little heavy handed at times they seems a little unbelievably OTT

Burnsy2023 · 27 May 2010 at 16:51

rypt said:
As for not specialists, then I would expect it to be part of the general training for the officers.

Sometimes I really wonder what planet you're on. No, no it's not as far as I am aware.

rypt · 27 May 2010 at 16:53

Burnsy2023 said:
Sometimes I really wonder what planet you're on. No, no it's not as far as I am aware.

I dunno, I'm on a planet that expects people who are tasked with doing a certain job (say seizure of evidence) to know how to take that evidence safely, without damaging it.

Just like I expect for the car dealer service people to know how to jack the car up without damaging it, how to change the oil or the brakes without damaging it, and so on.

Just like I expect for, say a firearms officer to know how to actually fire a firearm safely, and how to aim it in the correct direction, and him being actually able to hit something.

Is it wrong for me to expect people to know how to do their jobs properly?

Jonnybmac · 27 May 2010 at 17:01

gambitt said:
Okay, the charge was fraud. That is all I'm going to say. I've now decided that even if the police come across this thread I don't think it will matter.

So in summary:

- I was told it was fraud but nothing more.
- Evidence was only found at ONE of my colleagues addresses
- I had nothing to do with it and this is backed up my a lack of evidence
- The rest of us were arrested probably because we are good friends and seen together around the building (lunch, coffee breaks and occasionally work )
- The officers were actually friendly and polite, probably because I am the same way. My only gripe is the lack of information and cleanliness of the cell.

While I was lying in the cell I wasn't really worried because I knew that I've done nothing wrong even though I was going a bit crazy trying to think of what it could possibly be. I was pretty relaxed when I went to the interview probably because I was so tired and my solicitor had told me that no evidence had been found.

The arrest itself is not my real complaint. One day at the police station is nothing really. It's the fact that my computers and phone have gone and I'm suspended from work while they investigate and all this is based on is one person incorrectly pointing the finger at me.

When you get suspended, you get full pay.. so be happy that your getting free holidays,and afterwards get to go back to work with everyone knowing you were innocent.