Police theft ...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Burnsy2023 said:
It's not theft. There is no intent to permanently deprive.
Click to expand...

SO does that mean that techincally if I go into a supermarket, pick up a tin of beans and leave my name and address and say I will return it tomorrow or pay for it tomorrow I can't be prosecuted?
 
Von Smallhausen said:
Where is the dishonesty ? The police officer has no intention of keeping the item, it is logged and stored in secure police storage and the owner can get it back any time.

Appropriation has occurred but there is no intention to permanently deprive and the police have not assumed the rights of the owner, ie they will not keep it or sell it on etc.

You therefore have no offence of theft.
Click to expand...

As I said, depends on the item. If they are football tickets and I cannot get the tickets back in time for the match then it is theft under English law.
Dishonesty occurs because they have no legal right to take the item, appropriation occurs because they physically take the item, and permanent deprival occurs because they would only return me a piece of paper with no value to it any longer - as the match would have already started/finished.
 
I've spotted another flaw. What happens when you get to the police station and they say they just have your mobile but you also left your laptop but the policeman states it wasn;t there when he emptied your car?
 
rypt said:
As I said, depends on the item. If they are football tickets and I cannot get the tickets back in time for the match then it is theft under English law.
Dishonesty occurs because they have no legal right to take the item, appropriation occurs because they physically take the item, and permanent deprival occurs because they would only return me a piece of paper with no value to it any longer - as the match would have already started/finished.
Click to expand...


Good luck convincing the CPS with that one and I mean you no offence.
 
Greebo said:
I've spotted another flaw. What happens when you get to the police station and they say they just have your mobile but you also left your laptop but the policeman states it wasn;t there when he emptied your car?
Click to expand...

Then the Daily Mail kicks in AGAIN .....

POLICE IN GIVE PHONE BACK BUT KEEP LAPTOP BEFORE KICKING OWNER'S TEETH IN SHOCKER
 
Tefal said:
But if someone had left their car unlocked there would be nothing wrong with doing that?
Click to expand...

If someone left their bag in an insecure car and someone took it and handed it in to police with all items still in it then no theft has occurred.

How about if they leave their bag/phone etc unattended in a cafe/bar?
Click to expand...

Same as above. If it is taken and handed in then there is no theft.

If you decide to keep all or any items foe yourself then that becomes a different case.
 
A few people are getting a little mixed up with the Theft Act and what a Police Officer is duty bound to do.

Protection of Property as a duty of the Police is second only to Protection of the Person (which quite rightly should come top). Every other duty comes below these two - including prosection of offenders.

Protection of persons property is a recognised a duty. If they find something in the Street, or an insecure building or car they have a duty of care to protect not only that item but anything in it. If this means taking it back to the Police Station and leaving a note for the lawful owner then so be it.

Most Police Forces have Crime Prevention Departments where they advise the public on how to minimise the risk of being a victim of crime - removal of these articles from cars is an extension of this.

Do you really want the Officers to just walk past and leave the stuff on show for the local thieves to steal?
 
Andy90 said:
Do you really want the Officers to just walk past and leave the stuff on show for the local thieves to steal?
Click to expand...

I want the police officer to ensure that any would-be thieves are apprehended and that items are recovered - by say giving them MUCH stricter sentences if they cannot be recovered (15 years hard labour for instance)
 
rypt said:
Tell me at which point I'm wrong?
Click to expand...

I already have.

I have detailed the points to prove for the offence of theft that all must be proven.

Dishonesty appropriates property - Were the police officer's actions dishonest ? Bear in mind that reasonable steps are taken at the scene to trace the owner and if not the items logged and stored in police storage and a note left for the owner.

Intention to permanently deprive - See above. The police officer has no intention of doing so at all.

Yes the items do not belong to the police and the owner may well not give their permission but without the dishonesty and with no intent to permanently deprive then you do not have a complete offence of theft.
 
Shame cars aren't how they used to be and you could just push down the lock and hold the door handle as you shut the door to lock it again.
 
What's next, peering through house windows and removing expensive items that have been left on display because a prospective burglar might see them and think "ooh, I'm having that"?
 
Azagoth said:
What's next, peering through house windows and removing expensive items that have been left on display because a prospective burglar might see them and think "ooh, I'm having that"?
Click to expand...

They do check front door handles to make sure the property is secure during the night.
 
Azagoth said:
What's next, peering through house windows and removing expensive items that have been left on display because a prospective burglar might see them and think "ooh, I'm having that"?
Click to expand...

I would have thought that wouldn't be next but if I came across an insecure property where the owners were out I would take reasonable steps to secure it because that is what the public pay me for at the end of the day.

As Andy says the police have a duty to protect property.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom