Soldato
There was a case a decade ago where a judge ruled profanity should not be a punishable offense, so I don't think that "law" even applies now.
This is why people are losing respect for the police...
- Thread starter RossGReds
- Start date
There was a case a decade ago where a judge ruled profanity should not be a punishable offense, so I don't think that "law" even applies now.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 7,053
Harassment, alarm or distress, the one size fits all answer for any given situation.
Man of Honour
Citation needed.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 7,053
Really? Town Police Clauses Act 1847 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/10-11/89/section/28 upto 14 days in prison (F19). Would that happen? Probably not, but you seem awfully sure about your (incorrect) answer.
Caporegime
Lol. No.
Cops wrong for swearing - yes. But **** happens.
I'm not going to bother replying further. Not aimed at you per se, but some of the people here condoning the 'auditors' actions citing Free speech etc, are a bit special.
Auditors are doing more harm than good, they aren't doing it for 'the people', they are doing it for the clicks and the fact they have too much time on their hands.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 7,053
Which has no relavance to this incident, did you read the article or just the headline? (Guessing you didnt). Article suggest that it only applies to swearing at officers.
"Courts were unlikely to rule that officers would be caused distress by most swear words."
Take 20 seconds instead of 10 next time!
Caporegime
Laws apply equally to all.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 4,313
Good old OCUK, restored my faith in humanity yet again! Think OP was not expecting this response lol.
I absolutely detest these 'Youtubers' or 'auditors' and the idiots in the comments who agree with them. Do their fans seriously not understand that these guys don't actually care and just do it for the views? Can they not see that these people filming are provoking and inviting attention from the Police or authorities etc. Can they not see that just simply being polite and giving things like their name isn't going to harm them. We all know there are times where you don't have to, or shouldn't have to but that doesn't stop you being a decent ******* human being though and just cooperating and going on your way within minutes rather than a slagging match.
I particularly love it when they mention about how the Police harass them. 'Hurr durr, here they are again questioning me! Go hassle a real criminal'. Well they don't harass me, so it must be something you're doing then isn't it, you thick ****!
I absolutely detest these 'Youtubers' or 'auditors' and the idiots in the comments who agree with them. Do their fans seriously not understand that these guys don't actually care and just do it for the views? Can they not see that these people filming are provoking and inviting attention from the Police or authorities etc. Can they not see that just simply being polite and giving things like their name isn't going to harm them. We all know there are times where you don't have to, or shouldn't have to but that doesn't stop you being a decent ******* human being though and just cooperating and going on your way within minutes rather than a slagging match.
I particularly love it when they mention about how the Police harass them. 'Hurr durr, here they are again questioning me! Go hassle a real criminal'. Well they don't harass me, so it must be something you're doing then isn't it, you thick ****!
Associate
Good old OCUK, restored my faith in humanity yet again! Think OP was not expecting this response lol.
I absolutely detest these 'Youtubers' or 'auditors' and the idiots in the comments who agree with them. Do their fans seriously not understand that these guys don't actually care and just do it for the views? Can they not see that these people filming are provoking and inviting attention from the Police or authorities etc. Can they not see that just simply being polite and giving things like their name isn't going to harm them. We all know there are times where you don't have to, or shouldn't have to but that doesn't stop you being a decent ******* human being though and just cooperating and going on your way within minutes rather than a slagging match.
I particularly love it when they mention about how the Police harass them. 'Hurr durr, here they are again questioning me! Go hassle a real criminal'. Well they don't harass me, so it must be something you're doing then isn't it, you thick ****!
Came to say the same thing. I agree with most replies within this thread. Poor OP.
Man of Honour
No they don't, which is why the ruling was made. The outcome was that Police Officers have a higher threshold to be harassed, alarmed or distressed than a normal member of the public. Did you read your link at all?
Caporegime
Youre missing the point. The fact that its been deemed there are different thresholds now opens it up for dispute as to where they lie on an individual basis. Because its successfully been challenged once it can now be challenged again. So it is still equal for all.
Man of Honour
No, the ruling was specific to Police Officers and is binding as case law only within that context.
Soldato
That guy sounds like he comes from the tower hamlets.
Caporegime
And the ruling by Judge Daniel Pierce-Higgins?
Man of Honour
It wasn't a ruling. It was merely sentencing remarks which are not case law. The person in question had already been convicted prior to sentencing.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 2,136
Knights in blue, I like it
Tsk, I was hoping no one would notice that!
Well I blame Police Quest. I swear it only worked when I spelt it with a 'K'.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 2,136
I'm sure he could recall times when it was second nature for the public to lend aid if there was an altercation on the street, unlike now where it's just a bunch of sad ***** peering through their phones :/
Soldato
Absolutely.
Permabanned
There have been two times where I have helped the old Bill, once I was in my late mother's nearly new Ford Cortina, stopped in a queue on the hill from Handforth into Wilmslow, near the station, when I saw in the mirror a guy was running on the opposite pavement chased by a flagging copper screaming "Stop that man". The escapee attempted run across the road and it was obvious he was going for the gap between my car and the car in front, so I closed the gap and he went flying across the bonnet and landed in a heap. The breathless policeman grabbed him and cuffed him. I got out, as much to check for bodywork damage as anything, and he asked for my details. I told him I didn't want to get involved in time off work et cetera. He nonetheless insisted on taking my details and got his notebook out. I said "Chris Wilson" and he replied "Watson?". I said no, WILSON. He winked and said "No I am sure you said Watson". I finally twigged and gave him a fictitious address and everyone seemed happy. I never heard any more about it, there was no damage to face the wrath for, and the copper thanked me profusely.
The other time was in Manchester, late at night, coming out of a night club. A guy was trying car door handles along the street and a copper saw him and went to apprehend him. The guy put up a robust fight and the (seemingly very small and slight) copper was coming off worst. Probably emboldened by drink I ran to help and we managed to get him on the ground. I was now filthy dirty, wet and bruised. This one was a jobsworth and demanded I wait until a squad car came along. As his hands were full stopping the thief making a runner I wished him a good night and made a hasty retreat into the shadows. Not sure if I'd be so keen nowadays due to blame and claim and all that nonsense, as well as my advancing age of course...But I'd give moral support