Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Newbury Today Forum _ Newbury News _ Robberies and affrey in Newbury

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 11 2010, 07:23 AM

Note:I know affray is spelt wrong in the heading.

It would seem that underpasses are becoming a favoured place for robberies or muggings. Perhaps it should be advised not to venture alone into them? Perhaps it is advisable that one shouldn't wander alone at night in Newbury?

With reports of affray, or worse, seemingly on the increase in Newbury, I'd be interested in hearing the views of the local police; if we have any.

I understand that Thames Valley Police covers Reading; I wonder if perhaps that is to the detriment of Newbury?


http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=14215

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=14207

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=14206

http://forum.newburytoday.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=847

Posted by: Hugh Saskin Aug 11 2010, 07:49 AM

Probably safer to move to Swindon where, so I've been told, there's virtually no crime at all...

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Aug 11 2010, 08:15 AM

QUOTE (Hugh Saskin @ Aug 11 2010, 08:49 AM) *
Probably safer to move to Swindon where, so I've been told, there's virtually no crime at all...


I'd prefer it if you moved to Helmland. I've heard you would be popular with the locals.

Posted by: Bill1 Aug 11 2010, 08:43 AM

QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Aug 11 2010, 09:15 AM) *
I'd prefer it if you moved to Helmland. I've heard you would be popular with the locals.


Was that really neccessary?

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 11 2010, 08:44 AM

QUOTE (Hugh Saskin @ Aug 11 2010, 08:49 AM) *
Probably safer to move to Swindon where, so I've been told, there's virtually no crime at all...

Perhaps crims view Newbury as a soft touch; an easy target.

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 11 2010, 08:45 AM

QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Aug 11 2010, 09:15 AM) *
I'd prefer it if you moved to Helmland. I've heard you would be popular with the locals.

I think he thought, as do I, that Hugh Saskin was being sarcastic.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Aug 11 2010, 09:18 AM

QUOTE (Bill1 @ Aug 11 2010, 09:43 AM) *
Was that really neccessary?


Yes. He is just being sarcastic and as we know sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. Sorry Bill1 - The guy is just boring, tedious etc etc. I expect he'll post about other people using the forum to post in work time next. It's his pet topic. Yawn...... rolleyes.gif

Posted by: JeffG Aug 11 2010, 10:35 AM

QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Aug 11 2010, 08:23 AM) *
Perhaps it is advisable that one shouldn't wander alone at night in Newbury?

Well, I wouldn't these days, particularly in the town centre. Newbury has really gone downhill in recent years.

PS: in another post, it took me a while to work out where "Helmland" was supposed to be. Not very nice.

Posted by: admin Aug 11 2010, 10:52 AM

Lets keep away from the personal stuff please. The forum has been full of interesting, informed and grown up debate in the last few weeks in particular. Let's try and keep it that way.

Posted by: Bloggo Aug 11 2010, 10:54 AM

QUOTE (admin @ Aug 11 2010, 11:52 AM) *
Lets keep away from the personal stuff please. The forum has been full of interesting, informed and grown up debate in the last few weeks in particular. Let's try and keep it that way.

Yes, and other people have added some interesting comments as well wink.gif laugh.gif

Posted by: Bill1 Aug 11 2010, 12:28 PM

QUOTE (admin @ Aug 11 2010, 11:52 AM) *
Lets keep away from the personal stuff please. The forum has been full of interesting, informed and grown up debate in the last few weeks in particular. Let's try and keep it that way.



Well said!

Posted by: eternalriver Aug 12 2010, 09:31 AM

Text message converstion between my wife and I at about 7:15pm last night whilst waiting at Newbury train station for a train home (verbatim)

Wife: "Some yob just asked me for money - I said no and then he asked me if I have any credit for him to use my phone"
Me: "What is it with Newbury and its chav begging scumbags?"
Wife: "I always feel like I'm going to get mugged or beaten up at Newbury station. I hate it"
Me: "I think you should drive in then"

I work in Reading and visit Newbury a few times a month (I now live in Wiltshire) and I've been asked to hand over more 50p / £1 coins "to use the phone" and "for a cup of tea" MORE times than I've been asked in Reading.

What will it take to tackle this definitely growing problem? The perception is the police will / can not do much so what about a broken jaw to one or more of these rodents? I'm sure it won't be long before someone snaps and takes matters into their own hands!

Posted by: Jayjay Aug 12 2010, 02:36 PM

QUOTE (eternalriver @ Aug 12 2010, 10:31 AM) *
Text message converstion between my wife and I at about 7:15pm last night whilst waiting at Newbury train station for a train home (verbatim)

Wife: "Some yob just asked me for money - I said no and then he asked me if I have any credit for him to use my phone"
Me: "What is it with Newbury and its chav begging scumbags?"
Wife: "I always feel like I'm going to get mugged or beaten up at Newbury station. I hate it"
Me: "I think you should drive in then"

I work in Reading and visit Newbury a few times a month (I now live in Wiltshire) and I've been asked to hand over more 50p / £1 coins "to use the phone" and "for a cup of tea" MORE times than I've been asked in Reading.

What will it take to tackle this definitely growing problem? The perception is the police will / can not do much so what about a broken jaw to one or more of these rodents? I'm sure it won't be long before someone snaps and takes matters into their own hands!


If someone just asking for 50p makes you snap and want to break someone's jaw you need to get some help.

Posted by: GMR Aug 12 2010, 04:38 PM

QUOTE (Hugh Saskin @ Aug 11 2010, 08:49 AM) *
Probably safer to move to Swindon where, so I've been told, there's virtually no crime at all...



You are joking; I grew up in Swindon and my daughter is currently working there. It is not a case of 'no crime in Swindon' but a case of the people giving up reporting it as nothing is ever done.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 12 2010, 04:51 PM

Have to say that being part of Thames Valley Police does Newbury no favours. Lets be honest in any organisation there is a degree of 'group think' which affects management logic. In other words - that's how it is.

So, I'd hazard a guess that TVP see Newbury as a sleepy backwater. The real 'action' takes place in Reading, or Slough or anywhere but West Berks. Very easy mistake to make! I feel far safer in Reading Town centre in the evening than Newbury, don't mind admitting. Indeed at the moment, I spend a couple of evenings in central london - hordes of Police but no real sign of trouble.

Just to reinforce this, I saw the 'murder' figure for West Berkshire and compared it with the area I stay in North London, round Kings Cross. We were eight times higher! That was a couple of years back and I had a classic response from a Councillor 'Yes, but we know why all those people got murdered' . That gave me a lot of comfort!!

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 12 2010, 06:48 PM

What are BTP doing with regards to the train station??

Posted by: GMR Aug 12 2010, 06:51 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 12 2010, 07:48 PM) *
What are BTP doing with regards to the train station??


We give up, what are they doing? wink.gif

Posted by: eternalriver Aug 12 2010, 07:06 PM

QUOTE (Jayjay @ Aug 12 2010, 03:36 PM) *
If someone just asking for 50p makes you snap and want to break someone's jaw you need to get some help.



You're probably right, perhaps I do. I was brought up to earn money not ask random people in the street for it - my parents have a lot to answer for! wink.gif

Posted by: On the edge Aug 12 2010, 07:11 PM

QUOTE (Jayjay @ Aug 12 2010, 03:36 PM) *
If someone just asking for 50p makes you snap and want to break someone's jaw you need to get some help.


Perhaps BUT. Its rather like the street mucisian playing at Picadilly Tube Station - very nice BUT do we need the amplification so loud that it hurts your ears? Same with the 'spare 50p guv' no issue BUT do we need the laying across the pavement festooned in rubbish. Or the sitting about being agressive. That one broken window starts the rot syndrome - lets clean the town up. Today, no one in the country needs to live in abject poverty or 'on the street' - its a personal choice. Harsh but true.

Posted by: user23 Aug 12 2010, 07:22 PM

QUOTE (eternalriver @ Aug 12 2010, 08:06 PM) *
You're probably right, perhaps I do. I was brought up to earn money not ask random people in the street for it - my parents have a lot to answer for! wink.gif
I was brought up not to break peoples jaws. wink.gif

Posted by: Bofem Aug 13 2010, 02:54 AM

QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 12 2010, 05:51 PM) *
So, I'd hazard a guess that TVP see Newbury as a sleepy backwater.


I believe the answer may lie on page 13 of this week's NWN.

Story 1: Newbury court may close down due to lack of 'business'.
Story 2: PCSO organises fun day in Turnpike.

Either these PCSOs are a brilliant secret weapon who have unintentionally caused a courtroom closure...OR...police are too busy organising fun days to bring to do the job they're paid for (no, not dressing up as police officers, but to assist fullfat coppers on low level crime and disorder).

PS The lad who's constantly begging to "borrow your phone" has a town centre ASBO, but of course Dougie at Maidenhead CCTV isn't to know that is he.

Anyway, can't we get back to naff pubs? A certain retired police sergeant who spent 10 years trying to stop Wetherspoons opening in town is now the bouncer of the charming Diamond Tap. Fancy that!



Posted by: Jayjay Aug 13 2010, 01:09 PM

QUOTE (Bofem @ Aug 13 2010, 03:54 AM) *
Anyway, can't we get back to naff pubs? A certain retired police sergeant who spent 10 years trying to stop Wetherspoons opening in town is now the bouncer of the charming Diamond Tap. Fancy that!


I noticed that too. Each time Wetherspoons put an application in he stopped it. Some may say hypocrite, but I could not possibly comment.

Posted by: Iommi Aug 13 2010, 01:26 PM

He also managed to block a friend of mine from opening a bar in Barts Street.

Posted by: GMR Aug 13 2010, 07:42 PM

QUOTE (Bofem @ Aug 13 2010, 03:54 AM) *
I believe the answer may lie on page 13 of this week's NWN.

Story 1: Newbury court may close down due to lack of 'business'.
Story 2: PCSO organises fun day in Turnpike.

Either these PCSOs are a brilliant secret weapon who have unintentionally caused a courtroom closure...OR...police are too busy organising fun days to bring to do the job they're paid for (no, not dressing up as police officers, but to assist fullfat coppers on low level crime and disorder).

PS The lad who's constantly begging to "borrow your phone" has a town centre ASBO, but of course Dougie at Maidenhead CCTV isn't to know that is he.

Anyway, can't we get back to naff pubs? A certain retired police sergeant who spent 10 years trying to stop Wetherspoons opening in town is now the bouncer of the charming Diamond Tap. Fancy that!



I agree with you. It is easier to organise a fun day than trying to catch criminals.

The idea of the fun day was supposed to bring the community together, but the criminals and people who cause anti social behaviour are left to get on with their crimes. If the police really want to bring the community together then they should try catching the criminals first instead of playing games.

I've lived on the estate for 30 years and crime has increased fantastically lately. People are scared to go out of their homes after dark, or go near the shops where gangs monopolies the area.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 13 2010, 08:54 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 13 2010, 08:42 PM) *
I agree with you. It is easier to organise a fun day than trying to catch criminals.

The idea of the fun day was supposed to bring the community together, but the criminals and people who cause anti social behaviour are left to get on with their crimes. If the police really want to bring the community together then they should try catching the criminals first instead of playing games.

I've lived on the estate for 30 years and crime has increased fantastically lately. People are scared to go out of their homes after dark, or go near the shops where gangs monopolies the area.


GMR - you've got it all wrong. This is all about efficiency - if you have most of the 'community' in one place at one time - then the criminal fraternity can get far more done; without any interfearing old bill. Means having all your crime on one day - commit one do two others and stay free! laugh.gif

Posted by: GMR Aug 13 2010, 08:57 PM

QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 13 2010, 09:54 PM) *
GMR - you've got it all wrong. This is all about efficiency - if you have most of the 'community' in one place at one time - then the criminal fraternity can get far more done; without any interfearing old bill. Means having all your crime on one day - commit one do two others and stay free! laugh.gif



Didn't I say that in a roundabout way? laugh.gif wink.gif

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 13 2010, 09:35 PM

blinkered again! To the best of my knowledge magistrates only sit for criminal and driving matters twice a week and are always full. So perhaps the lack of business could be coming from the other courts that sit at newbury. But hey this logic doesnt bash the police so could never be a possibility! wink.gif

Posted by: GMR Aug 13 2010, 09:44 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 13 2010, 10:35 PM) *
blinkered again! To the best of my knowledge magistrates only sit for criminal and driving matters twice a week and are always full. So perhaps the lack of business could be coming from the other courts that sit at newbury. But hey this logic doesnt bash the police so could never be a possibility! wink.gif



Ease up... You shouldn't be so sensitive on here... and after all, you are the old bill. laugh.gif wink.gif

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 14 2010, 09:52 AM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 13 2010, 08:42 PM) *
I agree with you. It is easier to organise a fun day than trying to catch criminals.

The idea of the fun day was supposed to bring the community together, but the criminals and people who cause anti social behaviour are left to get on with their crimes. If the police really want to bring the community together then they should try catching the criminals first instead of playing games.

I've lived on the estate for 30 years and crime has increased fantastically lately. People are scared to go out of their homes after dark, or go near the shops where gangs monopolies the area.


Scared to go to the One Stop? I'm not.

Posted by: GMR Aug 14 2010, 10:51 AM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 14 2010, 10:52 AM) *
Scared to go to the One Stop? I'm not.


I didn't say I was, I often go there... but because i do I know how bad it is up there.

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 14 2010, 01:26 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 14 2010, 11:51 AM) *
I didn't say I was, I often go there... but because i do I know how bad it is up there.

I didn't say you were either.

You did post that 'People are scared to go out of their homes after dark, or go near the shops where gangs monopolies the area'

I find that hard to believe.

Posted by: Iommi Aug 14 2010, 01:30 PM

I've become more scarred; I've often been 'mugged' when I've gone to some of the bars in Newbury. tongue.gif

Posted by: GMR Aug 14 2010, 01:43 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 14 2010, 02:26 PM) *
I didn't say you were either.

You did post that 'People are scared to go out of their homes after dark, or go near the shops where gangs monopolies the area'

I find that hard to believe.


I can only go by what I see and what people on the estate have told me. I am sure there are others who have no problems.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 14 2010, 04:05 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 14 2010, 10:52 AM) *
Scared to go to the One Stop? I'm not.


I'm sure your not. This is probably an assumption - but a big strapping lad in the prime of life wouldn't be would he? However, like GMR I know several people who would think twice before walking through a pack of feral stood around in the semi darkness, using foul langage and acting tough. No matter how many of those responsible got keeping order suggest they aren't like that when you get to know them. Frankly I don't want to and why the heck should anyone else. This used to be and still is loitering.

Posted by: GMR Aug 14 2010, 06:30 PM

QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 14 2010, 05:05 PM) *
I'm sure your not. This is probably an assumption - but a big strapping lad in the prime of life wouldn't be would he? However, like GMR I know several people who would think twice before walking through a pack of feral stood around in the semi darkness, using foul langage and acting tough. No matter how many of those responsible got keeping order suggest they aren't like that when you get to know them. Frankly I don't want to and why the heck should anyone else. This used to be and still is loitering.



I agree; ones ability to defend ones self should be neither here nor there. The situation shouldn't exist in the first place.

Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 19 2010, 05:14 PM

I regret to see another report of an 'underpass' robbery! sad.gif

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=14309

Posted by: GMR Aug 19 2010, 06:23 PM

I know of other people who have had trouble walking under the Robin Hood roundabout. I advice anybody to go across the main road rather than use the underground. I've seen people hang around down there. That is what I also told my daughter to do.


Posted by: gel Aug 19 2010, 06:48 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 19 2010, 07:23 PM) *
I know of other people who have had trouble walking under the Robin Hood roundabout. I advice anybody to go across the main road rather than use the underground. I've seen people hang around down there. That is what I also told my daughter to do.


These underpass scum should be in fear of apprehension by Old Bill, who's local station is of course within spitting distance.
And be in fear of the consequences of being found guilty ie hard time in jail.

Usual defence will be offered up no doubt by their taxpayer funded lawyer of there being nothing to do in Newbury, which is society's fault, came from a troublesome home etc etc.

ACTION?


BRING ON THE GUARDIAN ANGELS, NEWBURY CHAPTER.

Oh no I was dreaming..silly me.

Posted by: GMR Aug 19 2010, 07:02 PM

QUOTE (gel @ Aug 19 2010, 07:48 PM) *
These underpass scum should be in fear of apprehension by Old Bill, who's local station is of course within spitting distance.
And be in fear of the consequences of being found guilty ie hard time in jail.

Usual defence will be offered up no doubt by their taxpayer funded lawyer of there being nothing to do in Newbury, which is society's fault, came from a troublesome home etc etc.

ACTION?


BRING ON THE GUARDIAN ANGELS, NEWBURY CHAPTER.

Oh no I was dreaming..silly me.



I agree, but because the law is so weak those stalkers feel that they can roam easily without any fear of waking up the coppers from their stupor.

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 19 2010, 07:18 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 19 2010, 08:02 PM) *
I agree, but because the law is so weak those stalkers feel that they can roam easily without any fear of waking up the coppers from their stupor.

A crime like this would take all of 60 seconds to commit. Please explain how you would go about stopping such a crime.

Posted by: GMR Aug 19 2010, 08:22 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 19 2010, 08:18 PM) *
A crime like this would take all of 60 seconds to commit. Please explain how you would go about stopping such a crime.



OK... you are right... we can't... Great news for the criminals though. Christmas has come early!!!! wink.gif


Robin Hood roundabout or subway is notorious for people using it for their own ends. Either put cameras in or close it off (or..... let people be abused). What you are suggesting is surrender or hinting that you allow them to get on with it.

Posted by: Iommi Aug 19 2010, 08:39 PM

The chances are, the people doing this are known to the police. That might not help now, but if they were banged up until they were old an grey the last time they committed this offence, no mugging.

Posted by: GMR Aug 19 2010, 08:55 PM

QUOTE (Iommi @ Aug 19 2010, 09:39 PM) *
The chances are, the people doing this are known to the police. That might not help now, but if they were banged up until they were old an grey the last time they committed this offence, no mugging.



The problem with that idea is for that to happen the police would have to actually do something; you see the problem here with the construction of your sentence? Put what I said to what you have said makes what you said look like an oxymoron. In other words a conundrum wrapped up in enigma rolled into a riddle. Sorry if I've confused things, but you are not the police so should be able to decipher what I am saying? And if you are then the banging on my front door at this time of night actually makes sense wink.gif

Posted by: On the edge Aug 19 2010, 10:21 PM

Yes - I know I'd much rather have a safer subway than a free lollipop and a balloon now and again. As has been mentioned earlier - the Police can't be everywhere - but lets see a few more patrolling round on foot. That would at least be rather more of a deterrent than acting as a play warden for the local kids.

Posted by: Bloggo Aug 20 2010, 07:40 AM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 19 2010, 08:18 PM) *
A crime like this would take all of 60 seconds to commit. Please explain how you would go about stopping such a crime.

Easy, when you catch them you lock them up in an unpleasant place for a long time. IE, a meaningful deterent. If they don't learn the lesson and commit the crime again them you lock them up for longer.
Not having a meaningful deterent will mean people will continue to be abused.

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 20 2010, 12:22 PM

QUOTE (Bloggo @ Aug 20 2010, 08:40 AM) *
when you catch them .

that is the nub of the problem, no?


Posted by: dannyboy Aug 20 2010, 12:26 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 19 2010, 09:55 PM) *
The problem with that idea is for that to happen the police would have to actually do something;


Do something - yes I agree. What I'm asking you is what that something should be.

The police have finite resources & time. So they allocate this to the areas most likely to get results.
Having a few coppers waiting around the Robin Hood or Burger King undrpasses to catch a mugger in the act isn't a good use of those resources.

Posted by: GMR Aug 20 2010, 04:18 PM

QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 19 2010, 11:21 PM) *
Yes - I know I'd much rather have a safer subway than a free lollipop and a balloon now and again. As has been mentioned earlier - the Police can't be everywhere - but lets see a few more patrolling round on foot. That would at least be rather more of a deterrent than acting as a play warden for the local kids.



They can't be everywhere, that is true, but where they are is not really affective.

Posted by: GMR Aug 20 2010, 04:22 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 20 2010, 01:26 PM) *
Do something - yes I agree. What I'm asking you is what that something should be.

Cameras in the subways, police patrolling the area.... better still give me the bloody job of coordinating them. I can't do a worse job, can I?

QUOTE
The police have finite resources & time. So they allocate this to the areas most likely to get results.

I agreed, but we see a lot of police either doing nothing or playing silly buggers at fates.

QUOTE
Having a few coppers waiting around the Robin Hood or Burger King undrpasses to catch a mugger in the act isn't a good use of those resources.


I agree, silly me! It is far better to let them get on with it. In fact couldn't we advertise those areas as 'free hotspots' for criminal activity?

Posted by: JeffG Aug 20 2010, 06:52 PM

I'm up for a free hotpot. Yum! wink.gif

Posted by: GMR Aug 20 2010, 07:15 PM

QUOTE (JeffG @ Aug 20 2010, 07:52 PM) *
I'm up for a free hotpot. Yum! wink.gif


Recheck... it says 'hotSpots" wink.gif

Posted by: On the edge Aug 20 2010, 09:50 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 20 2010, 01:26 PM) *
Do something - yes I agree. What I'm asking you is what that something should be.

The police have finite resources & time. So they allocate this to the areas most likely to get results.
Having a few coppers waiting around the Robin Hood or Burger King undrpasses to catch a mugger in the act isn't a good use of those resources.


Is there something else we could throw into the mix? We know these incidents take place; we could start by not walking home alone; but as part of a group. Use mobile phones to alert the Police when suspicious activity is noticed and also to ask friends and family to come and meet you. Thinking about it, there are a good few things we can do ourselves here.

Posted by: Iommi Aug 20 2010, 10:08 PM

The silence from the Police on this matter is deafening.

Wise words OTE, but it won't be long before we see these on the street corners of Newbury. Here's GMR and the Clay Hill chapter just entering the Robin Hood underpass...


Posted by: GMR Aug 21 2010, 08:41 AM

QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 20 2010, 10:50 PM) *
Is there something else we could throw into the mix? We know these incidents take place; we could start by not walking home alone; but as part of a group. Use mobile phones to alert the Police when suspicious activity is noticed and also to ask friends and family to come and meet you. Thinking about it, there are a good few things we can do ourselves here.


Good idea.... make the police's life even easier. More time for doing fates and other less important things. In fact I can envision a time where police will be totally redundant.

Posted by: GMR Aug 21 2010, 08:42 AM

QUOTE (Iommi @ Aug 20 2010, 11:08 PM) *
The silence from the Police on this matter is deafening.

Wise words OTE, but it won't be long before we see these on the street corners of Newbury. Here's GMR and the Clay Hill chapter just entering the Robin Hood underpass...



There is one problem with that photograph Iommi and that is they haven't got guns.

Oh, and Red isn't my colour... too Arsenal. wink.gif

Posted by: NWNREADER Aug 21 2010, 10:24 AM

Back in the 90s West Berks Police Area was involved with discussions with a Home Office chappie re the new proposals for performance measuring. It was made very clear the focus on detections having to be shown to increase was not really the best, as it required the numbers of crimes committed to increase - especially with robbery. The local reporting was even modified to reflect the opportunity to show (ethically) crime rates as well as detection rates so the measure included success in preventing crime rather than reacting to events. The then local boss was instantly put in place.....

The central government method of measuring performance is 90% to blame for the current situation.

Look at the 1829 (I think) key policing objectives as published by the then Commissioner of the Met and see which ones are no longer what is required......

Posted by: JeffG Aug 21 2010, 10:39 AM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 20 2010, 08:15 PM) *
Recheck... it says 'hotSpots" wink.gif

You cheated.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 21 2010, 12:54 PM

QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Aug 21 2010, 11:24 AM) *
Back in the 90s West Berks Police Area was involved with discussions with a Home Office chappie re the new proposals for performance measuring. It was made very clear the focus on detections having to be shown to increase was not really the best, as it required the numbers of crimes committed to increase - especially with robbery. The local reporting was even modified to reflect the opportunity to show (ethically) crime rates as well as detection rates so the measure included success in preventing crime rather than reacting to events. The then local boss was instantly put in place.....

The central government method of measuring performance is 90% to blame for the current situation.

Look at the 1829 (I think) key policing objectives as published by the then Commissioner of the Met and see which ones are no longer what is required......



Aaah the days of real management and not a focus group in sight! Number one - actually suggests crime prevention is also about protecting crims from punishment. So tough penalties did work. Think all we are suggesting now is that we pay more attention to number 7. We can do some of this ourselves - stout heart and a stout stick.

Posted by: GMR Aug 21 2010, 01:17 PM

QUOTE (JeffG @ Aug 21 2010, 11:39 AM) *
You cheated.


Sorry.... wasn't I supposed to? laugh.gif wink.gif

Posted by: Darren Aug 21 2010, 04:37 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 21 2010, 09:41 AM) *
Good idea.... make the police's life even easier. More time for doing fates and other less important things. In fact I can envision a time where police will be totally redundant.


You clearly have a bag of Aunt Bessies on your shoulder about this Fun Day. Wouldn't the nasty man let you go on the rides?


One of the biggest ways of reducing crime and the fear of crime is to get communities working together. To do so, you need to find a way to bring them together and the fun day is an ideal way to do that.

My understanding is that the whole day was organised by PCSO Reeves as part of his community duties. As you have previously said you are against PCSO's as they are a "gimmick, what difference did it make???


Having uniformed officers at the subway would only act as a deterrent while they are there and you cannot have officers there 24/7 as crime will just relocate. I would imagine that there is quite a lot of surveillance going on and targeting by plain clothes officers.

Reading this forum I sometimes wonder if some have watched too many episodes of Heartbeat and think Newbury is still in the 60's where crime is rare until very recently when some townies moved in. If anyone digs through the crime figures for similar sized towns I expect you will find a similar story.

For anyone who thinks that policing in the town is lacking, why not go off and do something about it instead of complaining???
http://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/joinus/join-vpoloff.htm

I guess it's easier to complain than to step up.

Posted by: GMR Aug 21 2010, 04:51 PM

QUOTE (Darren @ Aug 21 2010, 05:37 PM) *
You clearly have a bag of Aunt Bessies on your shoulder about this Fun Day. Wouldn't the nasty man let you go on the rides?


One of the biggest ways of reducing crime and the fear of crime is to get communities working together. To do so, you need to find a way to bring them together and the fun day is an ideal way to do that.

My understanding is that the whole day was organised by PCSO Reeves as part of his community duties. As you have previously said you are against PCSO's as they are a "gimmick, what difference did it make???


Having uniformed officers at the subway would only act as a deterrent while they are there and you cannot have officers there 24/7 as crime will just relocate. I would imagine that there is quite a lot of surveillance going on and targeting by plain clothes officers.

Reading this forum I sometimes wonder if some have watched too many episodes of Heartbeat and think Newbury is still in the 60's where crime is rare until very recently when some townies moved in. If anyone digs through the crime figures for similar sized towns I expect you will find a similar story.

For anyone who thinks that policing in the town is lacking, why not go off and do something about it instead of complaining???
http://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/joinus/join-vpoloff.htm

I guess it's easier to complain than to step up.



The point was that the police have more important things to do... or should do.

Posted by: Darren Aug 21 2010, 05:17 PM

I would say community involvement and being in a position to be approachable is very important. How much intelligent was gained that day by just one PCSO talking to the community in a relaxed environment?

Too often the police are accused of being distant from the communities they serve and never being seen except for when going past in a car. When they do get out there and get involved, that's wrong too.

Perhaps we should just employ ex-members of the Stazi and see how they like that form of policing.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 21 2010, 05:30 PM

QUOTE (Darren @ Aug 21 2010, 06:17 PM) *
I would say community involvement and being in a position to be approachable is very important. How much intelligent was gained that day by just one PCSO talking to the community in a relaxed environment?

Too often the police are accused of being distant from the communities they serve and never being seen except for when going past in a car. When they do get out there and get involved, that's wrong too.

Perhaps we should just employ ex-members of the Stazi and see how they like that form of policing.


Interesting. The problem is that the Police have been making a great effort to 'get in touch' with the community. NAGS, Door Knocking, Neighbourhood meetings etc. etc. However, they don't seem to be doing any listening.

If they were, they would have picked up that many local people do seem crime as an upward trend - something supported by the official figures and something constantly reported in the local press. GMR is doing something very worthwhile - not letting it go un noticed.

Yes, Newbury and its environs USED to be a sleepy old fashoined market town. Very much like Heartbeat. Look around - its now very much larger, a massive dormitory town. Far more suburban than rural. Simply, the infrastructure hasn't been keeping pace probably because many people in power locally yearn for the 'good old days' when we had a proper cattle market and pubs full of tobacco smoke.

To harsh to blame the incomers - they are probably in the majority now. Very few true native Newbrarians I would imagine. If you want a form bucolic nostalgia; still there in Yorkshire - but round here its gone.

Face up to reality, Newbury is suburban, with suburban problems. Yes, I do hope the Police stay close to the community but listening and acting.

Posted by: Iommi Aug 21 2010, 05:41 PM

Does anyone know what our plod to public ratio is these days, compared to, say, 30 years ago?

Posted by: GMR Aug 21 2010, 06:32 PM

QUOTE (Iommi @ Aug 21 2010, 06:41 PM) *
Does anyone know what our plod to public ratio is these days, compared to, say, 30 years ago?



Well, I can tell you something; 30 years ago they did what they were paid to do. Catch criminals and make them suffer for their crimes.

Posted by: GMR Aug 21 2010, 06:53 PM

QUOTE (Darren @ Aug 21 2010, 06:17 PM) *


I would say community involvement and being in a position to be approachable is very important. How much intelligent was gained that day by just one PCSO talking to the community in a relaxed environment?


That is true, however, it is no good collecting intelligence from 5 year olds and actually doing nothing. Whatever intelligence they've gathered hasn't benefited anybody on Turnpike. I know this because the yobs are still walking about intimidating people and abusing the area.

QUOTE
Too often the police are accused of being distant from the communities they serve and never being seen except for when going past in a car. When they do get out there and get involved, that's wrong too.


We've had one incident of one PCSO playing with 5 year olds at a fete that attracted less than 20 people, I wouldn't actually call that getting involved.

QUOTE
Perhaps we should just employ ex-members of the Stazi and see how they like that form of policing.



We do seem to employee the Stazi. But in the wrong areas and not in the way that is beneficial to anybody. Didn't you read the NWN a couple of weeks ago where one of the Stazi stopped a photographer taking photos on private land and his pictures confiscated? Right out of a Stazi text book. But it didn't benefit anybody other than the copper; it looked like he was doing something useful, but actually wasn't.


Posted by: Roost Aug 21 2010, 08:46 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 21 2010, 07:32 PM) *
Well, I can tell you something; 30 years ago they did what they were paid to do. Catch criminals and make them suffer for their crimes.



Aye, you try telling that to kids today and they just don't believe you!

And just out of curiosity, since when has it been down to the police to punish, or in your words "make them suffer"? I thought that were down to the Criminal (lack of) Justice system?!

Posted by: GMR Aug 21 2010, 08:55 PM

QUOTE (Roost @ Aug 21 2010, 09:46 PM) *
Aye, you try telling that to kids today and they just don't believe you!

And just out of curiosity, since when has it been down to the police to punish, or in your words "make them suffer"? I thought that were down to the Criminal (lack of) Justice system?!


It is not, it is there job to capture them, process them and then send them to the courts. If they can't past the first part then that would be a start.

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 21 2010, 09:09 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 21 2010, 09:55 PM) *
It is not, it is there job to capture them, process them and then send them to the courts. If they can't past the first part then that would be a start.


Actually the decision to send to court is not the police either.

On another point having officers on foot instead of cars benefits you lot that live in the town but does it benefit those that live out in the sticks? No.

The response times cannot be met without cars, west berkshire is not just made up of newbury town. If you want more officers on patrol kindly ask the government to stop cutting the budget.

Posted by: GMR Aug 21 2010, 09:27 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 21 2010, 10:09 PM) *
Actually the decision to send to court is not the police either.


According to the police it is.

QUOTE
On another point having officers on foot instead of cars benefits you lot that live in the town but does it benefit those that live out in the sticks? No.

I don't live in town. So that isn't much good then.

QUOTE
The response times cannot be met without cars, west berkshire is not just made up of newbury town. If you want more officers on patrol kindly ask the government to stop cutting the budget.


According to the government what we have got is sufficient.

Posted by: JeffG Aug 21 2010, 09:50 PM

Someone thinks PCSOs are a gimmick? IMO they are the best thing to happen to community policing in a decade.

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 21 2010, 10:13 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 21 2010, 09:41 AM) *
Good idea.... make the police's life even easier. More time for doing fates and other less important things. In fact I can envision a time where police will be totally redundant.

oh no Vigilante mode again...........

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 21 2010, 10:20 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 21 2010, 10:09 PM) *
Actually the decision to send to court is not the police either.

On another point having officers on foot instead of cars benefits you lot that live in the town but does it benefit those that live out in the sticks? No.

The response times cannot be met without cars, west berkshire is not just made up of newbury town. If you want more officers on patrol kindly ask the government to stop cutting the budget.

Don't waste your time ossy1. Unless the police start lynching 15 year olds from the lampsots of Turnpike, he'll never be happy.


Posted by: Iommi Aug 21 2010, 10:37 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 21 2010, 11:20 PM) *
Don't waste your time ossy1. Unless the police start lynching 15 year olds from the lampsots of Turnpike, he'll never be happy.

That would be BRILLIANT...! Power to the people! tongue.gif

Posted by: GMR Aug 22 2010, 09:04 AM

QUOTE (JeffG @ Aug 21 2010, 10:50 PM) *
Someone thinks PCSOs are a gimmick? IMO they are the best thing to happen to community policing in a decade.



The next part is if they actually did anything other than walking around.

Posted by: GMR Aug 22 2010, 09:07 AM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 21 2010, 11:13 PM) *
oh no Vigilante mode again...........


Why 'vigilante mode'? Are you saying that if the police don't do their job the only option is for vigilantes? That is a sad indictment of our society and police force.

Posted by: GMR Aug 22 2010, 09:08 AM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 21 2010, 11:20 PM) *
Don't waste your time ossy1. Unless the police start lynching 15 year olds from the lampsots of Turnpike, he'll never be happy.


So you are saying we should just allow the status quo? That we should turn a blind eye, as they police do in Turnpike?

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 22 2010, 02:19 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 22 2010, 10:08 AM) *
So you are saying we should just allow the status quo? That we should turn a blind eye, as they police do in Turnpike?
catching someone in the act is nigh on impossible. If the police do catch someone, they don't turn a blind eye. They can't turn up 30 mins afte the event & start arresting people without evidence. Hearsay isn't evidence.

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 22 2010, 02:19 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 22 2010, 10:07 AM) *
Why 'vigilante mode'? Are you saying that if the police don't do their job the only option is for vigilantes? That is a sad indictment of our society and police force.

No, I'm saying you are in vigilante mode. Again.

Posted by: GMR Aug 22 2010, 02:28 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 22 2010, 03:19 PM) *
catching someone in the act is nigh on impossible. If the police do catch someone, they don't turn a blind eye. They can't turn up 30 mins afte the event & start arresting people without evidence. Hearsay isn't evidence.


That is true, but I am not talking about arresting without evidence.

Most crimes are not caught in the act, but afterwards. A lot of criminal activity is known and they have proof... but decide not to take it further. That is what I am talking about.

Posted by: GMR Aug 22 2010, 02:29 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 22 2010, 03:19 PM) *
No, I'm saying you are in vigilante mode. Again.


Wanting criminals brought to justice and yobs dealt with isn't what I call 'vigilante mode'.

Posted by: On the edge Aug 22 2010, 04:45 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 22 2010, 03:29 PM) *
Wanting criminals brought to justice and yobs dealt with isn't what I call 'vigilante mode'.


Tend to agree - simply a sign of being a good citizen. However, Policing seems to have decended into an Alice in Wonderland situation - where what must be bad management and poor leadership means they've lost touch.

Creating PCSO's was in someways a good idea. BUT arguably, that was the original concept. Why not simply make them 'constables'? Without being rude about it, the office of constable does not need degree level geniuses. They are supposed simply to be able to excercise basic common sense and keep the Queen's peace. So why a distinction?

Then, to compound the error - some local authorities have appointed 'Wardens' over and above 'Parking Wardens'. What on earth do they do and what's the distinction?

On top of that we also have another unnecessary layer of management and bureaucracy called the Crown Prosecution Service - a target driven quango. Who most of the time quite forget that it is not up to them or the Police to work out the merits or worth of a case - thats' the job of the Magistrates.

Perhaps if we didn't have all this baloney we'd start to get somewhere. Picture - someone does something wrong, a Constable makes an arrest, writes down the facts as he or she sees them, and they both appear before the Magistrate next opportunity. What's wrong with that?

Lets get back to basic Policing and bring some dignity back to the office of Constable.

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 22 2010, 05:31 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 22 2010, 03:29 PM) *
Wanting criminals brought to justice and yobs dealt with isn't what I call 'vigilante mode'.

It is the way you express it.

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 22 2010, 05:33 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 22 2010, 03:28 PM) *
That is true, but I am not talking about arresting without evidence.

Most crimes are not caught in the act, but afterwards. A lot of criminal activity is known and they have proof... but decide not to take it further. That is what I am talking about.

You do a lot of 'talking about' without actually stating what these crimes are.
And what proof you have to give to the police so that something can be done.

circumstantial springs to mind.

Posted by: Roost Aug 22 2010, 05:57 PM

QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 22 2010, 05:45 PM) *
Tend to agree - simply a sign of being a good citizen. However, Policing seems to have decended into an Alice in Wonderland situation - where what must be bad management and poor leadership means they've lost touch.

Creating PCSO's was in someways a good idea. BUT arguably, that was the original concept. Why not simply make them 'constables'? Without being rude about it, the office of constable does not need degree level geniuses. They are supposed simply to be able to excercise basic common sense and keep the Queen's peace. So why a distinction?

Then, to compound the error - some local authorities have appointed 'Wardens' over and above 'Parking Wardens'. What on earth do they do and what's the distinction?

On top of that we also have another unnecessary layer of management and bureaucracy called the Crown Prosecution Service - a target driven quango. Who most of the time quite forget that it is not up to them or the Police to work out the merits or worth of a case - thats' the job of the Magistrates.

Hear hear! Novel idea 'tho letting the police get back to policing!

Perhaps if we didn't have all this baloney we'd start to get somewhere. Picture - someone does something wrong, a Constable makes an arrest, writes down the facts as he or she sees them, and they both appear before the Magistrate next opportunity. What's wrong with that?

Lets get back to basic Policing and bring some dignity back to the office of Constable.


Posted by: Roost Aug 22 2010, 05:59 PM

Yeah ok, that didn't work! Look in the middle for what I added! Sorry folks, bit of a luddite!

Posted by: GMR Aug 22 2010, 06:17 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 22 2010, 06:31 PM) *
It is the way you express it.


It's a gift wink.gif

Whatever way I express it it causes debate, and that can only be good.

Posted by: GMR Aug 22 2010, 06:18 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 22 2010, 06:33 PM) *
You do a lot of 'talking about' without actually stating what these crimes are.
And what proof you have to give to the police so that something can be done.

circumstantial springs to mind.



Exactly, and I have done (given evidence) and I know for a fact that nothing has been done about it.

Posted by: Chesapeake Aug 22 2010, 06:19 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 21 2010, 10:09 PM) *
Actually the decision to send to court is not the police either.

On another point having officers on foot instead of cars benefits you lot that live in the town but does it benefit those that live out in the sticks? No.

The response times cannot be met without cars, west berkshire is not just made up of newbury town. If you want more officers on patrol kindly ask the government to stop cutting the budget.



It seems to me Ossy1 (and I am sure that I am not the only one) that there are certain prolific posters on this forum who, no matter how many times they are told, just do not listen. This particular thread really has made my blood boil. Ossy1 I DO believe that you are one of the experts on this subject and yet your knowledge is constantly questioned! My hat goes off to you for trying and not giving up but then again I think that not giving up is a quality that is necessary in your line of work. There are those who break the law and do not listen and there are those armchair-police who think they know better and could do a better job mainly because they do not listen to reason.

Yes, if the Government massively increased the Council Tax rates we pay and massively increased Tax rates in general we may be able to police this country in the way that some of you want (a fully trained and equipped Police Constable on every corner). Unfortunately nobody would have any money left to go out and do anything.

The CPS, in the main, are the ones who decide on which cases go to court. Courts cost money, Solicitors, Barristers, Police, Admin, utility bills etc etc are just some of the court costs incurred in just one case. The CPS will not let anything go to court if there is a risk that it will not stand up and therefor be a waste of "Tax-Payers" money. That's yours and my money. Yes the Police probably do have a pretty good idea who commit the majority of crimes in this area but just having a "pretty good idea" will not be enough to commit to Court.

Didn't your teacher tell you that you need to listen more and talk (post) less?

There, that feels better biggrin.gif

Posted by: GMR Aug 22 2010, 06:19 PM

QUOTE (Roost @ Aug 22 2010, 06:59 PM) *
Yeah ok, that didn't work! Look in the middle for what I added! Sorry folks, bit of a luddite!


You can go back in and edit it.

And what bit is in the middle?

Posted by: Roost Aug 22 2010, 06:26 PM

Hear hear! Novel idea 'tho letting the police get back to policing


That bit was what I was attempting, futilely, to post!

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 22 2010, 06:40 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 22 2010, 07:18 PM) *
Exactly, and I have done (given evidence) and I know for a fact that nothing has been done about it.

tht is because it will be your word against someone elses - as I said, circumstantial evidence...

Posted by: GMR Aug 22 2010, 07:31 PM

QUOTE (Chesapeake @ Aug 22 2010, 07:19 PM) *
It seems to me Ossy1 (and I am sure that I am not the only one) that there are certain prolific posters on this forum who, no matter how many times they are told, just do not listen. This particular thread really has made my blood boil. Ossy1 I DO believe that you are one of the experts on this subject and yet your knowledge is constantly questioned! My hat goes off to you for trying and not giving up but then again I think that not giving up is a quality that is necessary in your line of work. There are those who break the law and do not listen and there are those armchair-police who think they know better and could do a better job mainly because they do not listen to reason.

Yes, if the Government massively increased the Council Tax rates we pay and massively increased Tax rates in general we may be able to police this country in the way that some of you want (a fully trained and equipped Police Constable on every corner). Unfortunately nobody would have any money left to go out and do anything.

The CPS, in the main, are the ones who decide on which cases go to court. Courts cost money, Solicitors, Barristers, Police, Admin, utility bills etc etc are just some of the court costs incurred in just one case. The CPS will not let anything go to court if there is a risk that it will not stand up and therefor be a waste of "Tax-Payers" money. That's yours and my money. Yes the Police probably do have a pretty good idea who commit the majority of crimes in this area but just having a "pretty good idea" will not be enough to commit to Court.

Didn't your teacher tell you that you need to listen more and talk (post) less?

There, that feels better biggrin.gif




This forum or these forums are about debate and we are all entitled to our opinions. Without it people like Ozzy will be redundant.

I listen, but that doesn't mean I have to bow to the speaker. Also; you are presuming that Ozzy has all the answers. I check my facts or I speak from experience.


Also; without people like me you wouldn't have anything to moan about (which is the only time you come on here). wink.gif

Posted by: GMR Aug 22 2010, 07:32 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 22 2010, 07:40 PM) *
tht is because it will be your word against someone elses - as I said, circumstantial evidence...



So what does that mean, we give up?

Posted by: On the edge Aug 22 2010, 09:02 PM

QUOTE (Chesapeake @ Aug 22 2010, 07:19 PM) *
It seems to me Ossy1 (and I am sure that I am not the only one) that there are certain prolific posters on this forum who, no matter how many times they are told, just do not listen. This particular thread really has made my blood boil. Ossy1 I DO believe that you are one of the experts on this subject and yet your knowledge is constantly questioned! My hat goes off to you for trying and not giving up but then again I think that not giving up is a quality that is necessary in your line of work. There are those who break the law and do not listen and there are those armchair-police who think they know better and could do a better job mainly because they do not listen to reason.

Yes, if the Government massively increased the Council Tax rates we pay and massively increased Tax rates in general we may be able to police this country in the way that some of you want (a fully trained and equipped Police Constable on every corner). Unfortunately nobody would have any money left to go out and do anything.

The CPS, in the main, are the ones who decide on which cases go to court. Courts cost money, Solicitors, Barristers, Police, Admin, utility bills etc etc are just some of the court costs incurred in just one case. The CPS will not let anything go to court if there is a risk that it will not stand up and therefor be a waste of "Tax-Payers" money. That's yours and my money. Yes the Police probably do have a pretty good idea who commit the majority of crimes in this area but just having a "pretty good idea" will not be enough to commit to Court.

Didn't your teacher tell you that you need to listen more and talk (post) less?

There, that feels better biggrin.gif



My teacher told me not to be a sheep. Listen and make up my own mind. I suspect that for Society's sake, its a very good thing that we have what you would describe as arm chair critics. If we didn't we'd still have kids climbing chimneys, the slave trade etc. etc. But that may be how you want it - 'The rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate, God made them high and lowly and ordered their estate'. You clearly know your place - suspect your teacher would say its a shame I don't know mine! rolleyes.gif

Posted by: JeffG Aug 22 2010, 09:40 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0DUsGSMwZY

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 23 2010, 12:19 AM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 22 2010, 08:32 PM) *
So what does that mean, we give up?

No - but you wouldn't want to be behind bars just because someone else said you'd been bad, would you?
To convict someone you need irrefutable evidence.

Posted by: Bloggo Aug 23 2010, 07:54 AM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 23 2010, 01:19 AM) *
No - but you wouldn't want to be behind bars just because someone else said you'd been bad, would you?
To convict someone you need irrefutable evidence.

This debate swings back and forth but the crux of it in my opinion is imposing a meaningful deterent on those that are caughtt breaking the law. A deterent that sends out the message that society has had enough of being mugged, robbed and assaulted. If it means building more jails, then lets do it and keep the law breakers behind bars for longer, take away their "priviledges" and make it painful so that others who would consider breaking the law think twice.
There are just not enough police to keep arresting repeat offenders so lock em up for a longer time.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Aug 23 2010, 08:36 AM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 23 2010, 01:19 AM) *
No - but you wouldn't want to be behind bars just because someone else said you'd been bad, would you?
To convict someone you need irrefutable evidence.


You have a point. Evidence is required. It does not detract from the fact though that if you arrested 'and threw away the key' about 20 or so people in Newbury that cause the majority of crime then Newbury would be a much nicer place to live. The Police know who they are. I know who they are. The Public just have to accept though that there houses are going to be burgled, there cars vandalised, and quite often accept being physically intimidated by these scum. You seem to want to allow this 'status quo' dannyboy because these 'people' have 'human rights'. I would agree with you if these 'people' actually had an ounce of 'humanity' in them. They don't. If they were wild animals (which they are) then they would be put down.

Posted by: blackdog Aug 23 2010, 10:14 AM

QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 22 2010, 05:45 PM) *
Then, to compound the error - some local authorities have appointed 'Wardens' over and above 'Parking Wardens'. What on earth do they do and what's the distinction?

What a great idea - give the green meanies the power to fine litterers, those who don't pick up their dog's mess, and particularly those who spit their chewing gum out on to the pavement.

Posted by: Brad Aug 23 2010, 11:45 AM

QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 20 2010, 10:50 PM) *
Is there something else we could throw into the mix? We know these incidents take place; we could start by not walking home alone; but as part of a group. Use mobile phones to alert the Police when suspicious activity is noticed and also to ask friends and family to come and meet you. Thinking about it, there are a good few things we can do ourselves here.


Seen Hot Fuzz? The community killed anyone causing trouble and they had a peaceful life!

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Aug 23 2010, 12:28 PM

QUOTE (Brad @ Aug 23 2010, 12:45 PM) *
Seen Hot Fuzz? The community killed anyone causing trouble and they had a peaceful life!


Lets all get 'tooled' up and form a vigilante group. We need a catchy name though! The media would love it. Please enter your Newbury Vigilante group name suggestion below. I'll start.

The Newburian Avengers.

Posted by: pinkfluffyclouds Aug 23 2010, 12:30 PM

QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Aug 23 2010, 01:28 PM) *
Lets all get 'tooled' up and form a vigilante group. We need a catchy name though! The media would love it. Please enter your Newbury Vigilante group name suggestion below. I'll start.

The Newburian Avengers.


Not so sure this would be the way to go. Know we need to protect ourselves but to create a vigilante group would make us no better than them surely? Catch 22 defend yourself and you probably are the one that will get arrested...

Posted by: JeffG Aug 23 2010, 12:35 PM

How about Scum Bandits?

Posted by: Brad Aug 23 2010, 12:38 PM

QUOTE (JeffG @ Aug 23 2010, 01:35 PM) *
How about Scum Bandits?


Sounds like a great cleaning product name!

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 23 2010, 01:27 PM

QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Aug 23 2010, 01:28 PM) *
Lets all get 'tooled' up and form a vigilante group. We need a catchy name though! The media would love it. Please enter your Newbury Vigilante group name suggestion below. I'll start.

The Newburian Avengers.

Hmmm, so if I decided that you & your rather right wing views were too much & I bashed you about the head with my truncheon, that would be okay would it?

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 23 2010, 01:30 PM

QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Aug 23 2010, 09:36 AM) *
You have a point. Evidence is required. It does not detract from the fact though that if you arrested 'and threw away the key' about 20 or so people in Newbury that cause the majority of crime then Newbury would be a much nicer place to live. The Police know who they are. I know who they are. The Public just have to accept though that there houses are going to be burgled, there cars vandalised, and quite often accept being physically intimidated by these scum. You seem to want to allow this 'status quo' dannyboy because these 'people' have 'human rights'. I would agree with you if these 'people' actually had an ounce of 'humanity' in them. They don't. If they were wild animals (which they are) then they would be put down.

Put down ! Been over to the Diamond Tap for a lunch time pint have we?

Soon you'll be advocvating doing people in because they look like they might be 'the wrong type'!

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Aug 23 2010, 01:41 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 23 2010, 02:27 PM) *
Hmmm, so if I decided that you & your rather right wing views were too much & I bashed you about the head with my truncheon, that would be okay would it?


I don't want you coming anywhere near me with your 'truncheon' thanks. blink.gif

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 23 2010, 01:45 PM

QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Aug 23 2010, 02:41 PM) *
I don't want you coming anywhere near me with your 'truncheon' thanks. blink.gif

Smack you about the head with it if you so much as look at me the wrong way I will.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Aug 23 2010, 01:47 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 23 2010, 02:45 PM) *
Smack you about the head with it if you so much as look at me the wrong way I will.


How big is it? laugh.gif

Posted by: dannyboy Aug 23 2010, 01:59 PM

QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Aug 23 2010, 02:47 PM) *
How big is it? laugh.gif

Big enough.

Posted by: Iommi Aug 23 2010, 03:05 PM

dannyboy, you're not TSG are you? tongue.gif

Posted by: HeatherW Aug 23 2010, 04:32 PM

QUOTE (Chesapeake @ Aug 22 2010, 07:19 PM) *
It seems to me Ossy1 (and I am sure that I am not the only one) that there are certain prolific posters on this forum who, no matter how many times they are told, just do not listen. This particular thread really has made my blood boil. Ossy1 I DO believe that you are one of the experts on this subject and yet your knowledge is constantly questioned! My hat goes off to you for trying and not giving up but then again I think that not giving up is a quality that is necessary in your line of work. There are those who break the law and do not listen and there are those armchair-police who think they know better and could do a better job mainly because they do not listen to reason.

Yes, if the Government massively increased the Council Tax rates we pay and massively increased Tax rates in general we may be able to police this country in the way that some of you want (a fully trained and equipped Police Constable on every corner). Unfortunately nobody would have any money left to go out and do anything.

The CPS, in the main, are the ones who decide on which cases go to court. Courts cost money, Solicitors, Barristers, Police, Admin, utility bills etc etc are just some of the court costs incurred in just one case. The CPS will not let anything go to court if there is a risk that it will not stand up and therefor be a waste of "Tax-Payers" money. That's yours and my money. Yes the Police probably do have a pretty good idea who commit the majority of crimes in this area but just having a "pretty good idea" will not be enough to commit to Court.

Didn't your teacher tell you that you need to listen more and talk (post) less?

There, that feels better biggrin.gif


I am new here so I do not know if I should speak out but I have been reading the posts on here long before I joined. What I have loved about this forum is the differences of views. So when I read Chesapeake’s bare face cheek in criticising another member because that member has voiced his opinions and spoke out at certain injustices in society. That person must be applauded, not rebuked. On the Edge’s post to Chesapeake was spot on “My teacher told me not to be a sheep. Listen and make up my own mind.” I agree. I am presuming that Chesapeake is an authority tyrant in real life who does not accept dissent amongst the ranks. I applaud anybody on here who speaks out. We, as a society, spend too much time kowtowing to those people who think they are superior to others. We, as ordinary citizens, must stand up for what we believe. If we are wrong, then fair enough, but we must voice our grievances no matter what the opposition is. Hats off to GMR, On the Edge and anyone else who puts their head above the parapet to voice their concerns.

As for ‘prolific’ posters. It is the prolific posters, in my experience, who usually have the guts to stand up against the authorities and will not be intimidated. Again we must give praise to those that are prepared to speak out. Iommi and Straffin are another two who I can think of who also stick their heads above the parapet. They also must be commended and any others who speak out against authority.

My mother always said to me that if confronted by somebody who claims to be an authority figure must be challenge and ask for their credentials. I presume Ozzy1 has shown to members on here that he is actually a police officer? From what I have been told of forums and chat rooms there are many people who go around saying such and such a thing to enhence their position. I talked to a neighbour of mine who used to be a police officer and he told me that anybody who claims to be something or other should give evidence otherwise it is a crime to say somebody is in an authorities position. I am sure other members will put me right on here as I do not really know anybody on here personally.

I do apologise if I have spoken out of turn but as Chesapeake said and I paraphrase here; It makes my bloody boil when a member is castigated for speaking out. In other words doing what, I presume these forums were created for. It might be me next or one of you. I suggest if one does not agree then challenge them, but insults weaken the castigator’s argument or points.

Thank you.

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 23 2010, 05:33 PM

QUOTE (HeatherW @ Aug 23 2010, 05:32 PM) *
I am new here so I do not know if I should speak out but I have been reading the posts on here long before I joined. What I have loved about this forum is the differences of views. So when I read Chesapeake’s bare face cheek in criticising another member because that member has voiced his opinions and spoke out at certain injustices in society. That person must be applauded, not rebuked. On the Edge’s post to Chesapeake was spot on “My teacher told me not to be a sheep. Listen and make up my own mind.” I agree. I am presuming that Chesapeake is an authority tyrant in real life who does not accept dissent amongst the ranks. I applaud anybody on here who speaks out. We, as a society, spend too much time kowtowing to those people who think they are superior to others. We, as ordinary citizens, must stand up for what we believe. If we are wrong, then fair enough, but we must voice our grievances no matter what the opposition is. Hats off to GMR, On the Edge and anyone else who puts their head above the parapet to voice their concerns.

As for ‘prolific’ posters. It is the prolific posters, in my experience, who usually have the guts to stand up against the authorities and will not be intimidated. Again we must give praise to those that are prepared to speak out. Iommi and Straffin are another two who I can think of who also stick their heads above the parapet. They also must be commended and any others who speak out against authority.

My mother always said to me that if confronted by somebody who claims to be an authority figure must be challenge and ask for their credentials. I presume Ozzy1 has shown to members on here that he is actually a police officer? From what I have been told of forums and chat rooms there are many people who go around saying such and such a thing to enhence their position. I talked to a neighbour of mine who used to be a police officer and he told me that anybody who claims to be something or other should give evidence otherwise it is a crime to say somebody is in an authorities position. I am sure other members will put me right on here as I do not really know anybody on here personally.

I do apologise if I have spoken out of turn but as Chesapeake said and I paraphrase here; It makes my bloody boil when a member is castigated for speaking out. In other words doing what, I presume these forums were created for. It might be me next or one of you. I suggest if one does not agree then challenge them, but insults weaken the castigator’s argument or points.

Thank you.



Cheasapekes check in criticising others????
So you do exactly that to me for sticking my head above the parapet and disclosing my employment? Do you not think you are being a bit hypercritical.

If your really concerned about my identity why not report me??

Posted by: Jayjay Aug 23 2010, 06:19 PM

QUOTE (HeatherW @ Aug 23 2010, 05:32 PM) *
I am new here so I do not know if I should speak out but I have been reading the posts on here long before I joined. What I have loved about this forum is the differences of views. So when I read Chesapeake’s bare face cheek in criticising another member because that member has voiced his opinions and spoke out at certain injustices in society. That person must be applauded, not rebuked. On the Edge’s post to Chesapeake was spot on “My teacher told me not to be a sheep. Listen and make up my own mind.” I agree. I am presuming that Chesapeake is an authority tyrant in real life who does not accept dissent amongst the ranks. I applaud anybody on here who speaks out. We, as a society, spend too much time kowtowing to those people who think they are superior to others. We, as ordinary citizens, must stand up for what we believe. If we are wrong, then fair enough, but we must voice our grievances no matter what the opposition is. Hats off to GMR, On the Edge and anyone else who puts their head above the parapet to voice their concerns.

As for ‘prolific’ posters. It is the prolific posters, in my experience, who usually have the guts to stand up against the authorities and will not be intimidated. Again we must give praise to those that are prepared to speak out. Iommi and Straffin are another two who I can think of who also stick their heads above the parapet. They also must be commended and any others who speak out against authority.

My mother always said to me that if confronted by somebody who claims to be an authority figure must be challenge and ask for their credentials. I presume Ozzy1 has shown to members on here that he is actually a police officer? From what I have been told of forums and chat rooms there are many people who go around saying such and such a thing to enhence their position. I talked to a neighbour of mine who used to be a police officer and he told me that anybody who claims to be something or other should give evidence otherwise it is a crime to say somebody is in an authorities position. I am sure other members will put me right on here as I do not really know anybody on here personally.

I do apologise if I have spoken out of turn but as Chesapeake said and I paraphrase here; It makes my bloody boil when a member is castigated for speaking out. In other words doing what, I presume these forums were created for. It might be me next or one of you. I suggest if one does not agree then challenge them, but insults weaken the castigator’s argument or points.

Thank you.


Good post Heather, but you had to spoil it with your remarks about Ossy. Think it about it logically, if you met someone in any social situation would you really expect them to whip their warrant card out? Why the interest in what someone does for a living anyway?

Posted by: HeatherW Aug 23 2010, 06:19 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 23 2010, 06:33 PM) *
Cheasapekes check in criticising others????
So you do exactly that to me for sticking my head above the parapet and disclosing my employment? Do you not think you are being a bit hypercritical.

If your really concerned about my identity why not report me??



Well, Cheasapekes said you were an 'expert' on the subject and I read somewhere else that you were supposed to be a police office. If you now are saying you are not then it was my mistake.

As for me having a "check [sic]". Well, good point. But someone has to cut the hypocrisy link somewhere along the line.

As for reporting you, well, are you saying the advice I was given was not correct? Being a copper I shall bow to your experience on this matter.

I presume your defence of Cheasapekes is a reward for her standing up for your professional integrity!

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 23 2010, 06:25 PM

QUOTE (HeatherW @ Aug 23 2010, 07:19 PM) *
Well, Cheasapekes said you were an 'expert' on the subject and I read somewhere else that you were supposed to be a police office. If you now are saying you are not then it was my mistake.

As for me having a "check [sic]". Well, good point. But someone has to cut the hypocrisy link somewhere along the line.

As for reporting you, well, are you saying the advice I was given was not correct? Being a copper I shall bow to your experience on this matter.

I presume your defence of Cheasapekes is a reward for her standing up for your professional integrity!


I do not write peoples posts for them, if the want to use the word expert then that is their opinion.

I have said it before that I post as me not as my job. I do however get fed up with the constant questioning of my job and having to prove myself when others have stated their occupation and no one has batted an eyelid.

Everyone keeps harping on about this being a forum and being entitled to their own opinion but when I have mine I and constantly questioned. All I have ever tried to do is give you an opinion of someone on the otherside of the fence but if you want to believe the armchair brigade and that they know best carry on.

As for reporting me, I am not saying your advice was wrong but you cannot impersonate something that you are!!!!

Posted by: HeatherW Aug 23 2010, 06:27 PM

QUOTE (Jayjay @ Aug 23 2010, 07:19 PM) *
Good post Heather, but you had to spoil it with your remarks about Ossy. Think it about it logically, if you met someone in any social situation would you really expect them to whip their warrant card out? Why the interest in what someone does for a living anyway?



I only commented on Ossy's profession because he was brought up as an authority figure. Was I wrong in enquiring for verification? If I had said I was an authority on such-and-such a subject I would expect to be challenged. But If I have broken forum etiquette I apologise. I am new to all this.

I have no interesting what anybody does for a living, unless that person says he does so-and-so for a living. If that then becomes the case then we all should take notice, do you not agree?

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 23 2010, 06:29 PM

QUOTE (HeatherW @ Aug 23 2010, 07:27 PM) *
I only commented on Ossy's profession because he was brought up as an authority figure. Was I wrong in enquiring for verification? If I had said I was an authority on such-and-such a subject I would expect to be challenged. But If I have broken forum etiquette I apologise. I am new to all this.

I have no interesting what anybody does for a living, unless that person says he does so-and-so for a living. If that then becomes the case then we all should take notice, do you not agree?


I have never said I was an authority on asubject just what my job was!!

Someone on here has stated they work for the council I never see them being questioned.

And another thing Heather if you had read posts you would realise I am a she not a he. Now that is something I am an expert on!!

Posted by: HeatherW Aug 23 2010, 06:37 PM

QUOTE
I have said it before that I post as me not as my job. I do however get fed up with the constant questioning of my job and having to prove myself when others have stated their occupation and no one has batted an eyelid.

If you post as you and not your job then how do people know what you do? Obviously it has been mentioned to impress. It has impressed the previous poster.

People question your job, and rightly so, because, I presume, you told people what you do. And you must admit that when people say they belong to one of the emergency services people do sit up and take notice. As they should. Is it then wrong to ask for verification?

QUOTE
Everyone keeps harping on about this being a forum and being entitled to their own opinion but when I have mine I and constantly questioned. All I have ever tried to do is give you an opinion of someone on the otherside of the fence but if you want to believe the armchair brigade and that they know best carry on.

That is a fair point, nevertheless, when others on here use your authority position to back them up then people have a right to question that authority. Surely you must agree with this? Being a police officer and all that.
QUOTE
As for reporting me, I am not saying your advice was wrong but you cannot impersonate something that you are!!!!

That is true, but how do we know you have the authority to speak as such?

Posted by: HeatherW Aug 23 2010, 06:42 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 23 2010, 07:29 PM) *
I have never said I was an authority on asubject just what my job was!!

Someone on here has stated they work for the council I never see them being questioned.

And another thing Heather if you had read posts you would realise I am a she not a he. Now that is something I am an expert on!!


I apologise for getting your sex wrong, but it is not relevant to this debate. What is relevant is somebody using you as an authority figure to try to criticise somebody else. I am sure you must be horrified with this? I personally would not like to be used to criticise another.

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 23 2010, 06:45 PM

QUOTE (HeatherW @ Aug 23 2010, 07:37 PM) *
If you post as you and not your job then how do people know what you do? Obviously it has been mentioned to impress. It has impressed the previous poster.

People question your job, and rightly so, because, I presume, you told people what you do. And you must admit that when people say they belong to one of the emergency services people do sit up and take notice. As they should. Is it then wrong to ask for verification?


That is a fair point, nevertheless, when others on here use your authority position to back them up then people have a right to question that authority. Surely you must agree with this? Being a police officer and all that.

That is true, but how do we know you have the authority to speak as such?



I didnt directly say what I did, someone sometime ago made a comment that all coppers were idiots which I took offence to and said something along the lines of "i take offence to that" the regulars worked it out and banned it about and still do. However I am not ashamed of my profession so why should I be bothered by people knowing. How exactly do you think I should prove it on here i wonder?


If OTHERS want to use my job to back THEM up what does that have to do with me and why should I be questioned about what THEY have said.

I'm not sure I understand what your last question is refering to? Am i allowed to speak as a police officer? Like I said I dont I speak as me. However I don't give legal advice and never would unless you want to visit me at the station and talk in a formal capacity.
As for police officers commenting on forums....they have their own site should you wish to pay it a visit.

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 23 2010, 06:49 PM

QUOTE (HeatherW @ Aug 23 2010, 07:42 PM) *
I apologise for getting your sex wrong, but it is not relevant to this debate. What is relevant is somebody using you as an authority figure to try to criticise somebody else. I am sure you must be horrified with this? I personally would not like to be used to criticise another.



Criticise or express their own opinion???

Posted by: HeatherW Aug 23 2010, 06:58 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 23 2010, 07:49 PM) *
Criticise or express their own opinion???



Whichever does not make any difference, you were used as somebody who was more in the know, and that authority was then used to browbeat another.

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 23 2010, 07:03 PM

QUOTE (HeatherW @ Aug 23 2010, 07:58 PM) *
Whichever does not make any difference, you were used as somebody who was more in the know, and that authority was then used to browbeat another.



I dont think they were using my authority as on a forum like this I have none. They have simply choosen to believe me.

Posted by: HeatherW Aug 23 2010, 07:11 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 23 2010, 08:03 PM) *
I dont think they were using my authority as on a forum like this I have none. They have simply choosen to believe me.



And were they right to believe you? Answering in the positive swings from your opinion to your authority.

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 23 2010, 07:16 PM

QUOTE (HeatherW @ Aug 23 2010, 08:11 PM) *
And were they right to believe you? Answering in the positive swings from your opinion to your authority.


What?

My job has come out and someone has choosen to believe it for themselves so why are you having a go at me. If you don't then so be it i'm not bothered either way.

Posted by: Chesapeake Aug 23 2010, 09:03 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 23 2010, 08:16 PM) *
What?

My job has come out and someone has choosen to believe it for themselves so why are you having a go at me. If you don't then so be it i'm not bothered either way.


Just a quick little comment here.... a VERY close relative was a Police Officer and I have VERY good friends who are still in the Police as, PC's, DI's DC's PCSO's etc and not only do I recognise certain turns of phrase that mean I believe Ossy1 IS a Police Officer but I also get fed up with the same people harping on and on along the same lines of whinging and "moaning"!

As has already been stated on here, this is a forum where everyone is allowed (to a reasonable extent) to voice their opinions and this leads to a difference of opinion which sometimes makes for amusing reading. GMR and I go back quite some way and we have had many differences of opinion which has led to lively debate. I don't think that we have ever truely been offended by each others comments (GMR please tell me if I am wrong?). I am allowed to whinge about others just as they are allowed to whinge about me. But surely by the same reasoning I am allowed to stick up for people who I constantly see being criticised. Ossy1 and Bill have been unfairly treated on here in the past and so I have "raised my head above the parapit" to defend them as is my right. If a person finds this offensive then they at least have a choice.

Yes I have and DO challenge authority and will continue to do so as is my right but that does not make me an autocrat just someone who will stick up for herself and those she sees as unfairly treated.

Sorry if people are offended, it is not my intention. unsure.gif

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 23 2010, 09:20 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 23 2010, 01:19 AM) *
No - but you wouldn't want to be behind bars just because someone else said you'd been bad, would you?
To convict someone you need irrefutable evidence.


Beyond all resonable doubt is the phrase you are looking for. If the burden of proof was the same as in civil cases then i suspect more people would be locked up as it would be easier to convict people.

Posted by: GMR Aug 23 2010, 09:28 PM

QUOTE (Chesapeake @ Aug 23 2010, 10:03 PM) *
Just a quick little comment here.... a VERY close relative was a Police Officer and I have VERY good friends who are still in the Police as, PC's, DI's DC's PCSO's etc and not only do I recognise certain turns of phrase that mean I believe Ossy1 IS a Police Officer but I also get fed up with the same people harping on and on along the same lines of whinging and "moaning"!

As has already been stated on here, this is a forum where everyone is allowed (to a reasonable extent) to voice their opinions and this leads to a difference of opinion which sometimes makes for amusing reading. GMR and I go back quite some way and we have had many differences of opinion which has led to lively debate. I don't think that we have ever truely been offended by each others comments (GMR please tell me if I am wrong?). I am allowed to whinge about others just as they are allowed to whinge about me. But surely by the same reasoning I am allowed to stick up for people who I constantly see being criticised. Ossy1 and Bill have been unfairly treated on here in the past and so I have "raised my head above the parapit" to defend them as is my right. If a person finds this offensive then they at least have a choice.

Yes I have and DO challenge authority and will continue to do so as is my right but that does not make me an autocrat just someone who will stick up for herself and those she sees as unfairly treated.

Sorry if people are offended, it is not my intention. unsure.gif


I am never offended, and I do enjoy the chase. However, this forum is a very polite forum compared to some I've been on.

As for whether YOU are allowed to whinge, of course you are. In fact you are allowed to whinge as much as I do.... and if this was a two horse race you'd be slightly in the lead laugh.gif wink.gif

PS I just hope you've got a sense of humour with that whinging?


As for HeatherW and On the Edge, I can understand their point of view and in some cases agree with them. Their comments show what this forum is all about; debate, question, observe... with a ssprinkle of powered humour.

I would like to make an observation; Ossy's replies to HeatherW showed that she was rattled; which is suprising coming from a hard nosed police officer. unless she left her thick skin at the door of this forum.... wink.gif

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 23 2010, 09:50 PM

shock horror police officers have feelings.

I doubt many people would take continual personal attacks on them without getting a bit p*****d off occasionally.



Posted by: GMR Aug 23 2010, 10:01 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 23 2010, 10:50 PM) *
shock horror police officers have feelings.


Is that in the job description or did you add that later when you had joined?

QUOTE
I doubt many people would take continual personal attacks on them without getting a bit p*****d off occasionally.


But well paid for it..... and of course a masochist quality. But I am sure you are a fine and upstanding member of the constabulary who controls that wild streak that comes out on here occasionally wink.gif .

Posted by: ossy1 Aug 23 2010, 10:10 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Aug 23 2010, 11:01 PM) *
Is that in the job description or did you add that later when you had joined?



But well paid for it..... and of course a masochist quality. But I am sure you are a fine and upstanding member of the constabulary who controls that wild streak that comes out on here occasionally wink.gif .


On the street people just rant at the uniform on here your having a go at me. There in lays the difference.

Posted by: Iommi Aug 23 2010, 10:37 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 23 2010, 11:10 PM) *
On the street people just rant at the uniform on here your having a go at me. There in lays the difference.

Notwithstanding you're not getting paid for the abuse on here! tongue.gif

Posted by: GMR Aug 24 2010, 04:37 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 23 2010, 11:10 PM) *
On the street people just rant at the uniform on here your having a go at me. There in lays the difference.


To be honest you should have kept your mouth shut. But saying that whether a police officer or not we all get scrutinised on forums. Just look at the posts against me. It is part and parcel of forum life. If I didn't like it I would have kept my mouth shut and hid in a corner.

To be honest the posts against you are not abusive or nasty; if you had been on some really rough forums then you'd know what forum abuse was. This forum is like a kids kindergarten picnic. Be grateful.

We are all here for different reasons; personally I am glad you are on here giving us your side of things, whether we agree with them or not.

Posted by: GMR Aug 24 2010, 04:38 PM

QUOTE (Iommi @ Aug 23 2010, 11:37 PM) *
Notwithstanding you're not getting paid for the abuse on here! tongue.gif


Exactly, and if I was then I'd get a fortune laugh.gif wink.gif

Posted by: On the edge Aug 24 2010, 06:58 PM

QUOTE (ossy1 @ Aug 23 2010, 10:50 PM) *
shock horror police officers have feelings.

I doubt many people would take continual personal attacks on them without getting a bit p*****d off occasionally.


Suspect most of us appreciate that in reality - but appreciate it can hurt. However, might be worth considering that most of the 'attacks' here are really wanting more Police. So ossy1 if Police was a commercial product; it would be much in demand and very expensive!

Posted by: GMR Aug 24 2010, 07:02 PM

QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 24 2010, 07:58 PM) *
Suspect most of us appreciate that in reality - but appreciate it can hurt. However, might be worth considering that most of the 'attacks' here are really wanting more Police. So ossy1 if Police was a commercial product; it would be much in demand and very expensive!


True; but with 'in demand' & 'expensive' should come (i.e. in the commercial sense) efficient and achievable. Alas; they are in the commercial sense laugh.gif wink.gif

Posted by: Darren Aug 25 2010, 08:13 PM

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=14346

I don't think I want to go and eat at "Buger King"... ohmy.gif

Posted by: JeffG Aug 25 2010, 08:50 PM

Spoilsport - I thought that might make it to the printed edition smile.gif

Posted by: user23 Aug 26 2010, 06:55 AM

I guess it's the nature of forums like this but it does seem to be largely the same few people moaning about the same stuff and bickering with people no mater what the topic, in most of the threads.

Posted by: Bloggo Aug 26 2010, 07:54 AM

QUOTE (user23 @ Aug 26 2010, 07:55 AM) *
I guess it's the nature of forums like this but it does seem to be largely the same few people moaning about the same stuff and bickering with people no mater what the topic, in most of the threads.

Somewhat far from accuarate as the range of subjects discussed on this forum is vast and largely carried out in a sensible and responsible manner.
Of course you will have a nucleus of contributers who participate more than others and that is the nature of forums.
Those subjects that seem to come up again and again are generally those that affect a lot of people and ones that don't seem to be dealt with effectively. People have a right to keep subjects in the public eye if they feel that they are being fobbed off.
This forum works and works well.

Posted by: Darren Aug 26 2010, 11:15 AM

At what point does it cease being a discussion and become a personal crusade?

Posted by: Bloggo Aug 26 2010, 11:22 AM

QUOTE (Darren @ Aug 26 2010, 12:15 PM) *
At what point does it cease being a discussion and become a personal crusade?

I don't think anyone can answer that for you as we are all different and see things in different ways.
Obviously bullying, being offensive and insulting other posters is where the line should be drawn.

Posted by: JeffG Aug 26 2010, 12:02 PM

QUOTE (Darren @ Aug 25 2010, 09:13 PM) *
http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=14346

I don't think I want to go and eat at "Buger King"... ohmy.gif

QUOTE (JeffG @ Aug 25 2010, 09:50 PM) *
Spoilsport - I thought that might make it to the printed edition smile.gif

It did. wink.gif

Posted by: Bloggo Aug 26 2010, 12:46 PM

QUOTE (Darren @ Aug 25 2010, 09:13 PM) *
http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=14346

I don't think I want to go and eat at "Buger King"... ohmy.gif

Do a nice sausage roll. wink.gif

Posted by: GMR Aug 26 2010, 04:07 PM

QUOTE (user23 @ Aug 26 2010, 07:55 AM) *
I guess it's the nature of forums like this but it does seem to be largely the same few people moaning about the same stuff and bickering with people no mater what the topic, in most of the threads.


You mean like your posts? I agree.

Posted by: GMR Aug 26 2010, 04:12 PM

QUOTE (Darren @ Aug 26 2010, 12:15 PM) *
At what point does it cease being a discussion and become a personal crusade?



People are on forums for different reasons. What is one man's personal 'crusade' is another man's interesting debate. We would all like others to conform to our own way of thinking, but free thought and democracy only allows differences. Sorry if that is not what you want.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Aug 27 2010, 11:17 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-11106899

It's even made it onto the BBC website...

Posted by: JeffG Aug 27 2010, 02:44 PM

QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Aug 27 2010, 12:17 PM) *
It's even made it onto the BBC website...

And typically for the BBC, under Related Internet links there is a link to Hampshire Constabulary.

Posted by: GMR Aug 27 2010, 04:36 PM

According to today's paper it said the police are finally going to act because of a string of attacks/ robberies. That is nice of them to wait until they've got a "string of attacks". One or two is nothing to bother about, but when you've got quite a few then there is some meat on the bones; we must be so grateful that it wasn't just one that had been attacked otherwise it wouldn't have been worth it.

Posted by: Iommi Oct 5 2010, 10:50 AM

I understand that someone else (young female) was mugged at the weekend by two blokes outside a kebab shop in Bart St. Allegedly, one of the blokes has recently been 'inside'.

Posted by: Bloggo Oct 5 2010, 10:57 AM

QUOTE (Iommi @ Oct 5 2010, 11:50 AM) *
I understand that someone else (young female) was mugged at the weekend by two blokes outside a kebab shop in Bart St. Allegedly, one of the blokes has recently been 'inside'.

Obviously for not long enough to have learnt a lesson. Unless the sentence is tough then they will commit crimes again.
But let's not go around this again eh?

Posted by: Iommi Oct 5 2010, 11:04 AM

QUOTE (Bloggo @ Oct 5 2010, 11:57 AM) *
Obviously for not long enough to have learnt a lesson. Unless the sentence is tough then they will commit crimes again. But let's not go around this again eh?

I've no quarrel for tough/long sentencing for violent criminals, I am only unsure as to the deterrent effect.

Posted by: Bloggo Oct 5 2010, 11:12 AM

QUOTE (Iommi @ Oct 5 2010, 12:04 PM) *
I've no quarrel for tough/long sentencing for violent criminals, I am only unsure as to the deterrent effect.

Well, it is my opinion that is the custodial sentence was long enough and the conditions in prison tough enough then they would not want to go back in.
It will of course be no deterent is the prison conditions are soft and the sentence short.

If this bloke does not feel any " pain" from the courts then why would he stop assaulting people. Until the justice system wakes up to this fact then it wont stop.

Posted by: Bofem Oct 5 2010, 11:16 AM

One member of a notorious Thatcham family has recently been released, and was trying to wind up a young dad who was walking with his wife and kid in Northbrook Street.

He shouted afterwards: "My name is M****** B**** and I'm in the newspapers every day!"

Seems like prison is a badge of honour rather than deterrent.

Posted by: Bloggo Oct 5 2010, 11:19 AM

QUOTE (Bofem @ Oct 5 2010, 12:16 PM) *
One member of a notorious Thatcham family has recently been released, and was trying to wind up a young dad who was walking with his wife and kid in Northbrook Street.

He shouted afterwards: "My name is M****** B**** and I'm in the newspapers every day!"

Seems like prison is a badge of honour rather than deterrent.

Exactly my point. Isn't it shamefull?

Posted by: Iommi Oct 5 2010, 11:47 AM

QUOTE (Bloggo @ Oct 5 2010, 12:12 PM) *
Well, it is my opinion that is the custodial sentence was long enough and the conditions in prison tough enough then they would not want to go back in. It will of course be no deterent is the prison conditions are soft and the sentence short. If this bloke does not feel any " pain" from the courts then why would he stop assaulting people. Until the justice system wakes up to this fact then it wont stop.

Like I said, I am unsure of how effective it would be on certain types of criminals, but I don't think these people should be allowed to roam the streets with impunity. If they become known to the police, they should go back in. I also feel that this issue demonstrates a problem with our probation system.

Posted by: Bloggo Oct 5 2010, 11:56 AM

QUOTE (Iommi @ Oct 5 2010, 12:47 PM) *
Like I said, I am unsure of how effective it would be on certain types of criminals, but I don't think these people should be allowed to roam the streets with impunity. If they become known to the police, they should go back in. I also feel that this issue demonstrates a problem with our probation system.

I agree but think the problem is deeper than just the probabtion system. The incident in question demonstrates that the law in this country is failing to protect law abiding people and needs to be reviewed urgently.

Posted by: pinkfluffyclouds Oct 5 2010, 12:20 PM

Anyone any idea what was happening on Sunday with the police helicopter buzzing around Greenham Road/The Nightingales area? Thought something would have been put on here in the news but nothing so maybe it was nothing but it was over there for a while!!

laugh.gif maybe that is why there is no police on the ground they are all up in the air !! tongue.gif

Posted by: GMR Oct 5 2010, 04:56 PM

QUOTE (Iommi @ Oct 5 2010, 11:50 AM) *
I understand that someone else (young female) was mugged at the weekend by two blokes outside a kebab shop in Bart St. Allegedly, one of the blokes has recently been 'inside'.


Careful; he has Human Rights. Maybe your tone should be more sympathetic. Not to the attacked of course, they have no Human rights and the real victim is/was the mugger. wink.gif


PS Maybe we could do a collection on this forum for two muggers? I presume they've had a deprived childhood while the one who was mugged had a more prefect existence. Let us now pray or is that prey?

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Oct 6 2010, 12:47 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Oct 5 2010, 05:56 PM) *
Careful; he has Human Rights. Maybe your tone should be more sympathetic. Not to the attacked of course, they have no Human rights and the real victim is/was the mugger. wink.gif


PS Maybe we could do a collection on this forum for two muggers? I presume they've had a deprived childhood while the one who was mugged had a more prefect existence. Let us now pray or is that prey?


http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=14735

Another robbery at knifepoint. You have to feel sorry for the mugger. Poor chap. I expect he had a deprived childhood. dry.gif

Posted by: JeffG Oct 6 2010, 01:09 PM

QUOTE
Chief Inspector Judith Johnson said the latest crime figures show that between April 1 and August 31 this year, robbery of personal property and the number of assaults have both decreased this year

If this is indeed the case, how come we have suddenly seen reports of a spate of violent crimes over the last couple of months?

Posted by: Bloggo Oct 6 2010, 01:27 PM

QUOTE (JeffG @ Oct 6 2010, 02:09 PM) *
If this is indeed the case, how come we have suddenly seen reports of a spate of violent crimes over the last couple of months?

How do we know that anything we hear from officialdom and anything we read in the papers is fact.
Figures and stories are manipulated to produce the result that the authors want you to see.
The well known "spin" factor.
Saying that though it does look like the rate of violent robbery is on the increase in Newbury as all of the stories are substanciated.
Her figures may reflect possible crimes that have not got into the press hence her enthusiasm.

Posted by: Iommi Oct 6 2010, 01:33 PM

QUOTE (Bloggo @ Oct 6 2010, 02:27 PM) *
Saying that though it does look like the rate of violent robbery is on the increase in Newbury as all of the stories are substanciated.

Interesting that the alleged incident outside the kebab shops at the weekend hasn't been reported. I understand that the alleged victim reported it to the old bill.

Posted by: gel Oct 6 2010, 01:58 PM

Latest knife robbery confirms they have no fear let alone respect of law.
Saw in latest incident, after robbing victim, he then banged rear screen of car, victim was "escaping" in.

"Well sorry officer I'd say, I accidentally reversed over him....twice".

We need the Guardian Angels..remember them.

Posted by: Darren Oct 6 2010, 02:17 PM

QUOTE (Iommi @ Oct 6 2010, 02:33 PM) *
Interesting that the alleged incident outside the kebab shops at the weekend hasn't been reported. I understand that the alleged victim reported it to the old bill.


On the crime report, there is a box for no press. It ticked, none of the details are released.

Posted by: GMR Oct 6 2010, 04:28 PM

QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Oct 6 2010, 01:47 PM) *
http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=14735

Another robbery at knifepoint. You have to feel sorry for the mugger. Poor chap. I expect he had a deprived childhood. dry.gif


Exactly. I am already starting to cry when I think about it. As for the mugged; do she try to defend herself? If so the mugger might be able to get some compensation.

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 6 2010, 05:04 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Oct 6 2010, 05:28 PM) *
Exactly. I am already starting to cry when I think about it. As for the mugged; do she try to defend herself? If so the mugger might be able to get some compensation.

yawn.

Posted by: GMR Oct 6 2010, 05:07 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Oct 6 2010, 06:04 PM) *
yawn.



I know how you feel; I often read your posts. wink.gif

Posted by: dannyboy Oct 6 2010, 05:11 PM

QUOTE (GMR @ Oct 6 2010, 06:07 PM) *
I often read your posts. wink.gif

good lad.

Posted by: GMR Oct 6 2010, 05:14 PM

QUOTE (dannyboy @ Oct 6 2010, 06:11 PM) *
good lad.



I try my best; if it brings a smile to my face and makes you happy.... what more can one ask? tongue.gif

Posted by: Darren Oct 6 2010, 08:48 PM

QUOTE
The offender then walked off with the victims’ mobile phone and cash.
Meanwhile the victim got into a green car and drove away up Boundary Road - but when after a short distance the vehicle stopped, the offender banged on the rear screen of their car.


Is it just me or does that sound really strange. I get the feeling there's more to this than meets the eye.

Posted by: Jayjay Oct 6 2010, 09:02 PM

QUOTE (Bloggo @ Oct 6 2010, 02:27 PM) *
How do we know that anything we hear from officialdom and anything we read in the papers is fact.
Figures and stories are manipulated to produce the result that the authors want you to see.
The well known "spin" factor.
Saying that though it does look like the rate of violent robbery is on the increase in Newbury as all of the stories are substanciated.
Her figures may reflect possible crimes that have not got into the press hence her enthusiasm.


The figure was taken from 'latest figures' i.e. last year. A lot of the violent crimes have been committed in 2010.

Posted by: Jayjay Oct 6 2010, 09:04 PM

QUOTE (Darren @ Oct 6 2010, 09:48 PM) *
Is it just me or does that sound really strange. I get the feeling there's more to this than meets the eye.


I thought it odd too, but put it down to bad reporting.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)