Jump to content

How daft does it have to get?

Recommended Posts

Glad to see the police the police have got their priorities right :(


"A boy of five playing hopscotch with friends looked up to find himself confronted by two police officers.


They ordered Ryan Badland and his five playmates to stop because chalking the grids on the road in their quiet cul-de-sac was "graffiti".


"I couldn't believe it," said Ryan's mother Lisa, 30, at their home in Burnham-on-Sea, Somerset."


Police order boy, 5, to stop chalking hopscotch 'graffiti' on the street


Maybe it's a failing on my part, but I can't see what is wrong with what the children were doing, given as it says in the article the chalk was washed away when it rained.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 363
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just a few points as an ex police officer. I would guess the police working at the hospitals were working their days off - I,m just suggesting that,not condoning it, because it shouldn,t be necessary.


2. People causing trouble at hospitals should be properly punished by the courts - absolutely inexcusable, drink or not. (see cameras, below)


3. Re memo taking at the scene of incidents. Some merit. Would firstly prefer though, IF, repeat IF, cameras are to be a fact of life, it would be handy to use them for the benefit of both the PC/ hospital worker and the alleged wrongdoer, as direct evidence.

They are already fitted to some police vehicles. Miniature head cameras are already being trialled.


Contentious subject I know, but if we all want justice to be SEEN to be done.........


Happy days

Link to post
Share on other sites



I saw two in the market precinct and one of them was the shortest thing I have seen. As a 6footer plus old time bobby, I asked him what the height limit was and he said that while you could accept women at 5 ft 4 you,ve got to accept men of the same height - and he possibly just about qualified although his helmet was almost as big as he was.


Important point made about evidence which will stand up in court.


Happy days

Link to post
Share on other sites

A double dose of daftness today:



"School tearaways are to be offered mountain bikes and iPods in return for good behaviour.


In a government campaign against soaring indiscipline, teachers are being told to reward disruptive pupils with prizes and privileges.


Badly-behaved youngsters must be praised five times as often as they are punished or criticised under guidelines unveiled by Education Secretary Alan Johnson. "


Classroom thugs told: Disrupt school and win an iPod!





"Hospital staff claim they were banned from handing out hot cross buns this Easter in case they upset non-Christians.


The decision disappointed patients at Poole Hospital in Dorset and angered catering staff.


In an email to their local paper, sent on Good Friday, catering staff said: 'We the kitchen staff of Poole Hospital were disgusted to find that the patients were not getting hot cross buns this morning.


"The manager of the catering department said he was worried about the ethnic minorities that work here.""


Hospital that 'banned' hot cross buns to avoid offending non-Christians


Actually I would have thought that non Christians would be more offended by bans such as the above, most if not all probably couldn't care less and I'm sure they don't begrudge believers celebrating the most important Christian festival......and shops don't do badly from it either. :wink:


[ 11.04.2007, 08:30: Message edited by: Paul Kennedy ]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought that banning things for fear of upsetting ethnic minorities could have the opposite affect by infuriating the natives and turning them against ethnic minorities.


ie, blaming them for the loss of their "events". :o

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very valid point Peter. No doubt there are people out there seeing how they can ban Easter and Christmas.....don't think the retail trade would be too happy about that though. I always find it rather ironic that an anti Christian country like China is only too happy to supply us with most of our Christmas presents and even now cards......thankfully they haven't mastered chocolate egg production and distribution.....yet. :wink:


[ 11.04.2007, 08:36: Message edited by: Paul Kennedy ]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an interesting one from The Daily Telegraph:


"Monmouth Tory MP David Davies was astounded to discover recently that the Department for Work and Pensions recognises polygamous marriages that were conducted overseas.


In a guide to Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit, the department states that claimants in polygamous unions are entitled to "additional allowances for each additional partner".


"Polygamy is both demeaning to women and alien to this country's culture," Davies tells me.


"I find it extraordinary that the state is recognising and giving financial incentives to those marrying more than one woman.


"These payments should cease immediately and I'm tabling a series of parliamentary questions to get to the bottom of the matter.


"Foreigners who come to Britain should be prepared to fit in with British cultural attitudes - and they do not include acceptance of polygamy."


He adds: "I shouldn't think that gay civil partners from here who go to a strict Muslim country would be entitled to many privileges, so why should we go out of our way to accommodate those who come here with practices which are alien to us?"


The analogy (gay polygamy?) momentarily escapes me, but it sounds like Mr Davies is on to something."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Guess the folliwing might as well go here, if for nothing else but to keep this topic going:


"Police officers have been handed a special translation guide to help them deal with Romanian crime suspects, it emerged yesterday.


The initiative has been introduced to tackle a crime-wave involving East European thieves and pickpockets who are targeting London's West End.


Since Romania joined the EU in January, thefts and handbag snatches have soared as organised crime gangs and beggars trawl the streets in the hunt for cash and valuables."


Here is the rest of the article including the phrase book together with some possible, tounge in cheek...or not, responses from the Romanian criminals. I notice the police phrases "you're nicked" and "you're going to be deported" are not included in the phrases the police are being taught, PS I almost forgot, "hello, hello, hello" :D:D:D :




[ 07.05.2007, 11:10: Message edited by: Paul Kennedy ]

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Daily Mail:


"Britain's most dangerous prisoner has been given ?200 to buy spectacles so he can see the ball when watching the football on TV.


The Prison Service offered Charles Bronson the money after his glasses were damaged in a brawl with two guards at Full Sutton high-security jail.


Bronson, who has attacked at least 50 prison officers over the past three decades, is boasting that he will buy designer frames by Calvin Klein.


He demanded new glasses because he could no longer make out the action while watching Premiership highlights on the BBC's Match of the Day in his cell.


Prison officials, who have spent ?500,000 handling rooftop protests by Bronson, agreed.


In a letter to a friend, Bronson, 54, said: "Well, I'm finally being compensated over them at Full Sutton smashing my specs.


"Now don't that prove everything I've said about what went on there? Why compensate me if it was my doing?


"They've studied CCTV of the incident. They've seen the cowardly screw who broke them and it's as simple as that.


"The truth always creeps out in the end. Watch this space!"


But Bronson's fellow inmates were unamused. One said: "Everyone else is really upset about this, when we heard he had won the case we couldn't believe it.


"Some of us have to struggle by but they've sorted him with a lovely pair. He's been **** of the walk since he got the news."


Another said: "Charlie really kicked up a stink about his specs and the screws were worried he would kick off when he started complaining that he couldn't see the ball when he was watching the football.


"They thought it would just be easier to stump up the cash for the specs that he wanted."


Blair Gibbs, campaign director of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "It doesn't seem to matter how despicable the prisoner.


"The unbelievably generous duty of care extended by our warped Prison Service is always the same.


"Big cash grants like this are routinely handed out to inmates instead of the cheaper alternative. Whatever happened to NHS specs?"


Since he was jailed for armed robbery in 1974, Bronson has developed a reputation as Britain's most dangerous convict.


During his time in prison, Bronson, a serial hostage-taker, has been involved in at least ten jail sieges.


He is deemed so dangerous that he has been moved 150 times and has spent more than 22 of his 30 years in jail in solitary confinement. He is currently in Wakefield Prison.


Bronson changed his name from Michael Peterson. He passes the time by painting and doing up to 3,000 press-ups a day.


He was given a life sentence in 1999 for holding a prison art teacher hostage for 44 hours because the man criticised some of his sketches.


He was filmed on jail CCTV leading his victim around like a dog with a rope around his neck.


In another siege, Bronson demanded a helicopter so he could fly to Cuba and compare his beard to Fidel Castro's - and a cheese sandwich in case he got hungry on the flight.


A Prison Service spokesman said: "A prisoner has been offered compensation of under ?200 after a control and restraint incident."


The prisoner's compensation victory will fuel the controversy over payouts to serving criminals.


In the last financial year, ?8.8million in compensation was paid out - almost 15 times the amount two years earlier.


Cases included a record ?2.8million payout for medical treatment for a prisoner who failed in a suicide attempt.


Around ?750,000 was paid to nearly 200 drug addicts who had withdrawal symptoms after they were forced to go "cold turkey".


In other cases, prisoners were given ?200 each after their DVD players were taken away because they watched pornography."



It's so easy to spend hard pressed taxpayers money. :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Paul Kennedy:

Last night's decision by the United Nations to approve Zimbabwe as head of the commission responsible for:


promoting economic progress and environmental protection.





A bit like putting Hitler in charge of the Jews. :x
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this from today's Dail Mail qualifies:


"Police claimed to have solved 542 different crimes by giving a final warning to a child who failed to pay in his Comic Relief sponsorship money, it has emerged.


Officers said it was proof of the "absurd" pressure they are under to solve as many minor crimes as possible to bump up government figures.


The youngster, who cannot be named for legal reasons, collected ?700 from friends and neighbours to give to charity.


But he did not hand in the cash to Comic Relief organisers, who hold a Red Nose Day every two years to raise money.


Police investigated the child for obtaining money by deception.


Instead of recording one crime, community support officers were sent to interview all who pledged money on his sponsorship form.


They logged a staggering 542 different crimes - then let him off with a formal warning, the Police Federation's annual conference in Blackpool heard.


Under Home Office rules this counts as 542 crimes solved, in the same way as if officers had trapped the same number of murderers, rapists or burglars.


Simon Reed, a senior official of the federation which represents rankand-file officers, said: "Officers are being encouraged and, at the same time, pressurised to come down on every single misdemeanour.


"A child obtained ?700 by keeping sponsorship money for Comic Relief.


"One crime? No, it actually took several weeks, and rigorous house-to-house inquiries by CSOs, to detect 542 crimes. That was all for a final warning."


A sergeant from North Wales, Sam Roberts, said her force had created a points system for different ways of punishing a crime.


She said officers receive only five points for an arrest, compared with 20 points for handing out an onthespot fine.


This encourages officers to downplay the seriousness of the offence in order for it to be solved quickly.


A fine is considered "case closed", whereas an arrest involves piles of paperwork.


The Government has faced growing demands to reform or scrap its target for bringing "offenders to justice".


It ranks every crime in the same way, regardless of whether it is a warning for being drunk or a murder.


Rank-and-file police say it has stripped them of the discretion to give offenders, particularly children, a simple telling-off.


Instead, they are under pressure to take "ludicrous" decisions to give a fixedpenalty notice or formal warning in order to chalk up a solved crime.


As yesterday's Daily Mail revealed, examples include a Cheshire man cautioned by police for being "in possession of an egg with intent to throw".


A Home Office spokesman said: "Officers should not pursue detection numbers for numbers' sake if that means chasing minor misdemeanours at the expense of serious offenders." "



Interesting to note that whilst the police might criticise the system, they are happy to benefit from it through performance related pay.


The whole system seems to be a shambles

Link to post
Share on other sites

Daily Mail...again:


A woman was handed an ?80 litter fine after her toddler grandchild dropped some crisps on the pavement.



Barbara Jubb had picked up the packet of Quavers when it fell from the hand of 20-month- old Emily.



But she failed to pick up two stray crisps that spilled from the bag.


Scroll down for more...



Cost a packet: Emily Jubb and a Quaver



Within seconds two council litter wardens swooped and issued her with an ?80 fine.



"This is diabolical," said Mrs Jubb, 57. "?80 is a lot of money, especially if it's just because a baby dropped two Quavers.



"I saw these two women coming toward me with clipboards. One of them produced a card and said, 'We are from the council and I'm going to fine you for littering'.



"I said, 'What litter - it's just two Quavers, it was my granddaughter, she dropped them'."



"People were standing around listening-they were just laughing, they couldn't believe it was happening."



The incident happened when Mrs Jubb was waiting for a bus with her daughter Selena, Emily's mother.



They were on their way back to their home in Crawley, West Sussex, after a hospital visit in which Selena was diagnosed with a heart condition.



Mrs Jubb added: "It was only when I got on the bus that I read the notice and realised they had fined me ?80."



Selena, 29, said: 'At first we didn't realise we had been fined. These two wardens had come up to us and given us a notice.



"When I read it on the bus I realised my mum had been given an ?80 fine. Luckily Emily didn't have a clue what was going on. I think they are targeting vulnerable people."



A spokesman for Crawley Council said: "People leaving their rubbish behind - or dropping litter anywhere other than a bin - is totally unacceptable.



"It annoys responsible residents who help us to keep the town clean and tidy and the council will not tolerate unsociable behaviour."



The council did however allow Mrs Jubb's appeal against the fine, saying the penalty would be waived because of the 'exceptional circumstances'



Thankfully commonsense did prevail..... in the end

Link to post
Share on other sites

Daily Mail.....who else. :wink:


Anyone who has been a victim of their contempt for the law or menacing behaviour might find it a little difficult to swallow.



But on the orders of a government agency, gangs of teenage criminals should no longer be called "gangs" because it might offend them.



Instead they should be referred to as "groups" and their crimes described as "group-related".


The instruction comes from the Youth Justice Board, which organises probation, training and detention for under 18s.



It echoes the decision by the Metropolitan Police three years ago to drop the phrase "gang rape" and replace it with "group rape".


Officers reasoned then that the word gang can wrongly suggest clearly defined membership.



The YJB sets out its case in a 200-page report on "gangs" and how teenagers are drawn into them.


It states: "Many young people interviewed for this study resented the way in which the term had come to be used to describe any group of young people involved in anti-social behaviour.


They felt adults attached the label to them simply on the basis that they were young and met in a group, assuming that crime was their main purpose for meeting.



"In fact, the label conjured up an image with which they might not want to be associated, even where they were involved in offending - not least because in some cases they knew from their own local experience what real gangs were and several of the young women in particular had suffered at their hands."



The report said that some youngsters could find the idea of a gang seductive because of crime films and TV programmes and black "gangsta" music.


It added: "There has been a noticeable trend toward referring to groups of young people indiscriminately as gangs.



"This is not appropriate and it could exacerbate the extent and seriousness of group-related offending or create problems where none previously existed.



"Juvenile gangs do exist in some urban areas, but most young people involved in group offending do not belong to gangs - even if others label them in this way."



Examining the broader issues behind youth crime, the agency said that chaotic family lives and the lack of role models were frequently to blame.



It found that youngsters drawn into gangs overwhelmingly come from family backgrounds characterised by disruption, conflict and single parenthood.



Young men follow brothers or more distant adult relatives into crime as they look for someone to emulate.



For many from the worst backgrounds, a gang provides a home life better than their "chaotic and unstable" families, it added.


The findings are further evidence linking broken family life with crime.


Children of single parents are far more likely to do badly at school and drift towards vandalism and crime. In particular, boys who grow up without fathers are at risk of falling into criminal behaviour.



The report said: "Teenagers could gravitate toward gangs and group violence as a result of poor family relationships, exclusion from school, absence of positive role models and a lack of youth facilities."


It found that among 25 girl gang members interviewed, only two lived with both parents.



? The Oxford English Dictionary says a gang is "any band or company of persons who go about together or act in concert (chiefly in a bad or deprecatory sense, or associated with criminal societies)".


I see the YJB must have been having a quiet time, given this matter is at the fore of their thinking. :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...