Street scum

[exile]

Looks like the program is repeated tonight on 4Seven at 21:00hrs UK - 22;00 CET.

[hughnique]

This supposition that the minute you come into the hands of a nice policeman, you will be dealt with within the parameters of the law, should you be charged is absolute bullshit, firstly the CPS will troll through everything so as to compile a prosecution based merely on the worst scenario, which carries the highest sentence available, therefore handling stolen goods, becomes conspiracy to steal, assault becomes an affray, and so on.

B0llocks.

It might be to you but I suspect you have never been there, let me tell you that is what goes on whether it be 50 years ago or since, I could go on giving other accounts of police entrapment etc, but believe what you want and are comfortable with.

[exile]

Well I did watch the repeat last night.

Your "the inevitable happened" actually means he hit the perps on their stolen motor bike with his 4x4 Merc travelling at such speed that neither managed to negotiate the bend in the road.

If you think that is reasonable behaviour then we live in different worlds.

[hughnique]

I don't believe it was reasonable, as you term it, behaviour, I would hazard a guess that it was carried out in the heat of the moment, by someone so incensed that these scumbags would have the front to come along in the dead of night, and try and nick, obviously the target, his trials bike from right under his nose. Also, during the pursuit, the motorbike passenger was wielding a wrecking bar or bolt croppers, smashing them into the Mercedes, so he wasn't behind them at that point. My beef with all of this is the disproportionate sentencing, and the remark, evidently made by the judge, that he spared the lads prison because it might be somewhat uncomfortable for them. Perhaps if the fractured skull merchant had been wearing a crash helmet it might not have been as serious

[Blaze]

This supposition that the minute you come into the hands of a nice policeman, you will be dealt with within the parameters of the law, should you be charged is absolute bullshit, firstly the CPS will troll through everything so as to compile a prosecution based merely on the worst scenario, which carries the highest sentence available, therefore handling stolen goods, becomes conspiracy to steal, assault becomes an affray, and so on.

B0llocks.

It might be to you but I suspect you have never been there, let me tell you that is what goes on whether it be 50 years ago or since, I could go on giving other accounts of police entrapment etc, but believe what you want and are comfortable with.

@hughnique I agree with MAD87, who I imagine knows a little more about the CJS than you do !
If you've had a bad experience yourself, you can hardly condemn the whole system. The English justice system isn't infallible but it's one of the best there is.

TV programmes and rag newpapers love to wind people up to a frenzy - you only have to see how that TV programme has got people talking about it.
There are too many amateur judges and juries who do not have all the facts and worse still, do not know the law.

[Pathca]

The accident happened a couple of minutes after they left the house,it was a long moment,the TV programme will not have shown all that came out in court

[exile]

And as @Blaze suggests, as episode 1 of the current series, it is designed to create interest/controversy. The producers seem to have sucked you in together with a whole lots of Daily X readers who are petitioning like mad.

[hughnique]

Pathca I am not sure but are cameras, or at the least broadcast cameras not allowed in court, Blaze how is it that Mad 87 knows more about the Criminal Justice System than I do, you don't know what I do or don't know.
As regards a bad experience I would pluralise that many times, unfortunately I seem to antagonise them somewhat, can't think why?
Albeit this could be termed a TV programme, it is hardly Eastenders, it is a documentary about a crime that actually took place, not some made up crap, I can, in some part, see why certain members will stand firmly behind the police, as they are probably paying their pension, and of course they see their colleagues and successors as whiter than white, that's why so many have recently been disrobed. I didn't pay much attention, but a senior officer was on the tele the other day stating there were still serving officers who should not be in the job, for one reason or another, but are. However it still does nothing to address the practice of disproportionate sentencing. As for being sucked in, have you no intelligence as to why one person gets banged up and the perps walk free, and continue their crimewave.

[MAD87]

Blaze how is it that Mad 87 knows more about the Criminal Justice System than I do

Well... I've been both a defence and a CPS prosecuting lawyer and a member of a parole committee, so I think that my experience of the Criminal Justice system is pretty rounded. Unless you've had the same experience or are a serving or ex-police officer (cf. Blaze and Pathca) or are an habituee of the courts in some other role, I think I'm safe in thinking that I know at least as much as you.

[hughnique]

I wasn't the one doubting your knowledge, it's when someone makes a statement, and drags a third party, i.e., you into the equation, without any supporting facts, plus you should not have to disclose your background to me or anyone else. No I am not in any way connected with the police, I could not join as I go red in the face when I lie. I still stand by my accusation that the CPS do go for the worst scenario, as was the case from the tale, 50 years old or not, conspiracy to steal, was defined to me as te intent to sit down with others and plan an act, for example theft from whoever, that is where the "conspiracy" comes in. In the case of Mr. A that was not the case, and this was corroborated in court, by one of the BT employees, also on trial, who stated clearly that Mr. A was not involved at the inception of the thefts, and that it had been running for many months before he appeared. My advice to Mr. A was to plead not guilty to that charge, but that was disregarded, and the judge took no note of it in her sentencing, plus the fact a two bob barrister didn't help.