PDA

View Full Version : So much fun smashing up peoples property


Escapee
09-04-2006, 20:15
I see in this months practical classics that a storage unit in South Wales containing a private collection of classic cars has been broken into.

They broke in and took cars from the collection and used them to smash into each other, up to 35 cars mainly Jaguars were damaged and some written off. The collection contained many low mileage originals, and shows photos of damaged MK2, MK1, XK120 and an XJS convertible. Apparently five people have been arrested, I expect that to be little consolation for the guy who apparently spent 27 years building up the collection.

I also visited one of my mates yesterday and saw some of the damage to his vehicles. Thieves broke into his warehouse and used a hydraulic cutter to shear off a £100 sturdy padlock, they jumped over much of his collection and the took a Freelander, Alfa Spyder and a very nice full rally prepared Impreza with a lot of rallying history.
I saw the Impreza which now has the back end smashed in and many of the aluminium panels dented. They also managed to sieze the engine, which is very strange considering the rev limiter and robustness of these units. Apparently the quote for engine rebuild is £6k alone. He says after the insurance claim he will still be about £15K out of pocket!

The police made an arrest and they were then set free, they have cctv evidence of the thieves in another town driving the Impreza whilst picking up girls to take them for a spin. Apparently there is fingerprints, footprints, cctv evidence, eye witnesses and DNS samples. The police had to let them go because the cps said so, and it sounds like the cps is not that interested because its only damaged property, no one was injured and there was no police chase.

To top that one, later in the week his Golf convertible was stolen. From what the police and eye witnesses say, it sounds like its the same gang the police let off earlier in the week.:mad:

robtufts
09-04-2006, 20:21
If only they did 33mph in a town centre then they'd have had the library thrown at them

Derek
09-04-2006, 20:34
I'd seen something about the guy whose Jag's were damaged, thats the kind of thing that sickens you that people can be so disrespectful of other peoples property that had obviously spent years and years building up.

Not even stealing them but just to destroy them 'for a laugh' is something that you wish they had the book thrown at them but you know they'll get away with a slap on the wrist and they'll bleat about only doing it as they were bored. :mad:

I know a few coppers up here and they are sick of the procurator fiscal dropping or reducing cases due to lack of time, incompetence or defence lawyers trying every trick in the book to get their clients off.

punky
09-04-2006, 22:05
You've got a bit confused in your post Escapee. The CPS don't tell the police anything. The police alone decide wether to let go/charge a suspect or not. After someone is formally charged, the case goes to the CPS, so its weeks after being charged that the CPS hears about it. Its extremely rare that the CPS will drop a case where someone has been denied bail too.

I too though am fed up with this attitude where a crime is so common, they don't tackle it. I don't care how common a crime is, how many police you need to recruit or prisons you have to build, every crime should be persued.

Escapee
09-04-2006, 23:37
You've got a bit confused in your post Escapee. The CPS don't tell the police anything. The police alone decide wether to let go/charge a suspect or not. After someone is formally charged, the case goes to the CPS, so its weeks after being charged that the CPS hears about it. Its extremely rare that the CPS will drop a case where someone has been denied bail too.

I too though am fed up with this attitude where a crime is so common, they don't tackle it. I don't care how common a crime is, how many police you need to recruit or prisons you have to build, every crime should be persued.

I'm not sure, but he said the police had the culprits and then let them go.

I dont think it was lack of evidence because they had fingerprints, footprints, DNA, CCTV and eye witnesses. I can only repeat what he said, and that was "The police said they couldn't hold them any longer without the say so of the CPS and they were granted bail"

Could it of been the police was trying to get them straight into court?

It seems fairly straight that they have the culprits. But as my parents found out last year, if the culprit denies it the police/cps are not interested. My parents car was damaged and the police were persuing the case, the guy had denied it but then changed his statement to "accidently" damaging the vehicle, obviously his solicitor had done a bargain.The police then dropped the case because the courts are so weak these days, he would of probably got off the criminal damage charges.

Anyway, I guess everyone is happy because it was another crime statistic cleared off the records by making it a civil matter instead of dealing with it.:rolleyes:

punky
10-04-2006, 01:57
I'm not sure, but he said the police had the culprits and then let them go.

I dont think it was lack of evidence because they had fingerprints, footprints, DNA, CCTV and eye witnesses. I can only repeat what he said, and that was "The police said they couldn't hold them any longer without the say so of the CPS and they were granted bail"

Well if they were granted bail, that's good - it means they have been charged with the crimes. Also, the police the permission of a judge to detain people for further questioning, not the CPS.

The police have absolutely not authority to drop cases. The need "reason to believe"/"suspicion" (I use quotes because they are strictly defined terms within Policing) someone commited a crime in order to charge them. If they don't, then they can't. Its upto the CPS to decide wether the evidence is strong enough to persue the case, whether its in the public's interest, etc.

Could it of been the police was trying to get them straight into court?
I don't quite know what you mean. It either goes straight to court or not. When someone is charged, depending on the severity of the case the police will grant them bail or they will have to go before a judge. The only exception is for certain minor, first time offences, if the police want to charge someone without worrying about court, they can issue a formal caution.

I think you might have misunderstood though, if they have got bail they have definitely been charged. Its possible that the police think the CPS will drop the case, but you never know.

Anyway, I guess everyone is happy because it was another crime statistic cleared off the records by making it a civil matter instead of dealing with it.:rolleyes:

I know how you feel there mate :(

basa
10-04-2006, 11:05
You've got a bit confused in your post Escapee. The CPS don't tell the police anything. The police alone decide wether to let go/charge a suspect or not. After someone is formally charged, the case goes to the CPS, so its weeks after being charged that the CPS hears about it.

The CPS are advised IMMEDIATELY by phone when someone is arrested, usually a local representative (often within the local police head office). The CPS then make an initial appraisal as to whether charges can be laid.

Bail is initially dependant upon the police. If it is a serious crime or if it is felt the arrestee will abscond the police will detain on remand until a court hearing where the judge / magistrate will decide bail.

Escapee
10-04-2006, 20:13
The CPS are advised IMMEDIATELY by phone when someone is arrested, usually a local representative (often within the local police head office). The CPS then make an initial appraisal as to whether charges can be laid.

Bail is initially dependant upon the police. If it is a serious crime or if it is felt the arrestee will abscond the police will detain on remand until a court hearing where the judge / magistrate will decide bail.

Is that something new, I'm sure he said the police claimed the decision is now down to the CPS.

The police certainly decided not to persue with prosecution against my parents neighbour who damaged their car. Even though there was CCTV evidence and he finaly said it was an accident ha ha, it didn't even get to the cps.

The police do decide if they are going to take action or not, I know that from both sides. in a situation where there is 50-50 blame, the police very often appear to toss a coin and take a side if they want an arrest. Also if I walked down the road stone cold sober late at night and attacked someone who had been drinking alcohol, its likely they would believe my story if I said he attacked me.

Even the police are human, and will often go with a gut feeling that wrong.