Elderly keying my new car

Minrich

matttye wrote: »

Not true.

Note: if a statement that would be a significant statement is made in response to a question by a police officer, that exchange constitutes an interview and therefore must be PACE compliant.

Which is what it was in this case , we're not talking about other significant statements are we ? I didn't want to confuse the matter where all people wanted to do is argue .... Perhaps should have been worded differently though

matttye

Minrich wrote: »

Which is what it was in this case , we're not talking about other significant statements are we ? I didn't want to confuse the matter where all people wanted to do is argue .... Perhaps should have been worded differently though

In the post you were replying to its not clear if she made an unsolicited comment or if it was said in response to questioning. Although it sounds like she was speaking in general terms rather than admitting a specific incident of criminal damage so they would need some more evidence to do anything about it.

It may, however, have given them reasonable suspicion I.e. grounds to arrest.

matttye

rover005 wrote: »

Police just called and said they wont be able to attend because they dont have a vehicle big enough for arrest... I told them I need immediate reschedule - Also, spoke to my neighbour and they said they would be happy to report her as soon as the cops are here.

Police don't need to arrest her if she's willing to cooperate and take part in a voluntary interview. If she refuses then arrest would be sensible.

I wish I could say I thought the police were fobbing you off but a lot of police officers I know automatically jump to the conclusion that an arrest is necessary when in fact a voluntary interview would have been more suitable.

Marktheshark

Is she a social housing tenant ?

Minrich

matttye wrote: »

In the post you were replying to its not clear if she made an unsolicited comment or if it was said in response to questioning. Although it sounds like she was speaking in general terms rather than admitting a specific incident of criminal damage so they would need some more evidence to do anything about it.

It may, however, have given them reasonable suspicion I.e. grounds to arrest.

Well unless she said it before they officers said anything then she would have been responding to their enquiry/questions .... Where she then states she would do it again until they stopped parking ..... Anyway this isn't helping the OP :A

matttye

Minrich wrote: »

Well unless she said it before they officers said anything then she would have been responding to their enquiry/questions .... Where she then states she would do it again until they stopped parking ..... Anyway this isn't helping the OP :A

The OP doesn't need help from us he needs the police to interview the woman.

Minrich

matttye wrote: »

The OP doesn't need help from us he needs the police to interview the woman.

The Police need to be seizing the coat from her house first , without it they have very little

matttye

Minrich wrote: »

The Police need to be seizing the coat from her house first , without it they have very little

They have CCTV footage of someone coming out of the neighbour's garden and appearing to scratch vehicles and then returning to the address.

Footage could be clear enough to do a gait analysis but I doubt they'd go to such expense for a minor criminal damage.

But yes the coat will help. They'll need to arrest her to search her premises unless she consents to the search.

Minrich

Gait analysis is just glorified opinion , like handwriting !

rover005

An update: The police just left and here's what happened:

at 9:50 I put a complaint against the police's lack of action, not keeping in touch and updating me on the case development and ignoring a racial discrimination incident.

at 10:00 two officers came in, reviewed the CCTV, asked me to burn a CD and took a thorough statement, where I implied that this is a racial incident that has been going on for years. I asked the officers to talk to our neighbours who had their cars scratched as well, but they denied as it would be an entirely different incident report.

Half an hour later, another knock on the door from the Sgt whom I had sent the email rant from earlier today and asked both of the reporting officers to step out of the property and have a word privately. 15 minutes later, they all came in and the Sgt said that it is too late to arrest the offender and they risk paying compensation for her time behind bars and that she would be arrested in the following days. He also asked me if I am ok to close the complaint.

As soon as I denied, he went on promising me to get back in touch in the next hour with reference numbers and to keep me updated. I confronted him saying that it is a 5-year ongoing issue and he said "Should I have known this at the time of the first report, I would have escalated the case". Came back with reminding him of showing him pictures of my other vehicles and their scratches.

Now I am waiting to hear back from the police, but they all mentioned that they have much more important issues to deal with and they are not sure if we would get anywhere further than this.

Am I nuts to think that our street vandal does indeed have connections with the police, thus stalling the investigation?