Small claims - against the police?

JustAnotherSaver

Johnnytwostep wrote: »

Oh so they were both doing a bit of charlie off the phone too. Naughty naughty. Bang em up.

Nice try.

Keep going. :T

Johnnytwostep

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

Literal :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: at this. All the more for the fact that i did actually imagine a giraffe in the passenger seat :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:.

But anyway, like you said, it certainly wasn't a 2kg bag.

I don't get it, one minute we seem to want to talk about facts, the next minute we seem to want to stretch it out, twist a little here & there so it suits our argument better.

I prefer to deal with the facts.

I also prefer to get helpful responses but it looks like we've had some here who aren't interested in that. Oh well.

the facts are your 'Friend' is banged to rights, fair cop guvnor, and count yourself lucky you, I mean your Friend wasn't banged up with big mal from B-wing.

JustAnotherSaver

Johnnytwostep wrote: »

the facts are your 'Friend' is banged to rights, fair cop guvnor, and count yourself lucky you, I mean your Friend wasn't banged up with big mal from B-wing.

baza52

so your friend says it was a "small amount"
How much is a small amount? a 1g baggie? An eighth, a quarter?
Was it all in 1 bag or was there more than 1 bag/stash of it?
Has the person with the drugs been caught or cautioned for possession before?

It does seem strange they went to such lengths if the amount was as small as your making it out to be.

daytona0

ThumbRemote wrote: »

waffle

You aren't following me, and you were rude in earlier posts (just like me in this one - quoting your post as waffle!). Also, the OP has resorted to calling people trolls.

I think the thread has run its course.

(though it is comical how OP's friend's mate was caught breaking the law and yet you're having a pop at me! I haven't done a thing wrong and I was trying to explore the implications of what you were saying - if you don't agree then by all means constructively criticise! But your language is quite insulting to be quite honest, I may say things which are wrong but I don't accuse fellow posters of being drunk or living in fantasy land or fabricating total rubbish. Absolutely no respect do you? I'd shudder to think how you'd treat me if I were a druggie! Or would you be all pally and turn on the first law-abiding citizen who chirps in? ). And OP getting so deeply involved in an issue relating to their friend, why would you be arsed? Leave it for your friend to deal with!

I don't want to spend my time arguing with chiefs on here. If the advice given is useless then please explain WHY, or please explore any valid points. Don't just insult me! Whatever you think about my posts, it still takes time for me to type them up and I do try to offer guidance even if it can be a bit harsh (or even wrong? Nothing wrong with being wrong if it stimulates discussion which can go on to help OP). I can just alternatively post something silly like others have done! I don't see you having a pop at those users

If you respond to this post then I'll tell you right now what my response will be:

"Ok, next time I will simply post this: Bang em up guvnor, menace to society. Pedalling drugs to kids is wrong."

That's me done on this thread Let me know if you want me to post that.

paddyrg

Sadly, I suspect the passenger may have previous or other reasons to be known to the police, which the driver may not be aware of. It would make some sense of the scene compared with a totally random stop and search of two people. The police may have been acting on intelligence that the friend, whilst carrying a smallish amount of drugs, was on their way to buy more, or burgle someone, or maybe just had enough previous that they know he's worth lifting at any time as a prolific fence, or other wrong'un. Pure speculation, I've no idea, but it would create a context where the police might act as they did.

Alas the driver is now a known associate of this chap, and the police are wary now. Maybe in the cells he kicked off or didn't cooperate as well as he'll tell people in the morning. No way to know, but he clearly didn't create enough distance from the passenger. That's a shame if it's the case - wrong place, wrong time, getting in with the wrong crowd and remaining on the police's radar. Maybe it is with selling the car and possibly even examining if his friendship group send the right image.

Lots of speculation there, just filling the void a little as there's clearly a more complex situation/other factors none of us know about. With the driver's recently elevated profile, though, keeping his head low might be the better option, pragmatically.

JustAnotherSaver

Yes the passenger was known to the police already.

I don't know exactly what for. How many or few convictions they'd got on their record. I just know that the passenger was known.

hollydays

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

Yes the passenger was known to the police already.

I don't know exactly what for. How many or few convictions they'd got on their record. I just know that the passenger was known.

In that case it seems there are a few thing you don't know.

Why hasn't the injured party asked the police what the procedures are for goods returned damaged? I would have thought if the condition of the phone wasn't logged as cracked when it was seized he should simply ASK. He no doubt has the details of the officer who seized it-contact him.Im sure the police are always getting told" you damaged the screen of my phone" so I'm sure they have safeguards in place.
The police force will have a civil claims manager. The ap needs to write to them.

Where's bop with a 'succinct 'summing up?

JustAnotherSaver

Just a question for the trolls as this one just came to me since you like to draw up scenarios so much, so imagine this one....

The police are tipped off that you're doing drugs out of your home. Or for whatever other reason that the police want to gain access to your house (they have some sort of intelligence that you're doing drugs out of your place) .... And they are unable to gain access. Perhaps you're not there. Maybe you're asleep. In the shower. Can't hear them. Whatever.

Wouldn't be the first time the police have gotten an address wrong or a person wrong would it, regardless of how infrequent it happens.

So now your front door is taken out & they find nothing because there was nothing to find.

Well since you like to sit so smugly at your troll desk saying the police are just doing their jobs so tough luck...

Would you be sitting in your armchair saying the exact same - well the police were only doing their job, I suppose I'll have to fork out for a new front door myself. Good on them for being so thorough though.

But I'm lucky. At least the fines I would've been hit with & possible jail time which I've avoided - I can put that money towards a new front door.

Hmm.

hollydays

hollydays wrote: »

In that case it seems there are a few thing you don't know.

Why hasn't the injured party asked the police what the procedures are for goods returned damaged? I would have thought if the condition of the phone wasn't logged as cracked when it was seized he should simply ASK. He no doubt has the details of the officer who seized it-contact him.Im sure the police are always getting told" you damaged the screen of my phone" so I'm sure they have safeguards in place.
The police force will have a civil claims manager. The ap needs to write to them.

Where's bop with a 'succinct 'summing up?

Any answers to these questions.?
You've been given an answer so I'm not sure what a hypothetical front door have to do with it.the police stopped a known criminal in possession of a small amount of cannabis. What exactly have they got wrong? The phones broken-write to the police-end of.