george b

Resident Members
  • Content count

    789
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

george b last won the day on January 23

george b had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

30 Reputable

1 Follower

About george b

  • Rank
    Regular User
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

170 profile views
  1. I like the way they ran after him, I would be going the otherway
  2. well if he spits in a MacDonald's you can nab him, anywhere else it would get a cone plonked on it to closing time
  3. well yes entirely possible, but not at all likely that they are going to shut off the access to Argos for three quarters of an hour over a bit of spit, they wouldn't do so over a dropped ice cream,so it couldn't be judged to be necessary
  4. being spat at quite possibly, but a person of reasonable fitness isn't going to be harressed or alarmed and certainly not distressed by the sight of someone spitting. It not the cost of cleaning that's the issue with crim damage, though that will be neglagble, as they have cleaners wandering around with buckets, who are already being paid, it the loss of use and its seems unnecessary to shut down an entire walkway to drag a mop over a bit of spital? The whole senario is a bit far fetched to be honest , round here security would escort him out, I cant think anyone would call the police over such a triffeling matter, that's if anyone took the slightest notice in the first place. Walking round the vomiting drunks takes most of your attention
  5. considered by whom, not a court I would hope, people might find spitting distasteful even disgusting, but nether of those are included in the criteria of po5 . It's the same with crim damage, a van will be taken out of service to be cleaned , equaling a loss of amenity, two square inches of floor hardly counts as a loss of use. Council bylaws won't apply to private property, and nether in case you were considering it would the littering law if the place has a roof
  6. the definition of public place can change between legislation. But that largely irrelevant. As no offence has been committed by the spitter
  7. so it's a real ambulance but a fake driver. How do you know he is fake?
  8. civil matter
  9. in what way is it a '' fake'' ambulance. It's either an ambulance or it isnt
  10. no
  11. much as i said then?? Negligence quite possibly, but the crim damage act requires recklessness', so no
  12. its a roman candle that attached not a mortar launcher . With recklessness' and crim damage, there has to be a degree of foreseeability about the specific out come. Playing football in the street resulting in a broken window would not be crim damage. Kicking your. Ball deliberately Against a window with no intention to break it very well might be of it if it breaks You could possibly foresee that it might fall out of the sky, but you couldn't be expected to guess. It would land on your neibours green house. So though you could well be said tp have been recklass in general. You couldn't be said of being recklass about about the specific property that has been damaged and that is what is required under the law to make crim damage stick
  13. I note that nobody has answered your question so the power is given to a constable in or out of uniform and as the office of constable apples when off and on duty. There seems no reason why a constable couldn't so do on hos weekend off if he deemed it necessary, so as other have said. It may not be the wisest thing. Pcso ate only pcsos when on duty so no its also worth noting that the power to seize tobacco products come from the children and young persons act 1933 , which has a)amended the age limit to 18 and b) only allows confiscation if the child is seen smoking not just in possession, a technicality that is sometimes forgotten
  14. in my Experiance most people are uneasy if you stick a camera in their face even more so if you then follow them around all evening. If you did that to a mop you would quite likely get punched or arrested cor harressment. Now whilst I support your right to film where and what you will.following the police round as a hobby seems a bit obsessive to me. And will ost likely get you negative attention, which I assume is one of your objectives as you can then put it on your channel. If you really want advice,,, get yourselve a girlfriend( or boyfriend) and find something more enjoyable to do with your Saturday nights.
  15. I think its important that the freedom to film in public is maintained and that people in aurthority who tell you its illegal are challenged. But at the point you start following them round you are probably pushing your luck a bit. They will be forced into doing something to maintain their ora of aurthority. Otherwise they might. Spend the whole shift with a crowd of cameramen following them round filming their every move. from your account it's clear that the pcso exceeded his aurthority possibly to the point of unlawful arrest, trespass on goods and assault??. I doubt very much that a pc attending is going to do lot more than smooth things over and maybe have a word with the pcso. Leaving you with the option of making a formal complaint and or taking a civil suit against the police from my very limited Experiance of pcsos, they seem to make a habit of inventing laws you might have breeched and then trying to bluff their way out if you challenge them