Beaker

Resident Members
  • Content count

    58
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Beaker last won the day on January 8

Beaker had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

10 Good

About Beaker

  • Rank
    Getting There
  • Birthday 14/01/77

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Preston

Recent Profile Visitors

112 profile views
  1. We were told that "Drunk an Incapable" needs to be assessed. If you have NO other choice then you can bring them to custody, but you might as well pick up your cake fine on the way in for custody officers.
  2. You keep pushing RIPA, and you're pushing it hard. Read chapter one, all of it if you like, but pay particular attention to Para 6. The circumstances in which a person makes an interception of a communication in the course of its transmission by means of a private telecommunication system are such that his conduct is excluded from criminal liability under subsection (2) if— (a)he is a person with a right to control the operation or the use of the system; or (b)he has the express or implied consent of such a person to make the interception. So yeah, if the guy said he could, then he could.
  3. He by reports I've read simply entered an existing chat. So he didn't search the phone for contacts etc. Can you tell me EXACTLY what part of RIPA applies? Have rescanned it going over what I remembered from previous readings nothing does. Also the dude who refused to look at the phone most likely was either in a rush to get elsewhere, or he didn't want egg on his face. I got stopped for phone, and then I waved my vape at him. Phone was in my jacket pocket under the seat, because I don't like there to be any problems with that. My firm sack us if we get points for phone use, because they supply us phone kits if we don't have them fitted already.
  4. Exactly, but RIPA doesn't apply anyway if the guy has handed his phone over willingly, and given the officer permisson. It may fall under DPA, but again as long as permission was given to use the data in a set manner, and not outside of that which the data subject agreed it's fine. CMA is a PITA, because it is so broad. However if the PC in question asked for permission to send a message to a guy's friends, did it and nothing else it's all good. if he then posted stuff to facebook, or trawled his emails then yeah he could be nabbed for that. I'm assuming the PC got permission, and he only sent a message to that message group. If that is the case then no law has been broken, and points to the dude.
  5. I work with people's data on a daily basis, mostly on a one-to-one basis. As such the company I work for is VERY keen on DPA, and yes in that role I'm covered by DPA rules. All we actually need once we've passed the standard account questions to satisfy FCA regulations is an agreement to use the PC or phone via remote, or in person. That agreement is sometimes verbal, sometimes written, and sometimes just on a little pop-up box. When we checked the legal bods came back to us with the information it doesn't matter if someone is drunk, as long as they click "I agree", or tell you verbally then you're covered. Unless his force has some specific policies in line with this type of situation he's in the clear. NOT a breach of DPA, nor if he has said permission is it a breach of CMA.
  6. He's drunk, he knows the street he lives on, but due to drink he can't remember the number. So he could communicate. He's likely too drunk to type, so he either hands over the phone, or the PC says "here mate, can I ask your friends what your address is using your phone?". Dude agrees, all good as far as I can see. I'm very familar with DPA and CMA, RIPA certainly doesn't apply here. As long as the PC didn't just take the phone and use it there are no problems that appear as long as he explained in the first instance. Also a bit of a technicallity, but if you're drunk and agree to let someone use your phone you have still given permission for them to, regardless if it's your mother, your wife or a nice PC that is just trying to get you home rather than argue with a custody sergeant over booking in someone because the local hospital told you to bugger off.
  7. Lets see if his PSD have anything to say. I've been so drunk I can't walk properly, but I was with it enough to explain to the officer I was speaking to where I lived. As far as DPA is concerned it isn't a breach if you have the agreement of the data subject to use that information in a way agreed between the data subject and the data user. That can be in writing or verbal. So as long as he asked and got a clear agreement there is no issue. I'm looking at RIPA, and trying to work out which bit (if any) covers it as there was nothing covert, and no delving in to records. I was curious to see if it fell under Computer Misuse Act, but again as long as the officer got agreement from the guy who owned the phone it doesn't apply.
  8. He didn't release the data to anyone though. He accessed the guy's phone, and used it to work out where the guy lived. He didn't release it to the public, one of the guy's friends did. If he's agreed with the officer who took him home to allow access to the handset then there are no issues there either are there?
  9. I wasn't 100% on the legsl points at the time, and having to report something to PSD before I've even finished training wasn't an attractive option. If it happens again he'll get his arse torn out verbally. He behaved exactly the same way we've been warned about. I know there is an there are some bylaws there about dogs and booze, but he was on the lead and I wasn't boozing. So no case to answer.
  10. I was sat on a park eating my lunch. He told me I had to move on, or he'd need to take my name and address etc. It's a bit 'posh' round where I was, and I'm guessing a dude with a Staffie doesn't fit the area. I couldn't be arsed arguing with him to be fair. Wouldn't mind except our local PCSO likes my dog, and Fatboy has stopped the local kids doing the back garden grand national when being chased.
  11. Im watching this for opinons, as I've had a disagreement with a PCSO recently where I was fairly certain I was right, but he was a bit of a tool (and I don't want any problems when I'm in training).
  12. Welcome to training with an ESP. I think I really will be avoiding using the thing until every other option has been considered. The nobbles on the rubber grip rubbed those almost immediately. Edit :: The blister on my finger is about the size of 5p piece, and I can't grip anything properly at the moment.
  13. Fair enough. I wasn't entirely clear on the legal points. I'd never even consider carrying any of it. My point was as it was explained we were allowed to have our issued baton, but not allowed to modify it, or get one from elsewhere. Which is fair. Just wasn't sure if there would be any issues with just owning them. Purely down to sentimentality, and thing like the old solid Hiatt cuffs are just funky. Plus, I may be old, but I'm not old enough to get away with a black leather police cape without people thinking I'm a vampire!
  14. Bit of background. My Grandfather when he retired was a Chief Super, and over the years he collected quite a lot of kit. My Grandmother is now in the process of moving house, and she's offered me his old collection of kit. Including a couple of old truncheons (Heavy wood and an unused chair leg), Inspectors canes, various handcuffs, capes etc. While I kind of understand Batons/Truncheons being offensive weapons anyone got any ideas if I'd run in to any issues if I was to keep them? I know I'm allowed to have my issued baton, but other kit like this I'm unsure of.
  15. It was Professor Plum, in The Library, with The Candlestick.