27 replies to this topic

[Prolixia]

Johnny and Adam have a drunk argument. Johnny is carrying a laptop in a bag, which he drops to the floor in order to take a swing at Adam. Adam runs round the corner and Johnny chases him right into you. At this point both Johnny and Adam are suddenly overcome by the desire to settle their differences with a handshake and go to their homes, rather than make allegations and both get nicked. You sent them on their respective ways.

Johnny gets half way home before he realises that he is no longer carrying his laptop, which he must have left in the street during the argument. He rushes back to the scene, but there's no sign of his computer. In actual fact it isn't even his laptop - he has borrowed it from a client and there are going to be some very awkward questions asked in the morning. Johnny decides that the laptop must have been stolen (on the basis that it has been taken from the street by someone) and realises that with suitable massaging of the facts this will represent a much more palatable explanation to his client. Johnny is therefore adamant that he wants to report a crime.

Is it appropriate to take a crime report, or would you insist on recording the laptop as lost property? On one hand it seems highly likely that the laptop was half-inched the moment someone saw it lying in the street, but on the other hand it is also quite possible that it had been removed simply in order that it could be handed in to the police. If it were recorded as lost property but wasn't handed in, does there come a point in time when it is assumed to have been stolen by whoever found it and can therefore be crimed, or would the police need to wait until it was recovered and then determine that it had actually been stolen?

This is based on a real scenario where was actually quite a lot more going on. In the real scenario I insisted that it be treated as lost property, but the facts were slightly different and I'd be interested on any thoughts on the more general case above.

Edited by Prolixia, 29 May 2012 - 02:31 PM.

[Sharpe]

If whoever took the laptop fails to report it as found property and keeps it, for example, then a theft has occurred. Of that there would be very little doubt.

I have considered both options but I would probably report it as a theft personally. No doubt the crime management bureau would have something to say, but my reasoning is that if I happened to find the person who took the laptop with it a week later I would arrest them on suspicion of theft.

Edited by Sharpe, 29 May 2012 - 02:54 PM.

[oddbod]

It can't be crimed as a theft until the found property register has been checked a reasonable time after the loss, after all someone may be on their way to the police station to hand it in.

[Shogy1]

It can't be crimed as a theft until the found property register has been checked a reasonable time after the loss, after all someone may be on their way to the police station to hand it in.

Why not? I can see where your coming from , however on the flip side there is no issue in recording it as stolen as it is also likely someone has had it away.

[oddbod]

An incident/CAD/serial must be created; the matter can then be recorded as a crime if (on the balance of probabilities) the circumstances as reported amount to a crime defined by law unless there is credible evidence to the contrary. You could crime it, check the register and find it has been handed in then try and get it no-crimed (best of luck with that ) or create an incident, check the register and then crime it if it hasn't been handed in. As you say, it's likely someone has had it away.
Either/or.

[Sharpe]

An incident/CAD/serial must be created; the matter can then be recorded as a crime if (on the balance of probabilities) the circumstances as reported amount to a crime defined by law unless there is credible evidence to the contrary. You could crime it, check the register and find it has been handed in then try and get it no-crimed (best of luck with that ) or create an incident, check the register and then crime it if it hasn't been handed in. As you say, it's likely someone has had it away.
Either/or.

Obviously I would check the register before criming it, I nearly edited my answer (again) to add that bit in but thought it would be a given.

[Prolixia]

As it happened, Johnny was throwing all kind of wild accusations around - including that Adam had grabbed the laptop and run away with it, which I knew was completely untrue (and Johnny freely admitted that when I challenged him on it). He was drunk, still pumped full of adrenaline, and egged-on by his mates who had returned with him to find the laptop.

In the end what I did was walk with Johnny back to the station so that he could report the laptop as lost. During the course of the journey I talked some sense into him regarding the difference between losing something and having it stolen, and the problems that would arise for him were he to make a false report. He stopped for a MacDonalds on the way, and I took the opportunity to go on ahead and warn the front desk what to expect.

[Shogy1]

As it happened, Johnny was throwing all kind of wild accusations around - including that Adam had grabbed the laptop and run away with it, which I knew was completely untrue (and Johnny freely admitted that when I challenged him on it). He was drunk, still pumped full of adrenaline, and egged-on by his mates who had returned with him to find the laptop.

In the end what I did was walk with Johnny back to the station so that he could report the laptop as lost. During the course of the journey I talked some sense into him regarding the difference between losing something and having it stolen, and the problems that would arise for him were he to make a false report. He stopped for a MacDonalds on the way, and I took the opportunity to go on ahead and warn the front desk what to expect.

How can the lap top be lost if he knew where he left it? It must have been removed by someone, so that means they either recovered it to hand into police or have stolen it. The more likely being it's stolen (in this day and age anyway)

For example: I'm sitting on a bus, my phone drops out of my pocket without me noticing and it gets left there when I get up and walk away not realising this it is then picked up and kept by someone (for the purpose of this no attempt to trace owner). I have "lost" the phone while the other person has stolen it. I can only report it as lost as I have no idea where it was.

As is for the scenario above. he knew where he left it. He went back to get it and it had gone. he quite within his rights to report it as stolen if he wishes. Albeit he can tell the owner of the laptop what he likes. That's down to him.

[Prolixia]

As is for the scenario above. he knew where he left it. He went back to get it and it had gone. he quite within his rights to report it as stolen if he wishes. Albeit he can tell the owner of the laptop what he likes. That's down to him.

Well, actually he didn't know quite where he left it. He simply noticed it was missing when he was on his way home and guessed that he must have dropped it somewhere during the scuffle - he couldn't tell me exactly where because the incident actually took place over a larger area than just the corner. I realise I'm here committing the irritating sin of adding new (real) information after I defined the (artificial) situation - and I apologise!

However, I'm not really sure that I agree with your reasoning in any case. Even if Johnny knows exactly where he lost the laptop, he became separated from it as a result of accidentally abandoning it rather than because someone took it from him. At the time when Johnny is telling me this I have no reason to assume that the laptop has been stolen rather than removed completely legally to keep it safe until it can be returned to him. Put it this way, if a few minutes later someone were to come round the corner with the laptop then unless they e.g. claimed it was theirs or walked straight past me then I'd be struggling to meet the points to prove for theft.

I completely agree with you that in reality the chances of Johnny seeing his computer again are slim, because there is every chance it has been nicked and not taken to be handed in. But the moment Johnny put it down it became lost property and not stolen property, and although it has now been removed I'm not sure at what stage we can guess that it has been stolen with enough conviction to warrant recording a crime. I guess that's my question - where along the line does that threshold lie?

[SkinSte]

How can the lap top be lost if he knew where he left it? It must have been removed by someone, so that means they either recovered it to hand into police or have stolen it. The more likely being it's stolen (in this day and age anyway)

For example: I'm sitting on a bus, my phone drops out of my pocket without me noticing and it gets left there when I get up and walk away not realising this it is then picked up and kept by someone (for the purpose of this no attempt to trace owner). I have "lost" the phone while the other person has stolen it. I can only report it as lost as I have no idea where it was.

As is for the scenario above. he knew where he left it. He went back to get it and it had gone. he quite within his rights to report it as stolen if he wishes. Albeit he can tell the owner of the laptop what he likes. That's down to him.

It's lost because he doesn't know where it is and there's no evidence at that time to suggest it had been stolen. As mentioned a million times, someone could have picked it up to hand it in.

I'd put it on as a crime related incident and if it latter turns out to be stolen (by not turning up) then a click of the switch and it's a crime. You get this all the time in front office, usually it's a mobile phone left in a pub. Each case must be judged on it's merits, but unless it's been seen to be taken by someone then it's usually not a theft.

[Shogy1]

It's lost because he doesn't know where it is and there's no evidence at that time to suggest it had been stolen. As mentioned a million times, someone could have picked it up to hand it in.

I'd put it on as a crime related incident and if it latter turns out to be stolen (by not turning up) then a click of the switch and it's a crime. You get this all the time in front office, usually it's a mobile phone left in a pub. Each case must be judged on it's merits, but unless it's been seen to be taken by someone then it's usually not a theft.

No need to get excited. If some one came into the front office with the above story I would crime it as a theft. What the crime management do with it is up to them

[Capt. Carrot]

It is theft unless there is credible evidence to the contrary. Straightforward Home Office Crime Recording Standards. If it later transpires that it isn't a crime then it can be re-classified.
There is a victim and whoever has the laptop did not have the owners permission to take it, if the "finder" turns up and hands it in, then re-classify at that point as that's when there's credible evidence that it wasn't a crime.

No need to get excited. If some one came into the front office with the above story I would crime it as a theft. What the crime management do with it is up to them

Precisely

[TCambs]

It is theft unless there is credible evidence to the contrary. Straightforward Home Office Crime Recording Standards.

Not quite. It's theft for the purposes of crime recording if from the circumstances reported that on the balance of probabilities a theft has occurred. In my mind, until reasonable time has been given for someone to hand it in then that test is not met. Our crime recording centre generally advise waiting 72 hours, after which point it'll be recorded as a crime.

I would hope any reasonable member of the public that came across an abandoned laptop would pick it up and go hand it in. I certainly don't think a reasonable person would just leave it there. What I'm getting at is, if it were left in public view for a period of time you'd expect it to be gone, no matter if it were a reasonable person or not so reasonable person who came along. Therefore the fact it is gone proves nothing.

Edited by TCambs, 30 May 2012 - 07:38 PM.

[Capt. Carrot]

Not quite. It's theft for the purposes of crime recording if from the circumstances reported that on the balance of probabilities a theft has occurred. In my mind, until reasonable time has been given for someone to hand it in then that test is not met. Our crime recording centre generally advise waiting 72 hours, after which point it'll be recorded as a crime.

I would hope any reasonable member of the public that came across an abandoned laptop would pick it up and go hand it in. I certainly don't think a reasonable person would just leave it there. What I'm getting at is, if it were left in public view for a period of time you'd expect it to be gone, no matter if it were a reasonable person or not so reasonable person who came along. Therefore the fact it is gone proves nothing.

Did you read the OP? The question was: is it appropriate to take a Crime report? The answer is "Yes". It's a theft until we know it isn't, as I pointed out. Points to prove for conviction are a slightly different matter.

[TCambs]

Did you read the OP? The question was: is it appropriate to take a Crime report? The answer is "Yes".

Yes I dead read the OP, I was aware of the question, and I disagree with your answer....

It's a theft until we know it isn't, as I pointed out. Points to prove for conviction are a slightly different matter.

No it isn't. It's a theft if on the balance of probabilities on the facts reported a theft has occurred. It's not simply a theft because the victim thinks it should be, or that there is no evidence it isn't.

Edited by TCambs, 30 May 2012 - 07:57 PM.

[Capt. Carrot]

It IS a theft for crime recording purposes because we would have no credible evidence to the contrary. What else can you possibly record it as? The loser left the laptop behind and now it isn't there. If a victim believes they are a victim of crime amd we cannot show that no crime has occurred them we must record it. I have absolutely no doubt that you were taught that at training school! Assuming you attended a Police Traiining school that followed the National Police Curriculum.

[TCambs]

It IS a theft for crime recording purposes because we would have no credible evidence to the contrary. What else can you possibly record it as? The loser left the laptop behind and now it isn't there. If a victim believes they are a victim of crime amd we cannot show that no crime has occurred them we must record it. I have absolutely no doubt that you were taught that at training school! Assuming you attended a Police Traiining school that followed the National Police Curriculum.

I would record it is a loss....

Why are you ignoring the 'on the balance of probabilities based on the facts (not opinions) reported' bit? The reported facts are:

'I left my laptop on the street, I went back sometime later and it was gone'.

If you agree that if he left it there for a period of time that it would likely be removed (either honestly or dishonestly) then the mere fact it has been removed does not, in my mind at least, mean on the balance of probabilities it has been stolen. If you discount the possibility of someone honestly picking it up by giving a reasonable timeframe for them to trace the owner or hand it in then the facts have changed and on the balance of probabilities a theft has occurred. If we did it your way there would be no such thing as lost property as it would all be theft...

The opinion of the victim means nothing. It is the facts they report that we must consider.

[Capt. Carrot]

I would record it is a loss....

Why are you ignoring the 'on the balance of probabilities based on the facts (not opinions) reported' bit? The reported facts are:

'I left my laptop on the street, I went back sometime later and it was gone'.

If you agree that if he left it there for a period of time that it would likely be removed (either honestly or dishonestly) then the mere fact it has been removed does not, in my mind at least, mean on the balance of probabilities it has been stolen. If you discount the possibility of someone honestly picking it up by giving a reasonable timeframe for them to trace the owner or hand it in then the facts have changed and on the balance of probabilities a theft has occurred. If we did it your way there would be no such thing as lost property as it would all be theft...

The opinion of the victim means nothing. It is the facts they report that we must consider.

'I left my laptop on the street, I went back sometime later and it was gone'. That's my balance of probabilites. if your laptop had disappeared from where you'd left it are you really going to think "oh that's alright, someone will hand it in?"

I'm not ignoring the balance of probabilities at all. On the balance of probabilities, assisted by experience, I would believe it's most likely never going to be seen again, at least not by the rightful owner.

When did a victims opinion start to count for nothing? It's a part of the consideration process to listen to what the victim actually thinks. if the victim is wrong and someone hands it in, we simply reclassify and let the victim know the good news. If we don't report it as a crime and the laptop never gets handed in, then a crime has probably occurred and we've lost time on the investigation, or worse still missed the opportunity to record the crime. Hence one reason why the BCS is usually different to our figures.

What do we have to lose by recording the crime?

[TCambs]

'I left my laptop on the street, I went back sometime later and it was gone'. That's my balance of probabilites. if your laptop had disappeared from where you'd left it are you really going to think "oh that's alright, someone will hand it in?"

I'm not ignoring the balance of probabilities at all. On the balance of probabilities, assisted by experience, I would believe it's most likely never going to be seen again, at least not by the rightful owner.

I have absolutely no problem with people having a different judgement to me on whether it is a theft on the balance of the probabilities. I have given my judgment and my reasons and am happy to stick by them. What I took issue with was you categorically saying it was a crime:

It's a theft until we know it isn't

To which I replied

No it isn't. It's a theft if on the balance of probabilities on the facts reported a theft has occurred. It's not simply a theft because the victim thinks it should be, or that there is no evidence it isn't.

And you asserted

It IS a theft for crime recording purposes because we would have no credible evidence to the contrary

When did a victims opinion start to count for nothing?

In the context of crime recording, which is what we're talking about, if the facts reported by a victim do not pass the test of 'on the balance of probabilities' then whether they think a crime has occurred is not relevant. The victim's opinion counts for nothing in making the decision as it should be an impartial decision based on the reported facts alone...

Edited by TCambs, 30 May 2012 - 08:53 PM.

[Capt. Carrot]

I have absolutely no problem with people having a different judgement to me on whether it is a theft on the balance of the probabilities. I have given my judgment and my reasons and am happy to stick by them. What I took issue with was you categorically saying it was a crime:

Those are factually incorrect statements.

In your opinion



In the context of crime recording, which is what we're talking about, if the facts reported by a victim do not pass the tests of the balance of probabilities and no evidence to the contrary then whether they think a crime has occurred is not relevant. The victim's opinion counts for nothing in making the decision as it should be an impartial decision based on the reported facts alone...

Really?

Okay, you go your way, I'll go mine. We clearly won't agree on this.
But i will just leave you with this:
3.2 When examining a report of an incident regarding offences related to identified victims, the test to be
applied in respect of recording a crime is that of the balance of probabilities: that is to say is the incident
more likely than not the result of a criminal act? In most cases, a belief by the victim (or person
reasonably assumed to be acting on behalf of the victim) that a crime has occurred is sufficient to justify
its recording as a crime, although this will not be the case in all circumstances. Effectively, a more victim
oriented approach is advocated.

Edited by Capt. Carrot, 30 May 2012 - 09:00 PM.

[Prolixia]

I think that there's a creditable argument either way. In the present case yes there is every chance that whoever found the laptop has nicked it, but on the other hand Johnny's belief that it was stolen isn't based on anything more concrete than his cynical (or realistic, if you prefer) view of human nature.

Mind you, if you start to assume that anything of any value will be nicked the moment it's left unattended then it's hard to see how much missing property could ever be recorded as "lost".

In terms of the loss in recording a crime, it would possibly generate quite a lot of extra work. Aside from the time spent putting the crime on the system there's a requirement to conduct an investigation, contact the victim, etc. Two minutes recording an entry in the lost property book is less costly to the force. I'm not saying that we should square things away to make life easier, just that there is an incentive to the force to avoid recording crimes that aren't really crimes. The real extent of the 'cost' is probably dependent on local force procedure and systems - in my force recording lost property is very quick and easy, whereas creating a crime is both a lot of work initially and creates a lot of follow-up work.

In my (real world) scenario Johnny was in no fit state to provide details of the crime in any case - when I told him it sounded like he had lost the laptop he told me outright that he would instead claim that Adam had mugged him and run off with the laptop (clearly untrue), if that would get him a crime number. In these particular circumstances I think that making an entry for lost property that night and then let Johnny decide how to proceed when he'd calmed down and sobered up the next day was in fact doing him a favour, but it did make me wonder where the line would be drawn. Hence this topic and the interesting debate

[davidedward]

the fact that he'd contemplated making a false allegation of robbery ('he told me outright that he would instead claim that Adam had mugged him and run off with the laptop'), coupled with the fact that he finally admitted he had no idea where he'd left it, would lead me to record it as lost property.

the 'complainant' is prepared to lie to obtain a crime number, and that is my credible evidence to the contrary. no crime.

[SkinSte]

No need to get excited. If some one came into the front office with the above story I would crime it as a theft. What the crime management do with it is up to them

An answer which does not agree with you does not automatically mean I got a little hot under the collar.

As Davidedward has pointed out, inconsistancies in stories mean I'm more likely to believe it's a false report solely for insurance purposes, which is why most people seem to report things to us anyway.

[Pablo Montoya]

Theft by finding for whoever 'found' the laptop (unless they were going to hand it in to a police station within a reasonable timeframe) and a loss of property from Johnny? Unless the situation grows arms and legs, then it should be dealt with as it develops.

By the way I purposely wrote this before looking in on other posters opinions.

[Shogy1]

An answer which does not agree with you does not automatically mean I got a little hot under the collar.

"As mentioned a million times" Sorry I took that quote that to mean you were getting a bit frustrated..