We have detected that your browser is using AdBlock

Police Community is a not for profit organisation and advertising revenue is key to our continued viability.

Please disable your AdBlocker on our site in order to continue using it.
This message will disappear once AdBlock has been disabled.

Thank you for your support - we appreciate it !

If you feel you are getting this message in error please email support@policecommunity.co.uk


Resident Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


~DEACTIVATED~ last won the day on May 18 2015

~DEACTIVATED~ had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

23 Sound


  • Rank
    Getting There

Profile Information

  • Gender

Previous Fields

  • Police Force
    Suffolk Constabulary

    Not the usual blue light question

    Ah the forum topic has been hijacked suitably with there being but one person who truly knows the answer. All bow ladies and gentlemen... the fountain of knowledge is posting and will argue every point you ever make.... FYI I would say its attached.

    Why do people mix us up?

    I can't say I have this problem at all... With people I know who get us confused I just get them to go their favourite search engine and learn about and then try to recruit them The only time I declared myself when off duty (which was to save life I hasten to add!) I declared myself as a Police Officer (which according to the wording on my warrant card is accurate!) and had no issues. I don't talk about being a Special / Police Officer to people who I don't know or have no need to tell so the issue never comes up there either. As for being on duty, people cant tell the difference between us and PC's so they don't ask. If I have to declare myself I am a police officer but this is reserved for telephone conversations ("Good Morning Mr Smith, my name is Joe Blogs and I am a Police Officer with Nottinghamshire Police......"). I think its also more personable than "Constable Blogs" for example!

    Baby in a Bar

    Agree with above unless both are drunk. Penalty for being drunk while in charge of child.E+W (1)If any person is found drunk in any highway or other public place, whether a building or not, or on any licenced premises, while having the charge of a child apparently under the age of seven years, he may be apprehended, and shall, if the child is under that age, be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding [F1level 2 on the standard scale], or to imprisonment, . . . F2 for any period not exceeding one month. (2)If the child appears to the court to be under the age of seven, the child shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be under that age unless the contrary is proved. Source: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Edw7/2/28/part/I

    Legal Highs & Section 23

    I have to say I agree with replies so far... The only thing I can think of is that the guy I was speaking to was suggesting that seeing as the "symptoms" of a legal high and a controlled drug may be similar / the same, the grounds for the search may well be there. I suppose that leaves the question of the power to seize said drugs. S23 gives Constables the power to: "seize and detain, for the purposes of proceedings under this Act (S23), anything found in the course of the search which appears to the constable to be evidence of an offence under this Act". (source: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/38/section/23) Given the shocking lack of training I have had with legal highs, I would probably mistake them to be illegal and seize them as they would appear to me to be evidence of an offence. Perhaps this is a rare occasion where less (training) is more!? Thoughts on that?

    Possible breach of bail

    Agreed. Common sense policing must prevail! I work a town centre so I would be getting CCTV on him and if he doesn't leave then he has broken bail and is 'nickable' again.

    Tale of Two Cops

    Gather details of all get ID's etc and inform a supervisor. I wouldn't want to be investigating a colleague who the next week might have my back.... No difference between dealing with an SC and a PC.

    Legal Highs & Section 23

    Hey all Been a while since I have posted on here. I was told by a regular PC the other day that a constable has a power to search under S23 Misuse of Drugs act. Has anyone got any insight on this? Thinking on it I seem to think I have heard this before... Also, for consideration to all who are reading this post, if a certain person who posts using the name of a rather curious primate posts a reply this will be duly ignored... He was the reason I left and stopped posting... He knows who he is!

    Training length for Suffolk - 2015

    How long is the initial training phase at Martlesham these days??
  9. I don't really get the point of the OP. Yes I agree that local police need to engage with their communities. But lets look at Tesco (for example...). Massive multinational. Does that mean the staff in my local express store don't engage with their customers? Of course not. The same approach could be made to policing, if we were to go in this direction. I personally think a national (or England and Wales, or whatever!) would be a great step in the right direction. From an operational perspective imagine how much easier policing would be if the entire force used the same systems, all intelligence was linked and accessible and not to mention that the most could be made out of ordering from the same suppliers incurring massive bulk discounts. You could still have the massive force split into counties, managed at a local level by local officers, but by standardising the structure, policies, procedures and training the police would become a much more consistent body. Let's be honest, it would really only need a body to govern the police force in a similar way to the way that the ACPO does. Of course there are arguments against, but with a bit of planning, and a jump into the unknown with a PMA, I can really see this working. One head on a multi-limbed beast would be much more coherent than multi heads on a multi limbed beast which would just be a confused mess!

    What would you do?

    Dont know if its just me but I cant see the videos....

    Dereliction of Duty

    I have experienced working with PC's who refuse to attend certain situations. I have found that (generally speaking of course- this will not apply to every PC)...depending on how long someone has been in will depend on their willingness to attend things. Newly confirmed officers normally seem to be keen and will go to anything Those who have been in for a little while (5-15 years) are the ones who seem a bit jaded and in my experience are the ones most likely to not go to something because they have a sausage roll on the go, or it is too close to end of shift. Those very experienced officers (15+ years) seem more willing to attend anything, but can spot things which are going to tie them up a mile off and will avoid if possible. These also seem to be the most pro-special. I have to stress that this is purely what I have experienced in my force and that other forces may be different and for any PC's out there reading this, this is obviously not representative of every regular out there. Of course I have come across exceptions to all 3 of the above statements, but these seem to be the most frequently occurring.

    Every Saturday Night

    Maybe my post was a bit too tongue in cheek... I agree with SkinSte, on the face of it, if we really only had the info that OP put, then SkinSte is right. There is no point in pursuing it, S35 for both parties go home and get yourselves some coffee. However, I suspect that if/when this does occur there is likely to be more evidence. If it is to do with an night out on a Fri/Sat evening (or a Mon, Tue, Wed, Thur, Fri, Sat or Sun evening for student cities...gotta love uni...) there are likely to be people about who saw something, door staff, employees, CCTV or marks or wounds on the alleged victim of the assault. Given this evidence, then I am sure that SkinSte would agree too, an arrest would be necesarry (and could be justified). I know what the OP put, for those who like to nit pick, but for the sake of student officers, or those who may be slightly inexperienced or be looking for guidance, I though it worth pointing the above out.

    Every Saturday Night

    This is more straight forwards than you would think... You need to gather first accounts and establish what has happened. You may end up nicking both to prevent a breach of the peace, more likely though I would suggest that from the first accounts you are likely to gather, arrest B on sus Assault Poss D&D if the circs allow. Convey to custody, take the Victim statement and hand over to days to let person B sober up Don't hate the player, hate the game.

    What I Did On Duty

    Specials town centre duty last Saturday. 3 years in. Go into the station and book on. Nothing out of the ordinary. Everyone is well behaved, a bit of lost property. On patrol get stopped by a church member who complains of a rough sleeper in the church doorway. Go and have word to move them on. Doesn't take kindly to being woken up at 0900 on a Saturday and tells me where to stick it. I tell him that I will stick him outside the town centre by banning him if he doesn't move now. He gets up and moves along. Beautiful day, so the local street drinkers are out as well as a lot of eastern Europeans drinking on the streets (I think it must be cultural thing as they genuinely are not aware that they cant do it). No problems. More patrols, nothing out of the ordinary. Crossing ata pedestrian crossing where a van screams past me and nearly knocks me over. Van is stopped at red lights a little way down the street so run after him and pull him over. Strong words of advice given and all checks come back positive. Driver is genuinely apologetic and apparently didn't see me! Shope theft from a body building store. They recovered goods so will return later to view and seize CCTV and take statements. Walk along street and find a car with hazards on, parked on double yellows, one indicator out looking like it is going to pull out causing confusion for traffic. Walk up to car to find 2 kids aged appx. 5& 8 in the car. Car unlocked. Opened door and spoke to kids, they told me their dad was in the shop and told me what he was wearing. Went into shop and asked male to step outside. Explained the issues that I had. Dealt with him for a faulty light only and warned him for the other offences he had potentially caused. Getting towards end of shift and a group of 4-5 lads walk past with an open bottle of desperado. Stop them and explain they cant hasve it. They don't like it. Find myself with four males squaring up to me on all sides. Hand slips down and unclips my PAVA. In one hand I have the bottle of beer. I give a clear loud verbal instruction to get back or get nicked. If they had taken one more step towards me they would have been sprayed. They back down eventually and go on their way just as another officer comes and engages to back me up. Go to take statement from shop theft earlier and put crime on to system. Book off on time!


    So then George oh mighty lawyer what the below actually means to us mere peasants who do not possess the intellect which you are blessed with. "A person acts recklessly within the meaning of section 1 of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 with respect to - (i) a circumstance when he is aware of a risk that it exists or will exist;" I can also tell you for a fact that RISK doesn't mean something has already happened, risk is the probability of something happening. Therefore this statement in my mind reads that where there is a probability that damage will be done, they will be acting recklessly. I will take heed of a private message I just read on this topic. OP - good luck. I'm better than having to argue this with someone who clearly has an issue with accepting that someone else could possibly maybe have a different opinion to his own. Enough said on this topic and as multiple people have advised me, Im blocking all of your posts George so I don't have to endure another second of your pathetic Im right and your wrong posts.