8x57
Distinguished Member
You got a good looking wife there Sir, has she got a sister?
Fieldsports Britain channel - 15:00 on the timeline.
- Thread starter Stalker62
- Start date
Maybe she had a "Fenton" amongst the trainees?
Stalker62
Well-Known Member
You seen the price of those recently?
To be fair again the officers acted on the info they had - crocs = high probability of a sex offender nearby…
Stalker62
Well-Known Member
8x57
Distinguished Member
No and I'm never likely to go and find out either.
Mike, You need a Heimlich?No and I'm never likely to go and find out either.
Swedish
Well-Known Member
How very dare you!To be fair again the officers acted on the info they had - crocs = high probability of a sex offender nearby…
Abdominal thrust dear boy, apparently the yanks were suing the family too much so it’s had a name changeMike, You need a Heimlich?
. Give me strength....
.
A late friend, an ex-Sergeant in the Metropolitan Police (Ian Henning who those who were in the job) who later became a paralegal in the US and then the UK, had a saying he'd imported from the USA. That everybody can be a Monday morning quarterback. It does look as if the video can be interpreted as "heavy handed police" bullying an innocent third party or on the other side as "police lead possibly disorientated victim away from place of danger".
But what is still the same regardless is that both parties have been the butt of a possibly malicious 999 call and it is hoped that this will now be investigated and action taken. All 999 calls are recorded and all will have a "CLI" (a calling line indicator which means that the number shows up on the 999 operator's screen). It is hoped that the originator of that call is also now being robustly investigated and if proven as malintent prosecuted.
But what is still the same regardless is that both parties have been the butt of a possibly malicious 999 call and it is hoped that this will now be investigated and action taken. All 999 calls are recorded and all will have a "CLI" (a calling line indicator which means that the number shows up on the 999 operator's screen). It is hoped that the originator of that call is also now being robustly investigated and if proven as malintent prosecuted.
Last edited:
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
If I wuz the chief constable I’d be investigating and prosecuting the complainant if at all possible.
I has all the hallmarks of a malicious complaint made by a neighbour ****ed off at having their lie in interrupted.
I’d also be looking for full retrieval of costs and damages.
I has all the hallmarks of a malicious complaint made by a neighbour ****ed off at having their lie in interrupted.
I’d also be looking for full retrieval of costs and damages.
8x57
Distinguished Member
If and that's a very big if, the injured party could prove (civil action so balance of probabilities) that the call was malicious then she should pursue her claim for £8,000 damages of the gate in the courts against the caller.
You'd need to establish a causal link. In that did the caller intend (or should have foreseen) that the police would respond in a robust manner and that in doing so the police might need to force the gates to do so. In the same way that, for example, a malicious 999 call to the fire brigade about a person trapped inside a supposed burning room inside a building inside factory complex might cause the fire brigade to breach a similar set of gates. So it is possible that a civil action might have legs, yes.If and that's a very big if, the injured party could prove (civil action so balance of probabilities) that the call was malicious then she should pursue her claim for £8,000 damages of the gate in the courts against the caller.
NoIDeer
Well-Known Member
Whoever called it in should be answering questions. If the police really thought they were responding to a shooting and ten shots fired they were right to not **** about?
Now if they had shot a dog for attempted licking...
Smellydog
Well-Known Member
Not really, she was not armed, they should not of even touched her.
nun_hunter
Well-Known Member
It was because Dr Heimlich was hugely discredited during the 80's and 90's due to unethical practices around promoting his method and falsely discrediting others.
He also quite unethically tried to argue for a cure of malaria by infecting people with malaria
His own son described him as "a con man and spectacular liar".
But I digress from extolling the virtues of Crocs!
There are those who wear Crocs and those who are won't wear them through fear they'll enjoy them too much and start telling others about how amazing they are. Just like CrossFit and owning a 6.5 Creedmoor
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
There is a strong likelihood is that the call was malicious and came from a neighbour.If and that's a very big if, the injured party could prove (civil action so balance of probabilities) that the call was malicious then she should pursue her claim for £8,000 damages of the gate in the courts against the caller.
The woman clearly did herself no favours by banging a dummy launcher repeatedly in the early morning, and it’s probably not the first time she’s done so.
There’s a recording of the telephone complaint and it is traceable, so the police should do what police do, trace it and interview the complainant.
Whether or not the police overreacted is largely conditional on the tone and content of the original complaint.
As for the £8K worth of damage, the electric rams alone are around £1500 a pair and are clearly busted, the gates, hinges and pillars are damaged and one of the pillars looks like it needs to be demolished and rebuilt. Then the wiring and panels will need to be replaced.
£8k may not be totally outrageous.
Similar threads
