Arrested, caged and DNA tested - for using MP3

[MechAg94]

Black? How big of a problem is that over there?


I agree with others. I don't have a problem with the call or confronting him. However, they should have realized it was a mistake and let him go on his way. They shouldn't have hauled him in anyway.

This same thing happens in the US. Cops raid the wrong house. Instead of realizing this and going away, they continue to search the house and only release the people hours later.

 

[joab]

Man arrested on suspicion
Doesn't that pretty much say it all?

You are always arrested on suspicion, cops do not have the power to charge

 

[sprithitler]

-Mechag94, the "driving while black" or "walking while black" grounds for arrest very much exists in Europe, maybe more so for doing those or other things while being of middle east heritage.
Walking while being a black, well dressed highly educated christian in GB or Sweden will generally speaking be a less suspicious undertaking than walking while being a middle eastern youth traveling to or from a lower income housing district.
We have every bit as much prejudice towards colored people in west europe as you have in the US, and probably far more problem with fundamentalist Islam than you have.

 

[george29]

Careful how you Brits scratch your privates, you may get arrested for public lewdness and claiming Jock Itch before the Queens Magistrate may not be a good enough defense.

(I dunno why I'm making fun of you Brits, we Ameican Sheeple are just one step behind you).

 

[Geronimo45]

Ah... HK's legendary MP-3. Almost as rare as the Glock 7.

 

[Cosmoline]

I object to the DNA database and (of course) to Britain's absurd gun laws. But in light of both I don't see any problem with the police response. Over there no citizens are ever allowed to own a handgun of any type, and to have one on you is a high level crime. The police response was in keeping with a report of a serious crime, and in keeping with their SOP of taking a broader array of suspects into custody than police do stateside. Due to a long line of Supreme Court cases US cops are much more likely to do a pat down and AVOID arresting people. Not because they're extra nice but because as soon as they formally arrest a suspect there are a hundred and one rights and requirements that swing into play--violation of any one will risk destroying an otherwise good case. So if there are questions to be answered they usually prefer to keep things less formal and get the suspect to agree to searches and to answer questions. Consent is the name of the game here, whereas in the UK cops can arrest without fear of having the case thrown out due to a Constitutional violation. They often arrest everyone involved even if they believe some or all to be innocent. Detain for questioning is the name of the game there.

The problem in this case is not the police, the problems are the sheepish fools who keep voting out of fear and the politicians who play off these fears.

 

[Officers'Wife]

How is this gun related?

It demostrates the hysteria and poor judgment of a citizenry frightened to death of 'gun violence' and the lengths such countries will go to in fueling that hysteria.

Selena

 

[CountGlockula]

Wow....just wow.

 

[Navy joe]

Ah... HK's legendary MP-3. Almost as rare as the Glock 7.

Sad, my first thought was what's an MP-3, how'd I miss it and how do I get it. Then I realize its a silly little music thingy. I suggest this hapless fellow download a little NWA for his player.

 

[B.357]

Sounds like our police:sometimes.
(not to offend any good officers here or elsewere)
It has been said some police are the villians, but I think it is the GOV that controlls them,and brain washes them!

 

[Zoogster]

Any reason to expand the DNA database. The crime itself is not important, just that they have a reason to add another entry.

 

[jakemccoy]

Double wrote,

So now the thrug has fostered a sense of "police are thugs" because they did their job and responded to an emergency call about a person with a gun, which is a big no-no in GB and prclamations of abuse of power.

Why blame the police and government for the mistake of a passerby who made the call?

Are the cops in GB working on a system that lacks all considerations of probable cause? I find it hard to believe that GB has no form of probable cause to arrest somebody. If they don't, I will never be travelling to GB.

A call from a person from 999 does not amount to probable cause. They should have frisked the guy, apologized (even if insincere) and sent him on his way. The police here went way overboard.

There's plenty of real crime out there. This incident is a grand waste of resources. I wonder how many women were assaulted while these cops were playing make believe. If you don't want to fight real crime, don't become a cop. If you call this following procedures, I invite you to come out of your cave into the real world where there's real crime. I blame the cops completely, not the 999 caller.

 

[.cheese.]

The man wasn't harmed.

How was he not harmed? A guy listening to an MP3 player was confronted with armed officers allegedly aiming right at him.... then detained.... then his DNA is stored permanently in a database along with a listing that he has been arrested for something firearm related.... when he had no firearm!

Is it ok as long as he wasn't beaten and tortured? No!

If that had happened to me, I sure as hell would have felt like I had been harmed!

 

[jakemccoy]

joab wrote,

You are always arrested on suspicion, cops do not have the power to charge

In America, cops need probable cause to arrest a person in public. Probable cause is more than suspicion. In a person's home, cops need to go beyond probable cause and get a search warrant.

Is suspicion all the cops need in GB??? Wow.

 

[RoadkingLarry]

So those that are defending the actions of the Brit police please explain what this british subject did that warranted his being subjected to these acts.
If I understand the basic sequence - some dolt saw his MP3 player and thought it was a gun, called the cops and reported a "man with a gun". Cops monitored him on CCTV (kind of scary in itself) till they found a convenient place to arrest him. He now has a permanant arrest record and his DNA recorded in a national data base.
How many things will be denied him when he has to answer yes to having been arrested or a background check comes back with a arrest for a gun crime?

 

[HowardC]

Not only should his legal record be expunged.....

.. He should have recourse against the ill-observant dupe that complained about him!

His rights have been maligned, and his reputation soiled in the eyes of the legal system and the rest of the public who will not know, nor try to discern, the true occurrence. Not only should he own the police force, but, he should own the person making the complaint. Only then will people start being careful what they see and do.
-HowardC

 

[KBintheSLC]

It does not surprise me that such injustice would come from such a regime. The Brit leadership (aristocracy) has many centuries of noose-like reigns over their populous (among the many they attempt to control worldwide). The part that scares me is that the Patriot Act emits a similar stench of tyranny.

 

[Joe Demko]

Please, before anybody else starts holding forth about this man's rights and who he should sue, please take the time to study the UK legal system. So far, Cosmolene wins the thread.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Everything up to the apprehension is understandable, given the laws in GB. The laws against guns, the CCTV, and all that are terrible, but they are what they are. Using that as background, everything up to the actual confrontation with the police is expected. They suspect someone has a gun, and they apprehended him. BUT the moment they realized it was an MP3 player they should have apologized and let him go on his way. The permanent record and the DNA database are inexcusable. A non criminal is now classified as a criminal for the rest of his life. There is no way that can be right. And he will more than likely lose opportunities because of it. It's safe to say he'll lose at least one or two job opportunities because of this.

 

[glink]

"That a passerby reports something on partial info is good, better that the police responds five times to nothing, than that they fail to respond one time to something."

With all due respects, I consider that horsesqeeze. Folks should not be running around spying on one another and submitting reports based on paranoia and unsubstantiated observation. The police are busy enough responding to legitimate issues without chasing off, based on the half baked delusions of prattling busy bodies.

 

[bluestarlizzard]

the article is sensational and presented to shock. welcome to modern reporting. the fact that a man was draged off by police AFTER it was conformed that he had nothing more then an MP3 player is a travesty. the fact that this poor man has a very ambigouse statment on his record that could be interpreted as a very bad thing by someone in the future is just plain old WRONG.
police responing to a suspected crime is fine. that is they're job, after all. but the second half of there job, assesing the situation and responing approriatly, is where these particular officers failed most misarably.
and i am in serious shock that some members of this forem are actually defening the actions taken!

 

[keeleon]

Any reason to expand the DNA database. The crime itself is not important, just that they have a reason to add another entry.

That's the first thing I thought of too. </tinfoil hat>

I have to say it is hard to put any blame on anybody in this. Yes his record should be expunged and the DNA should be removed from the database, but it won't as mentioned above. If the witness really believed the man had a gun, then he would have probably sounded very convincing to the police. If the police believed him, then they would have dispatched their full force, since, you know, with all guns being illegal, the most they normally have to do is hand out parking tickets, right? And you honestly can't blame the police for how they handled the man, because that is just standard procedure. They don't know if he ditched the gun, they don't know anything about him . And if gun crime is as rare there as they would like us to believe, the mere hint of guns their would be like a wide spread alien invasion in the US.

 

[chieftain]

With all due respects, I consider that horsesqeeze. Folks should not be running around spying on one another and submitting reports based on paranoia and unsubstantiated observation. The police are busy enough responding to legitimate issues without chasing off, based on the half baked delusions of prattling busy bodies.

In a society that has outlawed any and all guns, if someone see's what they think is a gun, they should report it. Particularly a society that has had a large group of their members murdered by terrorists. Recently.

Seeing something out of place is not spying. And yes it is a matter of degree. Let me ask you. If you were at Georgetown University, located in Washington DC. And saw a young guy walking quickly with a shotgun and go into one of the University Buildings, what would you do? Nothing?

It is the person that expects and takes what they need and want from a society, culture, and Nation, and does nothing to help or assist that nation is the real parasite. Past service or even sacrifice does not relieve anyone of that responsibility.

In the end it is about responsibility. Yup, a lot of folks will report things that aren't. Like the case in point. But the damage, ignoring a potential of this sort is, in the end, much worse. In most societies it is a disease, of disaffection.

How the authorities react/respond is a totally different subject. And yes I think in this case the authorities were abusive. Maybe the Brit's like it that way.

Speaking for our country here in the States, if anyone observes what they think may be terrorist activity, they should ignore it? I don't think that is appropriate, or right.

I will not. And if someone did observed it, and did nothing, what does that make them?

Go figure.

Fred

 

[jakemccoy]

Did I miss something? How are people here thinking that it's OK for the man to have to go through this and, thus, have a record?

Let me get the straight. If somebody wants to ruin another person in GB, they just have to call 999 and put on an acting job about how the person has a gun. Then, because laws are so strict against guns, the police are entitled to go into a full code red over the 999 call.

The last time I checked, murder is serious too. However, a murder should actually take place before the police go ballistic. Based on this case, it looks like here's how it can work in GB: Someone can call 999, report a murder and get some poor soul booked on a murder that did not take place; the cops recognize the mistake but keep the DNA records for suspicion of murder anyway.

 

[rdhood]

Actually, there is nothing wrong with someone reporting what she thought was a gun. There is nothing wrong with police following up, and taking proper precautions. But, by their own admission, they followed him on CCTV. They nabbed him and searched him, finding an mp3 player. Common sense says thats where it should have ended. They knew that he did not currently have a gun, and they had no reason to believe that he discarded it (they watched him on CCTV). Thus, they KNEW he did not have nor never had a gun.

In this case, the police clearly went beyond common sense in order to detain this guy, take his DNA, and leave him with a police record.

I think this example shows a clear move in the UK towards a "police state".