Arrested, caged and DNA tested - for using MP3

[alan]

I have no idea of the state of the law, re false arrest, false imprisonment etc. in GB, however in the U.S., given the same circumstances, I suspect that there would be one hell of a law suit or suits filed, and rightly so.

 

[alan]

I have no idea of the state of the law, re false arrest, false imprisonment etc. in GB, however in the U.S., given the same circumstances, I suspect that there would be one hell of a law suit or suits filed, and rightly so.

 

[biscuitninja]

Well, if there law is anything like Canada's... then you have very little, if any, recourse. I would start calling in the police names and see how quickly the police arrested one of there own.... Or should I say DIDN'T arrest one of their own.

 

[MD_Willington]

Not sure if most of you realize here in the USA, that when your child/children is/are born there is usually mandatory tests that occur, and samples are taken...

The easiest way to make a DNA database is a simple PKU heel prick test, all one needs to do is keep a little extra of the sample, you know.. "for official records"... and then you store the sample...

sure some sail tinfoil time, but it could be done quite easily.

 

[sprithitler]

-MD_willington.

In sweden that is already done, ever since 1975 a bloodsample from all newborns are stored in a register. Supposedly only for research. After the murder of our then minister of foreign affairs Anna lindh the police requisitioned the PKU sample for the suspected murderer, and was given it. A great blow to that register, since many people requested that their sample be destroyed after the integrity of the register was compromised in this way.

 

[jakemccoy]

MD,

At birth, a baby's DNA sample is not in the records as being associated with "suspicion of [felony]".

 

[doc2rn]

In US I would get a copy of the police report then take the person to court for defamation of character. Then I would hire an attorney with the reward $$$ to get the court to remove finger prints and DNA. Just my $.02.

 

[Seancass]

actually, in the US since no charges where filed, you could easily get the record erased. If charges are filed then they cannot, even if you are found innocent.

i'm pretty sure thats the way it works.

 

[mgregg85]

Britain begins it's sad descent towards a world much like that described in "V for Vendetta"

 

[Cmdr. Gravez0r]

The force will also keep on record that he was arrested on suspicion of a firearms offence.

INGSOC would be proud.

 

[12many]

I usually avoid posting in these type threads, but the title seems highly accurate to me and factual. To argue otherwise would be to avoid the facts.

The police watched him on camera as stated in the article and I would logically assume he was not viewed dumping the alleged gun, and upon arrest he was searched, and no gun was found. I assume this to be correct from my read of the article.

Since no gun was found, what was the reason for his arrest, printing and sampling? It was for carrying an MP3 player. Even if one argues that it was the mis-id by the lady, the mis-id still resulted from the MP3 player, and the police, upon search, did not care about the mis-id, and continued to arrest, print, and sample. Once the police did not find a gun, they knew it was a mis-id, but yet they continued to arrest, print and sample.

In contrast, if I ran up to the police and said I saw those people over there carrying a gun, would all those people be arrested, printed and sampled. I doubt it.

The whole story, like so many I read today, just flys in the face of logic. Are the police so dumb or rule bound to do all this when the search revealed only a MP3 player? It does not even make sense.

Either there is something missing, like the police side of the story or some other info, or I have lost all manner of respect for the UK police and system. It would be interesting to see the video.

 

[Zedicus]

jakemccoy: 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 traveling to GB.

Watch these, Make your own decision...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=VfQrDK9YHas
http://youtube.com/watch?v=K4cgAzlTjhE


1984 Anyone?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tuAgo_F5744

Papiere Gefallen!:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qkCLQkmUxDA

Interesting Commentary on the EU:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=jsEwThIcrN8

2005 G8 Summit disaster that was not shown on TV outside the UK:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NCKNFzuW8LA

Loads more where that came from.

 

[glink]

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?

Well this would be far from an unsubstantiated observation then would it not?
Why would you suggest that a reasonable person would 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.

How is a person who is minding their own business, being respectful of others and being careful not to falsely accuse them, being a parasite?

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.

Who said that? Of course not.

My issue is with meddling in other peoples affairs to a level that results in false accusations at a ratio of 5:1. That was the comment I took issue with.

You have repeatedly offered hypothetical situations, in preface as if I had stated them; and then in turn took issue with, and argued with them.

Interesting debate technique.

Like you said, go figure.

 

[akodo]

Quote:
A commuter was arrested at gunpoint and had his DNA and fingerprints taken simply for listening to his MP3 player while waiting for a bus.

This statement is an obvious sensationalized misrepresentation of what happened. The commuter was NOT arrested, DNA'd etc. for listening to his MP3 player. There is no law that makes it illegal to listen to your MP3 player while waiting on a bus. So this is not WHY he was arrested.

yes, double, it actually is. See, people are arrested for what they are doing, or not doing (or in some countries, for fear of what they might do) What he was doing was standing, waiting, listening to his MP3 player, THAT is what he was doing, that is what the cops determined he was doing.

Quote:
When a passer-by saw the 28-year-old get out his black Philips machine to change tracks, she panicked and dialed 999. All this happened because somebody called 999 and reported that he had a gun. THAT is why he was arrested, not because he was listened to his MP3 player. Misrepresenting the actual facts to sensationalize a story or to make it sound more interesting here is just plain wrong.

Wrong again. THAT is why the police SHOWED UP. It is up to the police to actually decifer what is going on, not simply believe whoever happens to ring their number. Do you think I should be able to dial 999, tell them "double naught spy is hosting dogfights in his basement" and regardless of what they find you deserve to be hauled to jail for my statment?

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.

No, the were called and clearly found a man doing nothing wrong, at which point they ruined his day, his week, and possibly his life as now any time he applies for a job under the question 'have you ever been arrested, and for what?' he will have to put "yes, suspicion of firearms violation"

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

You know what, the passerby made no mistake by calling. She feared a gun. She is not paid to be an expert, and doesn't have the authority to stop and question the guy, nor the resources to deal with it if it turns out she is right.

The guy went through GB's due process for suck activities and when it was determined he had done nothing wrong and the action was based on a mistaken report, they did what they should have done and released the guy.

And, after I call 999 with the fact you are hosting dog-fights, you will be body cavity searched, and your DNA will forever be on file, and any time you have a job application you will need to tell them "I was arrested for suspiction of animal cruelty, violation of the gambling laws, and possession of deadly materials" and there will be no additional question afterward that says "outcome of these charges?"

 

[akodo]

Cosmoline

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.

Really? See I believe in freedom. Freedom to own a gun is one, and with it i keep the others safe. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from oppression.

There is no reason the bobbies shouldn't have figured out what was going on, declared it a false alarm, and let him be.

There is a reason we have all those rights kick in when you are arrested, because they are needed to keep this stuff from happening. Just because their SOP allows it doesn't make it right. A SOP might well allow them to hold him for years without ever pressing charges, but that doesn't make it right.

"Their SOP allows" sounds a lot like "I was just following orders"

 

[sprithitler]

-Glink.

I was the one that offered the "better to have the police do five unnecessary checkkups, then have them not doing one necessary checkup".

I still think so, i also still think that being satisfied that the guy doesnt have a gun and cant be linked to having dumped a gun, the police should explain the situation, apologize for the inconvenience and send the guy on his way, without registering or even ID-ing him.

The cops do an important job, in western Europe they have an monopoly on legal violence, and as such we must give them the chance to do their job.
In return though, we must be able to expect them to do their job in a respectful manner as they are here to serve us and not the other way around.

 

[Pilgrim]

being taken into custody at gunpoint after doing nothing wrong is a pretty traumatic experience for many people, and I think that's why the officers should apologize. at least I would apologize for wasting hours of someone's time. they should also apologize for and correct his record, who wants to be recorded as a criminal over someone having poor eyesight?

You have it all wrong. He should be grateful they didn't kill him. The last innocent suspect the police took down they filled his head with bullets at contact range.

Pilgrim

 

[johninminnesota]

I have a question: has the ban on guns in GB reduced violent crime? Has violent crime with other than guns been reduced since the ban?

 

[Brenainn]

Why should he get an apology?

Why not????

 

[jerkface11]

Why did they still arrest him after they didn't find a gun? Is being accused of having a gun a crime? Do you throw the suspect into the Thames to see if he floats?

 

[jakemccoy]

Pilgrim wrote,

He should be grateful they didn't kill him. The last innocent suspect the police took down they filled his head with bullets at contact range.

***? Come on, dude.

 

[zxcvbob]

***? Come on, dude.

Look it up. Last summer I believe, they executed (assasinated?) a Brazilian electrician as he was sitting on a train in the station minding his own business. They thought he might be a terrorist. (do Brazilians have kind-of-dark skin?)

 

[LKB3rd]

The police in GB seem to be a bunch of thugs. Why didn't they release him as soon as they found no gun on him? I don't believe there is a bill of rights in GB so this guy probably has no legal recourse.
__________________

Show the peasants who is boss, and get one in the system!
It makes absolutely no sense if you assume they were doing their normal duties of investigating a possible crime. That investigation would have ended when they found only an mp3 player.
So, my first sentence theory is the one i go to next.

 

[UKarmourer]

Well, as a British Subject I cant say that I am surprised, our police do have a hard time of it, and in fairness it wont be the polices decision, it will be the CPS (crown prosecution service) and the lawmakers who will have written it in that if arrested on suspicion blah blah blah you will have your DNA taken.

did they react over the top? no, in the UK if you think someone is carrying a gun, you damn better dial 999, the only people carrying them legally will be police or possibly MI5.
anyone else is up to no good, so that will be why the reaction may seem over the top. (we have a 30 year history of terrorist incidents)

do I agree with it the keeping records bit, Hell no I got swabbed routinely at dover port prior to going on the channel tunnel (for explosives residue)
my test came up positive, the only thing that averted an arrest was my very believable explanation, my army ID and a phone call to my boss!

otherwise that would be me DNA test and record, all nicely in the system.

our system is slowly getting very police state like. I dont like it, they say that if you have done nothing wrong, what do you have to hide?
they asked local residents to submit to a volunatry DNA test in Ipswich during the invetigation of a string of rape/ murders. stupidly some people did just that

i long for 8 years and 4 months time, I will have finished my 22 years service, take my military pension and head for the US, if they will let in a veteran of Iraq and Bosnia that is!

 

[Cosmoline]

Really? See I believe in freedom. Freedom to own a gun is one, and with it i keep the others safe. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from oppression.

Sure, but that has nothing to do with what the police did in this case. They do not make the law. Any complaints about the state of freedom in the UK should rightly be directed at the IDIOTS in Parliament and the dingles who voted for them. The nation sold off its freedoms in hopes of greater security, and is now paying the price for that. You can't blame the police, since nothing they did was illegal or even that unusual.

There is no reason the bobbies shouldn't have figured out what was going on, declared it a false alarm, and let him be.

They did figure it out and they did let him go. But as I was trying to explain an arrest in the UK is not the same as an arrest in the US. It doesn't have anywhere near the same legal significance. Should it? Of course. But that's not for the cops to decide.

If the police overstep their bounds I'm the first one to criticize them. But in this case it appears they did everything literally by the book. It's a DIFFERENT book than the one we use here, but do you honestly think the UK cops are going to start following US criminal and Constitutional procedures? They wouldn't even understand them. That's something Parliament would have to address.