Monday - September 28, 2009

OK … THAT IS IT. IT’S OVER. I THINK I HAVE FINALLY FOUND THE DUMBEST PC RULING EVER!

I’m not believin’ this. Or maybe I don’t understand something. Or maybe I’m dumber then I thought I wuz. Words really fail here so ... read it all for yourselves and see if maybe you can explain it. Somehow.  It apparently makes all kinds of sense to the ppl doing it.

MARK OF MADNESS: POLICE REFUSE TO SHOW SUSPECT’S BIRTHMARK IN ID PARADE BECAUSE OF HIS HUMAN RIGHTS.

By Fay Schlesinger
Last updated at 1:41 AM on 28th September 2009

When Tracy Ryan spotted a suspected burglar emerging from the dog sanctuary where she works, she thought she would have little problem pointing him out to police.

After all, he had a large port-wine stain on his face.

But when police set up an identity parade, they refused to take the man’s distinctive birthmark into account - in case it infringed his human rights.

An officer from the Nottinghamshire force explained that the mark was too rare to be included in a profile of the burglar when it was entered into a computer database.

It would leave only a small pool of potential suspects in the electronic ID parade, he said, breaking police rules.

Under laws designed to take into account ‘the rights and freedoms of the public’, witnesses must be shown a minimum of 12 photographs before they are allowed to identify a suspect.

These are selected from a database of people who have passed through custody in Nottinghamshire, in the hope that the burglar is already known to police.

Because only a handful of people on a database had a birthmark or port-wine stain, the characteristic gave fewer than 12 results.
The characteristic was subsequently removed and the search was broadened.

This forced Mrs Ryan, 39, to examine the faces of 93 suspects, none of which she recognised.

It was on August 25 that £300 in charity donations was stolen from the Crossing Cottage Greyhound Sanctuary in Sutton on Trent, Nottinghamshire.

Mrs Ryan noted that, apart from his birthmark, the suspected culprit was tall and wore a white tracksuit. She also took his car registration number.

Police have subsequently made an arrest and Mrs Ryan is due to attend a second identification parade which will include the suspect, who is on bail.

He will be pictured alongside 11 people of a similar appearance. But if he has a birthmark, it will still be kept secret.

The suspected thief and the other participants will be made to cover one side of their face.

Mrs Ryan said: ‘Surely an unusual characteristic like a big birthmark should help a police investigation?

‘If there were just four or five people on the database with such marks, all the better.

‘I understand police have to follow procedures, but to me the

rules are flawed and amount to a pretty lame excuse.’

Her boss John Morton, who manages the home for 30 former racing dogs as part of the Retired Greyhound Trust, said: ‘The police are saying they can’t infringe human rights. But what about our human rights?

‘We are law-abiding people who have been victims of crime, and the police have a responsibility to maximise their chances of solving that crime. If this is the law, it has to be changed.’

Joanne Hall, of Nottinghamshire Police, said the force had to abide by the rules of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

She said: ‘The witness had to be shown not less than 12 photographs at a time. PACE sets out to strike the right balance between the powers of the police and the rights and freedoms of the public.’

***Police use two principal variations of the identity parade technique - picture viewing and Viper.

The first, when no suspect has been identified or arrested, involves creating a profile of the suspect based on the witness’s observations, such as height, build and hair colour.

At least 12 potential suspects are then selected from a database of those previously in custody.

Viper is used when police have a suspect in mind or have made an arrest. The suspect is recorded on video and shown to the witness alongside 11 other innocent people who bear a resemblance to him.

If the original suspect has a rare facial feature, such as a birth mark or tattoo, matching ID parade participants can prove impossible to find.

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 09/28/2009 at 02:58 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner