| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 5:58 am Post subject: Don't laugh - seriously!! |
 |
|
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1025670/Have-I-Got-A-Court-Cas e-For-You-The-man-fell-sofa-watching-hit-TV-ended-arrest.html#
| Quote: | The man who fell off a sofa while laughing at Have I Got News For You - and ended up in court
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 12:02 PM on 11th June 2008
A man was handcuffed, arrested and dragged before a court after falling off the settee with laughter while watching Have I Got News For You.
Christopher Cocker, 36, was enjoying the BBC1 show when a joke made by panellist Paul Merton had him doubled up with laughter.
He collapsed on the floor - but the thud startled his downstairs neighbour who, believing he had collapsed, called police.
Officers arrived and said Cocker was initially co-operative but became 'aggressive' when they asked his name and tried to shut his front door.
He was eventually disabled with parva spray through the gap and arrested.
Jonathan Taylor, defending, said: 'The officer accepts in his statement that he struck my client and then sprayed him again.
'He was handcuffed and unceremoniously thrown into the back of a police van. When he ended up in a police cell he was asking himself how all this had happened.'
Mr Taylor told Blackburn Magistrates' Court, Lancs., said that having informed the police he was the only one in the flat and he was fine, his client could not understand why they wanted his details.
'With hindsight he should just have told the police what they wanted to know and they would have gone on their way,' said Mr Taylor.
Cocker, of Blackburn, Lancs., pleaded guilty to resisting a police officer and was given a conditional discharge for six months following the incident on May 20.
A charge of assaulting PC Michael Davies was withdrawn.
Speaking after the hearing, Cocker said he had been in his flat minding his own business.
He said: 'I can't believe it - I was thrown in the back of a police van before being stripped naked and put in a cell.
'I was handcuffed behind my back and my ankles bound with plastic ties before six of them carried me to the van.
''It was something Paul Merton said and I remember falling of the settee, I didn't think it would end up in court.
'I hadn't had a drink or anything, I was just watching TV and all this happened. Paul Merton is one of my favourites. He's really funny.'
Prosecutor Alex Mann said the police went to ensure everything was all right and spoke to Cocker who was 'co-operative and relaxed' and he assured the officers everything was fine.
'He only became worked up when the police asked for his details,' said Mrs Mann.
'The police tried to explain they just needed the name for the report but he became aggressive and started swearing at the officer.'
After the hearing Joan Codling, 57, who lives in the flat below and made the call to police, said she contacted officers after being concerned that he may have fallen ill.
She said: 'I was worried in case he was having an epileptic fit. There was a lot of noise and I didn't know what to do so I called the police.'
A police spokesman said Cocker became 'aggressive' towards the officers who feared for their own safety.
The spokesman said: 'Parva spray was used to stop any confrontation and was necessary to protect the officers and any members of the public who were around at the time.
'Within the circumstances, we feel we used reasonable force.' |
We are here to help you sir!!! We are concerned about your safety. Papers please - or else!
_________________
"The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
scubadiver
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1850
Location: Currently Andover
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 6:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am not saying it isn't but it could be a lie. I have just finished reading 'Flat Earth News' by Nick Davies and there is a whole chapter devoted to the Daily Mail style of reporting news and it is shocking!
It is a highly recommended book.
_________________
Currently working on a new website |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redadare
Validated Poster
Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Posts: 204
Location: France
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 6:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just wanted his details 'for their report'. Sure. Then he is on the PNC for life.
All I can say is he is lucky this didn't happen today, because of course they could have held him for 41 days, 23 hours, and 59 minutes before releasing him without charge. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kbo234
Validated Poster
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Is it the law that one must give one's name and address to a police officer if he demands it, regardless of circumstances? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SHERITON HOTEL
Moderate Poster
Joined: 18 Jun 2006
Posts: 988
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Is Broon's' deepthought 42 day detention without charge law yet? I thought it had to go to the lords and then the European court before becoming statute.
What is the law then? do you have to give proof of ID to a policeman on demand? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SHERITON HOTEL wrote: | | What is the law then? do you have to give proof of ID to a policeman on demand? |
This is an excellent question and things have been different since Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) came into being. Other than under road traffic and anti-social behaviour legislation, you do not commit an offence by refusing to give your name and address to the police. That said, there are certain situations where you may be arrested if they cannot establish your name and address;
The main things to keep in mind are the three exceptions, when the police suspect you of a non-arrestable offence and require your name and address for the service of a summons (PACE Section 25), where you are the driver of a vehicle and where the police say they suspect you of anti-social behaviour. If you are arrested under Section 25, you must be released as soon as they have established your name and address.
You are only obliged to give the police an address that can be used for the service of a summons and this need not necessarily be your home address. You could give the phone number and address of a solicitor who is willing to receive the summons on your behalf. If you do decide to give the police your name and address, they may still arrest you if they reasonably believe that the details you have given are false. When asked for some form of identification, there is no obligation to provide it, but the benefit is yours as you will not usually be arrested if you have something with your name, address and photo on and provide it when asked – the choice is obviously yours, show it or end up in a custody suite. You are under no legal obligation to carry any ID though.
Where you are driving a vehicle on a road, police can demand your name, address and date of birth. They can also demand these details if they have reason to suspect that you have committed a driving offence or been the driver of a vehicle which has been involved in an accident. You commit an offence by refusing to give your details in this situation, and you will be arrested under PACE Section 25.
The Police Reform Act 2002 makes it an offence to refuse to give your name and address to a police officer, where the officer reasonably suspects that you have engaged in anti-social behaviour. This is defined as activities that have caused harassment, alarm or distress to other people. Section 50 carries no power of arrest, but if you refuse to give your name and address, then the police can say that they suspect you of committing a non-arrestable offence and Section 25 PACE then applies.
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SHERITON HOTEL wrote: | | Is Broon's' deepthought 42 day detention without charge law yet? I thought it had to go to the lords and then the European court before becoming statute. |
No it is not.
At the moment the Counter-Terrorism Bill 2008 is not an act of parliament, it is a bill introduced by the lamentable Home Secretary and former economics school teacher Jacqui Smith.
It does not become law until it passes muster in the commons, which it now has, through bribery and coercion and then in the lords.
An act then comes into force either on royal assent, unless of course she's not happy with it, or by a statutory instrument on a specified date, or on different dates if different sections of the act come into force at different times.
The lords will, without doubt, throw this back to the commons with amendments, just as they did with the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 in March 2005.
I wouldn't bet against this vicious new labour regimen invoking the parliament act to overrule the lords just as they did with the hunting ban.
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fish5133
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2568
Location: One breath from Glory
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kbo234 wrote: | | Is it the law that one must give one's name and address to a police officer if he demands it, regardless of circumstances? |
As far as I know its not a legal requirement to give your name and address to a police officer on request unless they arrest you . Similarly being stopped , the police must have a reason for stopping you and are obliged to issue a Stop Form indicating the reason and under what legislation they are stopping you.
_________________
JO911B.
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in high places " Eph.6 v 12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SHERITON HOTEL
Moderate Poster
Joined: 18 Jun 2006
Posts: 988
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| telecasterisation wrote: | | SHERITON HOTEL wrote: | | What is the law then? do you have to give proof of ID to a policeman on demand? |
This is an excellent question and things have been different since Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) came into being. Other than under road traffic and anti-social behaviour legislation, you do not commit an offence by refusing to give your name and address to the police. That said, there are certain situations where you may be arrested if they cannot establish your name and address;
The main things to keep in mind are the three exceptions, when the police suspect you of a non-arrestable offence and require your name and address for the service of a summons (PACE Section 25), where you are the driver of a vehicle and where the police say they suspect you of anti-social behaviour. If you are arrested under Section 25, you must be released as soon as they have established your name and address.
You are only obliged to give the police an address that can be used for the service of a summons and this need not necessarily be your home address. You could give the phone number and address of a solicitor who is willing to receive the summons on your behalf. If you do decide to give the police your name and address, they may still arrest you if they reasonably believe that the details you have given are false. When asked for some form of identification, there is no obligation to provide it, but the benefit is yours as you will not usually be arrested if you have something with your name, address and photo on and provide it when asked – the choice is obviously yours, show it or end up in a custody suite. You are under no legal obligation to carry any ID though.
Where you are driving a vehicle on a road, police can demand your name, address and date of birth. They can also demand these details if they have reason to suspect that you have committed a driving offence or been the driver of a vehicle which has been involved in an accident. You commit an offence by refusing to give your details in this situation, and you will be arrested under PACE Section 25.
The Police Reform Act 2002 makes it an offence to refuse to give your name and address to a police officer, where the officer reasonably suspects that you have engaged in anti-social behaviour. This is defined as activities that have caused harassment, alarm or distress to other people. Section 50 carries no power of arrest, but if you refuse to give your name and address, then the police can say that they suspect you of committing a non-arrestable offence and Section 25 PACE then applies. |
Er, thank you for that, my eyes glazed over a bit, it reminds me of the little Britain character who's catchphrase is...'yes but no but yes but...' There was that woman on Alex Jones' 'Road to Tyranny' DVD who refused to give the police her name at a road block and got arrested ,she pleaded it was unconstitutional as the officer admitted she'd not committed an offence,she eventually won her case .
(what do you think of the Gibson Sheriton as an instrument?) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
911Eyewitness
Validated Poster
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 216
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| telecasterisation wrote: |
[
When asked for some form of identification, there is no obligation to provide it, but the benefit is yours as you will not usually be arrested if you have something with your name, address and photo on and provide it when asked – the choice is obviously yours, show it or end up in a custody suite. You are under no legal obligation to carry any ID though.
. |
Yes, this is sort of a newspeak freedom. Like 1+1=3
You are free. No requirement. Your choice.
If you dont we just arrest you for a good month.
You are free to do and say what you want. We are a free country.
Your papers please? Freedom in jail or willful subjugation? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SHERITON HOTEL;
| Quote: | | Er, thank you for that, my eyes glazed over a bit, it reminds me of the little Britain character who's catchphrase is...'yes but no but yes but...' There was that woman on Alex Jones' 'Road to Tyranny' DVD who refused to give the police her name at a road block and got arrested ,she pleaded it was unconstitutional as the officer admitted she'd not committed an offence,she eventually won her case . |
Apologies that my response was a trifle convoluted, it isn't really a subject that can be answered with a simple yes or no.
| Quote: | | (what do you think of the Gibson Sheriton as an instrument?) |
I own a wide range of guitars, having said that, only a few Gibson/Epiphone instruments. I am not a fan of semi-acoustic 'jazz' guitars and don't currently have one, although the Sheraton is a very fine 335 copy but calling it a Gibson is a bit like calling a Squier a Fender. It is what it is though, a cheap but well made hollow-body.
I'd personally go for the infinitely better Ibanez AS103.
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
