Ducati stolen

So tell me, which would you prefer? Plod to raid an address
where there's the possibility of a stolen bike being stored,
or for them to carry out 3 weeks of surveillance, working through
a paper trail of owners/renters/casual users, and following
every lead and avenue (and potentially tipping off the thief)
before finally deciding to go and have a look-see?

 

Oh... erm... FOYRNB! ;-)

 

Not smashing their way into my legitimately held property and taking
my possessions away would be a good start. Any attempt you make to
justify it is doomed - there is _no_ excuse for this behaviour.

 

These aren't the oly two options available.

*ding*

 

My solution would have been to call the landlord and then call me whilst
sat in front of the garage, to see if I could get there with the key....
given that I was working less than 15 mins away at the time, I can't see
why this couldn't have been done.

 

You really don't get this whole "tip-off" thing, do you?

 

I fully understand 'tip offs' but that doesn't give them the right to go
in heavy handed, destroying my property and taking my posessions,
especially when they don't have the brain cells to work out what they've
done wrong.

I'm assuming you'd be perfectly happy to come home to find your front
door smashed in and your TV / computers missing on the strength of a
'tip off'?

 

Do you know the landlord well, and that he wasn't on holiday somewhere ?

It's all a question of that word so beloved of legal draughtsmen -
"reasonable".

1. Reasonable grounds for gaining entry under a warrant.
2. Use of reasonable force to gain entry.
3. Reasonable limits to property seized.

They will argue that the information they had ticked 1. Unfortunately,
either it was complete bollocks, or with some foundation, but perhaps,
as Mr A suggests they picked on the wrong specific garage.

For all we know, your landlord may have been implicated in the alleged
offences. That could explain why they didn't politely phone him first.
The damage done to the door looks excessive, but could they have gained
entry just by removing the lock somehow?

Once they gained entry, they found, what they were looking for - a
motorcycle, which at that point they had reason to believe might be
stolen. They had to remove it then, if for no other reason than it would
no longer be secure if left there. At the time they contacted you they
would have no way of knowing that the bike wasn't stolen, other than
contacting the landlord for details of all tenants. Once again, they
weren't going to do that if the landlord was under suspicion, and they
couldn't do that if he was unreachable. As a matter of interest, have
you been able to contact the landlord yourself to confirm that they were
reachable?

IME the owners of such premises are not always easy to get hold of.

No excuse for the cock up in searching the 'wrong' garage.
No excuse for not making the connection with you as the rightful owner
more quickly, once you gave them the necessary information.

We used to have to be a bit more careful when executing warrants to gain
entry to premises to silence alarms.
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Pete Fisher at Home: |
| Voxan Roadster Yamaha WR250Z/Supermoto "Old Gimmer's Hillclimber" |
| Gilera GFR * 2 Moto Morini 2C/375 Morini 350 "Forgotten Error" |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+

 

Happy, no, but I'd be annoyed by the fact they'd raided the wrong place
at all, not that they'd raided it without giving me a courtesy call
first.

Actually, if they took the PC, with all the dodgy scat and eel porn on
it, I'd be bricking it more than I'd be annoyed.

 

So can you see why I'm not particularly happy about the whole thing?

 

So, explain again how the Police knew that the bike belonged
to Steve and was not stolen before they opened up the
garage again, as I must have missed the bit that you know?

 

We're not in China, anymore.

 

snip>

Go and phone the tabloids, get a no win - no fee solicitor and make
them sorry they ever fucked you about. You'll have the satisfaction of
getting everything done much faster by a more cooperative police force
and you'll know that you've stood up for the man in the street and
stopped plod from carrying on with his heavy handed policing policies.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/28/police-bungled-house-raids

 

Sure. But you keep labouring the same mistaken point about advance
notice.

Incidentally, see my other post just now.

 

Wait for the next phase where they stake out SteveH's' garage and home
to try and fit him up for something so they can say "We had our
suspicions all along."

 

[Applause]

 

Oh God this is bringing back memories!

 

Particularly *after* he goes all ranty/tabloid/sue-your-asses on them.

Coppers are pricks, get them to fix the door (if you can get an improved
door so much the better) and move on.

Ogden's quite right though, what if you were a bike thief and that was my
Ducati in there? I would want them to get it back for me and not give
you any prior warning. Which would kind of defeat the object of a
surprise raid.

They got the wrong garage. Coppers are pricks, get them to fix the door
(if you can get an improved door so much the better) and move on.

 

I think you're wrong in this instance, as is SteveH - what if they hadn't
been his possessions and had been mine (stolen) in his legitimately held
property (lockup).

We're always quick to complain when the police don't act on our tip offs
concerning stolen bikes. In this case they have acted - and,
unsurprisingly, wrongly.

I don't think I need to labour the point on my opinion of the police in
general.