It has always been assumed by citizens that Britain is a fair and just country, where the police are always honest and helpful and where good people are free to live happy lives and where bad people are punished.
However the new so called anti terror legislation has given the police far too many powers and it has started to worry me just what happens when you’re innocent but the police believe you to be guilty? In the old days of ‘Innocent until proven guilty’ you were assured that the police had to prove in court that you’d done something wrong. Not so today. Today, it is becoming a case of ‘If the police say you’re guilty, you’re guilty’ and unfortunately no amount of evidence to the contrary, seems to sway them. You see evidence was used in the 20th century, it cost money collecting it and often hampered police investigations. Far better to just arrest and prosecute and have done with it these days.
I say prosecute but that comes further down the line, first you are arrested, and if they can’t think of a way to keep you, it becomes an anti terror offence. Such as what happened to poor old Mr Walter Wolfgang, the 82 year old held under the Terrorism Act, his offence, trying to re-enter the Labour Conference in 2005, after already have been ejected.
You have no defence against such legislation, the police can detain you for 90 days without charge. You can’t prove your innocence until you know what they are holding you for.
Another example of overzealous policing with no interest in right or wrong, (except that they are right, and therefore you are wrong), or innocence or guilt, is what happened to Helen Parry, who for some reason was pulled over by police. They checked out her car and decided, seemingly at random, that her car was not actually insured, and so towed it away, despite her protestations and attempts to prove that it was in fact insured.
They then left the pregnant Ms Parry to call her mother to pick her up, after refusing her a lift home. Fortunately she didn’t protest too much, or no doubt she would have held under the Terrorism Act.
Now while I applaud the diligence of the police, and the fact they are actually looking for drivers without insurance, I believe that they, and the crime statistics, not to mention other road users, would be better served if the police actually stopped, checked and impounded cars of guilty people.
Mistakes do happen, and this could quite easily just be a simple mix up, however the police have not apologised, do not believe that they have done anything wrong and went on to charge Ms Parry £105 to get her car back. As far as I know she has not been offered any refund, in fact the police statement said:
“We can confirm that the vehicle was seized. The driver of the vehicle can elect to have the case heard in court should they wish to dispute the matter.”
Charming! I really hope that she does take it to court, and is awarded a shed load of money in the process. What with the stress, possible harmful effects on the baby, being stranded, having no car and not being given any apology, she really should take them to the cleaners.
Then when they are short in their next budget because of it, they can sack the idiot in charge, chief constable Richard Brunstrom, who has also failed to apologise or accept that they did anything wrong.
As for their excuse of ‘computer error’, there’s no such thing, it’s a myth. There is only ‘human error’, either someone didn’t know how to use the computer/system or the person that inputted the data, entered it wrongly. Computer error is just a convenient way of saying, it’s nobody’s fault.