tomav84 Posted November 30, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted November 30, 2022 7 hours ago, KentVillan said: Just watched it. Infuriating. Wonder how it would have gone if he'd gone down the No Comment route, though. Was begging him to shut up and let a lawyer deal with it. yep. he admitted pursuing them which meant the judge made an example out of him for taking the law into his own hands still a piss take that those other lads are still walking the streets though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted November 30, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted November 30, 2022 12 hours ago, KentVillan said: Just watched it. Infuriating. Wonder how it would have gone if he'd gone down the No Comment route, though. Was begging him to shut up and let a lawyer deal with it. The criminals just said, "no comment , no comment", he was befriended by the coppers who then encouraged him to admit it was a red mist. From that moment on he was going to prison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted November 30, 2022 Share Posted November 30, 2022 (edited) First 2 eps of Willow is out today. Hopefully it'll be nostalgia overload. It was OK, nothing more. 6/10 stuff. All felt a bit flat and it lacked the charm of the old movie. So far at least. Hopefully it will get better as these 2 eps mainly set up the story and got the ball moving. Edited November 30, 2022 by sne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentVillan Posted November 30, 2022 Share Posted November 30, 2022 (edited) 44 minutes ago, tinker said: The criminals just said, "no comment , no comment", he was befriended by the coppers who then encouraged him to admit it was a red mist. From that moment on he was going to prison. I get that the police need to be a bit two-faced to lock up a paedophile or a serial killer or whatever. But in this case, I don't really see how ethically they were able to say to themselves, "he seems like a decent genuine person, I'd have done the same thing probably" and then go into a room and trick him into incriminating himself. It was bizarre and sickening. I felt like the police at the start were much more careful with him and tried to get him to calm down and shut up. The detectives completely suckered him. Anyway, key lesson is don't cooperate with the police until you've spoken to a lawyer. Edited November 30, 2022 by KentVillan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted November 30, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted November 30, 2022 38 minutes ago, KentVillan said: I get that the police need to be a bit two-faced to lock up a paedophile or a serial killer or whatever. But in this case, I don't really see how ethically they were able to say to themselves, "he seems like a decent genuine person, I'd have done the same thing probably" and then go into a room and trick him into incriminating himself. It was bizarre and sickening. I felt like the police at the start were much more careful with him and tried to get him to calm down and shut up. The detectives completely suckered him. Anyway, key lesson is don't cooperate with the police until you've spoken to a lawyer. i'd like to think i'd do the same. but he seemed genuinely shaken up and probably not thinking clearly. it's very easy to say now but when the detectives are being all chummy with you and sympathetic it would be easy to be tricked in that moment IMO they're very well trained in the process of extracting information and in their defence, it's their job to do so. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted November 30, 2022 Share Posted November 30, 2022 1 hour ago, KentVillan said: But in this case, I don't really see how ethically they were able to say to themselves, "he seems like a decent genuine person, I'd have done the same thing probably" and then go into a room and trick him into incriminating himself. It was bizarre and sickening. All the police want is to up their stats. Get as many convictions as possible, doesn't matter who or why or if they are guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted November 30, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted November 30, 2022 1 hour ago, villa89 said: All the police want is to up their stats. Get as many convictions as possible, doesn't matter who or why or if they are guilty. He was guilty, without doubt. Did he deserve to go to prison for 22 months, I'm not to sure tbh? They didn't mention if he had previous convictions so it's hard to say. TBH if I caught someone breaking into my house I would be happy they run off and would just call the police. If they was in my house then it's game on and anything I had would be used to get them out or render them harmless. Secret is , in your house, the law is more forgiving. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted November 30, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted November 30, 2022 I used to work with a guy who got into this exact situation, back in the 80s. The police response was totally different. He came back from the pub and caught some scrote about to leave with his TV, so he... detained him. The bloke put up a fight, but unfortunately for him my colleague was a karate black belt, and broke his leg. He then called the police, who took the perp away. A few days later, one of the rozzers came round and informed him that the burglar was threatening to take him to court for the assault, but (in the copper's words) "We 'persuaded' him that he didn't want to do that". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentVillan Posted November 30, 2022 Share Posted November 30, 2022 1 hour ago, tinker said: He was guilty, without doubt. Did he deserve to go to prison for 22 months, I'm not to sure tbh? They didn't mention if he had previous convictions so it's hard to say. TBH if I caught someone breaking into my house I would be happy they run off and would just call the police. If they was in my house then it's game on and anything I had would be used to get them out or render them harmless. Secret is , in your house, the law is more forgiving. I think if he'd kept his mouth shut, a lawyer would have been able to come up with an explanation that sounded more reasonable, and could have talked about the high rate of burglaries in the area, his fear for his pregnant wife, etc.... wanting to make sure they had left the area (rather than chasing them). And no quotes from him that the prosecution can use. I tend to agree, I probably wouldn't have done the same thing, but hard to know how you'll react in that situation. I didn't really agree with the police that it was premeditated because he'd had enough time to cool off. And I'm pretty sure it's been confirmed he had no previous convictions. Seemed a very harsh sentence indeed, although yes he was definitely guilty of the crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted November 30, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted November 30, 2022 2 hours ago, KentVillan said: I think if he'd kept his mouth shut, a lawyer would have been able to come up with an explanation that sounded more reasonable, and could have talked about the high rate of burglaries in the area, his fear for his pregnant wife, etc.... wanting to make sure they had left the area (rather than chasing them). And no quotes from him that the prosecution can use. I tend to agree, I probably wouldn't have done the same thing, but hard to know how you'll react in that situation. I didn't really agree with the police that it was premeditated because he'd had enough time to cool off. And I'm pretty sure it's been confirmed he had no previous convictions. Seemed a very harsh sentence indeed, although yes he was definitely guilty of the crime. He shouldn't have even mentioned they had broke in or that they was anywhere near his house, no comment , no comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjw63 Posted November 30, 2022 Share Posted November 30, 2022 On 22/11/2022 at 14:26, mottaloo said: Am loving the Animal Kingdom series....its helping me get through the wee small hours of my night shifts and I'll be sorry when I get to the end of it.....but : Hide contents I am peed off with Pope's behaviour now. OK, he's different, autistic (possibly), moody or even unstable.....OK, I get it but enough already ! Focus more on doing jobs rather than seeing if Pope's gonna kick off - again ! Pope is my favourite character now. Almost at the end of this now and I must concur with the earlier comments about young Smurf, she is incredibly sexy. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepyvillian Posted November 30, 2022 Share Posted November 30, 2022 (edited) I have to say, thoroughly enjoyed The English, some wonderful performances with Ralph Spall being the standout for me. He will be up there with the rest of the most despicable characters to appear on the small screen. Some really touching dialogue too. The line that stood out for me was one from Eli to Cornelia, " there is no destiny, only aiming, until you miss" I felt that one viscerally. A shame it had to end. Edited November 30, 2022 by sheepyvillian 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottaloo Posted November 30, 2022 Share Posted November 30, 2022 41 minutes ago, rjw63 said: Pope is my favourite character now. Almost at the end of this now and I must concur with the earlier comments about young Smurf, she is incredibly sexy. Indeed, Leila George would be a prime reason to support reviving the lovely ladies thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjw63 Posted November 30, 2022 Share Posted November 30, 2022 2 minutes ago, mottaloo said: reviving the lovely ladies thread 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted November 30, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted November 30, 2022 35 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said: Ralph Small being the standout, for me Who? (Rafe Spall, son of Timothy Spall). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepyvillian Posted November 30, 2022 Share Posted November 30, 2022 6 minutes ago, mjmooney said: Who? (Rafe Spall, son of Timothy Spall). Yep! That's the one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepyvillian Posted November 30, 2022 Share Posted November 30, 2022 18 minutes ago, mjmooney said: Who? (Rafe Spall, son of Timothy Spall). Sorry bruv, didn't notice that mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepyvillian Posted November 30, 2022 Share Posted November 30, 2022 (edited) On 29/11/2022 at 23:58, KentVillan said: Just watched it. Infuriating. Wonder how it would have gone if he'd gone down the No Comment route, though. Was begging him to shut up and let a lawyer deal with it. No comment is not what it used to be. Now there's an oblique reference of guilt. Those goalposts have certainly moved a bit. Edited December 1, 2022 by sheepyvillian 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentVillan Posted December 1, 2022 Share Posted December 1, 2022 7 hours ago, sheepyvillian said: No comment is not what it used to be. Now there's an oblique reference of guilt. Those goalposts have certainly moved a bit. I think that’s where the pre-prepared statements come in: https://www.reeds.co.uk/insight/legal-guidance-adverse-inferences/ Quote PREPARED AND SELF-SERVING STATEMENTS PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE To avoid the drawing of an adverse inference, some defendants will read out a pre-prepared statement and then refuse to answer any further questions. In some cases, it will be the legal advisor who reads out the statement. An adverse inference cannot be drawn by a defendant who merely refuses to answer police questions after a pre-prepared statement is read out. R v Knight [2003] EWCA 1977 and R v Turner (Dwaine)[2004] EWCA Cim 3108. Nor can an adverse inference be drawn if the defendant gives evidence at trial that is completely consistent with his pre-prepared statement. R v Knight [2003] EWCA 1977 and R v (1) Ashgar Ali (2) Liaqat Ali (3) Sarfraz Ali [2001] EWCA Crim 683. However, it is important for prosecutors to realise that an adverse inference can be drawn if the defendant gives evidence that is inconsistent with the statement or mentions a fact which at the time of the interview, it would have been reasonable to include in the pre-prepared statement. In R v Knight [2003] EWCA 1977, Laws LJ stated: “We wish to make it crystal clear that of itself the making of a pre-prepared statement gives no automatic immunity against adverse inferences under section 34.” (paragraph 13). Complicated legal area, but you’d think he should have at least as soon as he was under arrest prioritised getting a lawyer before answering any questions? It looked like he said a lot to the police without any lawyer present. I watched the programme again last night and there are a few hints in things he said that probably got him ruined. Calling them “little rocket polishers”, saying he could see the bike’s lights “in the distance”, saying he didn’t know if the road was a 30 or a national speed limit. Thinking about it some more, the detectives are right that he didn’t just endanger himself and the thieves, but also could potentially have killed other people. So maybe it’s one of those where it’s a nice guy reacting in an understandable way, where something still needed to be done in the eyes of the law. Really interesting programme anyway. Got me thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottaloo Posted December 1, 2022 Share Posted December 1, 2022 On 30/11/2022 at 07:43, tomav84 said: yep. he admitted pursuing them which meant the judge made an example out of him for taking the law into his own hands still a piss take that those other lads are still walking the streets though My OT is a serving officer and she was raging at the amateurish interview technique used. Even a dimwit like me could see the driver was in shock and needed better care and attention. Also when at the scene some copper said something like "yeah, gbh is a prison sentence " to the bloke minutes after they arrived on scene was shocking. Then she said "watch that scrote go no comment " and lo and behold what a surprise I've never been a radical but I would cheerfully pull the trigger on scum like those two crooks for all the aggro they caused and will cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts