And Again!

Please excuse the plain unadulterated nature of this report. I want to note it down as part of the historic record, but I don’t want to dwell on it.

I turned up to work this morning and was surprised to find (a) a Police car and (b) the owner and his wife with brushes and dustpans.

It seems the burglars came back last night and though they didn’t get much, they did smash more glass.

The boarded up front door lasted only two kicks despite the claims of the boarding up service.

I can’t say any more because I don’t want to prejudice any case that may be brought.

That’s slightly tongue in cheek because the police have given us a number of excuses for not taking any action even though they have a person or persons in mind.

If, however, they had made their escape down a bus lane they would already have a threat of legal action in the post.

When the police wrote to me about my speeding offence they threatened me with a £1,000 fine if I didn’t comply with their procedures. When they wrote a few weeks ago inviting Julia to participate in a jury, they threatened her with a £1,000 fine if she didn’t return the letter as specified.

I have checked but there seems to be no mechanism for us to threaten the police with a £1,000 fine if they don’t do their job.

Now, let me be clear. This isn’t aimed at individual police officers. They have to operate within an environment of budget cuts and under-staffing and they are constrained by a legal system that seems to actively prevent the prosecution and punishment of habitual criminals.

Having said that, when the owner rang 999 on on his way to the shop this morning (the alarm calls his phone) the emergency operator asked him (a) if he was in a car and (b) if he was using hands-free. Burglars are bad, but car drivers, it seems, are worse.

Then we were given a quick course in the registration of CCTV cameras and the Data Protection Act. It seems that someone walking down a public street has the power to object to being filmed. I would have thought that a person walking along a public street could have no expectation of privacy, but there you go. More nonsensical laws aimed at making life difficult for honest people.

I hope that in addition to the afflictions I wished on them yesterday the malefactors also contract a corrosive fungal condition of the dark recesses of their bodies and souls, and a plague of boils would be a nice bonus too.

Sorry – no photos again today. I thought I’d better leave it in case anyone could object in court. (See above regarding prejudicing a case that will, in all reality, never be brought).



14 thoughts on “And Again!

  1. tootlepedal

    You may well find that you get a police visit in a couple of years to discuss the break in when they are wanting to clear the files of past cases by attributing them all to a criminal that they have actually caught in the act and who wants to curry favour by admitting to several crimes that he/she did not actually commit..

  2. Helen

    I hope it’s okay for me to have laughed in the appropriate places. That is, the incongruities in our legal system.

    To be fair, it is in a driver’s own interests not to make a call when behind the wheel. Ending up in hospital with the car written off wouldn’t improve the day.

  3. derrickjknight

    It is rather good of WP not to allow me to like that particular post. My professional photographer friend would claim that a street is a public place and it is not therefore unlawful to photograph anyone there. The hands free question was insulting and a delaying technique. When you posted the first smash and grab, I almost warned that they would be back

    1. quercuscommunity

      The freedom to take photographs seems to be under increasing pressure. Strictly speaking I think my older photos of the group on the farm are a breach of data protection laws.

      The owner’s wife said that too, and wanted to stand guard on the second night. As they returned with an axe this time it was probably good she wasn’t there.


Leave a Reply