Forgot your password?
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.
monsterkev, December 28, 2010
Posted December 28, 2010
Radio 5. Now- but by time this added probably WAS at 10am
Nice to see some positive changes being suggested by ACPO, I hope the coaltion government takes note. Those zero tolerance local authorites that get self righteous about prostitution being a crime should ask themselves the question about why it's a crime. There's no reason for me to suppose an act of sex between 2 consenting adults should be a crime, much less have any cash and resources, much needed elsewhere in these times, to be devoted to it.
You can listen to this on http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00wqhxf/Stephen_Nolan_28_12_2010/ The interview start about 10 minutues into the program and is 20 minutes long with a few call ins after. This is a fore runn to the TV program on BBC News night I mentioned on another thread.
this will pan out to whether a police service with less funding should target prositution or stuff like burgulary, terrorism and anti social behaviour.
i know what i want them to do....
Posted December 30, 2010
ACPO's approach seems to me infinately more sensible that the 1st April 2010 lunacy introduced by the now non-deputy-PM.
Her, the latter's, approach resulted in legislation that is, put plainly, bad.
It's bad on so many counts:
As a purely practical issue - will a punter that ex post facto believes he has engaged with a coerced lady report same? - No (unless he is a lunatic)
Will a punter, in the process of booking and suspecting a forced girl report it? -No because there is now less reason to do so than before.
Harman's law is designed to strike terror. But such provisions cannot ever really be good law, and:
If the police have reason to raid premises they have to have or should have a reason. If the reason is that they have evidence that people are being coerced then the pre-existing law surely should cover the situation?
Otherwise one is left with the proposition that the police have simply been empowered to make threats.
Put it another way, PC Plod raids premises and threatens a punter with a conviction or a let-off caution, punter says OK prove girl in question is coerced, police as it turns out haven't done their homework and threat evaporates.
It's not the point that most punters might accept a caution. Legislation that permits such flimsy and ill-ordered conduct is deeply flawed.
So more strength to your arm ACPO and if they can get Harman's law repealed as a sensible by-product of their interventions the better it will be perhaps for the ladies, willing or not.
this will pan out to whether a police service with less funding should target prositution or stuff like burgulary, terrorism and anti social behaviour.i know what i want them to do....
Two things with the Police will cause any more rational approach to be unevenly applied are Proceeds of Crime law - as things stand the business is easy pickings and at times some confiscations just appear to be legal theft..
And the distinctly ambivalent attitude towards sex-workers among a very large number of male poloice officers
akanostromo raises a good point.
But is it not possible that ACPO are already seized with the notion that perhaps their use of the POC legislation is sometimes 'unfair'?
ACPO seems to be promoting debate about the possible legalisation of brothels. If brothels become legal then the POCA would be much less in point as respects brothel raids.
On his other point, well yes, there will always be people that think that anything other than 'within marriage sexual congress' is not acceptable. It can surely not be harmfulto have the very debate that ACPO is promoting?
ACPO seems to be promoting debate about the possible legalisation of brothels.
Although it could simply be that ACPO's website maintenance contract doesn't provide for holiday period service, I'm surprised not to see any reports on ACPO's own site of ACC Byrne's comments.
I do just wonder whether he is a brave man speaking for himself?
Posted January 1, 2011
Spoke to a friend in the police over Christmas. She stated that in light of the crossbow cannibal murders there is to be a review of how the police deal with prostitution as a whole across the country.
This is not a review of the legislation but a review of the working practices each force currently uses in tackling prostitution in all it's forms. At present it varies widely from one neighbouring force to another, there are no nationwide Standard Operating Procedures (SOP's) in place currently.
She indicated and she is of rank to know that it may mean higher tolerance of incall establishments and lower tolerance of street walking and outcall agencies. That said it will also mean more regular checks for establishments that are tolerated so they can evidence their duty of care should the wheel come off in the case of a murder, rape or serious assault.
Personally I think they'll want incall establishments to be in commercial premises as they still have planning enforcement and community impact to consider.
That sounds interesting and worth watching
Posted January 8, 2011
A caution is not a let-off. You are getting a criminal record. Do not accept a caution unless you understand the implications.
Spoke to a friend in the police over Christmas. Personally I think they'll want incall establishments to be in commercial premises as they still have planning enforcement and community impact to consider.
Spoke to a friend in the police over Christmas.
Makes a lot of sense! If (and that's a big "if", given that most serving Chief Constables were appointed during the blessed Harriet's reign) the influence of local watch committees is deminished that would be an excellent idea.
If your suggestion about industrial estates is borne out, a good number of punters are going to be getting a lot more useful about the house - "Yes, darling, I'll just nip off to B&Q (Wickes or whichever) and get the screws (and, sotto voce, have a screw while I'm about it)!"
Too right! Accepting a caution requires a written admission of the offence, and HH's gang were, I think, into "Conditional Cautions" which required payment of compensation, or attendance at a do-gooding course for four or five saturdays (or whatever day/evening) which might be difficult to explain away.
In most cases they'll only offer a caution if they haven't got enough evidence to get CPS interested.