Twitter fuels yobs’ behaviour but crime drops
11:30am Wednesday 13th March 2013 in News
Twitter fuels yobs’ behaviour but crime drops
NEIGHBOURHOOD police in North Swindon have reduced anti-social behaviour to a level well below their target.
But they have warned of incidents being organised on social networks.
Each year the force is given a target to which to reduce the number of incidents and the latest figures show Wiltshire Police as a whole has reduced incidents to 17 per cent below their target.
In North Swindon offences are 26 per cent under the target. Haydon Wick, Abbey Meads and the St Andrew’s ward have had 198 fewer reports of anti-social behaviour compared to last year.
A police spokesman said: “There has been a slight blip in a couple of places – Greenmeadow, with 11 extra reports, and Woodhall Park and Taw Hill where there have been 14 more calls compared to this time last year.
“Patrol strategies are being reviewed to address this.
“One thing we have noticed is that recent ASB tends to involve groups of young people who organise their activities on Facebook and Twitter via their mobile phones.
“We’d be grateful if parents would talk to teenagers about social media.”
Anyone with concerns about anti-social behaviour should contact their neighbourhood policing team on 101.
Comments(45)
Tim Newroman
says...
12:31pm Wed 13 Mar 13
is.gd/8Xz15T
house on the hill
says...
1:10pm Wed 13 Mar 13
itsamess3
says...
1:39pm Wed 13 Mar 13
However--folk seem happy to report crime--but shy away when they are asked to give evidence in court.
If the courts have all the evidence it could make a great difference to the outcome.
Tim Newroman
says...
3:48pm Wed 13 Mar 13
folk seem happy to report crime--but shy away when they are asked to give evidence in court.
As was explained to you, very eloquently, by LordAsh, the victims of crime often fear reprisal attacks and, quite rightly, know there's little the police can do to protect them. Hence, many criminals swan around, knowingly they're untouchable.
Equally, many victims of crime are too scared to even report crimes, let alone give evidence or take things further.
Do understand that this is a reflection of just how broken and unfit for purpose the current Criminal Justice System is - as been demonstrated to you by both LordAsh and I on several occasions, with numerous local examples provided.
Until the courts decide they're finally competent enough to deliver meaningful sentences to these criminals, nothing will change.
If the courts have all the evidence it could make a great difference to the outcome.
D'ya think?
Localboy86
says...
7:20pm Wed 13 Mar 13
itsamess3
says...
11:44pm Wed 13 Mar 13
Terrible habit to answer for others.
If a crime is not reported--no crime. If a crime is reported and the person will not give evidence there is little to no chance of getting it to court.
The quality of evidence bears heavily as to conviction and sentence.
I have had a look back to several of your posts both recently and in your other personas where you actively promote taking the law into your own hands. As Mr Blackwell you claimed to have seen the perps of a crime and you considered mounting the pavement a full hour before the crime happened and culprits arrested by an off duty officer the opposite end of town.
As you have claimed to have legal training recently i am very surprised you are not aware that there are a host of measures to ensure the safety and even anonimity in the courts--yet condone the failure to report crime. Crimestoppers can be informed anonymously so there is no excuse.
itsamess3
says...
11:46pm Wed 13 Mar 13
Terrible habit to answer for others.
If a crime is not reported--no crime. If a crime is reported and the person will not give evidence there is little to no chance of getting it to court.
The quality of evidence bears heavily as to conviction and sentence.
I have had a look back to several of your posts both recently and in your other personas where you actively promote taking the law into your own hands. As Mr Blackwell you claimed to have seen the perps of a crime and you considered mounting the pavement a full hour before the crime happened and culprits arrested by an off duty officer the opposite end of town.
As you have claimed to have legal training recently i am very surprised you are not aware that there are a host of measures to ensure the safety and even anonimity in the courts--yet condone the failure to report crime. Crimestoppers can be informed anonymously so there is no excuse.
Tim Newroman
says...
8:20am Thu 14 Mar 13
Terrible habit to answer for others.
I didn't. Your comment quoted nobody and was not specifically addressed to anybody. So, simply another error on your part.
As for the rest of your contribution, the usual rambling nonsense that is either a statement of obvious truisms or random fiction and lies.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
12:59pm Thu 14 Mar 13
There are a number of constraints on giving anonymous evidence in court.
Unlike yourself who regularly fails to substantiate their claims, comments and ramblings I'll provide the link for you.
http://www.cps.gov.u
k/publications/direc
tors_guidance/witnes
s_anonymity.html
itsamess3
says...
1:35pm Thu 14 Mar 13
All in all you demonstrate quite clearly you have very little knowledge of any part of the judicial system.
The old adage applies-repeat something often enough and it will be accepted--reality however shows not.
Tim Newroman
says...
5:03pm Thu 14 Mar 13
itsamess3 wrote:Nobody has any idea what you're even talking about anymore. I'm not even sure you do.
Tim
All in all you demonstrate quite clearly you have very little knowledge of any part of the judicial system.
The old adage applies-repeat something often enough and it will be accepted--reality however shows not.
LordAsh has, again, shown you up. That's now twice in as many days.
Time to hang up your boots, I'd suggest.
itsamess3
says...
5:51pm Thu 14 Mar 13
You simply confirm my claim anonimity is available. Procedures are available at the discretion of the Judge who will hear legal argument from both lawyers.
I would also remind you that withholding evidence is also an offence and as you made such a claim online you should have read the recent statement by the police as to their ability to trace an electronic footprint of any offender.
How off that you expect the courts to imprison offenders--yet not prepared to give eye witness statements to that effect.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
6:58pm Thu 14 Mar 13
Your claim was to imply that it is available for fairly minor cases, but the reality is that it isn't. For the sort of offenses discussed on this thread, anonymity would simply not be available and would result in a lack of evidence.
Withholding evidence may well be a crime, but how often would that be followed up. A couple of years ago a friend of mine was involved in a serious car accident on acre's way, where a person was driving dangerously overtaking other cars. He hit my friend cause massive damage to both vehicle and long term medical conditions to my friend. The case failed to go to court because the witnesses of which there were several would not give evidence and even the police advised him to drop the case. Yet the technical evidence alone was compelling. The dangerous driver then tried to claim damages from my friend by making a number of accusations against his driving!
So lets put reality in place unless your going to claim you have superior knowledge on this issue.
I have personal experiences as well as to whether the police can be bothered to follow up serious crimes.
Tim Newroman
says...
7:33pm Thu 14 Mar 13
Common misspellings of the word anonymity are:
anonimity
Happy to help.
itsamess3
says...
7:51pm Thu 14 Mar 13
Do carefully point out where i said anything about minor cases? It is up to the judge to decide if there is a threat of violence to a witness to warrant anonimity.
The case you refer to is a classic example where witnesses would not give evidence-meaning there was insufficient evidence for the CPS to present a case. In the same way the option to launch a private prosecution exists--it would not succeed without evidence.
As i have said--as you claimed to have witnessed crimes you did not report through fear of reprisal you could have phoned crimestoppers anonymously--you could have saved other victims of crime in doing so.
At least that way--sufficient forensic evidence could have been gathered.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
8:06pm Thu 14 Mar 13
Quote "s you claimed to have witnessed crimes you did not report through fear of reprisal you could have phoned crimestoppers anonymously--you could have saved other victims of crime in doing so."
That's not quite what I said in my original message as I deliberately separated out the two sentences. I know of others who haven't reported crimes through the expectation of reprisal.
I said "There are many I could report, but its not worth the hassle....", which is true and personal experience of dealing with the police suggests they can't be bothered even for things like road rage. I still await a response and incident number for an incident I reported 2 years ago. When trying to report it I was even patronised and insulted by a police officer in Gablecross police station.....!
You didn't say anything about minor cases I did. You suggested that anonymity was available, but you provided no reference to the limitations of when anonymity can be granted which is actually VERY rare.
How would making a phone call actually prevent the crimes happening, if they are not followed up on by properly reporting them and providing evidence? Forensic evidence is not always possible depending on the nature of the incident.
How often do you think the police prosecute someone for failing to provide evidence as per statement "I would also remind you that withholding evidence is also an offence and as you made such a claim online you should have read the recent statement by the police as to their ability to trace an electronic footprint of any offender.".
Please provide some evidence to back up your claim; as I would suggest that for the police to actually pursue someone for failing to give evidence is virtually nil!
itsamess3
says...
12:16am Fri 15 Mar 13
Your words--from which your friend appears to expand on.
"There are many I could report, but its not worth the hassle given that parents don't seem to care and the police and criminal justice system consistently fails to punish or issue deterrents..”
Seems that you are talking about kids misbehaving and on your hobby horse ranting on about the courts and judges without any knowledge of what really happens.
Do not forget other articles where you made such claims as it does appear to be you have witnessed so many crimes.
Officers and civillian staff on the front reception desks are monitored by cctv with sound and you simply have to ask to see a senior officer who will take your complaint and advise ypu of ways it can be dealt with.
The judge in the case decides in chambers the level of anonimity the witness should be given--could be simply by not revealing the name--Mr x--video link or behind a screen and more dependent on the severity of the offence.
There are a host of charges which can be brought against errant witnesses--i suggest you look as you seem to believe you understand the law--you dont--you are a dreamer.
Tim Newroman
says...
7:27am Fri 15 Mar 13
It's the reason why nobody takes his posts on the subject seriously.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
7:29am Fri 15 Mar 13
Once again you waffle on with no real references to back up what you say.
Not sure what you mean by "Your words--from which your friend appears to expand on" as my words were noticeable different from your assumptions. Given I don't know any of the other commenters by name, I can only assume by friend you refer to those who share similar opinions.
You fail to miss the point of reporting crimes on your doorstep, which means simply not providing your name is not good enough.
I witness at least 2 sometimes more red light jumpings a day (and I mean red not late amber). I witness many incidents of careless and dangerous driving a week. To the point actually where I'm considering installing dashboard cameras to my car.
I witness yobish behaviour several times a week.
I did report the officer about the behaviour and was told it would be looked into. No response. Your commenting now on a personal experience with your usual air of know it all authority; trying to undermine my personal experience. You make yourself look foolish.
You clearly are not reading what is actually written. I never said the charges don't exist. I said they are not used. Based on your comments it would suggest that police officers themselves in not pursuing such charges are guilty of the same charges. That's an interesting circle.
I'm still waiting on references to cases where they have been used, but as usual your not forthcoming.
In the mean time, perhaps you'd like to give you take on this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-england-wil
tshire-21788147
Another example of someone on a suspended sentence committing a violent attack on an individual and they have not been sentenced to jail time.
Tim Newroman
says...
12:55pm Fri 15 Mar 13
Another example of someone on a suspended sentence committing a violent attack on an individual and they have not been sentenced to jail time.
Indeed. That particular crime, committed by an offender already on a suspended setence after having been convicted numerous times previously, also included an incident of kicking to the head of an assault victime already on the floor.
Sentencing guidelines are very, very clear on such an incident - it commands a mandatory custodial sentence.
Which, of course, was not given despite the criminal already being on a suspended sentence.
Utter madness and wholly indefensible... so expect itsamess3 to try (and fail).
itsamess3
says...
3:52pm Fri 15 Mar 13
Perhaps the police have the word crank listed against your name as you do appear to witness so many offences.
Sorry but it is you making yourself look silly with you complete lack of knowledge as to legal procedures.
As to the case you highlight-yes--altho
ugh i am not in the uk right now and provided the satellite is not blocked we can view bbc channels and i saw the lady speak.
I must admit i was surprised at the charge due to the photos--but without examining the evidence heard.
I did ask my relative to enquire as he could have offered pro-bono advice to the lady--however there appears to be no grounds for an appeal and that is up to the CPS to decide. I will give you a clue--study the photo--there is something missing..
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
4:44pm Fri 15 Mar 13
You don't make me look silly, you make yourself look silly because you keep making claims that you cannot substantiate. You keep talking about my lack of knowledge on legal procedures, but it is you that consistently makes claims that are not substantiated.
There should be grounds to get the judge removed from office. The guy was already on a suspended sentence at the time of the offense. The guidelines are clear and he should have been jailed. Having a suspended sentence is your opportunity of a second chance; in this case he blew it and that should have been game over. Another sign of the broken criminal justice system.
I'm pretty sure that you have stated in the comments to a previous thread that anyone can initiate an appeal against a sentence.
Go on then enlighten me as to what is missing from the photograph.....?
As for the police having me listed as a crank, that is pretty unlikely. What I actually stated earlier was "I could" not that "I did" report many offenses. The few times I have had dealings with the police they have been pretty unhelpful.
Always Grumpy
says...
7:04pm Fri 15 Mar 13
itsamess3 wrote:"satellite is not blocked"!
Lordash
Perhaps the police have the word crank listed against your name as you do appear to witness so many offences.
Sorry but it is you making yourself look silly with you complete lack of knowledge as to legal procedures.
As to the case you highlight-yes--altho
ugh i am not in the uk right now and provided the satellite is not blocked we can view bbc channels and i saw the lady speak.
I must admit i was surprised at the charge due to the photos--but without examining the evidence heard.
I did ask my relative to enquire as he could have offered pro-bono advice to the lady--however there appears to be no grounds for an appeal and that is up to the CPS to decide. I will give you a clue--study the photo--there is something missing..
Is that when your big head gets in the way?
Oh, you really are so funny - it cracks me up when you say these uttely stupid things.
itsamess3
says...
11:49pm Fri 15 Mar 13
Violent assault? Nope- common assault was the offence charged.
No judge--magistrates.
Photo-not an official photo-undated-no evidencial value.
Appeals--nope never said anyone-the prosecution could appeal the light sentence to the Crown Court-or Defence on the severity of the sentence.
Tim.
"suspended setence"
"assault victime"
"Indeed. That particular crime, committed by an offender already on a suspended setence after having been convicted numerous times previously, also included an incident of kicking to the head of an assault victime already on the floor"
The guy had one previous for ABH during a bar brawl and given the max sentence suspended under magistrates rules. As the charge before the court was a lesser charge of common assault the magistrates ruled it would have been unjust to implement the earlier sentence-having been advised correctly it would have been overturned on appeal. Guidelines applied correctly.
A.G.
"uttely stupid things.” You sure do.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
8:25am Sat 16 Mar 13
That particular photo may not be official, but so what do you think she slapped a bit of make up on for a photo opportunity. He admitted 3 counts of assault.....!
He was still on a suspended sentence and should have been sent down. Its time the criminal justice system toughened up.
Another day and another example of a broken criminal justice system.
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-england-ess
ex-21798486
Your right, you didn't make a comment about anyone being able to appeal a sentence. As your so keen to lay traps for people so you can try to show how knowledgeable you are, I turned the tables. Because I did my research. Here's a quote for an official reference.
Quote "Who can complain that a sentence is unduly lenient?
Victims, their families, and members of the public may complain to their local CPS Area office, which may refer the sentence to the Attorney General if they consider the sentence to be unduly lenient.
Victims, their families, and members of the public may complain to their local CPS Area office, which may refer the sentence to the Attorney General if they consider the sentence to be unduly lenient.
The CPS may also complain directly to the Attorney General, and the Attorney General may independently refer a case to the Court of Appeal.
Because of the fixed 28 day time limit, these complaints should be made as soon as possible after sentencing."
Reference http://www.cps.gov.u
k/news/fact_sheets/u
nduly_lenient_senten
ces/
So anyone can start an appeal so your wrong about that....!
Tim Newroman
says...
10:36am Sat 16 Mar 13
The Criminal Justice System IS broken and innocent people ARE suffering at the hands of repeat, violent offenders who in prison and therefore physically incapable of creating more victims.
The criminal in this case WILL reoffend and, frankly, who can blame him? The system has done nothing but highlight to him that there are no negative consequences for his repeated law breaking.
It would appear that dear old itsamess3 believes that a man kicking seven shades of **** out of a defenceless girl, and stamping on her head while she's prone on the floor, isn't a violent assault.
Re. my typos, yes, I make the odd slip on the keyboard. Happy to admit that. At least I don't use misspellings and then spend several days claiming that they weren't misspellings - much to the hysterical laughter of all who read those ridiculous posts.
itsamess3
says...
12:07pm Sat 16 Mar 13
You have simply confirmed what i said. The decision to launch an appeal lies with either the prosecution and defence.
As for some time the courts have allowed victim statements before sentencing that would be taken into consideration.
In this case you as always use press reports and tv reports--the case notes are the facts the courts rely on and then the sentencing rules.
The appeal would be to the Crown Court. The judge can only decide if the sentence was correct in law on the charge made.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
3:16pm Sat 16 Mar 13
Never mind I wouldn't expect you to admit a lack of clarity or inaccuracy in their postings.
itsamess3
says...
3:52pm Sat 16 Mar 13
Anyone can make a complaint--but no action would be taken unless you can refer directly to the case notes and particularly the written judgment and the law proposed that makes the sentence unduly lenient--then the CPS if they believe there is merit to the claim could appeal.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
4:30pm Sat 16 Mar 13
http://www.swindonad
vertiser.co.uk/news/
10290987.Mum_spared_
jail_for_glass_attac
k/
The guy in the previously case was much worse, already on a suspended sentence and still didn't go to jail.
Complete lack of consistency in a broken criminal justice system that you continually defend.
I can only presume you are one of those on the gravy train with a snout in the trough of the criminal justice system.
Tim Newroman
says...
7:22pm Sat 16 Mar 13
Nobody, but nobody, should be spared prison simply because they happen to be abysmal parents.
The judge in this case even heightened the comedy value by stating that having children wasn't a get out of jail free card, even though he'd just proved that it was.
How do they get away with this stuff?
itsamess3
says...
11:52pm Sat 16 Mar 13
Good advice to you falls on deaf ears.
The adver article was very well presented as they reported the words of the judge very well-he was clear as to his reasoning. A harsh sentence for a mother with kids as there was a financial penalty as well.
You do seem to put yourself and your experience above a very respected judge with a good record of substantial sentencing.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
9:00am Sun 17 Mar 13
So now you advocate the newspapers on balanced story, whereas just a few days you were highly critical of them never reporting the full information.
As usual you side step and miss the point. The point I was raising is that if the single mother was told that she WOULD go to jail if not for her kids; why was th eguy in the other story whose offenses were multiple, more damaging and who was already on a suspended sentence not sentenced to jail.....
Another side step from you is to turn comments into attack with "You do seem to put yourself and your experience above a very respected judge with a good record of substantial sentencing.". I never referenced myself or my experiences in to the last few exchanges.
I reiterate my previous comments
Complete lack of consistency in a broken criminal justice system that you continually defend.
I can only presume you are one of those on the gravy train with a snout in the trough of the criminal justice system.
You claim you offer good advice, but all I ever see if someone so wrapped up in their self importance, they can never admit a mistake or inadequacy on their own or within the criminal justice system.
itsamess3
says...
10:44am Sun 17 Mar 13
You do have serious problems noticing the difference between the charges and the courts hearing the cases.
The first case--no matter what you THINK happened--the truth being the lad was charged with common assault and medical evidence and forensics supported the lads story--not the girls.
Thus the Magistrates ruled it would be unjust to implement the suspended sentence imposed for the more serious offence af ABH during a bar brawl--the Clerk to the Justices would have advised should the earlier sentence been implemented an appeal would likely succeed.
The other case--you really do need to read the article fully which is why i said the judge was severe due to his remarks as to her being groped and suggesting the glass in her hand was accidentally used--but of course YOU had better evidence than the Judge.
I have no connection to the gravy train other than a QC inlaw who prosecutes and defends and many pro bono cases.
Tim Newroman
says...
8:52pm Sun 17 Mar 13
People can talk about 'news article' this and 'full facts' that - but the reality is that people are committing numerous serious, violent crimes and are being given numerous 'last' chances and STILL never seeing the inside of a prison cell.
It can come as no surprise to anybody that these serious criminals simply continue to commit crimes and reoffend - the system has clearly shown them that they have no reason no to.
The person in question above cannot control their rage and frequently lashes out. I do hope it's not one of our illustrious contributor above's family members who bears the brunt next time it happens.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
9:50pm Sun 17 Mar 13
itsamess3 wrote:You highlight one of the criminal justice systems problems. A complete lack of consistency in the charges and all too often a less charge is applied since you make it easier to put a tick against the statistic.
Lordash
You do have serious problems noticing the difference between the charges and the courts hearing the cases.
The first case--no matter what you THINK happened--the truth being the lad was charged with common assault and medical evidence and forensics supported the lads story--not the girls.
Thus the Magistrates ruled it would be unjust to implement the suspended sentence imposed for the more serious offence af ABH during a bar brawl--the Clerk to the Justices would have advised should the earlier sentence been implemented an appeal would likely succeed.
The other case--you really do need to read the article fully which is why i said the judge was severe due to his remarks as to her being groped and suggesting the glass in her hand was accidentally used--but of course YOU had better evidence than the Judge.
I have no connection to the gravy train other than a QC inlaw who prosecutes and defends and many pro bono cases.
The very fact he was charged with common assault shows another element of a broken criminal justice system. You did see the picture right?
The criminal justice system is very broken and is on the side of the criminal not the victim, yet you continue to defend it.
What do you mean "and medical evidence and forensics supported the lads story--not the girls".....? I guess he simply pushed her and she fell putting all those marks on her face.
As Tim said, I can only hope that someone in your family is not a victim to some of these criminals, but then I'm sure you'd be generous enough to defend their actions.
itsamess3
says...
12:10am Mon 18 Mar 13
Yes i saw the picture--the medical evidence was--the bruising had not happened on the night in question. The incident itself was witnessed by an officer and was clear the guy had simply slapped her on the cheek once.
itsamess3
says...
1:08am Mon 18 Mar 13
I wonder what that person you have continually made allegations against that are not true would do--with the help of a very good lawyer.
Tim Newroman
says...
8:20am Mon 18 Mar 13
itsamess3 wrote:Your continued attempts at bullying - via implied threats, or suggestions, of legal action against various people on this website are not only against the website's Terms & Conditions, but you do not frighten me in the slightest you ludicrous little man.
Tim
I wonder what that person you have continually made allegations against that are not true would do--with the help of a very good lawyer.
itsamess3
says...
8:41am Mon 18 Mar 13
Tim Newroman
says...
3:11pm Mon 18 Mar 13
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
7:56pm Mon 18 Mar 13
itsamess3 wrote:Once again no references to support your claims.
Lordash
Yes i saw the picture--the medical evidence was--the bruising had not happened on the night in question. The incident itself was witnessed by an officer and was clear the guy had simply slapped her on the cheek once.
This really is a bad habit you know.
itsamess3
says...
2:02am Tue 19 Mar 13
Do you believe a police officer in giving evidence to the court would have forgotten to have given facts the woman is now claiming?
In fact the links you put up do not support your claims which is more to the point--neither does the court records.
Our system is far from perfect-but the door is open to rectify mistakes either way--2 notable ones being the Bentley case who was cleared decades after his execution. An even more notable case was a convicted multi rapist who had served 26 years and let out on licence and re-arrested 2 years later for similar offences. By that time DNA was a major part of evidence-forensics showed the DNA was not his--fortunately an astute lab technician reviewed his previous case and found no DNA trace to him-far too late as his life had been ruined.
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
7:43pm Tue 19 Mar 13
LordAshOfTheBrake says...
11:47am Wed 13 Mar 13
In addition people don't want the "revenge" attacks and come backs from the yobs which sometimes happen.
There are many I could report, but its not worth the hassle given that parents don't seem to care and the police and criminal justice system consistently fails to punish or issue deterrents..