Police raids

[David Hansen]

On 28 Feb 2003 at 21:38, Jeremy Barker wrote:

> Which is why I have long been of the opinion that when the police
> interfere in any way with a business or individual that is not a
> target of their enquiries (i.e. is not under suspicion) or operations
> (for example, if they close off a road for any significant time after
> an "incident") they really need to provide an open-ended indemnity for
> any and all losses that arise whether directly or indirectly from
> their actions.

Gordon Brown would never agree. In Edinburgh some years ago we had a 
disasterous four days or so. A gang of (largely) third world despots 
took over the city centre in someting called the Commonwealth Heads 
of Government Meeting. They did not come as guests, they came as 
invaders. The police made the city centre a ghost town. Businesses in 
the centre lost at least some money, a few lost a fair amount of 
money. The loss of money was entirely caused by the stupid activities 
of the police.

> rather than funded only by the
> extremely unfortunate individuals and businesses that get caught up in
> police operations through no fault of their own.

I can imagine the Home Office line, it's a price well worth paying.

--
  David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will *always* explain why I revoke a key, unless the UK 
 government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.