Police raids

Brian Beesley BJ.Beesley at ulster.ac.uk
Mon, 3 Mar 2003 10:32:37 +0000


On Friday 28 February 2003 21:38, Jeremy Barker wrote:

> > ``Oh well, we've
> > quashed the warrant, or dropped the charges. You'll have to wait 2 months
> > before you can have your stuff back''.

There is absolutely no excise for this sort of attitude.
>
> 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.

Indeed.
>
> People will say that it will be expensive to do that and I would readily
> agree.

In principle, I agree too. But it shouldn't be _too_ expensive - 
surelypolicy-makers should be able to manage the decision-making process as 
to how much "crime" we are prepared to tolerate in order to be able to live a 
reasonably normal life. (Back to the old argument - the fact is that there 
really _is_ an acceptable level of crime, or terrorism, since a zero rate is 
absolutely impossible to achieve even if 100% of the country's GDP was spent 
on "security". Just as absolute safety of e.g. the railways is impossible to 
guarantee without closing them all down.)

> However it would be an expense born at relatively little individual
> expense by the wider community through taxation (which is what funds 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.

Yes. But instead of leaving it open-ended like that, why not have legislation 
which imposes penalties (at least dismissal) which could be imposed on those 
policy-makers who persistently allow too much collateral damage resulting 
from "operational activities"?  (The sort that do inconvenience the public at 
large or inflict significant damage on innocent individuals or groups of 
people.)

Brian Beesley