A
D
David Martin
Guest
Ambrose Nankivell wrote:
> Pinky wrote:
> > Top posted
>
> *plonk*
Bunch of plonkers!
...d <searches for killfile on GG. Gives up>
> Pinky wrote:
> > Top posted
>
> *plonk*
Bunch of plonkers!
...d <searches for killfile on GG. Gives up>
S
Sniper8052(L96A1)
Guest
Squashme wrote:
> Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote:
>
>>Pinky wrote:
>>
>>>So I shouldn't have done it "publicly" -- sorry for that ----but he remains
>>>my kill file! No regrets about that action at all!
>>>
>>
>>Pinky,
>>
>>I have never, to my recollection, claimed my position as a police
>>officer made me right over others by mystical right and I have often
>>chastised my fellows on this newsgroup where that has been warranted. I
>>hope also I have offered some humour from the 'other side' when I have
>>had something which others might enjoy. This was one of those
>>occasions, if you find it unbelievable I can do nothing to convince you
>>otherwise however it is a true and faithful representation of the facts
>>as viewed from my motorcycle and I can think of no reason for posting it
>>otherwise as the majority of the replies have been to inform you of my
>>veracity rather than to challenge the substance of the post. Had you
>>not been so forthright in your statements of right I doubt it would have
>>raised more than a ripple of a smile on some readers faces which was
>>it's intent. Had I riled against this fellows behaviour and launched
>>into a diatribe about poor cycling and cyclists in general then I could
>>understand your ire. However I did not I was dumbfounded and amazed by
>>his bare faced cheek and almost mystical seeming blitheness in doing
>>what he wanted to do and getting away with it.
>>
>
>
> So he wasn't breaking any laws then?
>
Well of course - he was..., the thing is that I was not in uniform, not
in or on a police vehicle, not on duty at the time may have caused
greater danger by attempting to stop him and that whilst off duty it is
safer to remain off duty unless there is a pressing reason not to and
then the action one takes should be risk assessed before hand. Fools
rush in etc...
Sniper8052
NB: Sniper is not cleared to ride police motorbikes.
> Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote:
>
>>Pinky wrote:
>>
>>>So I shouldn't have done it "publicly" -- sorry for that ----but he remains
>>>my kill file! No regrets about that action at all!
>>>
>>
>>Pinky,
>>
>>I have never, to my recollection, claimed my position as a police
>>officer made me right over others by mystical right and I have often
>>chastised my fellows on this newsgroup where that has been warranted. I
>>hope also I have offered some humour from the 'other side' when I have
>>had something which others might enjoy. This was one of those
>>occasions, if you find it unbelievable I can do nothing to convince you
>>otherwise however it is a true and faithful representation of the facts
>>as viewed from my motorcycle and I can think of no reason for posting it
>>otherwise as the majority of the replies have been to inform you of my
>>veracity rather than to challenge the substance of the post. Had you
>>not been so forthright in your statements of right I doubt it would have
>>raised more than a ripple of a smile on some readers faces which was
>>it's intent. Had I riled against this fellows behaviour and launched
>>into a diatribe about poor cycling and cyclists in general then I could
>>understand your ire. However I did not I was dumbfounded and amazed by
>>his bare faced cheek and almost mystical seeming blitheness in doing
>>what he wanted to do and getting away with it.
>>
>
>
> So he wasn't breaking any laws then?
>
Well of course - he was..., the thing is that I was not in uniform, not
in or on a police vehicle, not on duty at the time may have caused
greater danger by attempting to stop him and that whilst off duty it is
safer to remain off duty unless there is a pressing reason not to and
then the action one takes should be risk assessed before hand. Fools
rush in etc...
Sniper8052
NB: Sniper is not cleared to ride police motorbikes.
S
Simon Brooke
Guest
in message <[email protected]>, Don Whybrow
('[email protected]') wrote:
> We Are Devo! wrote:
>>
>> There used to be a big 5 1/4 inch hole on the front for those things
>> ;-)
>
> That small?
>
> Mine was 8 inches.
>
I bet you say that to all the girls.
Actually mine was eight inches, too, but it was floppy.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; all in all you're just another click in the call
;; -- Minke Bouyed
('[email protected]') wrote:
> We Are Devo! wrote:
>>
>> There used to be a big 5 1/4 inch hole on the front for those things
>> ;-)
>
> That small?
>
> Mine was 8 inches.
>
I bet you say that to all the girls.
Actually mine was eight inches, too, but it was floppy.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; all in all you're just another click in the call
;; -- Minke Bouyed
S
Sniper8052(L96A1)
Guest
David Martin wrote:
> Tom Crispin wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 06 May 2006 07:11:37 GMT, "Sniper8052(L96A1)"
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hardly olympic athelete standard but 600cc's of Japans finest velocipede
>>> in the shape of my venerable Sam the Yam on the way into work. No
>>>problem at all to keep track of him with all that power to spare.
>>
>>Do you truly say that your original report was the truth, the whole
>>truth, and nothing but the truth? Or did you fill in the bits where
>>your memory failed you with tiny bits of poetic licence?
>
>
> I had cause yesterday to be discussing recent events with a member of
> Taysides finest who was recording my utterances in his notebook[1]. Two
> things were somewhat disconcerting. Firstly was the attempt to put
> words into my mouth for the purpose of the statement he was requesting
> I sign. I gently admonished him for that, and a few minor presumptions.
> The one which I did not raise but occurred to me later was that the
> statement had been written in his note book in pencil, wheras I signed
> it in ink. Maybe Sniper could confirm whether writing details into a
> notebook *in pencil* and asking someone to sign it is standard
> practice?
>
> ..d
>
> [1] He took more notes than the students in my lectures. If he had been
> a recent graduate he wouldn't have written anything down, just asked
> for the handout instead ;-(
>
David,
Whilst it is not 'best practice' to use pencil in ones PNB there is no
legislation which precludes an officer from doing so. There are
guidelines about how a PNB should be completed but in the most respect
although a PNB is an 'accountable document' it is for the officer to
decide how he makes entries.
There is no right or wrong layout either. I prefer to have a margin on
each page into which I place the time and incident numbers with dialog
to the right of that, each month I then rule off the remainder of the
page in use sign it and start a new month on a new page which I title
with the month name then underline. There is no form for doing this it
just helps me to keep track of time within the book. Provided the notes
in the PNB are consistently entered throughout in direct speech, where
appropriate and comply to the neumonic No ELBOWS then an officer may use
a pencil to make entries although as said it's not best practice, could
lead to evidence being questioned in court and should in my opinion only
be done if there is a reason for doing so. IE: It's raining or spitting
and the page is wet. In all other circumstances I would expect an
officer to use ink as best practice. Certainly in this incidence where
the officer was asking you to sign that an entry was a true and faithful
representation of your conversation/statement I would expect them to
have used ink throughout unless that were not possible for the reason
given above. And only then.
No
E-rasures
L-eaves torn out
B-lank spaces - in text
O-ver writing
W-re-writing
S- direct speech
I know it's not a very good neumonic.
There may also be local force guidelines which may have a bearing but I
could not comment on that.
Yours
Sniper8052
> Tom Crispin wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 06 May 2006 07:11:37 GMT, "Sniper8052(L96A1)"
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hardly olympic athelete standard but 600cc's of Japans finest velocipede
>>> in the shape of my venerable Sam the Yam on the way into work. No
>>>problem at all to keep track of him with all that power to spare.
>>
>>Do you truly say that your original report was the truth, the whole
>>truth, and nothing but the truth? Or did you fill in the bits where
>>your memory failed you with tiny bits of poetic licence?
>
>
> I had cause yesterday to be discussing recent events with a member of
> Taysides finest who was recording my utterances in his notebook[1]. Two
> things were somewhat disconcerting. Firstly was the attempt to put
> words into my mouth for the purpose of the statement he was requesting
> I sign. I gently admonished him for that, and a few minor presumptions.
> The one which I did not raise but occurred to me later was that the
> statement had been written in his note book in pencil, wheras I signed
> it in ink. Maybe Sniper could confirm whether writing details into a
> notebook *in pencil* and asking someone to sign it is standard
> practice?
>
> ..d
>
> [1] He took more notes than the students in my lectures. If he had been
> a recent graduate he wouldn't have written anything down, just asked
> for the handout instead ;-(
>
David,
Whilst it is not 'best practice' to use pencil in ones PNB there is no
legislation which precludes an officer from doing so. There are
guidelines about how a PNB should be completed but in the most respect
although a PNB is an 'accountable document' it is for the officer to
decide how he makes entries.
There is no right or wrong layout either. I prefer to have a margin on
each page into which I place the time and incident numbers with dialog
to the right of that, each month I then rule off the remainder of the
page in use sign it and start a new month on a new page which I title
with the month name then underline. There is no form for doing this it
just helps me to keep track of time within the book. Provided the notes
in the PNB are consistently entered throughout in direct speech, where
appropriate and comply to the neumonic No ELBOWS then an officer may use
a pencil to make entries although as said it's not best practice, could
lead to evidence being questioned in court and should in my opinion only
be done if there is a reason for doing so. IE: It's raining or spitting
and the page is wet. In all other circumstances I would expect an
officer to use ink as best practice. Certainly in this incidence where
the officer was asking you to sign that an entry was a true and faithful
representation of your conversation/statement I would expect them to
have used ink throughout unless that were not possible for the reason
given above. And only then.
No
E-rasures
L-eaves torn out
B-lank spaces - in text
O-ver writing
W-re-writing
S- direct speech
I know it's not a very good neumonic.
There may also be local force guidelines which may have a bearing but I
could not comment on that.
Yours
Sniper8052
D
David Martin
Guest
Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote:
> > I had cause yesterday to be discussing recent events with a member of
> > Taysides finest who was recording my utterances in his notebook[1]. Two
> > things were somewhat disconcerting. Firstly was the attempt to put
> > words into my mouth for the purpose of the statement he was requesting
> > I sign. I gently admonished him for that, and a few minor presumptions.
> > The one which I did not raise but occurred to me later was that the
> > statement had been written in his note book in pencil, wheras I signed
> > it in ink. Maybe Sniper could confirm whether writing details into a
> > notebook *in pencil* and asking someone to sign it is standard
> > practice?
> >
> David,
> Provided the notes
> in the PNB are consistently entered throughout in direct speech, where
> appropriate and comply to the neumonic No ELBOWS then an officer may use
> a pencil to make entries although as said it's not best practice, could
> lead to evidence being questioned in court and should in my opinion only
> be done if there is a reason for doing so. IE: It's raining or spitting
> and the page is wet. In all other circumstances I would expect an
> officer to use ink as best practice. Certainly in this incidence where
> the officer was asking you to sign that an entry was a true and faithful
> representation of your conversation/statement I would expect them to
> have used ink throughout unless that were not possible for the reason
> given above. And only then.
>
> No
> E-rasures
> L-eaves torn out
> B-lank spaces - in text
> O-ver writing
> W-re-writing
> S- direct speech
In this case, as I intimated, it was a minor matter as to whether it
was pencil or ink as I was merely making a witness statement (to a
minor collision between two cars. One drove off without leaving address
or insurance details). If I was being asked to make a statement and
sign it that would be incriminating for me, then I would insist it be
in ink (I'd probably have been taken away and be wanting a lawyer
too..)
There is a chance that the departing driver will be prosecuted - the
officer seemed to think he could pin a number of charges if needed.
Tried to get me to say that I had seen her driving carelessly, to which
I objected. I pointed out that in my opinion I could infer that shee
had been driving carelessly from the result of the accident, but hadn't
actually observed said driving directly.
He also presumed that because I was driving a car that I owned it, for
which I chastised him (gently and politely - I asked how he knew that
it was my car, he replied that it was because I had got out of it. I
did point out that I could have legally been driving someone elses
car.)
...d
> > I had cause yesterday to be discussing recent events with a member of
> > Taysides finest who was recording my utterances in his notebook[1]. Two
> > things were somewhat disconcerting. Firstly was the attempt to put
> > words into my mouth for the purpose of the statement he was requesting
> > I sign. I gently admonished him for that, and a few minor presumptions.
> > The one which I did not raise but occurred to me later was that the
> > statement had been written in his note book in pencil, wheras I signed
> > it in ink. Maybe Sniper could confirm whether writing details into a
> > notebook *in pencil* and asking someone to sign it is standard
> > practice?
> >
> David,
> Provided the notes
> in the PNB are consistently entered throughout in direct speech, where
> appropriate and comply to the neumonic No ELBOWS then an officer may use
> a pencil to make entries although as said it's not best practice, could
> lead to evidence being questioned in court and should in my opinion only
> be done if there is a reason for doing so. IE: It's raining or spitting
> and the page is wet. In all other circumstances I would expect an
> officer to use ink as best practice. Certainly in this incidence where
> the officer was asking you to sign that an entry was a true and faithful
> representation of your conversation/statement I would expect them to
> have used ink throughout unless that were not possible for the reason
> given above. And only then.
>
> No
> E-rasures
> L-eaves torn out
> B-lank spaces - in text
> O-ver writing
> W-re-writing
> S- direct speech
In this case, as I intimated, it was a minor matter as to whether it
was pencil or ink as I was merely making a witness statement (to a
minor collision between two cars. One drove off without leaving address
or insurance details). If I was being asked to make a statement and
sign it that would be incriminating for me, then I would insist it be
in ink (I'd probably have been taken away and be wanting a lawyer
too..)
There is a chance that the departing driver will be prosecuted - the
officer seemed to think he could pin a number of charges if needed.
Tried to get me to say that I had seen her driving carelessly, to which
I objected. I pointed out that in my opinion I could infer that shee
had been driving carelessly from the result of the accident, but hadn't
actually observed said driving directly.
He also presumed that because I was driving a car that I owned it, for
which I chastised him (gently and politely - I asked how he knew that
it was my car, he replied that it was because I had got out of it. I
did point out that I could have legally been driving someone elses
car.)
...d
S
Sniper8052(L96A1)
Guest
David Martin wrote:
> Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote:
>
>>>I had cause yesterday to be discussing recent events with a member of
>>>Taysides finest who was recording my utterances in his notebook[1]. Two
>>>things were somewhat disconcerting. Firstly was the attempt to put
>>>words into my mouth for the purpose of the statement he was requesting
>>>I sign. I gently admonished him for that, and a few minor presumptions.
>>>The one which I did not raise but occurred to me later was that the
>>>statement had been written in his note book in pencil, wheras I signed
>>>it in ink. Maybe Sniper could confirm whether writing details into a
>>>notebook *in pencil* and asking someone to sign it is standard
>>>practice?
>>>
>>
>>David,
>>Provided the notes
>>in the PNB are consistently entered throughout in direct speech, where
>>appropriate and comply to the neumonic No ELBOWS then an officer may use
>>a pencil to make entries although as said it's not best practice, could
>>lead to evidence being questioned in court and should in my opinion only
>>be done if there is a reason for doing so. IE: It's raining or spitting
>>and the page is wet. In all other circumstances I would expect an
>>officer to use ink as best practice. Certainly in this incidence where
>>the officer was asking you to sign that an entry was a true and faithful
>>representation of your conversation/statement I would expect them to
>>have used ink throughout unless that were not possible for the reason
>>given above. And only then.
>>
>>No
>>E-rasures
>>L-eaves torn out
>>B-lank spaces - in text
>>O-ver writing
>>W-re-writing
>>S- direct speech
>
>
> In this case, as I intimated, it was a minor matter as to whether it
> was pencil or ink as I was merely making a witness statement (to a
> minor collision between two cars. One drove off without leaving address
> or insurance details). If I was being asked to make a statement and
> sign it that would be incriminating for me, then I would insist it be
> in ink (I'd probably have been taken away and be wanting a lawyer
> too..)
>
> There is a chance that the departing driver will be prosecuted - the
> officer seemed to think he could pin a number of charges if needed.
> Tried to get me to say that I had seen her driving carelessly, to which
> I objected. I pointed out that in my opinion I could infer that shee
> had been driving carelessly from the result of the accident, but hadn't
> actually observed said driving directly.
> He also presumed that because I was driving a car that I owned it, for
> which I chastised him (gently and politely - I asked how he knew that
> it was my car, he replied that it was because I had got out of it. I
> did point out that I could have legally been driving someone elses
> car.)
>
> ..d
>
This sounds like first account notes and not a statement as such. It is
good practice to ask a witness to sign the notes so that nothing further
can be added. It also lends weight to the observations at court if they
can be produced timed and dated with a signature. A witness statement
would then be written up from these notes after a proper interview or
the officer may write a personal statement referring to the information
recorded an the PNB such as 'acting on information received and recorded
in my pocket note book number **** page *** I attended...and spoke to
the owner of the vehicle who stated..."
One might also ask a suspect to sign ones PNB after they had made a
'significant statement' or when reporting someone for summons following
a series of questions asked after 'caution+2' I.E. You are *not* under
arrest and will be free to leave after I have completed dealing with
this incident. You do *not* have to say anything but it may harm your
defence if you fail to mention *now* something which..."
As to the officer asking you to imply something you had not seen that is
clearly wrong as you say you were not a witness to the incident but a
witness to them driving away which is a different thing.
Sniper8052.
> Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote:
>
>>>I had cause yesterday to be discussing recent events with a member of
>>>Taysides finest who was recording my utterances in his notebook[1]. Two
>>>things were somewhat disconcerting. Firstly was the attempt to put
>>>words into my mouth for the purpose of the statement he was requesting
>>>I sign. I gently admonished him for that, and a few minor presumptions.
>>>The one which I did not raise but occurred to me later was that the
>>>statement had been written in his note book in pencil, wheras I signed
>>>it in ink. Maybe Sniper could confirm whether writing details into a
>>>notebook *in pencil* and asking someone to sign it is standard
>>>practice?
>>>
>>
>>David,
>>Provided the notes
>>in the PNB are consistently entered throughout in direct speech, where
>>appropriate and comply to the neumonic No ELBOWS then an officer may use
>>a pencil to make entries although as said it's not best practice, could
>>lead to evidence being questioned in court and should in my opinion only
>>be done if there is a reason for doing so. IE: It's raining or spitting
>>and the page is wet. In all other circumstances I would expect an
>>officer to use ink as best practice. Certainly in this incidence where
>>the officer was asking you to sign that an entry was a true and faithful
>>representation of your conversation/statement I would expect them to
>>have used ink throughout unless that were not possible for the reason
>>given above. And only then.
>>
>>No
>>E-rasures
>>L-eaves torn out
>>B-lank spaces - in text
>>O-ver writing
>>W-re-writing
>>S- direct speech
>
>
> In this case, as I intimated, it was a minor matter as to whether it
> was pencil or ink as I was merely making a witness statement (to a
> minor collision between two cars. One drove off without leaving address
> or insurance details). If I was being asked to make a statement and
> sign it that would be incriminating for me, then I would insist it be
> in ink (I'd probably have been taken away and be wanting a lawyer
> too..)
>
> There is a chance that the departing driver will be prosecuted - the
> officer seemed to think he could pin a number of charges if needed.
> Tried to get me to say that I had seen her driving carelessly, to which
> I objected. I pointed out that in my opinion I could infer that shee
> had been driving carelessly from the result of the accident, but hadn't
> actually observed said driving directly.
> He also presumed that because I was driving a car that I owned it, for
> which I chastised him (gently and politely - I asked how he knew that
> it was my car, he replied that it was because I had got out of it. I
> did point out that I could have legally been driving someone elses
> car.)
>
> ..d
>
This sounds like first account notes and not a statement as such. It is
good practice to ask a witness to sign the notes so that nothing further
can be added. It also lends weight to the observations at court if they
can be produced timed and dated with a signature. A witness statement
would then be written up from these notes after a proper interview or
the officer may write a personal statement referring to the information
recorded an the PNB such as 'acting on information received and recorded
in my pocket note book number **** page *** I attended...and spoke to
the owner of the vehicle who stated..."
One might also ask a suspect to sign ones PNB after they had made a
'significant statement' or when reporting someone for summons following
a series of questions asked after 'caution+2' I.E. You are *not* under
arrest and will be free to leave after I have completed dealing with
this incident. You do *not* have to say anything but it may harm your
defence if you fail to mention *now* something which..."
As to the officer asking you to imply something you had not seen that is
clearly wrong as you say you were not a witness to the incident but a
witness to them driving away which is a different thing.
Sniper8052.
D
David Martin
Guest
Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote:
> This sounds like first account notes and not a statement as such. It is
> good practice to ask a witness to sign the notes so that nothing further
> can be added.
It had been written in first person from my point of view.
> As to the officer asking you to imply something you had not seen that is
> clearly wrong as you say you were not a witness to the incident but a
> witness to them driving away which is a different thing.
I didn't witness the lead up to the accident, just the accident itself.
I spoke to a sergeant I know (he is an auxilliary minister at my
church) and he agreed that asking leading questions was not the done
thing. Less clear on pencil/pen.
...d
> This sounds like first account notes and not a statement as such. It is
> good practice to ask a witness to sign the notes so that nothing further
> can be added.
It had been written in first person from my point of view.
> As to the officer asking you to imply something you had not seen that is
> clearly wrong as you say you were not a witness to the incident but a
> witness to them driving away which is a different thing.
I didn't witness the lead up to the accident, just the accident itself.
I spoke to a sergeant I know (he is an auxilliary minister at my
church) and he agreed that asking leading questions was not the done
thing. Less clear on pencil/pen.
...d
R
Richard
Guest
We Are Devo! wrote:
>>> I remember talking to someone using ink, paper, envelopes and postage
>>> stamps.
>>> </yogm>
>
>
>> I don't understand... how did you get all of them into the computer?
>
>
>> Jon
>
>
> There used to be a big 5 1/4 inch hole on the front for those things ;-)
5.25"? Young whippersnapper. Size counts, and 8" floppies could store
far more data...er
R.
>>> I remember talking to someone using ink, paper, envelopes and postage
>>> stamps.
>>> </yogm>
>
>
>> I don't understand... how did you get all of them into the computer?
>
>
>> Jon
>
>
> There used to be a big 5 1/4 inch hole on the front for those things ;-)
5.25"? Young whippersnapper. Size counts, and 8" floppies could store
far more data...er
R.
I
ian henden
Guest
"Ambrose Nankivell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Pinky wrote:
>> Top posted
>
> *plonk*
> --
> Ambrose
What a load of plonkers you lot are......
)
==
IanH
news:[email protected]...
> Pinky wrote:
>> Top posted
>
> *plonk*
> --
> Ambrose
What a load of plonkers you lot are......
)==
IanH
