Unbelivable!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2083680/Church-roof-%27thieves%27-allowed-to-go-free.html

Church roof 'thieves' allowed to go free
By Paul Stokes
Last Updated: 3:10PM BST 06/06/2008

Three masked men suspected of stripping lead from a village church roof were allowed to go free because they could have been enjoying the view.
Police responded quickly after churchgoers reported seeing the trio on Treeton Parish Church, in Rotherham, South Yorkshire.

The suspects were caught wearing balaclavas and gloves with rolls of lead nearby, but officers were unable to prove an offence had been committed.

Carole Robinson, whose husband Ron is a churchwarden, said: "It was beyond belief. The police said they could claim they had only gone up to look at the view. It left people furious.

"We have been plagued with lead thefts."

Thieves have targeted the church, which is mentioned in the Domesday Book, ten times in as many months at a time of rising lead prices.

Eight five per cent of the roof has been stripped and church officials need to raise £100,000 for repairs and as much again to repair the tower.

Builders put up scaffolding to replace the roof with stainless steel sheets, but thieves have used it to get easier access and steal lead they could not previously reach.

Mrs Robinson said: "It's so frustrating that after so much damage and trouble, we finally catch men on the roof only for the police to let them off.

"The police arrived and the men came down. Lead had been removed and rolled up ready to be carried off.

"But the police said lead was not the kind of material you could get fingerprints from and they did not have enough evidence to take them to court because they could not link the men to the lead.

"I just felt totally vulnerable. It seems we are totally helpless and the law seems to be on the side of the criminals."

Four police officers, including a dog handler, were sent to the church to investigate reports of people on the roof after a Sunday service.

Chf Ins Jason Harwin, of South Yorkshire Police, said: "When the officers arrived they spoke with three youths who were on the scaffolding.

"Officers searched all three youths and thoroughly examined the surrounding area but found no evidence that any offences had been committed, nor that the youths possessed any articles with which to commit any offences.

"As a result of this officers had no power to arrest these youths and they were warned to stay away from the property."

What's so unbelievable about people being presumed innocent if you can't prove them guilty? We've had that system for about a thousand years.

What's so unbelievable is that the police got there so quickly! Too quickly in fact.

:hihi:

Does sort of make you wonder what would constitute proof in the eyes of the police if catching them red handed isnt good enough.

Presumably this particular crime didnt qualify for a spotfine so no great need of enforcement

What's so unbelievable about people being presumed innocent if you can't prove them guilty? We've had that system for about a thousand years.

I totally agree, very clever man you. These guys were obviously innocent

I totally agree, very clever man you. These guys were obviously innocent

No. They were probably guilty. Go back and actually read what I wrote, or else take some lessons in basic English law.

Does sort of make you wonder what would constitute proof in the eyes of the police if catching them red handed isnt good enough.


The only thing they were caught doing is sitting on a roof. That may be silly, but it's no crime.

No. They were probably guilty. Go back and actually read what I wrote, or else take some lessons in basic English law.

Keep taking that medication gorgeous :roll:

crackers......................:)

the following extract is from a newspaper...

Members of St Helen’s Parish Church in Treeton, South Yorkshire, have been left furious after police let off three masked men caught in the act of stealing lead from the ancient church.

St Helen’s, which is mentioned in the Domesday Book, has suffered 10 lead thefts in 10 months, amounting to £100,000 worth of lead taken from the church’s roof and clock tower.

Yet when three men wearing balaclavas and masks were caught by police on the roof of the church last Sunday, police let them off with a caution because they believed that they were just admiring the view, reports the Daily Mail.

Police cited “insufficient evidence”, as the men had nothing incriminating on them and police were unable to take fingerprints from the stolen lead roofing.

The lack of action has left the congregation outraged and concerned at the prospect of yet more thefts.

Church member Carole Robinson, who is married to a churchwarden, was quoted by the Daily Mail as saying, “It was beyond belief. The police said they could claim they had only gone up to look at the view. It left people furious.

“We have been plagued with lead thefts and when we finally catch men on the roof they let them off with a caution.”

Lead thieves are targeting churches across the country as the price of lead soars.

In the latest incident, police were called to the church last Sunday after several residents spotted the men on the roof.

“The police arrived and the men came down and in effect gave themselves up,” Mrs Robinson was quoted by the Daily Mail as saying. “It seemed they had been caught red-handed. Lead had been removed and rolled up ready to be carried off.

“But the police said lead was not the kind of material you could get fingerprints from and they did not have enough evidence to take them to court because they could not link the men to the lead.

“I just felt totally vulnerable. It seems we are totally helpless and the law seems to be on the side of the criminals.”

already covered (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=356388)

hi radspanner.. on the money again !

Threads merged

The only thing they were caught doing is sitting on a roof. That may be silly, but it's no crime.

True but from the story, you'd think that a jury would have convicted them because there was no other likely explanation as to what they were doing there with the lead , and it was beyond reasonable doubt they were nicking it.

Surely worth a prosecution..?

True but from the story, you'd think that a jury would have convicted them because there was no other likely explanation as to what they were doing there with the lead , and it was beyond reasonable doubt they were nicking it.


There's not one single shred of evidence to prove it that they'd ever laid so much as a finger on the lead.

A jury might convict, but if they did it'd be overturned on appeal for being a perverse verdict.

There's not one single shred of evidence to prove it that they'd ever laid so much as a finger on the lead.

A jury might convict, but if they did it'd be overturned on appeal for being a perverse verdict.

Not very often I find myself agreeing with you but you are dead right.

If the police had taken it to court then the whole outcome could have had a serious knock-on effect for other cases.

The police who turned up could have waited for them to come down with the lead but again this could be difficult if they are called to an emergency during that time.

Not really a great deal could be done under the circumstances. I am sure the culprits will come unstuck at some stage.

They most certainly were guilty. They were guilty of trespass at the very least. Any sensible judge would be able to impose the maximum available damages for that crime, with the pretty certain knowledge that the more serious crime was being undertaken.

And where's the good old British criminal spirit of claiming "it's a fair cop" these days?

:)

They most certainly were guilty. They were guilty of trespass at the very least. Any sensible judge would be able to impose the maximum available damages for that crime, with the pretty certain knowledge that the more serious crime was being undertaken.

And where's the good old British criminal spirit of claiming "it's a fair cop" these days?

:)

Trespass is a civil offence and requires the culprits to be sued.

Despite what the signs say, you cannot be prosecuted for trespass.

I guess this incident is similar to a scenario of someone being caught in a clothes shop with loads of T shirts stuffed in their bag. The person in the shop would have to be set free, as they haven't actually committed the offence until they have left the shop. Until then they haven't actually stole anything, just like these individuals sat on the church roof.

If there was lead rolled up ready for removal, and there had been no lead left by the builders, the only explanation is that either these youths had stripped it or someone else had. If someone else had stripped it why didn't they take it away?
At the very least there's strong circumstantial evidence against them.
I'd have thought it would have been worth going to court.

If there was lead rolled up ready for removal, and there had been no lead left by the builders, the only explanation is that either these youths had stripped it or someone else had. If someone else had stripped it why didn't they take it away?
At the very least there's strong circumstantial evidence against them.
I'd have thought it would have been worth going to court.

It is extremely difficult as well as quite unfair to convict somebody on cicumstantial evidence.

I don't for one minute believe these people were innocent but there really could have been other reasons for their being there. Given the cicumstances, how do you prove beyond all reasonable doubt that they were stealing the lead?

This particular type of crime angers me. For the sake of a few pounds gain, the criminals are prepared to leave caretakers of property, many of it charitable, with many thousands of pounds worth of repair costs. It must be absolutely devastating for the people involved.

It is not inconceivable that these culprits could have actually left a trail of devastation in excess of £million for innocent victims to contend with, and yet they now know that they are almost certain to get away with it. The same signal has been sent out to other lead thieves.

I know it would be extremely difficult to punish these people, but that is not an excuse not to try. If we don't try, then the criminals are winning. Let's face it, in my parents/grandparents day these culprits would have been punished, even with the same legal system, but the criminals and their lawyers have learnt to play clever with the legal system. Surely the rest of us need to learn to as well instead of saying, "it's just too difficult, we'll go and chase the easy targets instead."

In this case there's the civil offense of trespass. Sue them for damages, the distress caused to all concerned. It may be negligible, but at least it will mean their names can be mentioned in the press.

Prosecute them for wasting police time. They're quick to use this in other circumstances, and it should be pretty obvious to anybody that climbing on church roofs in balaclavas and looking like lead thieves is going to end up wasting considerable police time.

:roll:Well it has not been that warm at nights so would need the balaclavas on while they were sight seeing

They most certainly were guilty. They were guilty of trespass at the very least. Any sensible judge would be able to impose the maximum available damages for that crime, with the pretty certain knowledge that the more serious crime was being undertaken.


Trespass is not a crime, and in any event, any judge so doing would be in serious breach of his duties.

I know it would be extremely difficult to punish these people, but that is not an excuse not to try.


It's not in the least difficult to punish them; the difficulty is in proving they were actually committing a crime in the first place. Given the report as it stands, there cannot possibly be any such proof.

So unless you're willing to overturn one of the fundamental pillars of our free society - no conviction without proof - I don't really see what you're after.

I know it's not possible to charge them for the actual crime they were "probably" thinking of undertaking, thats why other avenues of opportunity need to be investigated, or created.

Otherwise we are just handing over the streets to the criminals. Oh by the way, on doing some googling I came across an interesting site called "The Policeman's Blog"

http://coppersblog.blogspot.com/

Here are some interesting opinions from Chicago cop-turned-private eye Paul Huebl:

The people of The UK are beyond help and hope. They’ve handed their streets over to robbers, rapists, killers and even terrorists.
With traditional snobbery the Brits have rejected use of force to avoid violent crime. People who dare hurt a criminal in the course of a deadly crime face years in prison as well as civil actions by the predators.
I guess the pacifists rule the UK with an insane idea that laying down playing dead and total cooperation with criminals is somehow good public policy. I’m sure the UK’s most hardened criminals love Merry Old England for this misplaced benevolence......

Are the Brits so dumb they can’t figure out that Charles Darwin, not the government, is policing their streets?


Interesting that the view from Chicago of all places, is that we in the UK are the ones with crime out of control.

It sounds like they should have been charged with 'going equipped', balaclavas, gloves and on the roof of a church. A jury would have no trouble convicting them of that offence if you ask me.

If they'd been handling lead then there would have been traces on their gloves, but I guess that would have cost lab time to check, and even then also be considered circumstantial evidence.

I know it's not possible to charge them for the actual crime they were "probably" thinking of undertaking, thats why other avenues of opportunity need to be investigated, or created.

Otherwise we are just handing over the streets to the criminals. .

Nobody's proved they are criminals yet. That's rather the whole point, in case you hadn't noticed.

Nobody's proved they are criminals yet. That's rather the whole point, in case you hadn't noticed.

Quite right. However 20 years ago, the police would act as judge, jury and executioner in cases like this. This caused a lot of problems wrt accountability, perceptions of injustice etc, but this is a prime example of where it worked better.

Quite right. However 20 years ago, the police would act as judge, jury and executioner in cases like this. This caused a lot of problems wrt accountability, perceptions of injustice etc, but this is a prime example of where it worked better.

Not necassarily.

And exactly how are the police going to act as judge, jury and executioner? Give them a good kicking? I'm sure that would help!

The one good thing from this is that if a crime were being commited, it was prevented from going any further. Surely this can be deemed a small victory.

...

The one good thing from this is that if a crime were being commited, it was prevented from going any further. Surely this can be deemed a small victory.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, funny guy. And what do think was going on in the 12 police man-hours it was taking to fill out all their forms?

Quite right. However 20 years ago, the police would act as judge, jury and executioner in cases like this. This caused a lot of problems wrt accountability, perceptions of injustice etc, but this is a prime example of where it worked better.

It didn't work better. Anyone wishing to claim the opposite is welcome to go and ask the Birmingham Six or the Guildford Four, or Stefan Kiscko, or ....

:rolleyes:

It didn't work better. Anyone wishing to claim the opposite is welcome to go and ask the Birmingham Six or the Guildford Four, or Stefan Kiscko, or ....

:rolleyes:

A) I didn't claim it was better in all cases

B) All those cases went before judge and jury and were handled by the CID or serious crime squads and then the CPS so aren't relevant to what I'm talking about, which is about local policemen on the beat making sure little scrotes think twice about petty criminal acts in the local community.

so :rolleyes: to you with knobs on.

I think the police have their hands tied due to lack of funds. If this was a more serious crime scenes of crime would have found a way of showing forensicly the lead found nearby was handled by the men on the roof. Even a drop of sweat would provide DNA. Another thing i can imagine the police didnt want dirty lead on their uniforms.

It'll be interesting to see what charges they manage to bring against the man on Harriet Harman's roof, that they couldn't againt these guys.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7442435.stm

Are we really to say if I catch somebody in my house looking through my drawers, no charges will be made if I had left my front door unlocked?

If that's the case trespass needs to be criminal and not civil imho.

As I said, just because it is difficult to charge these people, it doesn't mean to say we should make it easy for them.

I read this in the Daily Mail on Saturday...

"When three masked men were caught on the roof of an ancient church that had been stripped of lead worth £100,000, villagers felt their prayers had been answered.

Police arrived in time to catch the trio - in balaclavas and masks - red-handed.

Lead had been taken off and rolled up nearby ready to be taken away.

But to the astonishment of residents they only got a caution because officers decided they may just have been admiring the view.

After ten thefts of lead in as many months from St Helen's Church in Treeton, South Yorkshire, locals had become so desperate they had even set up their own undercover operation to catch them.

However, police let the suspects off because of 'insufficient evidence'. "


Admiring the view?

Whatever is the world coming to? :loopy:

I read this in the Daily Mail on Saturday...

"When three masked men were caught on the roof of an ancient church that had been stripped of lead worth £100,000, villagers felt their prayers had been answered.

Police arrived in time to catch the trio - in balaclavas and masks - red-handed.

Lead had been taken off and rolled up nearby ready to be taken away.

But to the astonishment of residents they only got a caution because officers decided they may just have been admiring the view.

After ten thefts of lead in as many months from St Helen's Church in Treeton, South Yorkshire, locals had become so desperate they had even set up their own undercover operation to catch them.

However, police let the suspects off because of 'insufficient evidence'. "


Admiring the view?

Whatever is the world coming to? :loopy:


Exactly. View of what? Treeton!

Orrrrr.....it's the "Daily mail" reporting yet more bull**** and stiring up more hatred and disprespect towards the police...

instead of reporting on actual issues....

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, funny guy. And what do think was going on in the 12 police man-hours it was taking to fill out all their forms?

I am happy to have a reasoned discusion on this if you are.

Do you want to stop being childish now and leave the personal insults out of this?

Whatever is the world coming to? :loopy:


It isn't "coming to" anything. It has, for about a thousand years, actually been a world where you cannot be convicted of a crime unless it's proven beyond doubt that you actually committed one.

Plenty of other countries where that is not so. Zimbabwe, Burma and North Korea spring to mind. Call me daft, but I don't want to live in one of them.

Threads merged

Almost all arrests and quite a few convictions are as a result of circumstantial evidence, simply because it is quite rare for criminals to be caught in the act. There can be scientific evidence produced later, maybe, to back up the circumstantial evidence, but at the time of an arrest, the police are usually acting on strong suspicioun. Why else would they bother to question a suspect or take samples.....etc...if they were sure ?
I would have thought that the police in the Treeton church case could at least have arrested the men on suspicion of attempted theft, going equipped for theft or perhaps being on ' enclosed ' premises for an unlawful purpose ? Not being a lawyer, I don't know the full situation as regards the law but it does seem rather odd.
Incidentally, what happened to the old ' suss ' law where many people seemed to be convicted for merely hanging around a car ....or so on...in a suspicious manner ? The men on the roof were a bit suspicious, were they not ? I wonder how the same police would react if they heard a cry of pain or distress in the distance and suddenly 3 men came tearing round the corner ? No forensic evidence at this stage ! Maybe they are jogging ? Would they just let them merrily run on ? Probably !

I am happy to have a reasoned discusion on this if you are.

Do you want to stop being childish now and leave the personal insults out of this?

Sometimes you've got a decision to make; in this case whether to enter into a lengthy thesis about the way Functionality decreases at an ever increasing rate vs Accountability, or whether to just throw in a glib line. I took the easy option.

It'll be interesting to see what charges they manage to bring against the man on Harriet Harman's roof, that they couldn't againt these guys.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7442435.stm

Are we really to say if I catch somebody in my house looking through my drawers, no charges will be made if I had left my front door unlocked?

If that's the case trespass needs to be criminal and not civil imho.

As I said, just because it is difficult to charge these people, it doesn't mean to say we should make it easy for them.

Its still burglary if someone enters your property if you left the door open. Many years ago when there was a charge of breaking and entering (now replaced with burglary) many burglars would have been found not guilty if they argued the point ie they never broke to enter. However i do not think the law is being used to its full extent these days, it has to be blamed on funds surely?

Shock News ! It's just been reported that the police have been taking another look at the Treeton Church Roof incident. Apparently they have arrested a number of men.
Could this be the beginning of a new trend ? Is this the start of a return to common sense in the way we deal with crime ? Will I NOT now be able to say I was looking at the twinkly stars if I'm found on the Nat-West roof at midnight ?
Will I no longer get a caution if they catch me staggering through the streets at 3.am. with a body in a sack ? [ " Just popping it down to the incinerator, officer. " ].
Will ' Treeton ' be the watchword of a revolution by Mr. & Mrs. Average ? As they say, " Don't hold your breath. "

Shock News !

Police take another look at men on church roof

POLICE who let off three men caught on the roof of a theft-plagued church today admitted they are re-investigating the case.
Churchgoers were angry when the balaclava-clad men were let go with a warning after they were found on the roof of Treeton Parish Church in Rotherham.

The centuries-old church has been a target for lead thieves - and the roof is covered with tarpaulin until it can be repaired.

Police said there was not enough evidence to prosecute the men and they could say they were on the roof admiring the view.

But they now say they have 'revisited' the case and a number of arrests had been made.

Chief Insp Jason Harwin said: "We are realistic and know that sometimes we have to revisit and review an incident to identify any shortfalls in the service we may have provided.

"Following further information, evidence has come to light which has initiated further investigations into the offence concerned.

"While this investigation continues with arrests already being made, we would like to assure the people of Treeton that we do take these matters seriously and are determined to bring offenders to justice."

The church has been a target for thieves 10 times in less than a year after lead prices soared.

Police say they have even staked out the church on occasions to try and catch those responsible.

Churchwarden's wife Carole Robinson said: "While we are delighted that the police are now taking action, everyone feels it is the publicity that helped. Since the publicity the police have taken it much more seriously."


http://www.thestar.co.uk/headlines/Police-take-another-look-at.4183659.jp

It isn't just churches which lead thieves are targeting.

I've recently been away from home due to a bereavement, and when I got home around midnight I found rainwater cascading into my lounge from the bay window ceiling. Fortunately, damage to home contents was slight, although the ceiling plaster has fallen down.

When I climbed up the ladder next day, I was gobsmacked to discover that all the lead roofing above the bay window had disappeared, and I'd only got bare wooden boards - which were clearly insufficient to protect the house from the elements.

I'm currently having the damage fixed (but not with replacement lead - as once bitten, twice shy!). If I ever found someone on my roof, I would instantly ring the police in the expectation of an arrest being made. I wouldn't expect the police to inform me that the intruder might actually be admiring the view!

Thieving sods. I am so mad right now. :rant:

Okay, I just experienced a crime this morning, of 2 youths who just took my iron gate away. So there is definitely some people in the S2 area who is targetting irons items in the area.

I was still sleeping when someone knocked on my door, to which I ignored. I got up to peer through my window, and saw 2 youths who were lurking around. Both in black, both in sports cap, and also one with a cigarette in his mouth. They peered into the truck in front of my house to see if there was anything to nick, but then didn't. They then looked dodgy, and I knew something was up, so I watched and next thing I know, they looked innocently and walked off with my loose gate! >.< !

I can't believe it, so I quickly changed and chase. I couldn't see them on the road in the direction that they went off. I don't want to insinuate but they definitely definitely live in this area as I do, cos I cannot imagine them walking off that far with it cos it's an iron gate!

Now what do I do? I should have taken a pic of them when I was watching from the window as evidence, stupidly, I forgot. :rant::rant::rant:

I've been thinking whether to hang around this area in case they show up again, cos I am sure that they live locally. At least to get a pic of who they are and how they are. Any advice as to what to do right is most welcomed.

too much trouble the police prefer to go for the motorist easier target

..........

Now what do I do? ........

Report it to the police.
Tell them you saw the culprits and they may bring a folder of mugshots for you to have a look at.
Claim a bigger, lockable gate from your insurance and make sure that it is tack-welded so it cannot be lifted off.

Thanks for that info.

I am so calmer now, cos I was really flapping just now. I got my running shoes on just to check to see if I can see the culprits around the area just so I can take a mug shot of them. :mad: I couldn't find them.

I went into my local corner shop and asked if she saw anyone, and she said no. She then told me about the history of missing gates here in the past. Sigh.

Then I went to the sandwich shop and asked, and the lady gave me the 0114 220 2020 number of this little ad she has from the police. I don't know whether to call this number, as it seemed like some kind of local business scheme with the police. So I left this number. She also said that I should get a crime number from the police for the insurance. I haven't even considered this at all. So I said thanks, and grumpily walked back home.

So I just went home and stuffed my face with a sausage and egg sarnie and a cuppa tea. :rant:

Anyway, to cut a long story short, I rang the 101 equivalent number, which I found on the net and asked her whether it is the right number to call. The lady asked what had happened, so I told her the whole story. So she said yes, it is the number to contact, and she took my details. (I think it must've gone onto a database - GOOD!) I asked her about the crime number, and she told me that someone will ring back today to get the full details and issue me a proper crime number.

Before I did this, I checked that Safer Neighbourhood Website that I saw earlier this week, and it is no use, cos I checked to find the right team's detail and I can't find my street on the map. I typed in my postcode, and it gave me Gleadless' details, and I don't fall into the remit of that team's area coverage. Anyway, I gave up on that website and found a website for 101. I didn't want to raise a big bill on 101 from my mobile, so I rang the following instead:
If you need an update on a case but are calling from outside of the Sheffield 101 area, call the Sheffield 101 contact centre: 0114 261 0622
http://www.101.gov.uk/101-areas/sheffield/index.html

I've been thinking about the whole incidence and predicted what had happened inbetween. They knocked on my door to check that no one is in. Cos the gate was actually loose on the side of my drive for a while. They must've moved it to the front of my house when no one responded. When I checked and looked at them through my window, I should've banged on the window when they were checking for people either side. Cos when they walked off with my gate, they didn't pick it up from round the corner.

The little scroates... and if I see them... I will mark their face, now that I know their side profile. Ugh, I could kick myself. I really thought that they were going to nick something from the workman's van, and that led me to believe something else. I should've been more weary about my iron gates.

So for anyone else reading, please note my example and Redrobbo's example and be vigilant! I remember a conversation on the train before with some random stranger about people nicking metal pieces just because there seems to be a demand for them now that China is increasing its manufacturing processes etc, and metal is increasing in value, but its bloomin ridiculous!

Now I've heard it all.. copper pipings, lead roofing, iron gates????