Private security masquerading as police

Shameful behaviour here, can't see the pi.., sorry, police, treating members of the royal family like this, no matter what they do.

https://youtu.be/esERcLop47g

Anyway, I'm just curious about one specific point in the video, what is the legal ststus of 'detained'? Is that some kind of half-way state between non-arrested and arrested?

Shameful behaviour here, can't see the pi.., sorry, police, treating members of the royal family like this, no matter what they do.

 

https://youtu.be/esERcLop47g

 

Anyway, I'm just curious about one specific point in the video, what is the legal ststus of 'detained'? Is that some kind of half-way state between non-arrested and arrested?

How did you come to the conclusion there were private security?

Yeah, I get the impression, that the police are often tasked with looking after the interests of business. Not sure what they were protesting in the video (fraking maybe?), but it does seem he police were being very one-sided; only protecting the interests of one party, as such, even though they purport to be police, they are in effect, acting as private security.

However, I'm more interested in the legal status of being 'detained'. Anyone know amuthing about that? Does it have any legal substance, or is it just more bully-boy tactics from the, so called, 'police'?

Easy, calls of suspicious person in area late at night. Said person trying car doors.

Police arrive see person trying car doors.

Stop him and talk to him and he cannot give a reasonable excuse for being there and lives nowhere near.

" you are being detained for the purpose of a search as I believe you may have instruments on you used for use in theft " ( going equipped)

There is a lawful power to detain and force ie handcuffs can be used.

If the person has no instruments on him and no offences commited he will be allowed to leave.

Yeah, I get the impression, that the police are often tasked with looking after the interests of business. Not sure what they were protesting in the video (fraking maybe?), but it does seem he police were being very one-sided; only protecting the interests of one party, as such, even though they purport to be police, they are in effect, acting as private security.

 

However, I'm more interested in the legal status of being 'detained'. Anyone know amuthing about that? Does it have any legal substance, or is it just more bully-boy tactics from the, so called, 'police'?

I get where you are coming from now. The police in that scenario would most likely claim they were temporarily detaining somebody on suspicion of an offence. They can do this while searching a car or doing a breath test etc... It's kind of a period where they can confirm whether an offence has happened before actually arresting somebody.

As for the private police bit in the scenario in the video the police would probably claim they were preventing obstruction of the highway.

Now onto what I thought you were taking about initially and that is whether they were real police at all. I watched the video carefully and could make no sense of some of the markings on the shoulders of the police - no number but two red diamonds for example. I thought police were supposed to display a number at all times.

I suspect some of them weren't police at all, maybe some kind of support group or PCSOs.

I get where you are coming from now. The police in that scenario would most likely claim they were temporarily detaining somebody on suspicion of an offence. They can do this while searching a car or doing a breath test etc... It's kind of a period where they can confirm whether an offence has happened before actually arresting somebody.

 

As for the private police bit in the scenario in the video the police would probably claim they were preventing obstruction of the highway.

 

Now onto what I thought you were taking about initially and that is whether they were real police at all. I watched the video carefully and could make no sense of some of the markings on the shoulders of the police - no number but two red diamonds for example. I thought police were supposed to display a number at all times.

 

I suspect some of them weren't police at all, maybe some kind of support group or PCSOs.

The two red diamonds indicate an inspector. They do not have collar numbers like ordinary PCs.

When asked if he had been drinking, the guy clearly said tea, not two !

However, he brought the actual arrest on himself by refusing the breath test.

The two red diamonds indicate an inspector. They do not have collar numbers like ordinary PCs.

Ah OK, so the one doing the bullying and lying was an inspector? He invented lies actually on camera.

He needs to be sacked. His behaviour was an utter disgrace.

https://www.gov.uk/stopped-by-police-while-driving-your-rights/breath-tests

The police can stop you at any time and ask you to take a breath test (‘breathalyse’ you) if:

they think you’ve been drinking

you’ve committed a traffic offence

you’ve been involved in a road traffic accident

If you refuse to take a breath test, or fail to supply a sample of breath and don’t have a ‘reasonable excuse’, you can be arrested. A reasonable excuse could be a genuine physical or mental condition stopping you from giving a sample.

The breath test gives a result straight away. If it shows you’re not over the drink drive limit, you may be allowed to go.

If you fail the breath test, you’ll be taken to a police station and given a final breath test. If it’s positive, you will be charged.

Charged with what? at this point they only think you have been driving, surely they would then be required to prove that you have been driving.

Shameful behaviour here, can't see the pi.., sorry, police, treating members of the royal family like this, no matter what they do.

 

https://youtu.be/esERcLop47g

 

Anyway, I'm just curious about one specific point in the video, what is the legal ststus of 'detained'? Is that some kind of half-way state between non-arrested and arrested?

What were they protesting about anyhow do we know?

This was posted Feb 2014, it is now July 2015.

This was posted Feb 2014, it is now July 2015.

What is your point?