Police chief going above and beyond....your thoughts please!

W

Walks99

Longterm Registered User
Hi All,

I've been following this story (becasue it's local) and because I simply do not believe that anyone, no matter who they are, is able to skirt the law in such a way that they might get away with the most evil of crimes!

In a nut shell.....

Computers were seized as part of a raid and before the Police could do anything with them, the suspect (who was also an expert witness in IT matters) obtained a high court order to have them handed back, possibly with the fact that the information on the disks could not be used as evidence. Giving him time to destroy the evidence maybe!?

My view is that we are far too concerned about insulting people than catching people who are so evil would make the Devil look like an angel.

Attributed to the BBC

--Start--
BBC NEWS | England | Bristol | Police chief served with summons


[h1]Police chief served with summons [/h1]

_45830657_41172944.jpg
Mr Port said he is taking independent legal advice

A high court summons has been served on Avon and Somerset's chief constable after he refused to return computers thought to contain child abuse images. Chief Constable Colin Port, who could face jail for contempt of court, received the summons on Tuesday.
Mr Port has refused to return 87 hard drives and 2,500 photographs which were seized in a separate investigation.
In a statement he said he was taking independent legal advice and would address the allegations in court.


--End--

I am fully supportive of what he's doing (the Police Chief) and think that he stnds for what the Police should represent, to Protect and Serve, and for once the Police not getting a bad wrap for the wrong reasons.

I'll back him to the end for what he is doing. Let's hope for a positive outcome.

Your views may differ to mine so I'd be interested to hear them.

Stay safe all

Walks
 
As Chief Constable he is fully aware of how the legal system works hence being able to get a High Court Order to get the computers back before they were properly examined.

I just wonder why he did,nt want them examined?

Surely if they were examined that would have dispelled any doubt of his integrity and behaviour, as it is at present it seems to leave rather unpleasant thoughts.

Who knows what really goes on behind closed doors?
 
Yet again it shows how the law works in favour of the said possible criminals, it is totally unjust, and as far as i am concerned crimes of this nature against young children who are far too young to say yes or no and in some cases are even below the age of criminal responsibilty and understanding of what is happeningto them is just the lowest form of life. They try and justify their actiona in so many ways, like they were born that way and it is just their preference and maybe that is the case i really wouldn't like to give an opinion on that because i am not a paedophile, what i do know is that they are the adults in this situation and therefor have an adult responsibility to safeguard the younger and weaker of our society not exploit them in such a way (pheww rant over, i just hate how they behave). The police in general do a fantastic job to deal with these people and this is just a kick in the teeth and a ridiculous thing to happen. After all WHY would you go to the trouble of getting a high court order to get back your computer IF you had nothing to hide? That just reeks of guilt in my opinion, unreal
 
Good on yer boss.
According to 'The Wright Stuff' this morning, the pictures are kiddy porn, and this so call expert witness, is saying that it's part of his job:confused:?
Yeah right. To be that quick off the mark with the high court order, he must have already had a plan in mind incase he's rumbled. Filthy piece of low life:mad:. I bet this scum wouldn't have got the order if the judge's kids had been involved:mad:

Good luck Sir. Even though you're ACPO maybe the fed could stand with you as well?

Starlight Out
 
[h1]Police chief served with summons [/h1]

_45830657_41172944.jpg
Mr Port said he is taking independent legal advice

A high court summons has been served on Avon and Somerset's chief constable after he refused to return computers thought to contain child abuse images. Chief Constable Colin Port, who could face jail for contempt of court, received the summons on Tuesday.
Mr Port has refused to return 87 hard drives and 2,500 photographs which were seized in a separate investigation.
In a statement he said he was taking independent legal advice and would address the allegations in court.


--End--

I am fully supportive of what he's doing (the Police Chief) and think that he stnds for what the Police should represent, to Protect and Serve, and for once the Police not getting a bad wrap for the wrong reasons.

I'll back him to the end for what he is doing. Let's hope for a positive outcome.

Your views may differ to mine so I'd be interested to hear them.

Stay safe all

Walks[/quote]


Walks99........ I keep reading your post and im a little confused???????

"I'll back him to the end for what he is doing. Lets hope for a positive outcome."

I noticed you thanked Annie for her post on this thread, just that your comment as quoted does,nt come across right........ unless its me?

Anyone else confused???

Peadophile child abusing scum bag B#stards (steam coming out of ears) deserve a bit more justice than whatever the courts can ever sentence.

I agree Disclose their addresses and leave the public to them !!!!
 
Oldman said:
As Chief Constable he is fully aware of how the legal system works hence being able to get a High Court Order to get the computers back before they were properly examined.

I just wonder why he did,nt want them examined?

Surely if they were examined that would have dispelled any doubt of his integrity and behaviour, as it is at present it seems to leave rather unpleasant thoughts.

Who knows what really goes on behind closed doors?
Click to expand...


Oldman you do understand that the chief inspector siezed these computers from, FROM a pervert. they are not his computers.
The pervert NOT the chief inspector is the one who has got the court order against the CI, making him return the fotos and hard drives to the pervert.
The CI has refused to return them, and is now due to be charged with contempt of court.
THE CI is NOT the pervert.
This isn't hopefully going to be another case of were the judge is as big a pervert as the accused, wasn't it Holland or the netherlands that had this problem recently, and it has shadows of the Jersey ? childrens home abuse case, or was it one of the isles. Authority figures in cahoots.:mad:
Stop the speed reading, its just like eating too fast it leads to upsets:D
 
Oldman said:
[h1]Police chief served with summons [/h1]

_45830657_41172944.jpg
Mr Port said he is taking independent legal advice

A high court summons has been served on Avon and Somerset's chief constable after he refused to return computers thought to contain child abuse images. Chief Constable Colin Port, who could face jail for contempt of court, received the summons on Tuesday.
Mr Port has refused to return 87 hard drives and 2,500 photographs which were seized in a separate investigation.
In a statement he said he was taking independent legal advice and would address the allegations in court.


--End--

I am fully supportive of what he's doing (the Police Chief) and think that he stnds for what the Police should represent, to Protect and Serve, and for once the Police not getting a bad wrap for the wrong reasons.

I'll back him to the end for what he is doing. Let's hope for a positive outcome.

Your views may differ to mine so I'd be interested to hear them.

Stay safe all

Walks
Click to expand...


Walks99........ I keep reading your post and im a little confused???????

"I'll back him to the end for what he is doing. Lets hope for a positive outcome."

I noticed you thanked Annie for her post on this thread, just that your comment as quoted does,nt come across right........ unless its me?

Anyone else confused???

Peadophile child abusing scum bag B#stards (steam coming out of ears) deserve a bit more justice than whatever the courts can ever sentence.

I agree Disclose their addresses and leave the public to them !!!![/QUOTE]


me also, very, very confused!
 
Oddjob said:
Oldman you do understand that the chief inspector siezed these computers from, FROM a pervert. they are not his computers.
The pervert NOT the chief inspector is the one who has got the court order against the CI, making him return the fotos and hard drives to the pervert.
The CI has refused to return them, and is now due to be charged with contempt of court.
THE CI is NOT the pervert.
This isn't hopefully going to be another case of were the judge is as big a pervert as the accused, wasn't it Holland or the netherlands that had this problem recently, and it has shadows of the Jersey ? childrens home abuse case, or was it one of the isles. Authority figures in cahoots.:mad:
Stop the speed reading, its just like eating too fast it leads to upsets:D
Click to expand...

A Hampshire cop (intel officer) and a hampshire judge, oh and i think a minister was also involved at some point,!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
scotti653 said:
A Hampshire cop (intel officer) and a hampshire judge, oh and i think a minister was also involved at some point,!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...


A minister, well that seals it then,
I think this is a job for The Telegraph.
Or the Whistle Blowers Weekly as its known in parlaiment.
 
Oldman said:
Confused you will be!!!

Best get back to the Jack and Jill books
Click to expand...

I'm confused because at no point was a chief inspector mentioned in the report, and it seems to be now very relevant? Maybe u cud enlighten me? As for jack and jill, I'm on book 2.

Posted via Mobile Device
 
scotti653 said:
I'm confused because at no point was a chief inspector mentioned in the report, and it seems to be now very relevant? Maybe u cud enlighten me? As for jack and jill, I'm on book 2.

Posted via Mobile Device
Click to expand...


Sorry I meant to say Chief Constable and not Chief inspector.
The courts are saying the evidence against the IT expert (his computer that the evidence is on) was obtained illegally and the Chief constable has to give it all back, or find himself in contempt.
The law is defending the alleged culprit.
Sure theres more to it, but thats it as it shows right now.
Jack and jill book 2, is that the one were jack takes jill around the corner, and says ''look at this Janet'' said John ''bet you've not seen one that big before. Janet laughed and laughed, as they were the smallest conkers she had ever seen.
Is that the one.:D
 
Oddjob said:
Sorry I meant to say Chief Constable and not Chief inspector.
The courts are saying the evidence against the IT expert (his computer that the evidence is on) was obtained illegally and the Chief constable has to give it all back, or find himself in contempt.
The law is defending the alleged culprit.
Sure theres more to it, but thats it as it shows right now.
Jack and jill book 2, is that the one were jack takes jill around the corner, and says ''look at this Janet'' said John ''bet you've not seen one that big before. Janet laughed and laughed, as they were the smallest conkers she had ever seen.
Is that the one.:D
Click to expand...

Ah now that makes sense, the BBC report was a bit light on info, so wasn't sure if there was another press release, or i'd lost the plot, Book two is good, but jack really let jill down in book 2! Scarred for life! But then she met billy big bolloxs!!! We should lend them
to oldman he might enjoy them?



Posted via Mobile Device
 
Leave the elderly and infirm alone, it's not their fault they smell of piss and peppermints and get eaten by cats now is it:rolleyes: You'll be there one day:D

God i wonder how bad OJ will be when he is a pensioner:eek:
 
If i have my reading glasses on correctly today, i say hats off to the Chief Whip.

However with first hand experience of our beloved police force's it might also be that the reason the Chief Whip does not wish to return the hard drives etc is because of the man hours put into building a case against the individual only to be proved wrong, has everyone forgotten the headline grabbing 24 terrorist suspects caught red handed fiasco????

Just for those that have something better to do than read the papers, they were all found to be innocent and no charges were brought against any of them although we were told they had posed an imminent threat to our society.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ahh but Carl they are like REAL criminals the laws different fro really nasty bad boys, they get away with it, all that hard earned terrorist funding you see... pays for lawyers with no soul
 
Hey Carl.
Not being able to build a case to the point of proof under the law, is not the same as innocent. There are a miriad of reasons why a case is withdrawn.
Just look at the scum that killed Stephen Lawrence. Innocent under the law, but very obviously guilty as sin:mad:.
Please remember that the actions of this Chief Constable, are driven by a wish to protect the most vulnerable members of society. Unless he's incredibly lucky, it's also professional suicide. Again a police officer is willing to go to the wall for his beliefs. Now that takes some bottle.

Starlight Out
 
Back
Top