Obstruction of Public Pavements - is it a criminal offence?

[mikehughescq]

You are incorrect. See post above.

[anon55098131]

@HappyListener

It’s not a road to vigilante culture, it’s a route to facism. If your position is that you want to see absolutism as regards the prosecution of very minor offences, the police force and admin behind it would need to expand exponentially – and the vital consent of the public would evaporate. The end from me - as I find such views very skewed.

Again, you either deliberately or out of ignorance of the facts miss the point entirely. You seem to persist in the notion that you can re-write the law according to your own views. Take it from me - you can’t.

[anon55098131]

@Bjorn

Exactly, that is the police’s job and if I remember correctly the police told you that this was not a police matter. In addition, they urged you not to call 999 unnecessarily. Time to move on, I think…

And they were incorrect on both counts - to which I am seeking an apology for being given incorrect information not compliant with the law.

[mikehughescq]

I doubt the force would need to expand exponentially. It’s just a matter of aligning their priorities with that of the public. The police will enforce anything if asked but if you don’t ask or wrongly assume that asking will somehow demolish heir ability to respond to major stuff then you don’t get.

By the logic of @HappyListener if extra resources would be needed will not be available one might ask what might be the purpose of any minor offence if the police aren’t going to, or going to be asked, to enforce it. The logical conclusion then would be to abolish minor offences. Which ones I wonder? Entirely subjective.

For some years the police insisted that they could not address most crimes against property or the person because it diminished their ability to respond to emergencies. When it came out that in fact you would get a response if you were rich/well off then mysteriously they’ve been advised that their culture must change and they’re now equally mysteriously beginning to take those offences seriously again without any extra resources or any impact on their ability to respond to emergencies. Funny that. Resources aren’t the issue here. Applying the law equitably is.

As already observed, the logic of the wisdom of the forum crowd doesn’t apply here. If you’re not a full time pedestrian then you’ve no real insight into the fact that this so called minor offence is anything but. The definition of minor is an entirely subjective forum construct. The law is objective and sees it differently. The issue then is getting the law enforced and that’s about public pressure.

[anon55098131]

@garcon

They unfortunately need to deal with a lot of nuisance and entitlement trying to block the important phone lines to be able to thankfully still have some resources left to manage at least some of the actual real emergencies, life threatening situations and crime.

Again we see this attitude of people deciding for themselves what constitutes a serious enough offence for the police to be dealing with.

Let’s be quite clear. Any criminal offence should be reported to the police. Whether or not the police have the resources to deal with it is in practice none of your concern. Your responsibility is to merely report crime. Let the authorities handle it from there.

The law exists as it is. You cannot decide how and when to apply the law, according to your own views or priorities. This is fundamental to our justice system. Everybody must abide by the law as it stands.

If you are advocating turning a blind eye to various offences that you don’t personally consider worth the attention of the authorities then that is getting into very dangerous territory indeed. Everybody will have differing views about what it is worth reporting.

Do not attempt to re-write the law. Abide by it.

[Hollow]

If you already knew the answer to the question why did you start the topic?

[mikehughescq]

Have you read any other threads on this forum?

“Which speaker for…”?

“Go listen…”

“Well yes but…”.

People start threads for all sorts reasons. The decision on whether that’s of value to you is your alone but we don’t generally hop on every single thread of no value to us in order to say so.

[bruss]

Are the bricks still on the pathway?

[mikehughescq]

I think you’ll find that making a call to 999 doesn’t stop the police doing anything. They still get to make a choice on what resources to allocate as all the services do.

[garcon]

There lies the problem for some it seems… but let me quote your fellow here:

“Your responsibility is to merely report crime. Let the authorities handle it from there.”

“I don’t expect for them to dodge their responsibilities. No excuses for them not going their jobs. If they don’t like it then get a job elsewhere.”

[porkyg]

[mikehughescq]

Only one brick to move there

[bruss]

Perspective and proportionality to have been abandoned by some.
Use of an emergency response number would’t be my approach.
The responsibility under the legislation is given to the highways authority. That would be my first port of call if I didn’t want to confront the builders or property owner. Local council will have an appropriate department.

[Neilb1906]

Exactly, Ive already highlighted the examples of contradictions in his posts, but he knows best ofcourse.

[Sloop_John_B]

I’m wondering whether we’re all being taken for a ride or did this really happen?

Phone Operator: what emergency service do you require?
Member of public. Police please.
PO: police emergency line, how can we help?
MOP: I’d like to report a criminal offence that’s in progress.
PO: Go ahead.
MOP: whilst out on my walk today I noticed someone, presumably a builder had left a pile of bricks on the pavement and there were some loose ones strewn across the pavement.
PO: Go ahead.
MOP: well this represents a clear and present danger to loss of life or limb.
PO: pause, is there anything else sir?
MOP: No, a crime has been committed which requires police intervention to prevent serious injury or loss of life.
PO: - I’m afraid I fail to see the emergency.
MOP: THERE IS AN IMMEDIATE DANGER TO LIFE AND LIMB FROM THESE STRAY BRICKS STREWN ACROSS THE PATH.
PO: (I’m really not paid enough for this) Sir this is not an emergency and you are taking up valuable emergency line time. I suggest the council or 101 are the appropriate avenues to take. Goodbye.

.sjb

[anon55098131]

@bruss

Perspective and proportionality to have been abandoned by some.

Perhaps so. But not, I hope, the law. You must abide by the law as it stands. Perspective and proportionality do not allow you to modify or interpret the law according to your personal beliefs unfortunately.

[Neilb1906]

Nobody is saying dont abide by the law are they.

You keep banging on about this.

Yes laws are there, but not all are enforced in every circumstance. As you well know the CPS itself applies a common sense filter to prospective prosecutions, its called the Public Interest test. If a case fails that it doesnt reach a court. Even though a crime has been committed.

[anon55098131]

@Marq

This is a very silly thread

Why are you wasting your time contributing then?

[anon55098131]

@Neilb1906

Yes laws are there, but not all are enforced in every circumstance.

That is not your decision to make. Or mine. It is as you point out a matter for the justice system.

This means that when a crime is committed it is not your resposibility to decide whether or not it should be actioned against.

[Neilb1906]

But you wanted to make that decision, didn’t you?