Why you should be concerned about the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021:

The above bill, currently going through Parliament will place some very unnecessary restrictions on public protest. I would urge everyone who cares about democracy to write to your MP to raise your concerns. I would recommend everyone read what these changes are. Here is a summary from a Government factsheet. My comments are in Red Italics.

• Widen the range of conditions that the police can impose on static protests to match existing police powers to impose conditions on marches.

This measure will enable the police to impose conditions such as start and finish times and maximum noise levels on static protests. The police already have the power to impose such conditions on marches. Barneteye comment -  This is a totally unneccesary limit on freedom to protest and is likely to be abused by the authorities. Large demonstrations and protests often see people come from far and wide. Crowds build up over a period. The only time when the police should ever impose time restrictions is when there is a clear and present risk of serious disorder. There is no reason why the Police should be able to impose rules on assembly, just to suit their own agenda. Back in 2012, the Barnet Eye led protests against the closure of the Friern Barnet Library, by announcing we'd be holding a People's Library on the green outside the Library on the Saturday Morning following the closure. 400 people spontaneously turned up. Under this law, the Police would be able to stop what was a perfectly peaceful and joyous protest.  This protest ultimately lead to the saving of the library. Under the new rules, I could have been carted off to jail.

HMICFRS’ inspection found that “protests are fluid, and it is not always possible to make this distinction [between static protests and marches]. Some begin as assemblies and become processions, and vice versa. The practical challenges of safely policing a protest are not necessarily greater in the case of processions than in the case of assemblies, so this would not justify making a wider range of conditions available for processions than for assemblies”.

 

• Broaden the range of circumstances in which police may impose conditions on a protest.

This measure will broaden the range of circumstances in which the police can impose conditions on protests, including a single person protest, to include where noise may cause a significant impact on those in the vicinity or serious disruption to the running of an organisation. The Home Secretary will have the power, through secondary legislation, to define and give examples of “serious disruption to the life of the community” and “serious disruption to the activities of an organisation which are carried out in the vicinity of the procession/assembly/one-person protest”. These regulation-making powers will clarify ambiguous cases where, if they arise, it may not be clear whether the threshold for the use of such powers have been reached. This will enable the police to make use of their powers with the confidence that they are doing so legally. Barneteye Comment - This is complete overkill. It states that it can be used where "serious disruption to the activities of an organisation which are carried out in the vicinity of the procession/assembly/one-person protest" Clearly one person with a megaphone can be rather irritating to some people. However, we have a tradition of tolerance for such protests in the UK. This blog has been involved in all manner of protests, sometimes on our own. What is the definition of 'serious disruption?'  Having to walk around the block, having to move to another area to make a phonecall? Not enjoying someone calling you a beastly monster as you go to Work? Just about every right that has been achieved that has improved the quality of life for the majority of UK citizens from the right for women to vote to the decriminalisation of same sex intercourse, justice for wrongly convicted Irishmen and ending of racist police actions has been the result of someone or some organisation having disruption to their business. If this law is passed then all of this progress will be stopped and authorities will be given carte blache to do as they please. You may not like it when protests affect you, but you will like it less when you start to lose your hard earned freedoms.

• Amend the offence relating to the breaching of conditions

This measure will close a loophole which some protesters exploit. Some will cover their ears and tear up written conditions handed to them by the police so that they are likely to evade conviction for breaching conditions on a protest as the prosecution have to prove that the person “knowingly fails to comply with a condition imposed”. The Bill will change the threshold for the offence so that it is committed where a person “knows or ought to have known” that the condition has been imposed. Barneteye - This is simply outrageous in a free society. It seems that if you 'ought to have known'  of a condition or regulation and you breach it, then you are breaking the law. I recall when we started the Save Barnet's Libraries campaign, we lobbied Conservative councillors at their surgeries. I recall a couple of little old ladies, who saw us, asked what we were doing and joined in. Under the new law, they'd could be carted off, if they'd unknowingly breached a 'condition'. The prosecution can claim, and it would be impossible to refute, that if they joined in they should have known. To me this is what police states do, not liberal democracies.

• Restate the common law offence of public nuisance in statute

The Bill will implement a recommendation by the Law Commission to introduce a statutory offence of public nuisance and abolish the existing common law offence. This will provide clarity to the police and potential offenders, giving clear notice of what conduct is forbidden.  Barneteye - I've lived 60 years in the UK and seem a whole raft of progressive measures adoopted as a result of protests that could be deemed public nuisance. Of course, at the time some people were inconvenienced. But can anyone seriously argue that measures such as votes for women and abolition of Victorian laws around sex, were not worth a bit of public nuisance?

• Ensure vehicular entrances to the Parliament Estate remain unobstructed

This measure will enable the police to direct an individual to cease, or not start, obstructing the passage of a vehicle into or out of Parliament and make it an offence not to comply with such a direction. This will protect the right of access to the Parliamentary Estate for MPs, Peers and others with business there, as recommended in the Joint Committee on Human Rights in their 2020 report on Democracy, freedom of expression and freedom of association: Threats to MPs. Barneteye - In some ways, I find this the most offensive provision of all. I am sure MP's hate hearing what the public think of them, as they zoom past in their limo's, but they are accountable to us all. Sitting down peacefully in front of the PM's car, may irritate him, but it is a completely valid form of protest. It seems to me that Parliament is where people should have an inalienable right to protest. To put restrictions on this is totally outrageous. We have plenty of laws if people are being violent, indulging in incitement, harrassing people etc. I am not aware of any instances where MP's have been barricaded in Parliament for weeks on end, starving to death. This is a typical example of out of touch politicians wanting the public kept at arms length. 

So you may ask, what happens if you commit a public nuisance offence?

We are introducing the offence in statute, and abolishing the common law offence, in line with the recommendations of the independent Law Commission. In doing so, we are narrowing the scope of the offence and lowering the maximum penalty from unlimited crown court penalties, to 10 years’ imprisonment. Barneteye comment - Ten years is more than a local paedophile was sentenced to after conviction for assaulting a 7 year old girl. It is completely draconian in its nature. There has been no case made to justify such harsh penalties for causing a bit of nuisance. If people are involved in activities that place life in danger or incite others to do so, there are already laws to deal with this. 

You may ask why the government feels it needs these changes

The highly disruptive tactics used by some protesters cause a disproportionate impact on the surrounding communities and are a drain on public funds. For example, during Extinction Rebellion’s protests of April and October 2019, some of London’s busiest areas were brought to a standstill for several days with the policing operation for the two extended protests costing £37m - more than twice the annual budget of London’s violent crime taskforce. Barneteye comment - The only justification is that it is expensive to police protests. It is telling that Extinction Rebellion are specifically named. I do wonder if there has been a cost put on the damage caused by climate change?

What is public nuisance?

The new statutory offence of public nuisance will cover the same conduct as the existing common law offence of public nuisance. The offence captures conduct which causes serious harm to, endangers the life, health, property or comfort of the public, or obstructs the public in the exercise or enjoyment of rights common to the public. An act or omission is considered to cause serious harm if as a result, a person suffers serious distress, serious annoyance, serious inconvenience or serious loss of amenity. Conduct captured here will include nuisances such as producing excessive noise or smells, or offensive or dangerous behaviour in public, such as hanging from bridges. For instance, previous convictions have been for throwing oneself into a river, or for threatening to jump from motorway bridges. Each of these caused unnecessary burden on, and distraction for, emergency services, in particular the use of police resources that could not be used elsewhere in the community. This denied an amenity to a cross section of the public. Barneteye Comment -  So you can get ten years for causing 'serious annoyance'? Ten years for producing 'excessive noises and smells'? My house backs onto the M1 Motorway and the Thameslink Railway. I was kept up all night last Saturday by work on the Railway. But that is OK. Having a noisy protest, to ask the government not to destroy the environment isn't. Make no mistake, this legislation is not a benign act of tidying up a raft of outdated laws. It is a concerted attack on freedom by a very authoritarian adminstration that believes the public should not hold it to account.

Please sign this petition to oppose this bill

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/579242

You can find out more at the Liberty website

https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Libertys-briefing-on-the-Police-Crime-Sentencing-and-Courts-Bill-Report-Stage-HoC-July-2021.pdf

Thanks to Brian Coleman Mill Hill NW7 is in the top 20 UK Burglary hotspots

As this blog reported last week, our local GLA member (and the man responsible for the parking mayhem in Barnet) Brian Coleman stated that crime was down in Barnet and it's all down to his hard work (full story here - http://barneteye.blogspot.com/2012/01/porkie-pies-of-brian-coleman-gla-member.html ). Imagine how surprised I was to read in the Sun that Mill Hill, where I live is in the top 20 burglary Hotspots.

Here is the image from the Sun's website
(full story here - http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4105484/They-dont-live-appily-in-crime-hit-Apperley.html )

Not only is Mill Hill number 20, Barnet is actually no 14. You can read the whole sorry tale here. What Coleman has to face up to is that if he wants to claim the success for good crime figures, he has to take the rap for the bad ones. As the freedom of information request published by this website in the story listed above shows Coleman has had no meetings with the Met police in Barnet to discuss these appalling figures, it is quite clear he must shoulder some of the blame for being so lazy. It really couldn't be more simple.

If I were Boris Johnson, I'd get shot of Coleman before his ineptitude completely derails his Mayoral bid in May.

Barnet Eye Special - Coppers with Choppers !

The theme for today is policing in Barnet. I try not to criticise the police too much, because they have a tough job. Last year I had a chat with the chief of police and he agreed that Barnet was probably the safest and most pleasant Borough to be in charge of. That doesn't mean that it doesn't have its challenges and issues. In fact Barnet has challenges because it is probably the most economically diverse Borough in the country. The issues for policing the leafy mansions of Totteridge, where gated mansions and private security firms aim to deter burlgars are completely different to issues facing those living in Grahame Park. I was having a chat with a less esteemed member of the constabulary over a pint and he said a very interesting thing. If a millionaire in Totteridge gets burgled and his house gets ransacked, he expects the chief of police to personally conduct the investigation. If a single mum in Grahame park gets burgled and her house gets ransacked, often she's amazed if anyone actually shows up. Even more interesting was his view that criminality pervades every level of society, it's just that those at the bottom of the pile are not as proficient at it and get caught.

He made the point that the crack addict who robs his local off license has a high chance of getting caught sooner or later and will probably end up in prison. The company director engaging in corporate fraud will most likely never get caught. It isn't just such financial crimes where the expectation of justice is so different. When it comes to issues of spousal abuse and wider sexual crimes, this isn't just the domain of the poor in the borough. The difference is that women in the higher levels of society also feel "shamed" and so are less likely to report. The likely remedy is likely to be financial in the form of a divorce settlement or some cash to "shut up and go away".

Then there is the issue of drugs. Is substance abuse less or more common in the towers of Totteridge or the crack dens of Colindale? As a percentage of the population, it is probably pretty similar. Again, there is probably a disconnect between what justice one could expect if caught. A working class person caught with drugs, will probably just accept the punishment, whatever that may be. For the more well heeled members of society, a bevvy of lawyers and implausable excuses will be deployed. The more well heeled, the more it costs the police to persue even the most trivial of issue.

We have a bit of a schizophrenic attitude to the police. Half the time (when we get a speeding ticket) we moan that "they haven't got anything better to do, but if a speeding driver runs over our child we say "why don't they do something". I discussed the seeming obsession with traffic offenses with the police and they pointed out that you are far more likely to get injured or killed by a speeding driver than be murdered or maimed by a maniac.

We all feel safer when we see bobbies on the beat. They add a general feeling of security to us. Last night, as I played football at Powerleague in Pursley Road, we had a Police helicopter hovering nearby for about 10 minutes. I've no idea what they were up to, maybe monitoring traffic on the M1 or A1 after and incident? To me Coppers in choppers always make me feel a tad uneasy. When I watch Police, Camera, Action ! type documentaries and they show helicopters stalking villains with night vision, it reminds me that the big brother society is moving ever closer. Helicopters are expensive toys, which I've never been entirely convinced deliver value for money.

One of my friends who is a policeman (with old school attitudes to crime) tells me that the big problem is not the police at all. It is the fact that criminals are not locked up quickly enough, for long enough or regularly enough. He tells me that in Barnet, most burglaries are caused by no more than a dozen people. To lock each one up costs a fortune and then they are released, with the police knowing full well that there will be a spike in burglary cases, almost immediately. Of all the crimes, burglary is the one which people feel the justice system is most out of kilter on (with the exception of paedophiles). The police tell me they take the issue seriously and can, with justification, claim that it is not their fault if the courts don't lock people up for long enough.

Last year we had the sad spectacle of a murder in a brothel in Burnt Oak. For many Barnet residents, this seemed like a window to another world. I doubt that many of our local politicans have ever ventured out into Burnt Oak for a night out. The delights of a  pint at the Bald Faced Stag on a Saturday night is a pleasure I cannot imagine Brian Coleman savouring. Sadly it is something I believe all of our politicians should do. Last year on the campaign trail in Mill Hill, I had a friendly chat with Tory Councillor John Hart. The subject of Burnt Oak and his colleagues came up. It may surprise you to hear me say it, but I think John is one of the very few Tories who recognise the value of Burnt Oak and its citizens. John told me he always buys his fruit and veg in Burnt Oak. He told me that the Tories should be courting the small traders who run the shops, the hard working Asian community and everyone else working to earn a crust. He told me that if Matthew Offord won in Hendon, it would be because he'd got out and about in Burnt Oak (at Johns suggestion apparently) and that the 2-300 votes he'd gained as a result of talking to people there may be the difference. As it turned out, Offord won by 106 votes. John was right and it "woz Burnt Oak which won it for Souperman".

It is interesting that in the midst of the riots last year, unlike many working class areas, Burnt Oak didn't see large scale rioting. I suspect that this is because there is a sense of community there. I believe that this is a lesson for the Metropolitan Police in all of this. It is easy to retreat to our bunkers when cash is tight. There is a tendency to return to the squad cars and the choppers to police the Borough. This would be a mistake. I believe that the opposite should be the policy. More engagement with the community and more efforts to get people to work with the police. As Matthew Offord won his seat in Burnt Oak, I'd like to see him start to champion the area and put himself at the forefront of efforts to build bridges between the community and the police. There is no easy solution to keeping Barnet safe. The most important thing is for the Police to ensure that ALL SECTIONS of society see the Police as part of the solution and not part of the problem. Last year I was talking to another friend who is a Met Police officer. We were discussing drug dealers. She said that she'd had to go and tell the mother of a 19 year old drug dealer that he'd been murdered. The mother was devastated, she felt it was her own fault for letting her son ever get involved in gangs and drugs. She said she wished she'd turned him in to the police, the first time she'd found him with drugs. Would you? Would I?


I hope to god it's a decision I never have to make and I never have to regret.

Car thefts in Mill Hill - Is it an epidemic

On Thursday evening I had my usual couple of pints of shandy after our five a side kickabout at the Three Hammers pub. As ever there was a hot topic of conversation. To my surprise, it wasn't the behaviour of Carlos Tevez in Munich on Tuesday. It seems that two members of our squad had their cars damaged by thiefs, seemingly working to order. One of my friends had the four wheels stolen from his BMW, in the drive of his house in Mill Hill. The house is on a reasonably busy road, which is a bus route. The insurance company sent a lorry to take the car away. Cost of new wheels £4,000. The team who retrieved his car  said that there are gangs doing this all the time. They know exactly what they want. They will check the location several times before striking. It seems they can remove the wheel at Ferrari F1 speed. Apparently they ship them out to the far east in containers to sell. The £4,000 set of wheels will earn them £500 max.

Several hints from the man who rescued the car, to bear in mind.

1) They only take full sets of wheels. The safest way to park is with one side of the car tight up against a wall, so they can't get in to steal them. He said that if the gang is disturbed they will simply run away as they are only interested in earning quick cash.

2) Use Halfords lock nuts rather than BMW ones. There are only a few types of BMW lock nuts, with Halfords there are 50 or 60, so there is less chance that they'll have the tools. They generally check this before they come to steal the wheels.

3) Often the gangs will knobble security lighting prior to the visit. If you notice that your security lighting has been interfered with in any way, this could indicate that you are being cased for a visit. A typical symptom is when an inaccessable security light gets broken or turned away from the area where the car is.

The other theft was even stranger. Another friend had all of the seats stolen out of their Ford galaxy. It was suggested that these were probably stolen to order, although how someone would lose the first set seems rather odd.

In both cases, it isn't the financial aspect which the victims found to be bad. It was the hassle. Days missed off work, children not taken to school, endless phone calls. In short a complete pain in the backside. If you see anyone behaving strangely, looking closely at your car or its wheels (or your neighbours) let the police know. If you happen to see any vans with people in at odd hours of the night checking out you or your neighbours property, let the police know. If you can get a make of vehicle and registration number, even better. I doubt we'll ever see this type of annoying petty crime ever go away, but the more difficult we make it for the perpetrators the less of it we'll see in our neighbourhoods.

The worlds worst car thiefs?

I was awoken last night by the sound of commotion in the street and our dog growling. The time was about 4.45. I immediately jumped up and looked out of the window. We've two cars, a Galaxy for family/band use and an old, dilapidated Mondeo for running around when the other one is in use. A couple of young herberts were standing by the door of the Mondeo, clearly up to no good. I immediately yelled as loud as I could (I can yell pretty loud) "What the F*** do you think you are doing?" They yelled back, laughingly "Nicking your car mate". At that they ran off down the road. I could see that they'd not managed to do anything so I thought I'd go back to bed. About five minutes later the sound of a car hurtling up the road agian disturbed me. I immediately felt bad as the herberts had clearly nicked someone elses car. As the speeding car returned and screeched to a halt, I thought "maybe they've come back to cause trouble". Looking out of the window, I realised that the speeding car was the Police. They had stopped and were looking around.

At this I went down and and had a word. I explained that I'd seen them. They asked for a description. As I was half asleep at the time I said "White, about 20". The polcieman explained that I'd been lucky. There was a disgarded brick on the floor. Apparently they'd broken in to one car and tried to hotwire it. Fortunately for me, no damage and no problem.

I was impressed with the speed of the arrival of the Police. I feel rather sorry for my neighbours. This type of car theft is very anti social and a real pain. We're taking my son and a group of friends to a party today. If we'd lost the car a group of small boys and girls would have been deeply disappointed (or we'd have had to inconvenience other parents). Why? So some herberts can have a little drive around.

Barnet Eye weekly round up

A few stories caught my eye. The first one was about a 102 year old woman living in North Finchley who was burgled. The type of cowardly scumbag who perpetrates this sort of crime revolt me. Now generally I'm very liberal, but in these cases I'd like to see these scumbags put in the stocks. The police and CPP don't seem to take these sort of incidents seriously (unless someone is killed in the process, sometimes by the home owner). I'd like to see at least the same amount of effort put into solving this as they do into speeding offences and other traffic violations, where the whole country is covered in cameras. Tell me this, if speeding is dangerous, how come the Police think it's OK if they do it?

On a happier note, five of our local young swimmers were were competing at the British Championships in Sheffield, against the likes of Rebecca Adlington. I must confess a vested interest as my daughter was one of them. They all did well and the experience will stand them in good stead for the future.

It seems that Barnet isn't the only place where Porkies & snouts in the trough is a story. It seems that a litter of Porkers are looking for a new home in Potters Bar. When we were growing up, my Dad told me of how he once had a pet pig growing up in Austrailia. He said that they are cleverer than dogs and it was great company. He regaled us with stories of it's tricks. We asked what happened to Percy? He said "That's the best bit, we roasted him for Chistmas". Tears all round. It seems that us Townies don't get country ways.

One last story that really worries me. The proliferation of Cannabis farms in Barnet. I've got very liberal views on drugs, but I am disturbed by the use of systemic pesticides in these factories to control pests. In years to come we'll have a massive price to pay with cancers and other illnesses. When you smoke farmed skunk, you are inhaling dangerously toxic weed killers. This is the only that it is possible to grow these crops so intensively. Please be careful