Cable Forum - View Single Post - "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"

papa smurf · 31-01-2009, 18:31

[QUOTE=Derek S;34725234]Ok so you are quite happy for a huge increase in the amount of CCTV cameras and filming taking place at every road junction in the land.
.................................................. ..................................
it is estimated that 4,200,000 cctv cameras operate in the uk if you need more i wont argue..

QUOTE=Derek
Oh and you can't just pick up forensics out of thin air, there isn't always any lasting evidence.
Fists and feet can be used to assault people, are you going to fingerprint them?

.................................................. ...................................
so we come back to concoct a story

QUOTE=Derek
How. In the original link two cops saw a driver on a phone. He said he wasn't. Whats the difference to two cops finding someone in a building but when he gets to court he says he wasn't there.
..........................................
even traffic wardens have helmet /hat cams[get some tec]
and if your in a building your leaving forensic unless your in stealth mode

QUOTE=Derek
There wasn't insufficient evidence though. Two witnesses both swore, under oath, they saw the accused driving whilst using a phone. Plenty of people are convicted every day in courts on the evidence of two people with no other corroboration. This shouldn't have been any different.
..........................
swore under oath -come on get serious

31-01-2009, 18:31	#162
papa smurf vox populi vox dei Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: the last resort Services: every thing Posts: 14,861	Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" [QUOTE=Derek S;34725234]Ok so you are quite happy for a huge increase in the amount of CCTV cameras and filming taking place at every road junction in the land. .................................................. .................................. it is estimated that 4,200,000 cctv cameras operate in the uk if you need more i wont argue.. QUOTE=Derek Oh and you can't just pick up forensics out of thin air, there isn't always any lasting evidence. Fists and feet can be used to assault people, are you going to fingerprint them? .................................................. ................................... so we come back to concoct a story QUOTE=Derek How. In the original link two cops saw a driver on a phone. He said he wasn't. Whats the difference to two cops finding someone in a building but when he gets to court he says he wasn't there. .......................................... even traffic wardens have helmet /hat cams[get some tec] and if your in a building your leaving forensic unless your in stealth mode QUOTE=Derek There wasn't insufficient evidence though. Two witnesses both swore, under oath, they saw the accused driving whilst using a phone. Plenty of people are convicted every day in courts on the evidence of two people with no other corroboration. This shouldn't have been any different. .......................... swore under oath -come on get serious __________________ To be or not to be, woke is the question Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer. The slings and arrows of outrageous wokedome, Or to take arms against a sea of wokies. And by opposing end them.