Hey, it's not against human rights to print mugshots, part 94

BBKing · 18-04-2008, 03:31

Amusing stuff from recent GLA transport committee hearings:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Hendy

As an example, bus crime committed in Lewisham is largely done by people who live there. So if we get the images of people who do it and if we can persuade local media, London-wide media, to carry them, the success rate of identification is very high indeed and I think you will all know from your local areas that the local media that we have encouraged to carry the mug shots - the ’Shop a Yob’ stuff - sometimes has 100% success rate; it is absolutely magnificent. We have had parents shopping their own children.
We had a paper boy in Bexleyheath found behind a bush ripping the front page off every copy of the free paper he is supposed to be delivering because it had his picture on. We have school teachers saying, “That one is in my class”. We have members of the community saying, “I know that face”. It is not just about vandalism; it is about some serious crime and quite often I am very interested to see, even in the national papers, when you see good CCTV images of people the police want for serious offences, they are nearly always public transport images.

frogstamper · 18-04-2008, 04:43

There was a news item on CBS a few weeks ago where one of their reporters travelled from Heathrow to Marble Arch, after doing some research it worked out he had been photographed on 346 separate cameras, ranging from public transport cctv, shop cctv and police and city of London cameras. Apparently, we the British are under more surveillance than any other society, lovely eh!!

Derek · 17-06-2009, 18:05

Except those cheeky chappies and chappesses at Liberty think it is and are backing the families of murderers in their attempt to get a new Plasma telly and holiday off the taxpayers.

Here (I know its the Daily Mail but its been reported elsewhere as well)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Daily Hate

Civil rights group Liberty is backing the relatives of two convicted killers who claim their human rights have been breached - after police used the criminals' faces in a poster campaign.

The number of shootings in Greater Manchester dropped by 92 per cent following the arrest of gangsters Colin Joyce and Lee Amos, so they were featured in a billboard which thanked the public for coming forward with evidence against them.

**Damien** · 17-06-2009, 18:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S

Except those cheeky chappies and chappesses at Liberty think it is and are backing the families of murderers in their attempt to get a new Plasma telly and holiday off the taxpayers.

Here (I know its the Daily Mail but its been reported elsewhere as well)

Although I disagree with Liberty sometimes I am generally a fan of their goals, I also don't see the need to make massive posters of already found and convicted criminals for a advertising campaign.

Derek · 17-06-2009, 18:24

If it shows that criminals are not untouchable and that information the public has is useful I'm all for it.

Personally if you are happy to murder another human being I doubt you'll be that bothered about human rights.

**Damien** · 17-06-2009, 18:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S

If it shows that criminals are not untouchable and that information the public has is useful I'm all for it.

Personally if you are happy to murder another human being I doubt you'll be that bothered about human rights.

Not saying I feel sorry for them but I don't see the need, they were already caught. The police deserve credit for getting them behind bars but a poster campaign to inform people of this?

EDIT: Actually, Giving the massive drop in crime as a result of the convictions I think it's a good way to inform people of the benefits of giving the police information. Ignore my previous remarks.

**Maggy** · 17-06-2009, 19:01

Anyway how can the posters infringe the rights of the relatives?They are not identified.

joglynne · 17-06-2009, 19:33

Living in Manchester this story is being given a lot of air time and I have to say I have found myself giving the the spokeswoman from Liberty a few incredulous looks.

These **** terrorised parts of Manchester and, such was the scale of the Gooch gangs intimidation in their neighbourhood, people were scared to death of crossing them or giving evidence against them. The relatives of these two were already well known where they live and any subsequent actions the Police took after these men were imprisoned which upset these men's relatives pales into insignificance when you consider the fact that these men choose to put their relatives in this position by choosing the lifestyle in the first place.

Derek · 03-12-2009, 11:20

And now the Ministry of Justice (sounds a bit 1984-ish doesn't it) says that good reasons are needed to print mugshots.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8392012.stm

Quote:

Police forces that "name and shame" criminals must remove the details from websites after a month, new rules say.
But data protection and human rights laws mean there are restrictions on what is published, how it is made public and for how long.
Officers will also need a specific reason to publish photographs.

Personally I'd tattoo any convictions on their foreheads and be done with it.

03-12-2009, 11:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S

And now the Ministry of Justice (sounds a bit 1984-ish doesn't it)

Strangely, every time I hear or see that (Ministry of Justice) it actually makes my skin crawl....

Dai · 03-12-2009, 12:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Earl of Bronze

Strangely, every time I hear or see that (Ministry of Justice) it actually makes my skin crawl....

Agreed. Shades of the 'Ministry of Truth' in Orwell's 1984 to my mind.

How many of us would agree with their version of justice in this brave new world?

03-12-2009, 13:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaiNasty

Agreed. Shades of the 'Ministry of Truth' in Orwell's 1984 to my mind.

How many of us would agree with their version of justice in this brave new world?

well considering that in "1984" truth and was whatever the government wanted you to believe and very little to do with justice, i do think that comparisons can be drawn.
In 1984 Winston Smith rebelled against a authoritarian society were every action and thought was monitored by the party ,today we have cctv everywhere ,monitoring of peoples Internet ,what they put in rubbish bins,DNA samples taken for the smallest of offences
In Orwell's 1984 Oceania was a super state of England and America ,and since the second world war England and America have had a "special relationship"with some cynics comparing England to the "51st state of the USA" .I personally think the superstate is more comparable to modern Europe were we are governed from Brussels with stupid little rules for everything ,individuals own rights being eroded in the name of human rights for all and these rules being implemented without any consultation from the "proletariat"to use Orwell's phrase
We have "government spin" which could be interpreted as Orwells "Newspeak" the art of telling selected truths to make us believe what they want ,something it has to be said the labour party excell in