Had to laugh!
-
Anti-terror police blow up tourist's broken down car outside Parliament I guess the Police are responsible for replacing his car. After all, it is not illegal to break down!
============================== Nothing to say.
-
Anti-terror police blow up tourist's broken down car outside Parliament I guess the Police are responsible for replacing his car. After all, it is not illegal to break down!
============================== Nothing to say.
The Olympics will be fun.
regards Torsten When I'm not working
-
Anti-terror police blow up tourist's broken down car outside Parliament I guess the Police are responsible for replacing his car. After all, it is not illegal to break down!
============================== Nothing to say.
Then you guess wrong. It was blown up under the auspices of the Terrorism Act (2006) and under the auspices of Terrorism Act (2000) Schedule 7. Under Sub-section 4.1.4 "An examining officer may use reasonable force to carry out a search" And under the précis of Sub-section 4.2 "An examing officer may, however, seize and detain anything which is given to them during the examination or which is found during the search"
--------------------------------- I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] English League Tables - Live
-
Anti-terror police blow up tourist's broken down car outside Parliament I guess the Police are responsible for replacing his car. After all, it is not illegal to break down!
============================== Nothing to say.
I don't think he should have buggered off and left it. Despite his note "Dear Mr Policeman, please ignore my ticking car, it is just broken down. Honest". Mate of mine broke down in a rental on Hanger Lane during rush hour and number of years ago. He got so much abuse almost instantly he left it there and got the train home from where he phoned the rental company to tell them where their car was. They already knew this as the police had told them quite some time earlier.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends. Shed Petition[^]
-
Then you guess wrong. It was blown up under the auspices of the Terrorism Act (2006) and under the auspices of Terrorism Act (2000) Schedule 7. Under Sub-section 4.1.4 "An examining officer may use reasonable force to carry out a search" And under the précis of Sub-section 4.2 "An examing officer may, however, seize and detain anything which is given to them during the examination or which is found during the search"
--------------------------------- I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] English League Tables - Live
Afraid not - they may use reasonable force, but are still responsible for any damage caused - in much the same way that if they knock down the door of a drug dealer to gain entry, they're then obliged to replace the door.... Or an example that's a little closer to my own heart - in an investigation, they needed to remove a part of a blood stained matress, so cut a hole in it to take away the stained area - and were then obliged to replace the matress....and yes - there was a conviction in the end (so it's not that they only have to do so if it was a mistake and no charges brough or conviction secured etc)....
C# has already designed away most of the tedium of C++.
-
Then you guess wrong. It was blown up under the auspices of the Terrorism Act (2006) and under the auspices of Terrorism Act (2000) Schedule 7. Under Sub-section 4.1.4 "An examining officer may use reasonable force to carry out a search" And under the précis of Sub-section 4.2 "An examing officer may, however, seize and detain anything which is given to them during the examination or which is found during the search"
--------------------------------- I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] English League Tables - Live