Allan.A 27 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Think I may need to look at getting myself an old traditional style gate net. Nice light weight and easy to fit inside my jacket. To be carried at all times when out with the dog. You know, in case the opportunity should ever arise whilst out lamping rabbits. Quote Link to post
Gaz_1989 9,539 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 If you can prove that a police officer has lied to a court of law then they would end up in very serious trouble As always, the difficulty is in proving anything There are liars and cheats in all walks of life; some find excuses for it, others don't bother. All unimportant really, as we do not know all the facts. Never mentioned lying to a court of law mate. We were talking about lying to us. To prompt a confession. People including yourself have said the police aren't allowed to lie. Suggesting that they don't. But they do Actually, no Go back and read what I've written properly Police officers are as capable and willing to lie as anyone else. The thing is, if they get caught out, they are in proportionally more trouble than anyone else . Ever heard the term 'breech of trust'? The fact that a police officer may lie (indirectly, or directly) 'off the record' in order to convince a suspect that it's in their best interests to confess, has never been disputed by me. However, if it can be proven that a police officer has fabricated evidence, or lied while making a statement, then it's a stretch on Rule 43 for them We can all speculate about the when, where, if's and why's in this case as much as we please, but unless the OP wants to furnish us with all the relevant facts then it is pretty pointless. What do I mean? Well, as others have suggested, if this is a 'hot' area, and the OP has any history with the police, then the chances are they will go for it and chuck some serious resources at establishing proof. If, on the other hand, the OP was on permission, lamping rabbits, and the evidence of illegality is ambiguous, then I doubt it will go too far. Happily, we don't have 'trial by media' in this country. Facts are put before a court and a decision is made based on those facts. I need a lie down after reading that So we agree the police are lying b*****ds? Ok great. Cheers. Lol. 1 Quote Link to post
andy97 209 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 If you can prove that a police officer has lied to a court of law then they would end up in very serious trouble As always, the difficulty is in proving anything There are liars and cheats in all walks of life; some find excuses for it, others don't bother. All unimportant really, as we do not know all the facts. Never mentioned lying to a court of law mate. We were talking about lying to us. To prompt a confession. People including yourself have said the police aren't allowed to lie. Suggesting that they don't. But they do Actually, no Go back and read what I've written properly Police officers are as capable and willing to lie as anyone else. The thing is, if they get caught out, they are in proportionally more trouble than anyone else . Ever heard the term 'breech of trust'? The fact that a police officer may lie (indirectly, or directly) 'off the record' in order to convince a suspect that it's in their best interests to confess, has never been disputed by me. However, if it can be proven that a police officer has fabricated evidence, or lied while making a statement, then it's a stretch on Rule 43 for them We can all speculate about the when, where, if's and why's in this case as much as we please, but unless the OP wants to furnish us with all the relevant facts then it is pretty pointless. What do I mean? Well, as others have suggested, if this is a 'hot' area, and the OP has any history with the police, then the chances are they will go for it and chuck some serious resources at establishing proof. If, on the other hand, the OP was on permission, lamping rabbits, and the evidence of illegality is ambiguous, then I doubt it will go too far. Happily, we don't have 'trial by media' in this country. Facts are put before a court and a decision is made based on those facts. I need a lie down after reading that So we agree the police are lying b*****ds? Ok great. Cheers. Lol. that there lying fcukers wasnt disputed but lieing about evidence they have in interview was which they carnt do or they will be no case to answer to if your brief and yourself are clued up or say they put him in the van and said youve been fimed or other nonsence on tape it goes away Quote Link to post
Gaz_1989 9,539 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 If you can prove that a police officer has lied to a court of law then they would end up in very serious trouble As always, the difficulty is in proving anything There are liars and cheats in all walks of life; some find excuses for it, others don't bother. All unimportant really, as we do not know all the facts. Never mentioned lying to a court of law mate. We were talking about lying to us. To prompt a confession. People including yourself have said the police aren't allowed to lie. Suggesting that they don't. But they do Actually, no Go back and read what I've written properly Police officers are as capable and willing to lie as anyone else. The thing is, if they get caught out, they are in proportionally more trouble than anyone else . Ever heard the term 'breech of trust'? The fact that a police officer may lie (indirectly, or directly) 'off the record' in order to convince a suspect that it's in their best interests to confess, has never been disputed by me. However, if it can be proven that a police officer has fabricated evidence, or lied while making a statement, then it's a stretch on Rule 43 for them We can all speculate about the when, where, if's and why's in this case as much as we please, but unless the OP wants to furnish us with all the relevant facts then it is pretty pointless. What do I mean? Well, as others have suggested, if this is a 'hot' area, and the OP has any history with the police, then the chances are they will go for it and chuck some serious resources at establishing proof. If, on the other hand, the OP was on permission, lamping rabbits, and the evidence of illegality is ambiguous, then I doubt it will go too far. Happily, we don't have 'trial by media' in this country. Facts are put before a court and a decision is made based on those facts. I need a lie down after reading that So we agree the police are lying b*****ds? Ok great. Cheers. Lol. that there lying fcukers wasnt disputed but lieing about evidence they have in interview was which they carnt do or they will be no case to answer to if your brief and yourself are clued up or say they put him in the van and said youve been fimed or other nonsence on tape it goes away It'a raining outside. You wanna ring your brief and check? Lol. Quote Link to post
trenchfoot 4,243 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 If you want to know what they will look to trap you on check out the website http://huntingact.org Quote Link to post
jimmy1982 153 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Don't get a duty solicitor, they work with the old bill half the timeAll piss in the same pot solicitors , prosecution, barristers, coppers , judges, f**k um all. Quote Link to post
shaaark 10,199 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 If you can prove that a police officer has lied to a court of law then they would end up in very serious trouble As always, the difficulty is in proving anything There are liars and cheats in all walks of life; some find excuses for it, others don't bother. All unimportant really, as we do not know all the facts. Never mentioned lying to a court of law mate. We were talking about lying to us. To prompt a confession. People including yourself have said the police aren't allowed to lie. Suggesting that they don't. But they do Actually, no Go back and read what I've written properly Police officers are as capable and willing to lie as anyone else. The thing is, if they get caught out, they are in proportionally more trouble than anyone else . Ever heard the term 'breech of trust'? The fact that a police officer may lie (indirectly, or directly) 'off the record' in order to convince a suspect that it's in their best interests to confess, has never been disputed by me. However, if it can be proven that a police officer has fabricated evidence, or lied while making a statement, then it's a stretch on Rule 43 for them We can all speculate about the when, where, if's and why's in this case as much as we please, but unless the OP wants to furnish us with all the relevant facts then it is pretty pointless. What do I mean? Well, as others have suggested, if this is a 'hot' area, and the OP has any history with the police, then the chances are they will go for it and chuck some serious resources at establishing proof. If, on the other hand, the OP was on permission, lamping rabbits, and the evidence of illegality is ambiguous, then I doubt it will go too far. Happily, we don't have 'trial by media' in this country. Facts are put before a court and a decision is made based on those facts. I need a lie down after reading that So we agree the police are lying b*****ds? Ok great. Cheers. Lol. that there lying fcukers wasnt disputed but lieing about evidence they have in interview was which they carnt do or they will be no case to answer to if your brief and yourself are clued up or say they put him in the van and said youve been fimed or other nonsence on tape it goes away It'a raining outside. You wanna ring your brief and check? Lol. Kin el gaz, I wouldn't want to play chess with you! Quote Link to post
Maximus Ferret 2,059 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 If you can prove that a police officer has lied to a court of law then they would end up in very serious trouble As always, the difficulty is in proving anything There are liars and cheats in all walks of life; some find excuses for it, others don't bother. All unimportant really, as we do not know all the facts. Never mentioned lying to a court of law mate. We were talking about lying to us. To prompt a confession. People including yourself have said the police aren't allowed to lie. Suggesting that they don't. But they do Actually, no Go back and read what I've written properly Police officers are as capable and willing to lie as anyone else. The thing is, if they get caught out, they are in proportionally more trouble than anyone else . Ever heard the term 'breech of trust'? The fact that a police officer may lie (indirectly, or directly) 'off the record' in order to convince a suspect that it's in their best interests to confess, has never been disputed by me. However, if it can be proven that a police officer has fabricated evidence, or lied while making a statement, then it's a stretch on Rule 43 for them We can all speculate about the when, where, if's and why's in this case as much as we please, but unless the OP wants to furnish us with all the relevant facts then it is pretty pointless. What do I mean? Well, as others have suggested, if this is a 'hot' area, and the OP has any history with the police, then the chances are they will go for it and chuck some serious resources at establishing proof. If, on the other hand, the OP was on permission, lamping rabbits, and the evidence of illegality is ambiguous, then I doubt it will go too far. Happily, we don't have 'trial by media' in this country. Facts are put before a court and a decision is made based on those facts. I need a lie down after reading that So we agree the police are lying b*****ds? Ok great. Cheers. Lol. that there lying fcukers wasnt disputed but lieing about evidence they have in interview was which they carnt do or they will be no case to answer to if your brief and yourself are clued up or say they put him in the van and said youve been fimed or other nonsence on tape it goes away You're implying the suspect should believe what the police say, as long as it's recorded in the interview. That's just not true. For instance if they tell you they've got you on vid and then the film is "lost" after you've confessed....... They can say they've witnesses then say the witnesses pulled out..... etc. etc. etc. Never rely on what they say. 2 Quote Link to post
nothernlite 18,028 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Even in court they will lie its part of there training to lie 99% of them Quote Link to post
lamping-lad 160 Posted May 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 (edited) Three of us was walking down a road with a dog each we was stopped by police saying they t had reports of people lamping in a field about half a mile from we're we was one of them drive up and down the road then came back and said he'd found a dead hare beside the road which here believes we placed there we was arrested and interviewed then let us go 3 mts later summons to court. They dint take dogs away or there supposed hare they found or swab the dogs mouths. Edited May 7, 2014 by lamping-lad Quote Link to post
Giro 2,648 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Thats hardly evidence.. I can drive down most country lanes and find rabbits,hares,badgers and pheasants that have been hit buy cars.. Stick with the not guilty.. Its not much of a case against you.. Hope it goes well for you mate... I would be stressed with having to go to court... 2 Quote Link to post
andy97 209 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 If you can prove that a police officer has lied to a court of law then they would end up in very serious trouble As always, the difficulty is in proving anything There are liars and cheats in all walks of life; some find excuses for it, others don't bother. All unimportant really, as we do not know all the facts. Never mentioned lying to a court of law mate. We were talking about lying to us. To prompt a confession. People including yourself have said the police aren't allowed to lie. Suggesting that they don't. But they do Actually, no Go back and read what I've written properly Police officers are as capable and willing to lie as anyone else. The thing is, if they get caught out, they are in proportionally more trouble than anyone else . Ever heard the term 'breech of trust'? The fact that a police officer may lie (indirectly, or directly) 'off the record' in order to convince a suspect that it's in their best interests to confess, has never been disputed by me. However, if it can be proven that a police officer has fabricated evidence, or lied while making a statement, then it's a stretch on Rule 43 for them We can all speculate about the when, where, if's and why's in this case as much as we please, but unless the OP wants to furnish us with all the relevant facts then it is pretty pointless. What do I mean? Well, as others have suggested, if this is a 'hot' area, and the OP has any history with the police, then the chances are they will go for it and chuck some serious resources at establishing proof. If, on the other hand, the OP was on permission, lamping rabbits, and the evidence of illegality is ambiguous, then I doubt it will go too far. Happily, we don't have 'trial by media' in this country. Facts are put before a court and a decision is made based on those facts. I need a lie down after reading that So we agree the police are lying b*****ds? Ok great. Cheers. Lol. that there lying fcukers wasnt disputed but lieing about evidence they have in interview was which they carnt do or they will be no case to answer to if your brief and yourself are clued up or say they put him in the van and said youve been fimed or other nonsence on tape it goes away It'a raining outside. You wanna ring your brief and check? Lol was simply to prove a point that few give advice and dont really no what there talking about i was just checking it as id hate for someone to get a charge when it could have been avoided n obviously your one of them giving bad info out Quote Link to post
Gaz_1989 9,539 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 If you can prove that a police officer has lied to a court of law then they would end up in very serious trouble As always, the difficulty is in proving anything There are liars and cheats in all walks of life; some find excuses for it, others don't bother. All unimportant really, as we do not know all the facts. Never mentioned lying to a court of law mate. We were talking about lying to us. To prompt a confession. People including yourself have said the police aren't allowed to lie. Suggesting that they don't. But they do Actually, no Go back and read what I've written properly Police officers are as capable and willing to lie as anyone else. The thing is, if they get caught out, they are in proportionally more trouble than anyone else . Ever heard the term 'breech of trust'? The fact that a police officer may lie (indirectly, or directly) 'off the record' in order to convince a suspect that it's in their best interests to confess, has never been disputed by me. However, if it can be proven that a police officer has fabricated evidence, or lied while making a statement, then it's a stretch on Rule 43 for them We can all speculate about the when, where, if's and why's in this case as much as we please, but unless the OP wants to furnish us with all the relevant facts then it is pretty pointless. What do I mean? Well, as others have suggested, if this is a 'hot' area, and the OP has any history with the police, then the chances are they will go for it and chuck some serious resources at establishing proof. If, on the other hand, the OP was on permission, lamping rabbits, and the evidence of illegality is ambiguous, then I doubt it will go too far. Happily, we don't have 'trial by media' in this country. Facts are put before a court and a decision is made based on those facts. I need a lie down after reading that So we agree the police are lying b*****ds? Ok great. Cheers. Lol. that there lying fcukers wasnt disputed but lieing about evidence they have in interview was which they carnt do or they will be no case to answer to if your brief and yourself are clued up or say they put him in the van and said youve been fimed or other nonsence on tape it goes awayIt'a raining outside. You wanna ring your brief and check? Lolwas simply to prove a point that few give advice and dont really no what there talking about i was just checking it as id hate for someone to get a charge when it could have been avoided n obviously your one of them giving bad info out Yeh I gave out false info, sorry lads. The police will never lie to you. Definitely not in an interview. They will never say they've got evidence that they haven't. And the hunting act will be overturned with immediate effect Quote Link to post
lamping-lad 160 Posted May 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Think I may need to look at getting myself an old traditional style gate net. Nice light weight and easy to fit inside my jacket. To be carried at all times when out with the dog. You know, in case the opportunity should ever arise whilst out lamping rabbits.i thinks it law you can't net hares at night Quote Link to post
jimmy1982 153 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 (edited) Three of us was walking down a road with a dog each we was stopped by police saying they t had reports of people lamping in a field about half a mile from we're we was one of them drive up and down the road then came back and said he'd found a dead hare beside the road which here believes we placed there we was arrested and interviewed then let us go 3 mts later summons to court. They dint take dogs away or there supposed hare they found or swab the dogs mouths. f**k um mush dont let them get to ya a bet youve got bags under ya eyes not sleeping haha. What youve just said they found a hare a the side of the road to me its road kill. Edited May 7, 2014 by jimmy1982 Quote Link to post
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.