Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

[bluebottle]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

The story and video, and or stills, have already featured this week in The Evening Standard, The Daily Mail online, The Sun online, The Huffington Post, 9 News Australia, The Times of Mumbai and the Gulf Times just for starters!

I also forgot to mention I found an interesting thread about it on the Policespecials.com website where serving Police officers debate the procedure and legalities of Officer Khan's 'intervention'.

It does make you wonder if London Borough of Tower Hamlets backed off because of Citizen Khan's behaviour. At the very least, he has brought the authority into disrepute. He has certainly brought the law into disrepute.

The sort of behaviour you experienced is not the result of someone donning a uniform and power going to their head - it is deliberate and intended to whip up and stir up civil tension and unrest so that this corrupt and discredited government can bring in the Civil Contingencies Act and slide into place a corporatist-globalist dictatorship, aka corporate fascism. I'm attaching a copy of Rules for Radical by Saul Alinsky, an American Marxist agitator - now dead - tributes to which the three main political parties placed on their websites until they realised more and more people have found out what is going on, who Saul Alinsky is and what the plan is and took the tributes down very quickly. Read it and you will see, very quickly, why everything is going wrong, including Citizen Khan's behaviour.

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

I could go on

Magistrates and crown courts as mentioned deal with criminal cases as you should know.

[mio]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

It is criminal.
.

That's interesting. The Police statement to The Evening Standard said that 'No allegation of crime' was made. Also one of the Police officers attending said that he had "no idea of their [the CEO's] procedures". "Their procedures?" I asked. And he said "Yes, this is a civil matter".

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Here is the information regarding enforcement measures and fines(fines are not a civil penalty by the way)

http://www.environmentlaw.org.uk/rte.asp?id=50

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

That's interesting. The Police statement to The Evening Standard said that 'No allegation of crime' was made. Also one of the Police officers attending said that he had "no idea of their [the CEO's] procedures". "Their procedures?" I asked. And he said "Yes, this is a civil matter".

Well criminal they are. That is provided the council has adopted the legislature through one of its by laws.

[bluebottle]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

They are also prospective, meaning they are not yet in force.

[teaboy2]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Just to clarify the bye laws are made under the previously mentioned act. Which states

An Act to amend section 6 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998;

There are many acts of parliament that enable councils to create by-laws . A breach of by-law in self is not necessary a criminal act. In 2006 things changed, from breaches of by-laws being punishable criminally to being punishable by FPN instead.

You keep posting links to Council sites, and wiki (a user contribution site and therefore not necessary correct), but fail to porvide legislation that shows dog fouling is a criminal offence. Also how can one be guilty of such offence if they have not been found guilty by a court? So no, its not a criminal offence.

Non payment of the FPN, and when recipient does not opt for a court hearing in the time specified, the penalty may be increased by 50% and registered against the recipient as a fine (Non Payment of Fine at this point is when it becomes a criminal offence, so this is where it changes from civil to criminal). It may then be enforced by the normal methods used to enforce unpaid fines, including imprisonment in some circumstances.

Any way - The OP's dog did not foul on the land so whether its a crminal offence or not is irrelevant where it concerns the OP

[mio]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

The sort of behaviour you experienced is not the result of someone donning a uniform and power going to their head - it is deliberate and intended to whip up and stir up civil tension and unrest so that this corrupt and discredited government can bring in the Civil Contingencies Act and slide into place a corporatist-globalist dictatorship, aka corporate fascism.

This had occurred to me. And it's scary.

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

There are many acts of parliament that enable councils to create by-laws . A breach of by-law in self is not necessary a criminal act. In 2006 things changed, from breaches of by-laws being punishable criminally to being punishable by FPN instead.

You keep posting links to Council sites, and wiki (a user contribution site and therefore not necessary correct), but fail to porvide legislation that shows dog fouling is a criminal offence. Also how can one be guilty of such offence if they have not been found guilty by a court? So no, its not a criminal offence.

Non payment of the FPN, and when recipient does not opt for a court hearing in the time specified, the penalty may be increased by 50% and registered against the recipient as a fine (Non Payment of Fine at this point is when it becomes a criminal offence, so this is where it changes from civil to criminal). It may then be enforced by the normal methods used to enforce unpaid fines, including imprisonment in some circumstances.

Any way - The OP's dog did not foul on the land so whether its a crminal offence or not is irrelevant where it concerns the OP

I do not understand why you are having such a problem with this the legislation has been quoted , it is here

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/16/section/59

This is the part relating to fixed penalty notices for an OFFENCE

Fixed penalty notices

(1)

This section applies where on any occasion—

(a)

an authorised officer of a primary or secondary authority has reason to believe that a person has committed an offence under a dog control order made by that authority; or

There has been no decriminalization of this, it is an OFFENCE. Not a tort or a civil breach..

Good grief

[Guest]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Here#

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/20/section/3

Offence.

(1)

If a dog defecates at any time on designated land and a person who is in charge of the dog at that time fails to remove the faeces from the land forthwith, that person shall be guilty of an offence unless—

(a)

he has a reasonable excuse for failing to do so; or

(b)

the owner, occupier or other person or authority having control of the land has consented (generally or specifically) to his failing to do so.

(2)

A person who is guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

Now do you want me to put up the definition of the word"conviction "(do you think this is a civil term) or would you like me to tell you what a standard scale fee for an offence is.

[bluebottle]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

There are many acts of parliament that enable councils to create by-laws . A breach of by-law in self is not necessary a criminal act. In 2006 things changed, from breaches of by-laws being punishable criminally to being punishable by FPN instead.

You keep posting links to Council sites, and wiki (a user contribution site and therefore not necessary correct), but fail to porvide legislation that shows dog fouling is a criminal offence. Also how can one be guilty of such offence if they have not been found guilty by a court? So no, its not a criminal offence.

Non payment of the FPN, and when recipient does not opt for a court hearing in the time specified, the penalty may be increased by 50% and registered against the recipient as a fine (Non Payment of Fine at this point is when it becomes a criminal offence, so this is where it changes from civil to criminal). It may then be enforced by the normal methods used to enforce unpaid fines, including imprisonment in some circumstances.

Any way - The OP's dog did not foul on the land so whether its a crminal offence or not is irrelevant where it concerns the OP

I would concur about a lawfully-issued FPN becoming a criminal matter when the penalty is not paid. However, you cannot be accused of any offence and be penalised without being allowed to see the evidence and challenge the evidence alleged to prove the offence you are being accused of committing. Quite simply, a local authority has no power, in law, to sidestep or ignore due legal process. Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights prevents punishment without there being an offence in law and certainly not without being first tried by a court or legally-convened tribunal. Articles 17 and 18 prevent a person's Convention rights from being destroyed or restricted. All rights under ECHR are inviolate and inalienable. Section 6, Human Rights Act 1998 makes it unlawful for any authority, person or commercial entity whose function is public, that is, on behalf of the State, whether local or national, to breach a person's Convention rights.

Andy58,

You appear to be posting links to different websites in an attempt to bolster your arguments. Citizen Khan and London Borough of Tower Hamlets are on a very sticky wicket, legally, and I suspect they know they are. I am very surprised the OP's dog did not sink its teeth into Citizen Khan's leg or backside or cock its leg and pee all over his trouser leg in protest. You certainly have a very good grasp on Civil Law and I won't deny that, but I am with Teaboy2 on this matter.

[bluebottle]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

This had occurred to me. And it's scary.

Feel free to let as many people as possible have copies of the document I have posted, Mio. The more people that know and tell others, the better. Standing up to the creeps who try to push their luck - like Citizen Khan - is the way to defeat them. Just stay calm and polite and point out when and where they are wrong. They'll shout and holler at you like a demented idiot, but if they see their bullying and intimidation is having no effect, just strengthening your resolve, it scares them because they've been programmed to believe everyone will cower in fear and do their bidding. As Citizen Khan found, you're a feisty lady who takes no nonsense from anyone.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

It is a criminal matter though isn't it(in general)

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/16/section/64

What law(s) do you believe would have been broken if mio rather than her dog had (allegedly) shat on the pavement?

[CleverClogs]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

It does make me wonder, however, if it would be worth Mio emailing the elected members of London Borough of Tower Hamlets with a link to the video

Find them at https://www.writetothem.com

[teaboy2]

Re: Show me the poo! - Over reactivive civil enforcement officer

Here#

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/20/section/3

Offence.

(1)

If a dog defecates at any time on designated land and a person who is in charge of the dog at that time fails to remove the faeces from the land forthwith, that person shall be guilty of an offence unless—

(a)

he has a reasonable excuse for failing to do so; or

(b)

the owner, occupier or other person or authority having control of the land has consented (generally or specifically) to his failing to do so.

(2)

A person who is guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

Now do you want me to put up the definition of the word"conviction "(do you think this is a civil term) or would you like me to tell you what a standard scale fee for an offence is.

Repealed in 2005.

I would concur about a lawfully-issued FPN becoming a criminal matter when the penalty is not paid. However, you cannot be accused of any offence and be penalised without being allowed to see the evidence and challenge the evidence alleged to prove the offence you are being accused of committing. Quite simply, a local authority has no power, in law, to sidestep or ignore due legal process. Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights prevents punishment without there being an offence in law and certainly not without being first tried by a court or legally-convened tribunal. Articles 17 and 18 prevent a person's Convention rights from being destroyed or restricted. All rights under ECHR are inviolate and inalienable. Section 6, Human Rights Act 1998 makes it unlawful for any authority, person or commercial entity whose function is public, that is, on behalf of the State, whether local or national, to breach a person's Convention rights.

Totally agree with you. To me there was no evidence just a false accusation by the CEO against Mia