Enforcement of the new rules on social distancing, unnecessary journeys etc.

[Tetchytyke]

Well Lancashire is a pretty dull place so....

Rumours that the tickets were issued on the A59 as people tried to escape Lancashire for the correct side of the Pennines are, of course, completely unfounded.

she actually looks like Sonic the Hedgehog!

What, bright blue?

 

[Bantamzen]

Rumours that the tickets were issued on the A59 as people tried to escape Lancashire for the correct side of the Pennines are, of course, completely unfounded.

Of course they are untrue, those miscreants were sent straight to Hull to serve their punishment...

 

[Domh245]

First one out of the door should be Rachel Swann their Deputy Chief Constable - she actually looks like Sonic the Hedgehog!

I was actually quite shocked when I saw her on the news last year during the Whalley Bridge dam disaster. I believe in diversity & how it should be expressed but there has to be a limit in standards of appearance for a senior police officer who should be representing the rank & file of a professional organisation.

CJ

If she's been behind these incidences of Derbyshire constabulary overstepping the mark, then sure, but going after her because of how she looks isn't on..

 

[nedchester]

If there are a lot of people out it becomes hard to stay apart.

I agree.

I live on the edge of an urban area. Within 5 minutes of my house it's all fields. Therefore, I can go out on my bike and meet very few others. In fact I would say that cycling is safer than walking in regard of social distancing.

Obviously, matters are different if you live in central London, Birmingham or Leeds?

 

[island]

That's not how the law is worded. You can't walk out of your front door unless one of the items in the list is the reason, however if one of them is there is effectively no limit to the travel you can legally do for that end. For instance you can go to your local preferred supermarket, you don't have to go to the nearest one.

There is no arbitrary town or district limit of any kind.

However, it is important we don't take the mick.

If we’re being precise, you can’t leave your property. If you have a front garden you can go and sit there all day.

 

[island]

A fine maybe, but the 6 months in jail is pushing it too far.

The penalty for breaching the regulations is a fine, jail time is not an option. Under section 45P of the Public Health Act 1984 the regulations cannot create imprisonable offences.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

And here we go................

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-650-flouting-coronavirus-lockdown-rules.html

"A woman has been arrested on the railways and ordered to pay £650 for breaching the Government's coronavirus lockdown measures.

Marie Dinou, 41, from York, was arrested by a British Transport Police (BTP) officer after she was found 'loitering between platforms' at Newcastle Central station on Saturday.

Dinou, who refused to explain to police why she was travelling, was charged with failing to comply with requirements imposed under the Coronavirus Act 2020."

 

[baz962]

The best example I can think of is people primarily in rural areas whose houses front onto 60mph roads with no pavement.

Wouldn't most of those have decent front gardens and drive's and similarly decent rear gardens , possibly backing onto rural fields

 

[ainsworth74]

Dinou, who refused to explain to police why she was travelling, was charged with failing to comply with requirements imposed under the Coronavirus Act 2020.

Of course if she failed to explain what she was doing then she failed to provide a "reasonable excuse". One suspects that if she had actually told officers what she was doing she'd have been left to go about her business or given advice.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Wouldn't most of those have decent front gardens and drive's and similarly decent rear gardens , possibly backing onto rural fields

Not necessarily.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Of course if she failed to explain what she was doing then she failed to provide a "reasonable excuse". One suspects that if she had actually told officers what she was doing she'd have been left to go about her business or given advice.

It does sound like this was the all-too-common conviction for "wilfully annoying a Police officer".

 

[Domh245]

Of course if she failed to explain what she was doing then she failed to provide a "reasonable excuse". One suspects that if she had actually told officers what she was doing she'd have been left to go about her business or given advice.

Bingo

It does sound like this was the all-too-common conviction for "wilfully annoying a Police officer".

Or section 9.2 of the legislation

(2) A person who obstructs, without reasonable excuse, any person carrying out a function under these Regulations commits an offence.

although section 3 is possibly also applicable if she'd been told to clear off but was refusing to

9.(3) A person who, without reasonable excuse, contravenes a direction given under regulation 8, or fails to comply with a reasonable instruction or a prohibition notice given by a relevant person under regulation 8, commits an offence.
..
8.(3) Where a relevant person considers that a person is outside the place where they are living in contravention of regulation 6(1), the relevant person may—

(a)direct that person to return to the place where they are living, or

(b)remove that person to the place where they are living.

 

[111-111-1]

First one out of the door should be Rachel Swann their Deputy Chief Constable - she actually looks like Sonic the Hedgehog!

I was actually quite shocked when I saw her on the news last year during the Whalley Bridge dam disaster. I believe in diversity & how it should be expressed but there has to be a limit in standards of appearance for a senior police officer who should be representing the rank & file of a professional organisation.

CJ

Yes she is not your typical old style police officer. Things have changed since Z-Cars and Dixon of Dock Green.

I am more concerned as to whether she good at her job than her looks.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It does sound like this was the all-too-common conviction for "wilfully annoying a Police officer".

Bingo.

Given the holes in the legislation, if she'd just said "I'm off to get some money" there's nothing they could do.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Glossop police are now putting these on cars.

Image reads:

Is there any information about where these leaflets are being placed? I presume that this is not in the Glossop Tesco car park.
By 'Glossop Police' do you mean Derbyshire Polce?
I am still unclear why people seem to have the view that Derbyshire Police are being unreasonable. According to The Guardian the Derbyshire force has yet to issue a fine, summons or make an arrest [in connection with the current restrictions]. How is flying a drone at a distance and not over people's heads a serious abuse of power?
Why is it apparently 'unacceptable' for police forces to have slightly different approaches in very different sorts of areas but apparently fine for certain journalists and even a retired Supreme Court justice to completely fail to appreciate the difference between a toxic, caustic, derelict, flooded quarry that has needed deterrence for years and a 'natural beauty spot'?

 

[DarloRich]

First one out of the door should be Rachel Swann their Deputy Chief Constable - she actually looks like Sonic the Hedgehog!

I was actually quite shocked when I saw her on the news last year during the Whalley Bridge dam disaster. I believe in diversity & how it should be expressed but there has to be a limit in standards of appearance for a senior police officer who should be representing the rank & file of a professional organisation.

CJ

WOW - a woman has spiky air so should be sacked. Shall we get a grip? It isnt 1952.

 

[island]

And here we go................

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-650-flouting-coronavirus-lockdown-rules.html

"A woman has been arrested on the railways and ordered to pay £650 for breaching the Government's coronavirus lockdown measures.

Marie Dinou, 41, from York, was arrested by a British Transport Police (BTP) officer after she was found 'loitering between platforms' at Newcastle Central station on Saturday.

Dinou, who refused to explain to police why she was travelling, was charged with failing to comply with requirements imposed under the Coronavirus Act 2020."

Of course if she failed to explain what she was doing then she failed to provide a "reasonable excuse". One suspects that if she had actually told officers what she was doing she'd have been left to go about her business or given advice.

Yes, most likely she skipped the fare from York to Newcastle and failed the attitude test.

 

[DarloRich]

I think the intention of the police to get people to think about their journeys and consider if they are REALLY essential is very sensible. We see from comments here exactly why that is necessary. We see here and in the real world there are a core group of people who will not accept any reduction on their ability to enjoy their rights or accept the seriousness and uniquely challenging situation we find ourselves in.

I think in some places they have done their work badly and could have done it differently but the intent is correct. It is clear it is needed. People cant or wont grasp the concepts involved. It isnt a conspiracy. It is an emergency.

 

[Darandio]

Is there any information about where these leaflets are being placed? I presume that this is not in the Glossop Tesco car park.
By 'Glossop Police' do you mean Derbyshire Polce?

On car windows apparently. Glossop, Derbyshire, doesn't matter. It was posted on the Glossop Police SNT page.

 

[C J Snarzell]

Merseyside Police are also being quite ruthless towards people exercising along their coastal areas - such as Southport, Crosby, New Brighton & West Kirkby.

 

[infobleep]

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...-after-testing-positive-for-covid-19-11966273

13 years old & 19 years old - that’s no age! Apparently healthy (but obviously a Post Mortem may say otherwise).

Still, let’s not observe the guidelines because you can’t tell me what to do & I have a point to prove that it’s lawful and that’s really all that matters!

Fill yer boots!

Stay at Home, Support the NHS, Save Lives!

The government really should have pur the guidelines into law so that people aren't then arguing over the staying at home bit of the Stay at Home support the NHS and saving lives message.

 

[AM9]

Could be interesting this weekend as, unlike last weekend, the weather's looking fine and warm, which may well bring the crowds out.

Perhaps one potential solution would be to adopt the restrictions in Australia where you can still use a park to exercise in - but you can't lounge, nap, sunbathe, or just peacefully gaze at the trees as you might once have. ...

Cue the next lot of smartarses, standing/sitting around saying that they are getting their breath back as a result of exercising. Short of physically making inapproriate behaviour much more difficult/inconvenient than doing the considerate thing, there will alway be those that choose to test the law, even if it is at the expense of those that it is intended to protect.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The government really should have pur the guidelines into law so that people aren't then arguing over the staying at home bit of the Stay at Home support the NHS and saving lives message.

They did (with the exception of the "once a day" bit of exercise in England, which I suspect may have been a clerical error but barely makes any practical difference to anything as most people don't voluntarily go for a run twice in a day). It's just that some people like to think the guidelines are not what they actually are.

 

[Trackman]

Yes, most likely she skipped the fare from York to Newcastle and failed the attitude test.

It was a ticket offence, press jumped on the Covid-19 angle and most didn't even mention the ticketing offence.
and as you say failed the attitude test, i.e. refusing to disperse or to take a Covid-19 £60 FPN , which you can but you'll end up in court, which happened.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I am still unclear why people seem to have the view that Derbyshire Police are being unreasonable.

So you think it is ok for the police to go around saying things are illegal when they are, in fact, not illegal?

For Derbyshire Police to do this the day after a former Supreme Court judge called them out on it just seems to be deliberately antagonistic.

There are ways of communicating the message that driving 20 miles to go for a walk is extremely antisocial without just making laws up.

just that some people like to think the guidelines are not what they actually are.

A guideline is just that- a guideline. If the police were saying "driving 20 miles to walk here is selfish and irresponsible, bugger off" I wouldn't have the same issue. Although I would question whether it is a necessary part of their duties in a time when we should be minimising contact.

How is flying a drone at a distance and not over people's heads a serious abuse of power?

The drone was not at a distance, it was low flying, and the people in the video were clearly identifiable. As they were breaking no law, it is extremely distasteful to see the police behaving like this so they can get a few likes on Facebook.

retired Supreme Court justice to completely fail to appreciate the difference between a toxic, caustic, derelict, flooded quarry that has needed deterrence for years and a 'natural beauty spot'?

To be fair, Derbyshire Police did not, in their press release, say they were dying the water black because it has a pH of 11.5 and anyone who jumps in is effectively swimming in a mild bleach. They actually referred to the location in their own press release as a "picturesque location" and said they did it because of Covid-19.

So Lord Sumption is entitled to assume that, when the police say they've shut a "picturesque location" due to visitors ignoring Covid-19 guidelines, that it is actually a picturesque location and that they've overstated the law.

Merseyside Police are also being quite ruthless towards people exercising along their coastal areas - such as Southport, Crosby, New Brighton & West Kirkby.

Whereas our government, just 50 miles away, has closed car parking on the Promenade to allow walkers and cyclists more room to exercise along the prom whilst keeping their distance from others.

Other than as a willy-waving power trip, I don't understand why some police are choosing to pick this battle in the way that they are doing. They will need all the goodwill that they can get if we're still in lockdown in six weeks.

 

[stevetay3]

It was a ticket offence, press jumped on the Covid-19 angle and most didn't even mention the ticketing offence.
and as you say failed the attitude test, i.e. refusing to disperse or to take a Covid-19 £60 FPN , which you can but you'll end up in court, which happened.

Could someone explain the attitude test

 

[Bletchleyite]

Could someone explain the attitude test

The "attitude test" basically surrounds how people dealing with you will respond if you have done something relatively minor wrong, dependent upon your attitude to the matter. It's not a formal thing, it's just people being human.

Examples:

Passenger has no ticket because they were in a hurry, guard comes round, passenger is really apologetic to guard that they were running late, having a really bad day so far etc, passenger is sold a discounted ticket with a "please don't do it again, next time it might be an RPI writing you up for a prosecution, maybe if you're in a hurry next time you could buy a ticket on your phone?". Both continue their day happily.

Passenger has no ticket because they were in a hurry, guard comes round, passenger shouts abuse at guard about how **** it is that there was a queue at the ticket office and the TVM is broken. Passenger is as a result of failing the "attitude test" sold a full price Anytime Single, both continue their day rather annoyed and unhappy.

 

[Iskra]

So you think it is ok for the police to go around saying things are illegal when they are, in fact, not illegal?

For Derbyshire Police to do this the day after a former Supreme Court judge called them out on it just seems to be deliberately antagonistic.

There are ways of communicating the message that driving 20 miles to go for a walk is extremely antisocial without just making laws up.



A guideline is just that- a guideline. If the police were saying "driving 20 miles to walk here is selfish and irresponsible, bugger off" I wouldn't have the same issue. Although I would question whether it is a necessary part of their duties in a time when we should be minimising contact.



The drone was not at a distance, it was low flying, and the people in the video were clearly identifiable. As they were breaking no law, it is extremely distasteful to see the police behaving like this so they can get a few likes on Facebook.



To be fair, Derbyshire Police did not, in their press release, say they were dying the water black because it has a pH of 11.5 and anyone who jumps in is effectively swimming in a mild bleach. They actually referred to the location in their own press release as a "picturesque location" and said they did it because of Covid-19.

So Lord Sumption is entitled to assume that, when the police say they've shut a "picturesque location" due to visitors ignoring Covid-19 guidelines, that it is actually a picturesque location and that they've overstated the law.



Whereas our government, just 50 miles away, has closed car parking on the Promenade to allow walkers and cyclists more room to exercise along the prom whilst keeping their distance from others.

Other than as a willy-waving power trip, I don't understand why some police are choosing to pick this battle in the way that they are doing. They will need all the goodwill that they can get if we're still in lockdown in six weeks.

I agree with all this. Don't see why responsibly exercising in the countryside is an issue, providing distance is maintained and you are staying local. It's the one thing you can still do and it's healthy.

The fact that during a time like this Derbyshire police have the manpower and resources to be following people with drones and dyeing lakes says a lot about their priorities.

Needless to say South Yorkshire Police were quick to jump on the totalitarian bandwagon with their 1984-esque 'Roadside Education Checkpoints,' you'd think a force with such an image problem might try and make themselves seem less draconian and more engaging, not publish it all over twitter in order to scare people into staying at home. They need to be less police force and more police service and start using some common sense.

 

[stevetay3]

The "attitude test" basically surrounds how people dealing with you will respond if you have done something relatively minor wrong, dependent upon your attitude to the matter. It's not a formal thing, it's just people being human.

Examples:

Passenger has no ticket because they were in a hurry, guard comes round, passenger is really apologetic to guard that they were running late, having a really bad day so far etc, passenger is sold a discounted ticket with a "please don't do it again, next time it might be an RPI writing you up for a prosecution, maybe if you're in a hurry next time you could buy a ticket on your phone?". Both continue their day happily.

Passenger has no ticket because they were in a hurry, guard comes round, passenger shouts abuse at guard about how **** it is that there was a queue at the ticket office and the TVM is broken. Passenger is as a result of failing the "attitude test" sold a full price Anytime Single, both continue their day rather annoyed and unhappy.

So I have a valid ticket,some inspectors say it is.not valid,I politely point out thay are incorrect in this matter do I then fail the attitude test and if so what legislation allows this to be taken further

 

[Bletchleyite]

So I have a valid ticket,some inspectors say it is.not valid,I politely point out thay are incorrect in this matter do I then fail the attitude test and if so what legislation allows this to be taken further

Depending how you make that point you may or may not fail the "attitude test".

The "attitude test" is not something formal nor written and carries no legislation. The effect of it is simply that if it is "passed", the person dealing with you may well choose to use their discretion not to use the enforcement mechanisms available to them.