Does Derbyshire Police have a problem?

[All Line Rover]

Had I seen this (now deleted) tweet on the constabulary's Twitter account, I would have assumed that the account had been hacked:



Transcript: "We are appealing for help to identify a man who kissed a woman on the cheek to thank her for helping when his lorry became stuck under a low bridge. Were you in the area?"

Derbyshire Police mocked over 'kiss on the cheek' assault appeal

Police said the unwanted kiss was a sexual assault and the victim was "very distressed".

www.bbc.co.uk

Derbyshire Police said the unwanted kiss fell under the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

The force said the victim, a woman in her 70s [sic!], was "very distressed, especially at a time when close contact with strangers is to be avoided" and added: "We take all allegations of this nature extremely seriously."

Despite removing the details of the incident, police said people with information could still get in touch.

The force recently faced criticism for using drone footage to "lockdown shame" those walking in the Peak District.

I could, in light of present circumstances and the "victim's" age, vaguely hazard the possibility of assault, but that offence would not fall under the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

 

[Busaholic]

I'm in my 70s and was recently spontaneously kissed on the cheek by a woman in her 50s, who had a bicycle with her. I must have forgotten to inform the police of this, and my wife for that matter.

 

[robbeech]

Right or wrong, we should just let Derbyshire police have their massive ongoing power trip that they seem so jovial about generally, if we ignore them they’ll go away surely.

 

[GB]

Offence

(1)A person (A) commits an offence if—

(a)he intentionally touches another person (B),

(b)the touching is sexual,

(c)B does not consent to the touching, and

(d)A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

(2)Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents

Definition

"Sexual”
[F1For the purposes of this Part ([F2except sections 15A and 71 ]), penetration, touching or any other activity is sexual if a reasonable person would consider that—

(a)whatever its circumstances or any person’s purpose in relation to it, it is because of its nature sexual, or

(b)because of its nature it may be sexual and because of its circumstances or the purpose of any person in relation to it (or both) it is sexual.]

Unless there is more to the story I can't see how any reasonable person would consider a kiss on the cheek as sexual assault. Mind boggles.

 

[LowLevel]

*shrug* presumably the woman in question made a complaint to the police and I doubt I would take anyone kissing me on the cheek particularly kindly at the moment. There is a time and a place. I'm not going to criticise without knowing the facts.

 

[gg1]

Under normal circumstances being kissed on the cheek by a stranger wouldn't bother me in the slightest, but these aren't normal circumstances. I wouldn't have gone as far as reporting it to the police but would nonetheless be VERY ****ed off if someone had done so any time in the past 6 weeks.

You need to be somewhat closer than 2 metres apart from a person to kiss them.

 

[xc170]

The force that also followed dog walkers with a drone around the peak district....

 

[Iskra]

It's not just Derbyshire is it, many of our police forces have behaved totally ridiculously over the last couple of months.

I think we should just have one national police force, it would streamline them and the money saved could translate into more frontline officers. We'd also then get nationwide consistency in how the law is applied, rather than the current hodgepodge.

 

[LMS 4F]

It's not just Derbyshire is it, many of our police forces have behaved totally ridiculously over the last couple of months.

I think we should just have one national police force, it would streamline them and the money saved could translate into more frontline officers. We'd also then get nationwide consistency in how the law is applied, rather than the current hodgepodge.

Beware what you wish for, Scotland went down this road some time ago at the behest of their devolved government and by all accounts it is a bit of a shambles.
Loved by Politicians as they hope to have more control over the police I would suggest. Easier to browbeat one chief than 43 all over the country. Also I would expect that the big losers would be rural forces as resources were moved into the Cities. Not that the likes of North Yorks gets much of a deal already.

 

[pdeaves]

I think we should just have one national police force, it would streamline them and the money saved could translate into more frontline officers. We'd also then get nationwide consistency in how the law is applied, rather than the current hodgepodge.

Or you would end up with one 'super chief' over a large number of 'regional chiefs' with their own decision making powers (i.e. the same as today but with another expensive salary at the top). For every way of rationalising/simplifying, someone can find a way of adding complication/expense without much real change!

 

[al78]

I asked a friend of mine about this who is a retired police officer.

"The police are obliged to investigation an allegation of sexual assault due to the serious nature and penalty for a crime under this act. In order to do so, they need to find the suspect and any witnesses that can corroborate either the victim or suspects statement.

Kissing a person without their consent can amount to a sexual offence. They have to satisfy Actus Reas and Men’s Rea before deciding if it should go to court. Guilty mind and guilty act. You can google those but make sure you add U.K. law as we are different to US. We have some offences that there is strict liability.

An example of strict liability is where a licensee of a pub is away for a weekend and leaves his Barman in charge. Whilst in the pub the barman allows under 18’s to consume alcohol in there. The licensee having no knowledge of this incident is therefore guilty of the offence. Because strict liability applies here.

So in order to make a decision about the suspect's behaviour did he commit the act and did he have a guilty mind. Then after those are satisfied. Is it in the public interest to prosecute this man. It certainly seems to be an over reaction but these are the tests that the police have to apply by law."

Make of that what you will.

 

[al78]

Under normal circumstances being kissed on the cheek by a stranger wouldn't bother me in the slightest, but these aren't normal circumstances. I wouldn't have gone as far as reporting it to the police but would nonetheless be VERY ****ed off if someone had done so any time in the past 6 weeks.

You need to be somewhat closer than 2 metres apart from a person to kiss them.

In addition, you don't know if the woman in question has been the victim of a sexual assault in the past which could make her more fearful near unfamiliar men, especially if she is alone with one.

It sounds like what the man did was done in the best of intentions, but it was careless. I really like women and look for any excuse to hug my female friends, but there is no way I am touching or invading the personal space of a stranger without permission.

 

[yorkie]

The law is a bit silly (yes this is wrong but it shouldn't be considered sexual assault!) and yes Debyshire police have a big problem too.

 

[Enthusiast]

We have some offences that there is strict liability.

Sexual assault is not a strict liability offence. As quoted above, the statute says that the "touching" has to be intentional. Without that intent there is no offence.

 

[al78]

Sexual assault is not a strict liability offence. As quoted above, the statute says that the "touching" has to be intentional. Without that intent there is no offence.

That is in what I quoted, that guilty mind and guilty act have to be proved. The point is the police have to investigate regardless of whether you or I or anyone else thinks it is absurd. The police cannot choose when and when not to investigate a report.

 

[Mojo]

I think it’s largely a cultural thing reflective of people from that part of the country.

 

[PeterC]

I think it’s largely a cultural thing reflective of people from that part of the country.

I remember a acquaintance from Teesside being shocked when I kissed a female friend in greeting in front of her husband.

 

[Jamesrob637]

Another reason why, when driving, I'll gently bump kerbs for ambulances and fire engines despite having a low-ish car, but police will have to stick behind me until the road widens out or there's nothing coming the other way for ages. Don't know how it is where other forum members live, but oncoming traffic tends to just keep moving whenever there's an emergency vehicle - it's usually dependent on the traffic travelling in the same direction to pull over to allow the emergency vehicle to have a fast run.

 

[Jamesrob637]

It's not just Derbyshire is it, many of our police forces have behaved totally ridiculously over the last couple of months.

We've probably just noticed it more as the streets have been quieter!

 

[robbeech]

It's not just Derbyshire is it, many of our police forces have behaved totally ridiculously over the last couple of months.

It’s absolutely not just Derbyshire, but they have featured heavily in news stories due to what can only be described as overreactions of epic proportions. I live in Derbyshire (only just) so you’d expect I’d hear more about them and be biased, but most of the stories I’ve seen about truly ridiculous, and in many cases unlawful behaviour by Derbyshire police have had a source outside the county, sometimes by some distance. As such it’s clear that there really is more absurd behaviour and appalling attitude from them, at the moment at the very least.
It was Derbyshire police who banned a friend of mine from driving for opening the car door for his injured mother to let her get into the driving seat. Some truly vile attitudes there, a shame as of course it drags down the reputation of most that are very good and just trying to do their job.

 

[MotCO]

It was Derbyshire police who banned a friend of mine from driving for opening the car door for his injured mother to let her get into the driving seat.

What on earth was their reasoning? Was your friend an uninsured or unlicensed driver or something and the police thought he was attempting to drive?

 

[Antman]

It’s absolutely not just Derbyshire, but they have featured heavily in news stories due to what can only be described as overreactions of epic proportions. I live in Derbyshire (only just) so you’d expect I’d hear more about them and be biased, but most of the stories I’ve seen about truly ridiculous, and in many cases unlawful behaviour by Derbyshire police have had a source outside the county, sometimes by some distance. As such it’s clear that there really is more absurd behaviour and appalling attitude from them, at the moment at the very least.
It was Derbyshire police who banned a friend of mine from driving for opening the car door for his injured mother to let her get into the driving seat. Some truly vile attitudes there, a shame as of course it drags down the reputation of most that are very good and just trying to do their job.

I don't think Derbyshire Police can ban anybody from driving.

Anyway getting back to the OP Derbyshire Police might also want to ask the driver how he got his lorry stuck under the bridge?

I don't know the circumstances surrounding this kiss but a few years ago my partner kissed a kindly policeman on the cheek when he stopped and changed a tyre for her............ fortunately it wasn't in Derbyshire.

 

[robbeech]

What on earth was their reasoning? Was your friend an uninsured or unlicensed driver or something and the police thought he was attempting to drive?

I think the officer had had a bad day. They were on the street waiting for a known criminal to return home to make an arrest but it had gone wrong so they were disappointed. It comes across as they wanted to make their trip to that street worthwhile. He had a full license and insurance, no record of any sort, he never held the keys (nor did the prosecution try to say he did) he just opened the driver’s door and helped his disabled and additionally injured at the time mother into the car.
He was a non emergency ambulance driver, doing hospital transfers for patients etc, so he lost his job and nearly lost his house. It was a big thing in the local papers. The officer in question was charged with some falsifying evidence of similar offence a few years later and booted off the force but it didn’t get my friend his 12 months of driving back, or his job, and he’s still paying off the debt now. For reference, not that it would ever be an excuse if he was in control of a vehicle, he blew 38.

I don't think Derbyshire Police can ban anybody from driving.

Ok, he was arrested and they were believed as that’s what happens. Consider the hair firmly split

 

[Spamcan81]

Another reason why, when driving, I'll gently bump kerbs for ambulances and fire engines despite having a low-ish car, but police will have to stick behind me until the road widens out or there's nothing coming the other way for ages. Don't know how it is where other forum members live, but oncoming traffic tends to just keep moving whenever there's an emergency vehicle - it's usually dependent on the traffic travelling in the same direction to pull over to allow the emergency vehicle to have a fast run.

So you'll happily delay the police even though you have absolutely no idea what the nature of their business is. Do you adobt this attitude even they're using blues and twos, i.e. an emergency shout?

 

[Antman]

I think the officer had had a bad day. They were on the street waiting for a known criminal to return home to make an arrest but it had gone wrong so they were disappointed. It comes across as they wanted to make their trip to that street worthwhile. He had a full license and insurance, no record of any sort, he never held the keys (nor did the prosecution try to say he did) he just opened the driver’s door and helped his disabled and additionally injured at the time mother into the car.
He was a non emergency ambulance driver, doing hospital transfers for patients etc, so he lost his job and nearly lost his house. It was a big thing in the local papers. The officer in question was charged with some falsifying evidence of similar offence a few years later and booted off the force but it didn’t get my friend his 12 months of driving back, or his job, and he’s still paying off the debt now. For reference, not that it would ever be an excuse if he was in control of a vehicle, he blew 38.
Ok, he was arrested and they were believed as that’s what happens. Consider the hair firmly split

No hair splitting at all........and it would be nice to hear the full story.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No hair splitting at all........and it would be nice to hear the full story.

I have certainly heard before of "drunk in charge of a vehicle" charges being pressed against people who were in or near a vehicle and had the keys, and those charges being successful. It is best not to have car keys on your person in any form when above the limit, regardless of what you do with them. If you end up in the situation of sleeping in your car outside a pub, for instance (not that I ever have), the best option is to unlock the car from inside the pub and leave the keys behind the bar, and to sleep in the back seat of the car. Though even then you potentially could take off the handbrake so it's not an absolute get-out.

 

[Antman]

I have certainly heard before of "drunk in charge of a vehicle" charges being pressed against people who were in or near a vehicle and had the keys, and those charges being successful. It is best not to have car keys on your person in any form when above the limit, regardless of what you do with them. If you end up in the situation of sleeping in your car outside a pub, for instance (not that I ever have), the best option is to unlock the car from inside the pub and leave the keys behind the bar, and to sleep in the back seat of the car. Though even then you potentially could take off the handbrake so it's not an absolute get-out.

Oh right, I didn't see any mention of the person being under the influence of alcohol and presumably it was a court of law who banned them from driving.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oh right, I didn't see any mention of the person being under the influence of alcohol and presumably it was a court of law who banned them from driving.

It mentions "blew 38" above, though I don't recall what the legal levels are.

 

[Jamesrob637]

So you'll happily delay the police even though you have absolutely no idea what the nature of their business is. Do you adobt this attitude even they're using blues and twos, i.e. an emergency shout?

As I say, I'll pull over when/where is safe to do so. In all my years of driving I've probably had an emergency vehicle behind me with blues and twos on maybe half a dozen times between all types on a single carriageway road, so the chances are so low anyway.

 

[Jamesrob637]

It mentions "blew 38" above, though I don't recall what the legal levels are.

0.35 is the drink drive limit in England; not sure about Scotland and Wales.