UK police break into -50- homes pretending to be robbers to highlight....crime?

[Poll_Blind]

From Police criticised for staging mock burglaries:

It was meant to be an imaginative way of highlighting how easy it is to break into people's homes – but police in Devon today faced criticism for posing as burglars and sneaking into the homes of unsuspecting residents and collecting valuables in "swag bags".

Devon and Cornwall police – who left the swag bags behind – found more than 50 unsecured properties and claimed their owners were glad to receive the wake-up call and subsequent advice.

But not all residents were happy, and a lawyer suggested the officers may have been guilty of trespass.

Householder Mike Parsons said: "Talk about a police state. Since when have members of the constabulary been allowed to enter into someone's private property uninvited and without a warrant?

Much more detail at the link. Amazing. I'm very surprised that none of these police were attacked by homeowners rightfully believing they were actually being burgled. Talk about nuts!

Think about all the money spent to commit those "fake" crimes- I put "fake" in quotes because I believe, whatever the motivation, that real crimes were committed in the execution of these truly bizarre "awareness" exercises. Shouldn't those police be doing something a little more worthwhile, like, um, policing or something? Is this what happens when you have too many police and not enough crimes: The police go around working both angles to show you what you're missing?

PB

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

1. Ask yourself, "Why would this never happen in the US?" (n/t)

[Poll_Blind]

2. Because at least one of those homeowners would be armed and shoot them dead?

:shrug:

Cause that's what I'm thinking.

OnEdit: What the hell was I thinking- this does happen in the U.S. all the time when police, for instance, raid the wrong house. And sometimes those innocent people are armed and take shots at the police- and then the police gun them down. I was imagining this as UK-style police breaking into U.S. houses, not U.S. style police.

Yuck.

PB

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

5. No matter what style of police... British or American.

In America, we have the right to choose to defense as a first tactic against intruders. If you're allowed to own firearms, you can even use them to aid your defense in most cases. The mere fact that any of these british cops felt they could do this with little risk of getting cut, shot, or bludgeoned is clear evidence of the nanny state the UK has become. :(

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. Technically, they did not 'break in'. They entered unsecured premises.

That doesn't make it right, to my mind, but it's not as if they were jimmying doors and breaking windows.

There is a slightly higher burglary rate in the UK - but even so, the simplest way to stop a burglar is lock the fracking door.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

6. Is the UK different than the US?

In the US, if you enter another's premises you can be charged with criminal trespass or Breaking & Entering - even if the door/window is unlocked. The entry does not need to be "forcible" nor do any locks need "picked" or "jimmied". Obviously, if you are caught with stolen property it's definitely B&E with burglary as well.

It's an interesting subject matter though because if you have insurance they typically will not pay a claim for stolen property from a car, home, or business if the area was unsecured. Kind of a double standard. The insurance industry likes to use the phrase "invitation of criminal behavior" or "gross negligence".

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. Correct -'criminal trespass' is not the same in England

Any person can enter a place if the landowners permit it. However, this does not necessarily make a permanent right of access, and unless they have dedicated a bit of land to be permanently open it is within the power of the landowner or their agent/representative to ask any person to leave, assuming that person does not have some other lawful reason to be there.

The landowner or their agent/representative does not have to give a reason. If the person does not go immediately, by the shortest practical route, then they are trespassing. Despite the well known sign ‘trespassers will be prosecuted’, trespass is not a criminal offence and trespassers cannot usually be prosecuted. They can, however, be sued in a civil court. To be successful in court the landowner must prove a significant financial loss as a result of the trespass and thus it's extremely unlikely that this would ever happen.
...
There are things that can turn trespass into a criminal activity, namely causing criminal damage, taking items away from a site, and threatening behaviour towards staff/security (this can be verbal as well as physical).

Criminal Trespass is a new law introduced in the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 and makes any trespass on Crown land a criminal offence. The law was introduced primarily to stop protestors disrupting military actions or invading places like Buckingham Palace & The Houses of Parliament. However the law applies to any piece of land owned by the Crown (including MoD sites). The penalty for criminal trespass is up to 6 months in prison with up to a £5000 fine.

http://www.derelictplaces.co.uk/index.php?do=trespass

As the lawyer says in the article:

No one has an automatic right of entry to someone else's property without consent. That applies to police officers and members of the public, and whether it is unsecured is irrelevant. Police need a warrant from a magistrates court if they wish to do this, or they may enter a property if they believe an offence is being committed. To my mind, if they have entered properties like this, they are trespassers. Trespassing is not a criminal offence but it is considered a civil wrong and could be pursued through the courts as such."

He added: "What if one of the homeowners goes on to claim something has gone missing while the officers were in the property? There is a risk of an accusation of burglary. And everyone is entitled to use reasonable force to defend their property from intruders. Conceivably an officer could have been attacked."

So it's possible there might be some finding against the police in a court, but it's not clear. 'Reasonable force' probably wouldn't include shooting someone dressed as a policeman with no weapons when they're not threatening you physically in any way at all, I'd think, though that would be up to a jury. Perhaps a jury might accept a rugby tackle and a few punches and kicks as "reasonable force to defend their property".

[pitohui]

4. the police in u.k. have been up to some real performance art lately

you gotta love england, this is the story that for me, finally overtops the gimmick where they had former pickpockets do the "putpickets" -- putting goodies INTO people's purses and pockets -- in london abt the silly season time last year

of course this is wrong on so many levels but as art and performance, i don't know, you just gotta love it