jchinuk Posted September 7, 2010 Share Posted September 7, 2010 (edited) Has anyone any insight into this story, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1309728/Guns-rocket-launchers-missiles-seized-police-Worcester-house-raid.html ? Is is really an "arms hoard", it looks more like some poor blokes collection of arms and ammunition to me. The phrase "West Mercia Police said the pre-planned operation was launched as a result of 'received intelligence' but refused to elaborate on who tipped officers off about the weapons cache." sounds vaguely sinister, either police reacted to gossip or are out to stop people collecting such material. jch Edited September 7, 2010 by jchinuk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmite!! Posted September 7, 2010 Share Posted September 7, 2010 (edited) I think the answer is in this line.. Mr Lane, a father-of-one, was arrested on suspicion of possessing an illegal firearm over the haul and has now been bailed pending further inquiries. & as such they would seize anything else they found to be sent of for forensic examination to make sure the deacs haven't been tampered with.. this happened a few years ago to a well known dealer, took him a couple of years to get all his stuff back & he was in the clear. I was brought in a few years ago when a certain sorting office was cleared & the bomb squad was brought in after a package addressed to me became damaged, it contained a few 30mm rarden rounds & the women in the sorting office panicked, I was bailed for 3 months until I received the rounds back in a nice little box with a window & the rounds in plastic tubes.. the label on the front said "EOD.. certified FFE, these items are legal to own" unusually it was the EOD that carried out the testing & not the FSS, maybe because it was they that removed them. The phrase "West Mercia Police said the pre-planned operation was launched as a result of 'received intelligence' but refused to elaborate on who tipped officers off about the weapons cache." sounds vaguely sinister, either police reacted to gossip or are out to stop people collecting such material. Or they were acting on information that he had LIVE Firearms.. if he had a registered Cannon on licence it would be unusual to raid him, he would of normally just of got a visit from his FEO .. makes me think that the cannon may not of been on ticket.. Edited September 7, 2010 by Marmite!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jchinuk Posted September 7, 2010 Author Share Posted September 7, 2010 Thanks for the inside info, though sadly the news that "no further action" will be taken will not get the same news coverage. jch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmite!! Posted September 8, 2010 Share Posted September 8, 2010 Thanks for the inside info, though sadly the news that "no further action" will be taken will not get the same news coverage. jch "no further action" so is that the latest news then?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cosrec Posted September 8, 2010 Share Posted September 8, 2010 Can read a lot in to this part of report if you want "'There are other matters ongoing with the police at the moment but I do not want to talk about them." Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1309728/Guns-rocket-launchers-missiles-seized-police-Worcester-house-raid.html#ixzz0yty8vOEK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmite!! Posted September 8, 2010 Share Posted September 8, 2010 "'There are other matters ongoing with the police at the moment but I do not want to talk about them." Yes I suspect there are... Hmmmmmmmmmm....:stop: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cosrec Posted September 8, 2010 Share Posted September 8, 2010 Stum :undecided: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveo578 Posted September 8, 2010 Share Posted September 8, 2010 jchinukThe phrase "West Mercia Police said the pre-planned operation was launched as a result of 'received intelligence' but refused to elaborate on who tipped officers off about the weapons cache." sounds vaguely sinister, either police reacted to gossip or..... "received inteligence" is part of an inregular noun, We have "received inteligence" You have "unsubstanciated rumour" She has "gossip" The police are very good at going off half cocked (sic) as he is the chairman of a local shooting club an initial enquiry at low level by the FEO would probably been sufficient to ascertain whether an offence had been commited. safariswing I was bailed for 3 months The problem with being "bailed pending further enquiries" the accused under English Law can be DNA tested and the result held on file forever. safariswingOr they were acting on information that he had LIVE Firearms.. if he had a registered Cannon on licence it would be unusual to raid him, he would of normally just of got a visit from his FEO .. makes me think that the cannon may not of been on ticket.. Again low key enquiries by the FEO or even an instructed officer would have resolved the matter, there is too much media inspired policing in the UK today (who tipped off the press?) -obviously they wanted their own 15minutes of fame. Remember heedless of the end result this will be classified in "home Office Returns" as a major fire-arms incident justifying additional resouces at a time when budgets are about to be cut -if that's not too political. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timbo Posted September 8, 2010 Share Posted September 8, 2010 If it does all come to nought then perhaps one for the IPCC.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landycommander Posted September 8, 2010 Share Posted September 8, 2010 Given that this story was reported by the Daily Mail you would be advised to take any police related story with a shovel full of salt! The Daily Mail seem to have a vendetta against the British police service and will turn non-news into a front page exclusive! The police are duty bound by law to investigate intelligence provided to them, but it does seem they went a bit over the top! the DNA should also not be a problem for any law abiding person! it may one day identify you in an accident etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferrettkitt Posted September 8, 2010 Share Posted September 8, 2010 With Daily Mail in the sentence that should be enough to know that its plain gossip. They should have red banner behind 'Daily Mail' and join the rest of the red rags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveo578 Posted September 8, 2010 Share Posted September 8, 2010 Ferrettkitt They should have red banner behind 'Daily Mail' and join the rest of the red rags Red banner behind the logo:argh: I say sir are you one of those dammed anarchists:??? Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveo578 Posted September 8, 2010 Share Posted September 8, 2010 landycommander the DNA should also not be a problem for any law abiding person! You obviously have very little faith in the Scottish legal system which has ordered that DNA samples must be removed from police files if the accused is not found guilty of an offence or removed in the case is NFA -in the remainder of Great Britain even if an accused is acquitted or does not get to court (NFA) the samples are held on file -which by inference means the accused person has a defacto "criminal record". how will you feel in the future if insurance companies are allowed access to police files -as they have been with DLVA records? DNA like finger prints is assumed to be foolproof it is not. scientific DNA is (I routinely give samples for university hospital research) police gathering and crime lab methodology is not foolproof and one of the scientists involved in formulating the current forenstic DNA protocols has publicly said that he is unhappy with the routine retention and poor scientific control of DNA in the English legal system. it may one day identify you in an accident etcI would be happy to have an independent body possibly by one the universities who have real expertise to hold a register of all UK citizens for the purposes of identifying anyone killed or seriously injured in an accident, but except for convicted criminals no records should be available for investigating authorities to trawl- they are not by defination dis-interested persons. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landycommander Posted September 8, 2010 Share Posted September 8, 2010 You obviously have very little faith in the Scottish legal system which has ordered that DNA samples must be removed from police files if the accused is not found guilty of an offence or removed in the case is NFA -in the remainder of Great Britain even if an accused is acquitted or does not get to court (NFA) the samples are held on file -which by inference means the accused person has a defacto "criminal record". how will you feel in the future if insurance companies are allowed access to police files -as they have been with DLVA records? DNA like finger prints is assumed to be foolproof it is not. scientific DNA is (I routinely give samples for university hospital research) police gathering and crime lab methodology is not foolproof and one of the scientists involved in formulating the current forenstic DNA protocols has publicly said that he is unhappy with the routine retention and poor scientific control of DNA in the English legal system. I would be happy to have an independent body possibly by one the universities who have real expertise to hold a register of all UK citizens for the purposes of identifying anyone killed or seriously injured in an accident, but except for convicted criminals no records should be available for investigating authorities to trawl- they are not by defination dis-interested persons. Steve I am employed at the front line of the Scottish legal system! And have first hand taken many DNA samples and fingerprints. I am not really that concerned about the retention limits on DNA. My DNA is on file along with my finger prints and I have nothing to fear from them being held on the database as I have done nothing wrong. many people seen to think that they live in a Police state and that the government will plot against them if their details are held on a database. The problem with the system in England and Wales is that there is far too many organisations dealing with the information/samples. In Scotland once it has been taken by the police it goes to one agency which is a national agency and serves all 8 Scottish forces. anyway, seems like we have went off on a tangent from the original topic! The Daily Mail have turned a non-news story into another opportunity to bash the police!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveo578 Posted September 8, 2010 Share Posted September 8, 2010 (edited) Mod edit..topic has gone so far off topic so thread locked Edited September 8, 2010 by Marmite!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts