Jump to content

- - - - -

Judge Lets 23 Yr Old Burglar Keep £85K The Filth Found In His Kitchen

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic



    I live on HPC!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,387 posts

Posted 05 April 2012 - 09:48 PM

Surely by the same argument, we should dispense with all the money-laundering checks we have in the system?


This guy had thousands in the Nationwide so it wasn't uncovered until he had an actual brush with the authorities.

I get the feeling they're like airport security checks carried out by staff in a perfunctory manner without sentience inconveniencing the law-abiding, upon whose general support the authorities rely most on to assist them, and only of benefit to officious staff who like a power trip.

I bet Bin Laden could have put £100k cash in the average High St bank as long as he had an electricity bill and a driving licence with him.

#17 Tiger Woods?

Tiger Woods?

    HPC Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,126 posts
  • Location:God's own earth

Posted 05 April 2012 - 10:14 PM

Brunettes and Red Heads are where its at

You are a nonce and I claim my £5.

Expect knockers at the door any minute.
"I would offer congratulations were it not for this tentacle gripping my leg." - Jack Vance

#18 24gray24


    HPC Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,188 posts
  • Location:uk

Posted 05 April 2012 - 11:26 PM

As law and order begins to collapse in a society, (because the rich stop paying taxes essentially), the police force gradually morphs into highway robbery. First fines increase, then become arbitrary, then become outright demands for money with menaces.

This is what happened in Argentina in the 1999 collapse.
2012 prediction:

banks fall like dominoes in 2013, as funds are withdrawn into PMs.

Sarkozy, Obama and Merkel all fall from power.

the british housing crash is not gradual and slow, it drops like a stone on the day interest rates rise.

#19 mfs1959


    HPC Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 655 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:18 AM

From reading the article it seems that Hampshire Police applied for a cash forfeiture order under POCA. Recent case law has stated that if a cash forfeiture is applied for then the prosecution must show that the cash came from specific criminal conduct on the balance of probabilities.

In this instance the Courts were right not to allow the forfeiture as Hampshire Police could not show that the amount seized directly related to the offence for which the defendant was convicted. Poor form by Hampshire, they need to keep up with developments in POCA case law, which is very fluid.

I would imagine HMRC will look very carefully at this case. If he has amassed over £150,000 (£85k cash, £60k bonds, + Nationwide account) over 10 years he will have a healthy tax liability, and whatever fine HMRC decide to levy.

#20 Son of Taeper

Son of Taeper

    HPC Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,075 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 12:51 PM

A few years back the police broken into 2 safe deposit company vaults that had not complied with the new FSA regulations. The police broke into nearly 7,000 boxes regardless of the owners and they wanted proof of ownership of contents, however the Met police were hit with a lot of law suits and lost. There were things like cash and gold being found in boxes and the presumption was it was stolen etc. You expect to find things of value in a safe deposit boxes, that is the reason in having them.

There was someone here on HPC who had to go to their MP to get their gold back from the police.

I like it.
If we take it to a logical conclusion, and I'm walking through the town one night, are we saying I might need to prove ownership of my shoes?
The views expressed in my posts are my own based upon what I read on other information supplied by other HPC members.
These should not be used a a definitive answer to any posts I attempt to answer.

#21 Nationalist


    HPC Senior Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,207 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 12 April 2012 - 12:59 PM

POCA has been hideously abused. It's a civil recovery, so no legal aid - you're on your own if you're poor, and no translation if you're foreign and poor. The standard of proof is "balance of probability" not "beyond reasonable doubt" and the POCA act is probably unconstitutional, violating the 1689 Bill of Rights.

Of course nice English-speaking middle class people are not affected, so let's not worry about it. :P

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users