A two-year-old girl accused of hitting a car with a stick was investigated by police on suspicion of vandalism.*sigh*
The vehicle’s owner called the police claiming the child had deliberately damaged his car.
It has emerged that the toddler’s name and details are being held on file with Wiltshire Constabulary following the incident.
Are there any adults here in this story?
Officers say they were obliged to respond to the call-out, even though the toddler, who could barely walk, was too young to be arrested or even formally questioned about her actions.It seems this is one of the running disputes that so tax modern police forces:
A spokesman for the force said the family had already been engaged in a dispute with their neighbours, who owned the car, so police visited the little girl at her home in Chippenham, Wiltshire, to prevent these long-running tensions boiling over.Why not just let them fight it out amongst themselves?
Her details will not be added to the national police database but a force official admitted two was ‘an astonishingly young age’ to be visited by police.One would hope that the ‘relevant advice’ was not to be so stupid next time…
They added: ‘Within a street a couple of families were at severe loggerheads and one of the youngsters did something to one of the other family’s property.
'Police were called, they defused the situation and relevant advice was given.’
But no. It appears not. In fact, it appears they have been encouraged to call the police, amazing as that might sound:
‘The previous advice given to the parties involved in this street was, “You don’t go and sort it out yourself, you call the police” .Well, certainly.
‘As far as we are concerned, they did the right thing and the matter was resolved to the satisfaction of the people whose property was alleged to have been damaged. It was a mountain out of a molehill anyway.’
But you can’t complain about that when you’ve encouraged them to reclassify every small hillock as Mount Everest, can you?
One thing was a little disturbing, though:
He added: ‘We aren’t talking about the child being arrested, or interviewed – that can’t happen – and the child’s DNA was not taken as we have no lawful power to do that.’Not ‘It would be immoral’ or ‘too authoritarian’ or ‘pointless’.
Because ‘We have no lawful power to do that…’
You can almost hear him think to himself ‘…yet!’, can’t you?