Pity poor Richard McNaughton. He has been complaining of antisocial behaviour at his Guinness Trust flat since 2004, but has been told there is ‘too little evidence’ to take action.
So he hit on the idea of CCTV, and paid for its installation himself.
The 41-year-old installed the system after he was told there was not enough evidence to back up his complaints about antisocial behaviour.So you won’t act unless there’s evidence, and then he’s prevented from actually collecting that evidence?
Now staff at his housing association have warned the CCTV system could be a “cause of friction” and its use might breach his tenancy agreement.
Perhaps you should change your name to the Kafka Trust…
It isn’t even as if he’s the only one, either:
He bought the cameras to help him build up a log of gripes and said he would never be able to provide the information required by the trust, if he had to take them down.Why indeed?
Mr McNaughton said: “Instead of trying to help, the trust is saying they want me to take the cameras down.
“I know there are at least three other people around here with security cameras looking out over the grassed areas – why am I the only one who is being criticised?”
No one from the Guinness Trust was available to comment.There’s a surprise…
He has only paid for what the police IN PARTNERSHIP with the housing association should do to investigate the allegations. The supposed breach of tenancy agreement is nonsense and they know it. Having worked on a particular estate in the early 90's I can tell you that it was very easy to sort things out very quickly but it requires dedicated officers and staff and their presence must be fairly constant. It also means getting the CPS to assist otherwise a lot of hard work can get dumped for a variety of reasons. These days, the moe laws, the aprtnerships and all the other bollocks seems to have made things worse NOT easier. best thing this chap could do is make the allegations fit the definition of a HATE CRIME, no wriggle room there for the authorities. Shame ALL allegations aren't dealt with equally, it would go a long way to help too.
As ranter implies, Mr McNaughton should allege that he has become the target for homophobic taunts. A dozen of Colchester's finest would turn up in 3 minutes with dogs and provision for immediate access to counselling facilities for Mr McN. Evidence? Not needed since all Mr McN requires is to "feel" got at.
For real crime this is again a case of remembering the idea is to "reduce reported crime".
Not to reduce crime, oh no. Not to presecute criminals, cetainly not.
This chap is going against everything our police and other authorities are intending so no wonder he is in trouble!
Hopefully the new lot will eventually getting round to doing something about this sort of stuff but it's a faint hope I admit.
"He has only paid for what the police IN PARTNERSHIP with the housing association should do to investigate the allegations. "
Rather like a person sending their kids to private school, because the state-owned ones he's forced to pay for from taxation are, well, utterly rubbish...
"As ranter implies, Mr McNaughton should allege that he has become the target for homophobic taunts."
I've no doubt that would get a quicker response.
"Hopefully the new lot will eventually getting round to doing something about this sort of stuff but it's a faint hope I admit."
It's going to take time. For every cop who would relish the thought of going back to normal policing, there's at least two who have really and truly bought into the left-wing crime theories...
For every cop who would relish the thought of going back to normal policing, there's at least two who have really and truly bought into the left-wing crime theories...
What would a farmer do to a sheepdog that decided to go after the easy sheep rather than the troublesome wolves?
Post a Comment