Last night I saw they mother of the kid I got out of nick the other week. She told us that they had gone away to her mum's for a week but had to come home because D hit her gran. Good grief! Apparently she ran off but got scared by some Black girls on a nearby council estate and came back. Now D is sleeping in a tent in her friend's back garden on a local estate (so much for not hanging round with her anymore!). Well at least mum knows where she is and they come home when they want to wash their hair and D needs to get a change of clothes.
I don't know! This school holiday it's gone stupid. For example, I got woken up at 3.00 a.m. in the early hours of Friday by what sounded like muntered teenagers shouting and screaming and I yelled out of the window to tell them to shut up and 'phoned the police to report a disturbance but it was a waste of time. Nobody gives a toss about all these kids wandering the streets and drinking round the clock.
Another incident occurred the previous Friday night – well, Saturday morning really – as I discovered a towel had gone missing from the washing line. At about 10.00 a.m. on Saturday, I saw a bunch of lads walk past the house, one of whom I recognised, and he had my towel slung over his shoulder. I called after them and told them the towel looked suspiciously like one that went missing off the line. They said that they had found it on the memorial in the park, apologised and put it back. Well, at least the towel had an exciting night. But I ask you! Kids wandering the streets with cans of lager at 10 in the morning – someone should be watching what they're up to surely!
John Denham, now minister for this new DUIS was on about it on telly this morning saying they needed to tackle the problem. Well, Mr. Einstein, it's simple really – get more coppers on the streets stopping then doing it! It is not rocket science! If they were my kids I would be down the park embarrassing them not going 'ooh, what can you do?' there's loads that can be done. I blame the parents – useless bastards!
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Dirty Greedy Bastards
Yesterday we went to Halifax Show. We looked at the funny vegetables and flower arrangements and bees and some crafts. We bought some cake and nice homemade stuff in jars, then had a pause before looking at more stalls and watching dogs doing tricks. We then bought pork pies for lunch and watched some more dog tricks and then went to see the funny chickens. There was one that was absolutely huge! I have no idea how they get it so big! After that, we had a pint of Black Sheep and watched some more dogs – this time with carts, then some horses with carts, then came home.
Most enjoyable, bu the day was marred slightly by a lack of sheep, goats and cattle due to the outbreak of foot and mouth in Surrey the other week. I thought movement restrictions didn't apply outside the exclusion zone anymore but perhaps they got the news too late in Halifax. Anyway, I think it's daft. It looks like that Meriel research lab is to blame anyhow. I bet they get away with it – it's like the Bernard Matthews bird flu scandal. He ends up getting compensation from taxpayers money. Outrageous!
And talking of outrageous, looks like the unscrupulous acts of venture capitalists has finally burst the bubble on the false economy based on loans of non-existent money. So now we all have to suffer – the dirty greedy bastards!
Most enjoyable, bu the day was marred slightly by a lack of sheep, goats and cattle due to the outbreak of foot and mouth in Surrey the other week. I thought movement restrictions didn't apply outside the exclusion zone anymore but perhaps they got the news too late in Halifax. Anyway, I think it's daft. It looks like that Meriel research lab is to blame anyhow. I bet they get away with it – it's like the Bernard Matthews bird flu scandal. He ends up getting compensation from taxpayers money. Outrageous!
And talking of outrageous, looks like the unscrupulous acts of venture capitalists has finally burst the bubble on the false economy based on loans of non-existent money. So now we all have to suffer – the dirty greedy bastards!
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Who is the Real Public Enemy
A friend came round last night to ask if I'd help get her daughter out of nick. She had been arrested following trouble at t'mill and seeing as mum was the complainant, another appropriate adult had to go down to the police station. I was told it was just to collect her, but in fact she had to be processed and interviewed in front of me. D looked scared to death when they brought her out of the cells and she was surprised to see me. Later she said they had told her nothing about what was going on.
She was read her rights, and when asked about wanting a solicitor she seemed uncertain. As we were about to sign that she waived her right to a solicitor, I asked her if she was sure about that. She said that she would like to have one. The police looked a bit pissed off about that but explained that they had to get a duty solicitor. In the meantime, they would do the processing, which involved taking a description and mug shot, fingerprints and DNA swab.
Now hang on a minute: when did that one creep in? Apparently, all suspects are now DNA sampled, and this can be taken by force if necessary. D is just turned 12, and will now be on the national DNA database for life. My god! Which law was that in?
We were, however, impressed by the fingerprint computer – quite outstanding technology there!
After processing, D and I were asked to wait in the interview room, and I asked for drinks – D said she hadn't had anything to eat or drink all day and wasn't sure what time she'd been brought in – I think it was around 7.00 p.m.
I shall now try and relay the events and subsequent charges, according to both mother and daughter's events.
On Sunday night, some friends of D's came round to the house and asked if she was coming out. Her mum said no as it was 9.30 p.m. and too late, and she didn't want her being out with those friends as they were a bad influence. She locked the front door and hid the keys.
After some arguing, D picked up a chair and threatened to break the kitchen window. According to D, her mum dared her to do it and D went for the window with the chair but intended to stop before hitting it, was unable to stop and so it went through. According to mum, D hit the window with the chair twice until it broke. By both accounts, D then escaped through the open window.
D was out all night. She says she stayed at a friend's whose mother said she should talk to her mum, and D agreed but said she needed to calm down first so was allowed to stay over. Her mum reckons she stayed out all night in the park, because...
At 7.00 a.m. Monday morning, D cam back to the house and went into the living room. The telly was on so D thought her mum was awake, but she was asleep on the sofa bed. According to mum, D stole a packet of cigarettes and money from her handbag. According to D, she took the cigs as her friends had asked her to get some, but she didn't even see the handbag thus hadn't taken the money. D left the house again.
D returned later, and tried to go upstairs. Her mum told her to get out, and D replied it was her house too. According to mum, D attacked her, grabbing her wrists and kicking her twice. According to D, mum grabbed her hair, and D kicked her once to get her off, then ran off again.
The police later found D in the park and at first told her they were taking her home. However, I think it was at this point that the police advised mum to bring charges so that D would have to go to the police station and it would put her off crime for life.
From what I saw, it has done the trick, but it's rather a harsh lesson. D was eventually given a juvenile reprimand: the charge sheet itemised reckless damage and stealing cigarettes (she'll laugh about that later). This will be against her record until she is 18. We finally got out at 12.45 a.m., 3 hours after I arrived at the station. As we were leaving, the officers said they new D's friends well and advised her not to hang around with them. I think she had by now worked out for herself this was not a good idea.
Both D and her mum said they wanted to move away, although they had some different ideas as to where.
I've known D since she was 3 and when she was younger, she witnessed a lot of domestic violence between her parents and had no real boundaries or routines such as regular bedtimes. Until a couple of years ago, she seemed to be growing up relatively unscathed, but she is hitting adolescence with a bang.
I was glad to be there for D and I hope it really has scared her enough to stay out of trouble. But I have a bad feeling about her now being on the police database at just turned 12 (even though she acts like she's going on 16!). I have been reading some articles about the DNA database, and a lot of commentators have pointed out that it brings us one step closer to a police state. I concur, but not one of them mentions that it could be yet another way of criminalising a generation of young people. At least D didn't get an ASBO – don't get me started on that one!
Let me just ask - who is the real public enemy? D, or the system that turns her into a criminal for having a fight with her mum?
She was read her rights, and when asked about wanting a solicitor she seemed uncertain. As we were about to sign that she waived her right to a solicitor, I asked her if she was sure about that. She said that she would like to have one. The police looked a bit pissed off about that but explained that they had to get a duty solicitor. In the meantime, they would do the processing, which involved taking a description and mug shot, fingerprints and DNA swab.
Now hang on a minute: when did that one creep in? Apparently, all suspects are now DNA sampled, and this can be taken by force if necessary. D is just turned 12, and will now be on the national DNA database for life. My god! Which law was that in?
We were, however, impressed by the fingerprint computer – quite outstanding technology there!
After processing, D and I were asked to wait in the interview room, and I asked for drinks – D said she hadn't had anything to eat or drink all day and wasn't sure what time she'd been brought in – I think it was around 7.00 p.m.
I shall now try and relay the events and subsequent charges, according to both mother and daughter's events.
On Sunday night, some friends of D's came round to the house and asked if she was coming out. Her mum said no as it was 9.30 p.m. and too late, and she didn't want her being out with those friends as they were a bad influence. She locked the front door and hid the keys.
After some arguing, D picked up a chair and threatened to break the kitchen window. According to D, her mum dared her to do it and D went for the window with the chair but intended to stop before hitting it, was unable to stop and so it went through. According to mum, D hit the window with the chair twice until it broke. By both accounts, D then escaped through the open window.
D was out all night. She says she stayed at a friend's whose mother said she should talk to her mum, and D agreed but said she needed to calm down first so was allowed to stay over. Her mum reckons she stayed out all night in the park, because...
At 7.00 a.m. Monday morning, D cam back to the house and went into the living room. The telly was on so D thought her mum was awake, but she was asleep on the sofa bed. According to mum, D stole a packet of cigarettes and money from her handbag. According to D, she took the cigs as her friends had asked her to get some, but she didn't even see the handbag thus hadn't taken the money. D left the house again.
D returned later, and tried to go upstairs. Her mum told her to get out, and D replied it was her house too. According to mum, D attacked her, grabbing her wrists and kicking her twice. According to D, mum grabbed her hair, and D kicked her once to get her off, then ran off again.
The police later found D in the park and at first told her they were taking her home. However, I think it was at this point that the police advised mum to bring charges so that D would have to go to the police station and it would put her off crime for life.
From what I saw, it has done the trick, but it's rather a harsh lesson. D was eventually given a juvenile reprimand: the charge sheet itemised reckless damage and stealing cigarettes (she'll laugh about that later). This will be against her record until she is 18. We finally got out at 12.45 a.m., 3 hours after I arrived at the station. As we were leaving, the officers said they new D's friends well and advised her not to hang around with them. I think she had by now worked out for herself this was not a good idea.
Both D and her mum said they wanted to move away, although they had some different ideas as to where.
I've known D since she was 3 and when she was younger, she witnessed a lot of domestic violence between her parents and had no real boundaries or routines such as regular bedtimes. Until a couple of years ago, she seemed to be growing up relatively unscathed, but she is hitting adolescence with a bang.
I was glad to be there for D and I hope it really has scared her enough to stay out of trouble. But I have a bad feeling about her now being on the police database at just turned 12 (even though she acts like she's going on 16!). I have been reading some articles about the DNA database, and a lot of commentators have pointed out that it brings us one step closer to a police state. I concur, but not one of them mentions that it could be yet another way of criminalising a generation of young people. At least D didn't get an ASBO – don't get me started on that one!
Let me just ask - who is the real public enemy? D, or the system that turns her into a criminal for having a fight with her mum?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)