My m8 said
-
-
Lmfao.................................Comment
-
Hey guys, smoggie was posting in good faith, non panic-mongering. He doesnt sound like a frivolous sort of character. . . He thought it may be useful to someone, its up to you to decide what you make of the info and to act, (or not) on it as you see fit.
No need to make sure if he gets a whiff of owt else, he says nowt for fear of ridicule. .
Come on BoroComment
-
Can the police issue a warrant? Don't they need some kind of proof first? Is being tipped off enough for a warrant?
Lets say they find something, what is the worst that can happen?Comment
-
a hefty fineComment
-
load of kack
(op that is )Comment
-
In English law, any interference with your personal liberty beyond, say, a tap on the shoulder, is prima facie unlawful. Similarly, it is a trespass to enter another person's home without that person's permission, or to interfere with another person's property. This applies as much to the police as it does to anyone else. It follows that unless a right to stop and/or search is granted by a specific legal provision, the search will be unlawful.
Because the police have to have some way to go about their business without being sued every day, English law provides that there are certain circumstances in which a `constable' is permitted to search you, your car, or your house. In law, a `constable' is any policeman or woman, of whatever rank, and I will use the same term here for brevity. In general, a constable is allowed to use `reasonable force' to carry out a lawful search. The search will be unlawful if it is not carried out in the proper way, or outside of the specific powers that the law provides. You are entitled - in theory - to use `reasonable force' to resist an unlawful search. I wouldn't advise it, however, because very often the legality of a search cannot be determined until there has been a court hearing, and if it goes against you, you'll be looking at a conviction for `assaulting a constable in the execution of his duty' in addition to any other problems you may have. In any case, the constable is only doing his or her job, and doesn't deserve an outburst of violence just because his interpretation of the law turns out to be different to yours.
Your principle reasons for wanting to show that a search was unlawful are (i) to support a claim for damages against the police, and (ii) to ask the court to exclude any evidence that the search revealed. However, while a claim for damages will very often succeed, evidence gathered from an unlawful search will not necessarily be rejected by a court; on the whole UK courts find the `fruit of the the poison tree' quite palatable. The likelihood of unlawfully-obtained evidence being excluded depends on the extent and flagrancy of the illegality
Except for anti-terrorist operations, unless you are arrested (see below) there are very few grounds on which a constable can enter your home to conduct a search without a search warrant from a magistrate. Even where there is a power to enter premises -- for example to prevent a breach of the peace -- this does not confer a power to search.
As far as anti-terrorist measures are concerned, if authorised by a senior police officer, a constable may enter your home without a warrant to search for materials that may be used for terrorism [s37 TA]. This power of search is subject to the same controls as anti-terrorist stop-and-search procedures. In particular, its use must be notified to the Home Secretary, and the authorising officer has to have reasonable grounds that it is necessary to prevent terrorism.
In most other circumstances a search will be unlawful without a warrant, unless you consent to it. A magistrate has a general power to issue a search warrant against your home if he or she reasonably believes that (i) a `serious arrestable offence' has been committed; and (ii) evidence relevant to the investigation of that offence is likely to be found there; and (iii) there is no other way to gain access except with a warrant. There are also technical restrictions that may not be very relevant; for example, the magistrate must have reasonable grounds for believing that material sought is not protected by legal professional privilege.
A `serious arrestable offence' is, in essence, one that results in death or serious injury, rape, kidnapping, or serious financial loss. It follows that a magistrate may not issue a search warrant to search for evidence of minor thefts, for example.
Magistrates also have specific powers to issue search warrants in respect of, for example, offensive weapons [s142 CJA], nuclear weapons (!) [s52 ATCSA], dangerous chemicals [s66 ATCSA], hidden terrorists [s42 TA], firearms or imitation firearms [s46 FA], and controlled drugs [s23 MDA].
In all cases, the magistrate is expected to grant the warrant only if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the sought articles are likely to be found. However, it is not uncommon for the police to ask for, and get, a warrant to search for a broad range of articles, e.g., `electrical items'.
A search warrant is normally valid for one month after issue; it cannot be lawfully executed if this time period has expired.
ATCSA: Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
CJA: Criminal Justice Act 1988
CJPA: Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001
CJPOA: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994
PACE: Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
MDA: Misuse of Drugs Act 1971
FA: Firearms Act 1968
TA: Terrorism Act 2000Comment
-
personally i think a pinch of salt is required with these tales, years ago the same storys done the rounds about TV license inspectors being backed up with swat teams and special legal powers and shit, when in actual fact they are hired goons and nothing else.
in the unlikely event of getting a house call from VM etc wanting to enter your property, promptly produce a camera of some description stick it in their face (avoiding actual contact if possible) and tell them you are recording this intrusion for legal purposes, see how they run
Comment
-
OK friends this story is true and I was the villain------a few of you including the "Boss" know that I am involved elsewhere on the net trying hard to upset Mr M******. I have personally been arrested, heavilly fined and my PC and receivers confiscated by those nice people at S**.
I was and still am a so called satellite hacker and c***s*****, illegal because Mr M says so. I have been grassed up at least 3 times by other hackers and been fined over 3 grand to date----I have proof and its been in local press. I have lost a lot of equipment but whilst the nice people at the house of S** continue to fleece their clients, people such as myself will continue to hack----although I now do it from abroad.
V***** and S** are being allowed to run riot in this country and if you don't conform or pay their ransom size subscriptions then quite possibly you may pay the price.
The answer to this is keep your mouths shut if you have dodgy equipment---don't tell your friends unless you really trust them and don't answer the door to them dodgy men in suits carrying clipboards.
Have Fun.
The Reaper."Everything I do is legal---I think."Comment
-
good comments keep it realComment
)
Comment