Follow-up: The Brits Lose Another Subject

Last August I wrote an article titled "The Brits Lose Another Subject", detailing the circumstances under which a young Londoner was assaulted (slashed repeadedly in the head and neck with a knife) only to have the Bobbies do absolutely nothing to apprehend the assailant ... even though they knew who it was and where he lived.


Six months later, the same 22-year old Peter Woodhams was again accosted on the street in front of his home and shot dead. This in a country where guns, especially handguns (which was the weapon of choice here), are forbidden to law-abiding Brits.

The punks still have guns. Only the law-abiding are forbidden the means to defend themselves.

After Woodhams' death, the police finally got off their dead butts and stopped by the punks house. Eventually they arrested him and put him on trial for murder.


This week, the punk was convicted of murder despite his strong defense that "he only meant to scare his victim."

How had he intended to scare his victim?

At the Old Bailey, Tucker [the murderer] said he believed the gun he fired would only "go bang".

He said he was on his mobile phone when he saw an angry Mr Woodhams coming towards him swearing.

"I put my phone in my pocket and pulled out the gun and started shooting," he told the court.

He said he fired the weapon "to scare him, make him go in the other direction", but then noticed the blood on his chest.

Very observant of him, 'noticing' the unexpected blood on the chest of his (unarmed) victim. One wonders what he had THOUGHT the logical outcome would have been. I can picture him now, looking down at the gun in his hand and scratching his head with the other hand, muttering to himself "Sonovabitch, how the heck did THAT happen?"

Here's the punch line, and this one will just kill you:

Nine police officers are now facing a misconduct inquiry after claims they did not carry out a detailed enough investigation into the incident.

Talk about bloody british understatement.

----------------------------------------------
UPDATE: March 29, 2007

The Bobbies must be truly desperate for 'good press'. This from the London Daily Mail:

A peeping Tom has been banned from going out at night without a fluorescent jacket on.

Stephen Cooper, 24, has been ordered to wear the high-visibility clothing so he can be spotted by potential victims.

The pervert, who has pleaded guilty to voyeurism, received the order after being caught creeping into a woman's garden and staring through a crack in her curtains.

Great. They can't do anything about assault, very little about murder; but they're great on controlling Peeping Toms.

The Brits must be really unimpressed with the priorities of their police, right?

Welllllll .... maybe. Maybe not. Here's a comment attached to the article:

It's not often I'm left speechless but truly after reading this article it did happen.

I'm so pleased he will be highly visible - that should put everyone's mind at rest. Thank goodness for British justice.

"British Justice." Right.

It's unclear whether this comment should be taken at face value, or the British gift for sarcasm still lives.

We hope it's the latter. Otherwise, there is no hope at all.

BUT WAIT! There's Still Hope!

According to The Telegraph (UK),
Children Face Criminal Checks From The Cradel!

Checks will be made on all children to identify potential criminals under an extension of the "surveillance state" announced by Tony Blair.

A Downing Street review of law and order also foreshadowed greater use of sophisticated CCTV, an expanded DNA database and "instant justice" powers for police.

The review is intended to chart a course for the next 10 years by focusing more "on the offender, not the offence".

Most crime is committed by a small number of offenders who could be identified almost from birth, ministers believe.

---

The Government believes children can be prevented from becoming offenders if early intervention is targeted at those who displayed certain traits. These include having a short attention span or living in a deprived environment.

Here's a list of "features" of the proposed action:

• Universal checks on children to see who is at risk of becoming an offender.

• More support for problem families.

• Expand DNA database to include people who "come into contact" with police.

• More summary powers for the police to hand out instant justice.

• Better use of more sophisticated CCTV.

• Prolific offender orders for repeat offenders.

• Seizing non-cash assets from suspected criminals.

• Special units and courts for mentally ill offenders.

• Tougher community sentences.

• More drug rehab in jails.

• Review of police service to reduce red tape and put more bobbies on the beat.

Great. The bobbies they already have 'on the beat' are demonstrably incompetent, lacking in initiative and notoriously lazy. What's the solution? Certainly not to thin the ranks of dickwads. Instead, they're going to hire more dickwads.

And they're going to target your children as "bad boys" before they graduate from nappies. Whatever happened to the concept of "Crime AND Punishment"? Now they're going to punish 'potential' criminals, but now word on getting proven criminals off the streets.

Sorry, Great Britain.

Soon there will be only incarcerated maybe-wanna-be's, and Yobs.

We in the civilized world are gonna miss you.