Watching out for crime (From Daily Echo)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
Watching out for crime
10:19am Friday 12th November 2010 in Your Say
By Matthew Greening, Chief Superintendent
Watching out for crime
One evening this week I was at the Southampton Neighbourhood Watch annual meeting.
If you don't know Neighbourhood Watch then you might think it's about coffee mornings or nosey neighbours.
If you do know about it then you probably realise that it's a great scheme supported by people who just care about their own and their neighbour's safety from crime and they are prepared to do something about it for themselves and each other.
We heard about some great examples of local work and a determination to keep building on that and in particular encourage more young people into being neighbourhood watch members and supporters.
It doesn't cost and it doesn’t take much time up. The most important thing about it is sharing information, often from police, between close neighbours and looking out for each other, for example so that people tell each other about suspected bogus callers to homes. Neighbourhood Watch can be a great way for people to build relationships and trust with each other.
We've currently got a rise in the number of houses being burgled in the City and some people are making it too easy for criminals by leaving property on show and houses insecure. Please be careful about the security of your own home and look out for each other. If you might like to develop a scheme locally then contact your local police Safer Neighbourhood Team or Southampton City Council and we can help.
Watching crime as it actually happens though is thankfully very rare still.
Except, that is, when there is a public demonstration. I expect lots of us have seen the images of 'students' smashing windows in London. Did you notice though who was surrounding the individual and watching as he kicked a window in?
There was a ring of photographers and camera people all around him and other demonstrators were some way back. So what was really going on?
A student demo or a thug performing in front of cameras knowing he would soon be seen across the world on TV, YouTube etc. A few criminals looking for a few minutes of fame and a load of journalists ready and willing to help them achieve it. Before you come back and say there were some police just stood watching too then I note the PM criticised the police planning but rightly praised the few officers who were in the face of such anger and hatred.
At G20 police were criticised for being too heavy handed, at this demo we were supposedly not strong enough. Is there just the right amount of police force used or just the right amount of damage and injury by demonstrators? Anyone want to try and define what the right amount is?
Comments(4)
DCM
says...
1:06pm Mon 15 Nov 10
jt1105 wrote:If they'd gone in and arrested the guy then they would have risked inflaming the situation even more or being physically attacked by this thugs friends.
How about arresting an individual when a crime is or has been committed (i.e. when someone is kicking a window in) instead of just standing around? (Even the BBC's footage showed this.) When I peacefully and lawfully attended the G20 protests in April 2009 (in protest of the banking bailouts which contributed to the decifit we face now) I was, without charge and not under suspicion of any crime, held in a "kettle" (physically detained in an enclosed area) by police for 5 and a half hours, denied access to food, water and toilets. Men and women had no choice but to urinate in public. Police officers refused to communicate with the crowd, pushed back demonstrators with heavy riot shields and batons, creating a sense of fear and urgency in the crowd - many of whom feared the police would suddenly disperse peaceful, unarmed people with whatever violent force they felt necessary. Of course, I am aware that the Metropolitan Police and the Hampshire Police are entirely separate organisations. But will Hampshire Police be given "body scanners", "armoured vehicles" and "unmanned spy drones" ("defence firms are working closely with UK armed forces and contemplating a "militarisation" strategy to counter the threat of civil disorder", source: The Guardian, 13/11/2010) as is being discussed now for the MET?
The kettling tactic, whilst controversial, prevented any large scale problems and a repeat of the problems seen in London at the May Day riots or in other countries around the world where G20 protests have got way out of control.
You should feel grateful that you live in this country with the police force we have and not elsewhere in the world where the police and goverments are far less tolerant of protests.
Oh, and don't believe everything you read in the Guardian. That paper is at risk of becoming the left's version of the Daily Mail.
AndyAndrews
says...
5:25pm Mon 15 Nov 10
Tallula
says...
7:46pm Fri 10 Dec 10
I'm concerned that the police have forgotten in these situations that most of the crowd are innocent people commiting no crime and should be treated as such.
I'd never heard of kettling before that day and what I saw was terrifying,like an Eastern bloc country. It was also different in that a lot of that legal crowd were children.
I followed on Twitter,frightened Mothers looking for their children,pre-teens frightened and confused. Many kids are taught to respect police,to seek them out in scary situations.I saw 'tweets' that day from kids telling parents they had spoken to police and were frightened that the policeman refused to speak to them,in the kettle.If the police thought that frightening schoolkids was a good way of stopping them going on legal protest marches,they were wrong,all they did was teach those kids not to trust them or respect them again.Those kids should have been protected and led to safety by the police,not made to stay in freezing cold for hours in the dark,urinating in the street,no food or water. I always respected the British police until that day,adults are responsible for their own actions. For their treatment of the children,I'm disgusted,they should hang their heads in shame.
jt1105 says...
11:12am Sun 14 Nov 10
When I peacefully and lawfully attended the G20 protests in April 2009 (in protest of the banking bailouts which contributed to the decifit we face now) I was, without charge and not under suspicion of any crime, held in a "kettle" (physically detained in an enclosed area) by police for 5 and a half hours, denied access to food, water and toilets. Men and women had no choice but to urinate in public. Police officers refused to communicate with the crowd, pushed back demonstrators with heavy riot shields and batons, creating a sense of fear and urgency in the crowd - many of whom feared the police would suddenly disperse peaceful, unarmed people with whatever violent force they felt necessary.
Of course, I am aware that the Metropolitan Police and the Hampshire Police are entirely separate organisations.
But will Hampshire Police be given "body scanners", "armoured vehicles" and "unmanned spy drones" ("defence firms are working closely with UK armed forces and contemplating a "militarisation" strategy to counter the threat of civil disorder", source: The Guardian, 13/11/2010) as is being discussed now for the MET?