Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think Derbyshire police need to read the LAW and understand that you can't fine people when they are not breaking it

688 replies

chomalungma · 08/01/2021 12:16

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-55560814

Surrounded by police, treated like a criminal for driving 5 miles to a beauty spot for a walk.

It is not illegal to drive to exercise.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
benedicto · 08/01/2021 14:42

There have been consistent problems with Derbyshire Police being heavy handed Really it's not just them. I relatively rural and the police are doing similar here.

PerfectlySublime · 08/01/2021 14:43

I'm sure they couldn't have taken a flask and there wasn't a need to use Starbucks drive through!

Maybe next time the walkers could make coffee at home in a thermos rather than going to a coffee shop....

You shouldn't be penalised for doing something completely legal for goodness sake. If the gov don't want people using coffee shops then they need to close coffee shops. You can't have them open and then fine people for using them, that's utterly ridiculous.

The police were far too heavy handed in this situation. I hope they don't pay the fines.

QuimReaper · 08/01/2021 14:43

Shouldn't someone be starting an enquiry into Devonshire Police Force? They're like Nicholas I's Special Corps of Gendarmes

fluufy · 08/01/2021 14:44

And the standard of proof for criminal sanctions is "beyond reasonable doubt" . Not "on the interpretation of the police"

IN COURT. Not on the street. The individual officer decides at that point. If they get it wrong, thats for the charging officers/CPS/Courts etc to decide

benedicto · 08/01/2021 14:45

So it is legal for a coffee shop to be open to sell takeaways, but if you purchase these takeaways you could be fined £200, whether you walk with it or drive with it?

2021vision · 08/01/2021 14:45

The thing is people are losing respect for the police and this just compounds it. From now on everyone will just challenge them, they really don't do themselves any favours.

PerfectlySublime · 08/01/2021 14:47

@benedicto

So it is legal for a coffee shop to be open to sell takeaways, but if you purchase these takeaways you could be fined £200, whether you walk with it or drive with it?
Makes perfect sense doesn't it.
Original poster
chomalungma · 08/01/2021 14:49

Scrodinger's coffee

You can simultaneously be allowed to buy it and not be allowed to buy it.

OP posts:
Same4Walls · 08/01/2021 14:49

@benedicto

So it is legal for a coffee shop to be open to sell takeaways, but if you purchase these takeaways you could be fined £200, whether you walk with it or drive with it?
Clearly. It's not hard to see why anyone would find those sort of guidelines confusing at all...it's as clear as mud. Confused
theThreeofWeevils · 08/01/2021 14:50

suicide, which is a crime in English law

No it isn't.

GreenlandTheMovie · 08/01/2021 14:50

The best way of tackling over heavy police enforcement like this is to refuse to accept the penalty and self represent in court to challenge it.

I'm sure the prospect of the courts being clogged up with this sort of stuff will soon result in a memo to police forces to make sure they stick to enforcing laws that actually exist, not made up one's.

benedicto · 08/01/2021 14:51

@chomalungma

Scrodinger's coffee

You can simultaneously be allowed to buy it and not be allowed to buy it.

Only in Boris's Britain.
fluufy · 08/01/2021 14:52

In this case of lockdown exercise, there is no fair trial. There is no judge!The police are the judge. Which should not every happen in a democracy - the two parts of law enforcement are supposed to always be separate

Don't silly. they get issued a fine, and if they think the fine is not applicable to them, they can go to court and argue it out there. Don't be so dramatic!

Same4Walls · 08/01/2021 14:55

they get issued a fine, and if they think the fine is not applicable to them, they can go to court and argue it out there

Lets be reasonable the police handing out these fines know that many of the soft targets they fine won't go to court. They will find it too stressful, complicated or worry ot will be too time consuming. They will therefore pay the fine despite having done nothing wrong.

benedicto · 08/01/2021 14:56

Don't silly. they get issued a fine, and if they think the fine is not applicable to them, they can go to court and argue it out there. Don't be so dramatic

So I have to go to court to prove my innocence?!

That is definitely a reason for being dramatic.

I would lose weeks/months of sleep over that and probably require medication. I have never been to court in my entire life.

The law should not require me to go to court to prove my innocence. The law in democracies works by the burden of evidence being on the police/CPS to prove your guilt.

Arobase · 08/01/2021 14:58

a quick check on google maps show that the place she lives in is 7 miles from the reservoir.... might be a small difference, but that is the law.

It isn't the law.

Derbyshire police clearly need their training processes checked. I'm pretty sure every other police force trains its officers that they have to enforce what the law says, not what they think the "spirit of the law" is. I hope these women challenge the fine, Derbyshire police aren't going to learn until they lose a few cases and have to repay costs.

fluufy · 08/01/2021 14:58

I don't think any of you know how the law, policing, or courts work at all. And yet have many vitriolic opinions on all of the above.

TheTeenageYears · 08/01/2021 14:58

"exercise with your household (or support bubble) or one other person, this should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area"

"Stay local means stay in the village, town, or part of the city where you live."

In this case they should exercise in Ashby-de-la-Zouch so they were breaking the rules.

badpuma · 08/01/2021 14:59

It's also a massive waste of money and time (both court and police time) if they have to go to court to get fines upheld which should never have been issued.

Arobase · 08/01/2021 15:00

@benedicto

Don't silly. they get issued a fine, and if they think the fine is not applicable to them, they can go to court and argue it out there. Don't be so dramatic

So I have to go to court to prove my innocence?!

That is definitely a reason for being dramatic.

I would lose weeks/months of sleep over that and probably require medication. I have never been to court in my entire life.

The law should not require me to go to court to prove my innocence. The law in democracies works by the burden of evidence being on the police/CPS to prove your guilt.

The law does work on the basis that the burden of proof is on the prosecution, for this offence as much as any other. It's absolutely basic. Nevertheless, how do you suggest anyone who is wrongly accused gets the charge dismissed without going to court?
badpuma · 08/01/2021 15:00

@TheTeenageYears

"exercise with your household (or support bubble) or one other person, this should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area"

"Stay local means stay in the village, town, or part of the city where you live."

In this case they should exercise in Ashby-de-la-Zouch so they were breaking the rules.

They were not breaking the rules. The legislation does not require people to stay local, nor does it impose a distance which is reasonable to travel.

Guidance is not law and police do not have the power to fine people for a breach of guidance.

Same4Walls · 08/01/2021 15:01

@fluufy

I don't think any of you know how the law, policing, or courts work at all. And yet have many vitriolic opinions on all of the above.
Please fill me in what part do you think we are not familiar with or misunderstanding?
Original poster
chomalungma · 08/01/2021 15:01

@fluufy

I don't think any of you know how the law, policing, or courts work at all. And yet have many vitriolic opinions on all of the above.
The law is quite clear on what is allowed.

The police can issue fines. In this case, the fine would be against the law so it would be thrown out.

But people are more likely to pay a fine, rather than go to court - especially if extra costs are involved.

The police need to know what the law is. Not interpret themselves.

It's not difficult when it comes to exercise to see that this was not against the law.

Maybe the police should be prosecuted for wasting the court's time?

OP posts:
Arobase · 08/01/2021 15:03

@TheTeenageYears

"exercise with your household (or support bubble) or one other person, this should be limited to once per day, and you should not travel outside your local area"

"Stay local means stay in the village, town, or part of the city where you live."

In this case they should exercise in Ashby-de-la-Zouch so they were breaking the rules.

That's from the guidance, not the regulations, and is therefore not a statement of the legal requirements.
benedicto · 08/01/2021 15:03

Nevertheless, how do you suggest anyone who is wrongly accused gets the charge dismissed without going to court
The charge/fine should not be issued until a court has found that you are guilty (rather than the punishment being issued first and then you having to go to court to establish whether you deserve the charge/fine).