Madness - you simply could not make it up

[thedorchester]

A 12-year-old boy was charged with assault and taken before the courts - for throwing a cocktail sausage.
The boy was accused of throwing the pork snack at a 74-year-old man in Woodhouse Park, south Manchester, which the boy's mother described as an "utter joke".
She told the BBC: "They came to arrest him in my house, they took him into a police van. They took him to Elizabeth Slinger [police station], put him in a cell, took his photographs, his fingerprints, then interviewed him. "And then they decided to charge him with common assault - with a sausage.


And then the following from the Daily Mail today…

Dad told to write to MP as he cradled his thug-battered son
By LUCY BALLINGER
A father who phoned 999 when his son was knocked unconscious by a drunken thug was told to write to his MP rather than bother the police.
Businessman Pete Bayliss called after his 22-year-old son Chris was taken to hospital with a broken nose and other injuries. But police said they were too busy to investigate the attack.

Dad told to write to MP as he cradled his thug-battered son | the Daily Mail

[flashy]

oh my goodness, the second one is just pathetic

[cashman]

both instances are classic examples of "The Law Is An Ass"

[Wynonie Harris]

The second case is disgraceful but I'm not so sure about the first one...imagine a 74-year old walking through the park when a kid suddenly throws something at him (which apparently he thought was a stone at first). At the best, a very unpleasant experience, at the worst, it could have given him a heart attack. OK, maybe the police should have just given him a good talking to but it seems they have done this in the past, as the lad has had warnings from them before over other incidents...obviously, with no effect. Perhaps his mother should be more concerned over her son's behaviour, than anything the police have done.

[katex]

Agree with you Wynonie .. next time could be a heavier missile, and you have given us a little more insight into the background, so think they were well within their rights to get him down on the records as a future troublemaker. How disrespectful he was.

The second, yes, well, on the face of it that does seem a little 'uncaring' of the police and a serious assault, which should have been treated as such.

[Gayle]

Typical though isn't it - the mother is blaming the police for her own bad parenting! A twelve year old should really know better than to throw their food around.

[thedorchester]

I think readers are missing the point - the purpose for highlighting the two cases was to establish a basis for comparative evaluation. It is readily obvious that the matter involving the youngster is far less of a priority than that of the chap rendered unconscious. It is scandalous that the police have considered it insignificant to investigate the latter.

So far as regards the youngster, only a fool would consider it a proportionate response to the crime. One has to take into account the age of the offender, the severity of the crime, the appropriate use of resource and so on. Can any readers on here actually say that they did not engage in similar activites as youngsters, but have since put that down to youthful indiscretion. To have police officers, the CPS, court staff and the rest engaged in assessing this affair when the streets are littered with violent drunken yobs, rapists and murderers is farcical and a complete waste of taxpayers resource.

[Gayle]

Yes, but it's not an either or situation.

These are two separate incidents in different towns and different times. It may seem that the first case is overkill but we don't know the history of the boy and from the back story that Wynonie said, he probably needed a bit of a scare to stop him turning into a thug. And, yes, I can honestly say that I NEVER did anything like that as a twelve year old.

[SPUGGIE J]

Never mind a post code lottery for medication it seems we have one on policing as well. There may have been something in the 12 year olds past to haul him up but the police not wanting or maybe not having the time to investigate is a shameful shambles.

[magpie]

I have to agree with the first case... today a sausage tomorrow a bottle or petrol bomb:

should have left him in the cell longer:

[Eric]

Originally Posted by thedorchester

I think readers are missing the point - the purpose for highlighting the two cases was to establish a basis for comparative evaluation. It is readily obvious that the matter involving the youngster is far less of a priority than that of the chap rendered unconscious. It is scandalous that the police have considered it insignificant to investigate the latter.

So far as regards the youngster, only a fool would consider it a proportionate response to the crime. One has to take into account the age of the offender, the severity of the crime, the appropriate use of resource and so on. Can any readers on here actually say that they did not engage in similar activites as youngsters, but have since put that down to youthful indiscretion. To have police officers, the CPS, court staff and the rest engaged in assessing this affair when the streets are littered with violent drunken yobs, rapists and murderers is farcical and a complete waste of taxpayers resource.

Don't think anyone is missing the point. Cashman seems to hve got it. Perhaps you didn't make the point clear enough. Or perhaps you are disappointed that those who responded did not see things exactly the way you saw them. You can't pose a point for discussion and expect the response that you would give. Well, maybe you can but it doesn't work that way. Once you start a thread it is out of your control; people will respond the way that they feel.

[West Ender]

I despair sometimes. I had a visit from a policeman today, well, I say man - he looked about 19. It seems a neighbour's car was broken into at the weekend (nothing taken from the 10 year old banger) and he was investigating. He actually knocked on my door to ask if I'd seen or heard anything.

Now that's all well and good but, a year ago, someone I know rang the police on a Sunday morning because he had seen a man with a rifle shooting ducks on the local lake and also firing into the surrounding trees. The place is a popular walk, and also a fishing spot, for locals and visitors and the gun-slinger was making it a war-zone. What did the police do? They turned up 3 days later, asked a few questions and disappeared, no follow-up.

Both incidents concern Cheshire Police. One could have been very serious, the other was definitely not. It beggars belief.

[Tin Monkey]

According to the police, the sausage throwing incident was the latest in a series of cautions the lad had received. Place the even in context and you can understand why the offender was arrested.

[Wynonie Harris]

I can see what you're getting at in your comparison of the two cases. However, because the police were wrong not to respond to the serious complaint in the second case doesn't necessarily mean they were wrong to arrest the lad over a comparatively minor misdemeanour in the first case.

Yes, throwing a cocktail sausage at someone has comic overtones, doesn't it? Not so comic if you're an elderly person on your own and a youth unexpectedly hurls a missile at you. Could be quite frightening I would imagine. It obviously disturbed the gentleman concerned enough to make a complaint, so perhaps the police were right to arrest the lad.

I also never threw missiles at elderly people when I was a kid, but then again, I'm just "a fool".

[Wynonie Harris]

Well that makes two of us, Gayle.

Incidentally have you noticed something horribly familiar about the somewhat stilted, overly formal language that this poster uses.

Originally Posted by thedorchester

the purpose for highlighting the two cases was to establish a basis for comparative evaluation.

It couldn't be...could it?