Thread: Police vandalism of seized property

Someone I know was recently arrested for one of the worst crimes imaginable. When I mention that the police had a warrant to seize computers, cameras and pictures, you can guess what I'm referring to.

It turned out it was a mistake, he had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with what they were investigating, and he was released without charge - the police were polite and apologetic, and his stuff was returned without further ado.

The problem was not with the officers he came across personally, but rather with the anonymous jobsworths working in the hi-tech crime unit who examined his stuff. They completely, and probably deliberately, mistreated his belongings and a lot of them are unusable. They also flat-out refused to make a copy of an important work document for him, which had serious repercussions at work as he was due to present an important dossier but could not do it as his laptop was confiscated by the police. Making a copy of this one Word document would have taken seconds and not been any inconvenience whatsoever.

His digital camera SD card is now completely unusable. They have blocked it - you put it in the camera and you can no longer take or delete any pictures. It was a fairly new 16GB memory card. They have physically ripped off a little bit of plastic on the side to achieve this. Also a large part of his hard drive has been permanently 'blocked off' - effectively reducing his memory space by two-thirds. He relies on his laptop for work and has masses of things on there, and he'll now need to buy an external hard drive (or a new laptop) as there's not much room left. Also his mobile phone is unusable, you can no longer get any signal, it is now just on emergency calls only. So he has to buy a new mobile phone.

So he has been left possibly hundreds of pounds out of pocket, and the police say they are not responsible and it's tough luck! The police made a genuine mess-up in even going to his house, it was a complete mistaken identity, they were looking for number 38 (....) Street and they went to 38 (....) Road by mistake, causing huge embarrassment and distress to him and his family, given the social stigma of the crime he was accused of.

The police are far too protected when they make incompetent mistakes like this. It wasn't even a mistake - the hi-tech unit maliciously broke his equipment and are not paying him a penny. They must surely be made accountable for things like this and those that abuse their powers to seize property should be sacked and publicly disgraced, just like what they seek to do with the people they wrongfully accuse of such appalling crimes.

Thanks, I suggested that to him too.

It seems unbelievable that the police are entitle to deliberately vandalise and damage people's property and are not liable for it.

The police seem immune to everything, including punishment for murdering innocent people on the underground or killing protestors. Also it's a matter of "pubilc policy" that the polce are not liable for any damage caused while acting according to procedure i.e. seizing equipement in accordance with the warrant and doing whatever the hell they like with it, vandalising it, destroying it, or never giving it back to the person who owns it, is perfectly permissible and the victim is not entitled to any compensation. The police are disgusting.

the polce are not liable for any damage caused while acting according to procedure i.e. seizing equipement in accordance with the warrant

But if it was the wrong person, in the wrong house, surely the seizure was not in accordance with the warrant?

what if the warrant said bob smith at no 23 high road and they raided Todd Smith at no 23 High street?

Where does liability rest there?

Genuine question, this is not my field so I don't know.

Originally Posted by perplexity

While all I am going on is advice that is routinely available from all sorts of sources, "in accordance with the warrant" seems to be clear enough.

i.e.

If the warrant specified the wrong person in the wrong house, the warrant is to blame. If the warrant was correct but the Police got it wrong, the Police are liable for that.

The address raided was the correct one on the warrant: it was the warrant itself that was incorrect. The police raided the right address that was specified on the warrant but it turned out the people writing the warrant had got the address wrong. So the police were doing everything correct according to the warrant, it was the anonymous people who are never liable for anything who got it wrong. But the police were rude and obstructive about the whole affair and refused to apologise, as they insisted they did everything right according to the warrant. In addition they vandalised property rendering it unusable and making him hundreds of pounds out of pocket, and it made a hugely detrimental effect on the his work performance and family life, given the social stigma attached to the crime in question. He's asked me to write all this myself because he is too scared of being identified on any forum etc. he is a member of. This is also the only reason he has not gone to the press yet, because the police might relaliate.

The warrant was indeed wrong, through no fault of the officers seizing the property, but the police were still out of order in the way they acted. I am informed the IPCC have been contacted. They had no need to arrest him specifying the details in front of his wife and 11 year-old daughter when they could have done it in the next room.

Also, even though it was a genuine mistake by the police, the arrest and property seizure will stay on record and so whenever he gets a CRB check in future, he will be down as being arrested for making indecent images of children. He has been told that regardless of being innocent, the nature of the accusation means it stays on record forever, with no exceptions. The effect on any future job applications etc. will be hugely damaging.

I hate to say this - but the warrant was technically competent, therefore the police where within their powers. However, the incompetence in specifying the wrong address remains actionable, as anyone who has had their door smashed in by police executing a warrant for that address, when it should have been the next block.

As for the memory being 'blocked off' diagnostic tools can resore this (unless physically damaged), as for the rest - home insurance should cover, and they pursue from the police.

Tom did a court order that this experts equipment be returned & did a chief constable say he would defy the order?? if so I am aware of that particular matter.

Originally Posted by MARTIN3030

Raymond-Last post on here was 9 weeks ago-I take it you either missed it then-or else are bored ?

Bored. Only footie on.... 8)