Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Polite Vest Banker
FightBack Forums > Discussion > News / Press Articles
andy_foster
Banker (possible typo?) convicted of impersonating a police occifer after riding an ex police bike with most of the stickers still on it and wearing an old police uniform with a "POLITE notice" hi-vis vest.
Link to terrorism is utter bollox. Link to him being an utter c*ck-womble massively understated.

http://www.itv.com/news/london/2018-02-08/...ceiving-public/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/08...victed-alleged/
Fredd
At least one of those "news" organisations should be prosecuted for crimes against journalism, too, or at least excessive reliance on unacknowledged cut & paste; the exact same phrase leaps out in both articles:
QUOTE
The officer told the court the high vis jacket warn under the vest, was an old police jacket based on the three reflective strips on the sleeves, which are only on officers' uniforms.


At least the Telegraph version sought to entertain:
QUOTE
The case comes just a fortnight after police were accused of making it easier to impersonate criminals by selling old uniforms on the auction website.
Churchmouse
Assuming this was a conviction under s.90 of the Police Act 1996, and the magistrates accepted "that this offence may not have been [his] intention to deceive but that was the effect," then he was probably convicted under (2):

QUOTE
Any person who, not being a constable, wears any article of police uniform in circumstances where it gives him an appearance so nearly resembling that of a member of a police force as to be calculated to deceive shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

and
QUOTE
“article of police uniform” means any article of uniform or any distinctive badge or mark or document of identification usually issued to members of police forces or special constables, or anything having the appearance of such an article, badge, mark or document...

Based on the number of people I've seen whose attire could fit that bill, Mr Emanuel was somewhat unlucky to have been stopped for this offence, not to mention convicted. Still, there is no excuse for the widespread reference to him being a "banker"...

--Churchmouse
DancingDad
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Sat, 10 Feb 2018 - 11:14) *
........Based on the number of people I've seen whose attire could fit that bill, Mr Emanuel was somewhat unlucky to have been stopped for this offence, not to mention convicted. Still, there is no excuse for the widespread reference to him being a "banker"...

--Churchmouse


You see many people riding ex police bikes, with all the markings and blue light while wearing not only dayglow that could be mistaken for police but was actually ex police and worded to play on word similarity?
It is one thing to ride a white bike with white fairings and marvel at the way people drift out of your way, it is another to actively promote it.
Banker seems very apt to me, if it wasn't deliberate, it was cos it seemed cool.
Either way, no street cred.
Ocelot
I have seen people with that 'Polite' notice on their hi-viz vests, but not to this level. C*ck-womble is now my mot de jour.
Churchmouse
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 10 Feb 2018 - 11:25) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Sat, 10 Feb 2018 - 11:14) *
........Based on the number of people I've seen whose attire could fit that bill, Mr Emanuel was somewhat unlucky to have been stopped for this offence, not to mention convicted. Still, there is no excuse for the widespread reference to him being a "banker"...

--Churchmouse


You see many people riding ex police bikes, with all the markings and blue light while wearing not only dayglow that could be mistaken for police but was actually ex police and worded to play on word similarity?
It is one thing to ride a white bike with white fairings and marvel at the way people drift out of your way, it is another to actively promote it.
Banker seems very apt to me, if it wasn't deliberate, it was cos it seemed cool.
Either way, no street cred.

I haven't seen any blue lights on ex-police bikes, no. Everything else mentioned, yes, and no doubt every single one of those riders was convinced that they were not "impersonating an officer", because nowhere did their clothing actually say "police". So now the "rule" is that their entire ensemble has to be considered together in order to assess whether the overall artistic impression was more "policey" than not? The court's new "bright line" isn't exactly high viz...

It is significant that Mr. Emanuel was apparently not using his blue light, so none of those allegedly deceived motorists doing terrible things like (a) giving him room to get by and (b) slowing down to the speed limit could have based their actions on its presence (or absence). That would be concerning to me if I were a high-viz fetishist riding an ex-police bike at any time within a few weeks of a terrorist incident (this last bit of unknown logical significance, but best throw it in anyway).

I'm also not sure why mis-identifying a management consultant or even a compliance officer as a "banker" should be celebrated. It's an appalling example of ignorance combined with prejudice, all for a snigger.

--Churchmouse
The Rookie
QUOTE
He was riding a white former South Yorkshire Police BMW R1200 motorcycle, which he has bought on eBay for his daily commute in and out of the City.

The bike also had a Royal Corps of Transport crest sticker on the front screen, and a ER crest below the rear number plate, black and white 'battenburg' stickers along either side and raised rear blue light, which was no longer working.

So the crests weren't put on (replacing the presumably removed Police county crests) to deceive?
Churchmouse
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 10:16) *
QUOTE
He was riding a white former South Yorkshire Police BMW R1200 motorcycle, which he has bought on eBay for his daily commute in and out of the City.

The bike also had a Royal Corps of Transport crest sticker on the front screen, and a ER crest below the rear number plate, black and white 'battenburg' stickers along either side and raised rear blue light, which was no longer working.

So the crests weren't put on (replacing the presumably removed Police county crests) to deceive?

I can't believe you're attempting to hang meat on the bones of that old nag, as if it's a real law. Are you really suggesting that the same bike, ridden by the same person, in the same circumstances (except for the fact that it had been purchased legally with different livery) would either be or not be a criminal offence depending solely on whether he had stickered it himself? (Where's the evidence that he did, by the way? Maybe the guy he bought it off had done it.) If riding a liveried bike is an offence, so be it, but this "calculated to deceive" nonsense is reprehensibly lazy, vague lawmaking.

--Churchmouse
southpaw82
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 23:40) *
as if it's a real law.

Real as in s 90 of the Police Act 1996?

QUOTE
(1) Any person who with intent to deceive impersonates a member of a police force or special constable, or makes any statement or does any act calculated falsely to suggest that he is such a member or constable, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both.

(2) Any person who, not being a constable, wears any article of police uniform in circumstances where it gives him an appearance so nearly resembling that of a member of a police force as to be calculated to deceive shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.
Churchmouse
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 23:56) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 23:40) *
as if it's a real law.

Real as in s 90 of the Police Act 1996?

QUOTE
(1) Any person who with intent to deceive impersonates a member of a police force or special constable, or makes any statement or does any act calculated falsely to suggest that he is such a member or constable, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both.

(2) Any person who, not being a constable, wears any article of police uniform in circumstances where it gives him an appearance so nearly resembling that of a member of a police force as to be calculated to deceive shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.


You'd make a great straight man, SP... cool.gif

--Churchmouse
southpaw82
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Fri, 23 Feb 2018 - 10:28) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 23:56) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 23:40) *
as if it's a real law.

Real as in s 90 of the Police Act 1996?

QUOTE
(1) Any person who with intent to deceive impersonates a member of a police force or special constable, or makes any statement or does any act calculated falsely to suggest that he is such a member or constable, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both.

(2) Any person who, not being a constable, wears any article of police uniform in circumstances where it gives him an appearance so nearly resembling that of a member of a police force as to be calculated to deceive shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.


You'd make a great straight man, SP... cool.gif

--Churchmouse

You’re welcome tongue.gif
4101
the blue light was a bad idea.
Fredd
QUOTE (4101 @ Sat, 24 Feb 2018 - 16:55) *
the blue light was a bad idea.

The one that wasn't an actual working light, just some blue plastic?
4101
QUOTE (Fredd @ Sat, 24 Feb 2018 - 23:40) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Sat, 24 Feb 2018 - 16:55) *
the blue light was a bad idea.

The one that wasn't an actual working light, just some blue plastic?



as far as I am aware, that was the one.

No vehicle shall be fitted with a lamp which is capable of showing any light to the rear, other than a red light, except–


blue light from a warning beacon or rear special warning lamp fitted to an emergency vehicle, or from any device fitted to a vehicle used for police purposes;
The Rookie
But it wasn’t a lamp......so that section doesn’t apply.
DancingDad
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 25 Feb 2018 - 01:47) *
But it wasn’t a lamp......so that section doesn’t apply.

Looked like a lamp.
On a stick the way police blue lights are/were
Blue.

Same as everything else, easily interpreted to make the bike look like a police bike.
Add on the Police garments.....

May have not been a working lamp and had Polite instead of Police on jacket plus non police stickers but the overall look was that this was a police rider on a police bike.
With enough being there that the average man would have seen it and automatically thought police.

That all falls fully into the requirements of the act.

Only question in my mind is whether there was intent to deceive, not that I am convinced that part is even needed.

If the blue lamp had not been there, had the word polite not been on the jacket, had something been done to make it look like this is simply a guy riding an ex police bike, I would not believe the act applied.
But he didn't, he put the extra touches in and that left him open.
The Rookie
QUOTE (4101 @ Sun, 25 Feb 2018 - 00:55) *
No vehicle shall be fitted with a lamp which is capable of showing any light to the rear, other than a red light, except–

You seem to have missed the relevance, for the purposes of this bit of legislation it wasn’t a lamp as it wasn’t capable of showing any light. The fact it looked like a lamp isn’t relevant in respect of this bit of legislation.
southpaw82
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 25 Feb 2018 - 16:48) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Sun, 25 Feb 2018 - 00:55) *
No vehicle shall be fitted with a lamp which is capable of showing any light to the rear, other than a red light, except–

You seem to have missed the relevance, for the purposes of this bit of legislation it wasn’t a lamp as it wasn’t capable of showing any light. The fact it looked like a lamp isn’t relevant in respect of this bit of legislation.

No vehicle, other than an emergency vehicle, shall be fitted with–

(a)a blue warning beacon or special warning lamp, or
(b)a device which resembles a blue warning beacon or a special warning lamp, whether the same is in working order or not.
notmeatloaf
The issue will be stitching "POLITE" onto a police jacket the blue light. The police don't just cut the "C" off their old uniforms and go "there, convincingly not police" when flogging them on.

A few years ago the craze around here was for chavs to fit their cars with blue front sidelights and drive around like that. Then the police seemed to have a purge - certainly I saw a good few stopped - and the problem seems to have gone away.

Otherwise high viz jackets and high viz vehicle decals are surely so common now that you will have to have defurred furry handcuffs or other police giveaways to be mistaken for a police officer rather than builder or idiot banker.
4101
I used to be a bike courier, we always thought the wannabe plod were tools with their BMWs and ex plod kit.

https://youtu.be/KeuJ_6skbF4?t=2m7s
andy_foster
https://www.motorcyclenews.com/news/2019/ju...st-ruined-life/

I can only assume that his conviction was overturned on the grounds that the judge had horse-riding friends who also wore 'polite' vests.
DancingDad
We had discussions on this when he was convicted.
I still reckon what he chose to wear was calculated to make other motorists think he was a cop.
Strange how the story picture shows him with another bike, not the ex police BMW he was riding at the time.
cp8759
I wonder why the Met doesn't take the same approach with the security guards at Canary Wharf? They look a lot more like old bill than this guy, and their uniform is clearly calculated to deceive.
Charlie1010
It’s a private estate and it helps the police save time.
I find them very helpful.
The Rookie
QUOTE (Charlie1010 @ Fri, 14 Jun 2019 - 05:10) *
It’s a private estate

Is the offence limited to only public land then?
Charlie1010
I don’t know.
But if it is an offence why hasn’t it been stopped? After how many decades?
cp8759
QUOTE (Charlie1010 @ Fri, 14 Jun 2019 - 08:55) *
I don’t know.
But if it is an offence why hasn’t it been stopped? After how many decades?

That's a good question. If a private individual were to dress up in exactly the same uniform, I'm sure they would find themselves in a spot of bother. But if you're talking about people employed by a multi-billion pound private corporation, different rules seem to apply, even though they shouldn't.

QUOTE (Charlie1010 @ Fri, 14 Jun 2019 - 06:10) *
I find them very helpful.

So do I, I just don't think they should look like the police.
Charlie1010
What about these ‘vest *ankers’.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-be...-berkshire-home
cp8759
QUOTE (Charlie1010 @ Tue, 25 Jun 2019 - 06:44) *

Well the High Court has already given some thought to the idea of revoking their licence, see Rooftops South West Ltd & Ors v Ash Interiors (UK) Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 2799 (QB) at 47:

A Writ of Control is not to be regarded as a kind of blank cheque or a licence to act with impunity. Wisely, neither Mr Shale nor Mr Royle relied upon or referred to this part of their clients' case in their submissions. However, it is astonishing and concerning that their clients, a body and an individual acting under statutory licence, should have done so. Taken together with the multiple breaches of procedure and the absence of proper records that I have referred to, the apparent lack of recognition or insight on the part of the persons concerned, the lackadaisical and dismissive attitude of DCBL to these proceedings and the fact that what oversight the third defendant exercised with respect to DCBL was and is apparently rendered from Florida, there are grounds to consider terminating the third defendant's authorisation to act as an enforcement officer under Regulation 12 of The High Court Enforcement Officers Regulations 2004. I will refer the case to the Senior Master for consideration of that course.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.