If you have been identified in the mass media as one of these people you DO NOT need to hand your self in. There is little to gain. See this article for more on that
http://www.fitwatch.org.uk/2010/12/13/students-should-not-be-panicked-by-mets-published-pictures/
However there are reports of individuals who the police are searching for in order to make an arrest. Some people may believe they do not have much chance of escaping arrest due to the amount of details the police have on you (such as your name) and may not want to go underground and are therefore considering handing themselves in. The writers of this article (All Colours Are Beautiful) would like to share this advice:
If the police have your name and they want to arrest you and you are thinking about handing yourself in:
- This doesn't mean you are guilty. Just that it may be hard to avoid being arrested. This way you can have more control over the situation and give yourself TIME TO PREPARE.
- Check the Green and Black Cross detailed bust card ( http://greenandblackcross.org/legal/briefings)
- Consider giving a no comment interview. This puts the ball in their court and means you don't admit anything till you see what they have against you. It can be too easy to start trying to explain yourself and end up admitting something they otherwise couldn't prove.
- Get a GOOD solicitor. NOT A DUTY SOLICITOR. You want a legal firm that has experience and understanding with protesters. The Green and Black team have been working with Bindmans through all the student demos so far. Bindmans can be called on 02078334433. But two other good firms are Birnberg and Pierce (02099110166) and Hodge, Jones and Allan (07659111192).
- Don't turn up to the station with your phone. They'll take it. Plus anything else you have on you that they think relates to the case.
- What address will you give? What addresses are the cops likely to know you live at? Empty these spaces of anything that might connect you to the case (clothes, flyers, shoes, pictures). Remove your laptop, phones, cameras, maybe advise your housemates to do the same. Take these things to another space the cops wont find out about and destroy anything incriminating such as clothing. Cops only have permission to search shared spaces and your private space but sometimes they try to ignore that and go into other people's rooms. Is there anything else in your house that you don't want them to find?
- What have you been saying on Facebook, Twitter etc? What have people said about you? What photos are you tagged in? Remove anything you think might amount to evidence against you.
We are all trouble makers!
All
Colours
Are
Beautiful
is an invisible working group set up to stimulate the economy of friendship and inssurection
fitwatch
Comments
Hide the following 9 comments
Never talk to police
05.01.2011 10:45
They are not your friends. You can't possibly benefit by talking to them. You can however lose a lot. No comment is the only sensible choice.
This is a video of a US lawyer going through the full reasons why you should not talk to the cops (hosted on youtube who will log your IP address) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik
I realize that he isn't talking about the UK specifically, but the principle is exactly the same. Don't say a word!
nocomment
Which Witch?
05.01.2011 11:51
Nobody is suggesting this woman is a which, or even a witch.
The police think it is possible that this woman has committed a crime. It hardly surprising that the BBC, which is entirely funded by the government just as the police are, should help in the hunt for potential lawbreakers.
Of course, everyone has to pay for the police, but we have a choice of whether to pay for the BBC or not.
Don't pay for the BBC. Government funded news and dumbed down trashy entertainment like Eastenders are designed to keep you under control.
Pete
In begrudging defence of teh Beeb
05.01.2011 16:02
Pete's argument is that the BBC covered this story because they are funded by the government (not entirely accurate), and the police are also funded by the government. If this were true, why did other media outlets, from the Guardian to the Daily Mail, cover the story? My answer is that it is because they have a vested interest in the current status quo, not because they are government funded.
I think the difference is important, since the solution Pete suggests - not paying for the BBC - would not affect any of the other mainstream providers. The solution is not to rely on the mainstream at all and support truly independent media.
Radio 4 fan
wich, witch, what?
05.01.2011 16:42
I'm afraid I disagree.
We do not have to pay for the police. We do not have to consent to tax at all. but if we do not know that, we probably will, through social pressure. Just like if we do not know, we will incriminate ourselves through police pressure, even if we are innocent, if we forget to say no comment.
When we start a new job, we fill in certain IR forms. Don't and your employer will have no consent to stop PAYE tax. They may still deduct tax, but it will be without consent to do so. In my current job, I did not fill any tax forms, an so far my employer has not stopped any tax. I wish I could tell you more;)
For me, it's not about the money, it's about my right to chose what I spend my hard earned wages on. And it wouldn't be the police. They are clearly not here to in force the rights of us all, but the political will of other.
It's not just the police who enforce the will of others on us though. It is also our employers. And it's even socialists, who say that we must pay tax for the good of society.
The simple truth is that if we allow others to spend our wages for us, it is others who will chose wether they spend it on welfare or warfare.
TAX IS THEFT
so say no comment to all thieves
anon
For those of you in Scotland...
05.01.2011 16:51
http://scalp.noflag.org.uk/2011/01/04/police-action-following-last-years-anti-cuts-protests/
Scottish Activist Legal Project
e-mail: scalp [at] noflag.org.uk
Homepage: http://scalp.noflag.org.uk/2011/01/04/police-action-following-last-years-anti-cuts-protests/
Entirely accurate.
05.01.2011 18:50
The TV licence fee is a tax payable to the government, and if you use a TV you have to pay that tax or you risk the usual punishments for minor tax evasion - a fine and a criminal record. See the document in the link which discusses the licence fee's status as a tax.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldbbc/128/128i.pdf
The government has given the BBC the job of collecting this tax, a job which the corporation has chosen to outsource to Capita, a company often in the news and not always for the best of reasons. Like all tax cash, the money is held in the government's Consolidated Fund and given to the BBC under the terms of each year's Appropriation Act.
Not only is the BBC entirely government financed, the level of that finance is set by the government. This is why the government has been able to freeze the licence fee for the next 6 years. The BBC had no say in the matter. Also, all senior BBC appointments, including the director general and every single member of the corporation's governing body (the BBC Trust) are appointed only after government vetting and approval.
So, if you want government financed news given to you by government approved people then the BBC is just what you need.
Not for me thanks.
Pete
BBC = Bollocks for Brains Cretinati
06.01.2011 00:22
Ever since then, I've watched telly without a TV licence. If anybody from the TV licence detector van knocks at the door, I just turn the TV up. There's something really funny about the TV detector dude not being able to fine me, because BBC News 24 is bellowing too loudly about about people not paying their taxes.
I do it with my remote control, I don't even have to get up.
Lord Rees-Mogg
Not only, but also!
06.01.2011 00:35
Talking to the filth is defo a bad idea.
The nark are paid to get you into court, something about hitting targets. If a copper interviews you his only job is to get you to tell him what he needs to put a case before the judge. He ain't interested in being good to you. That's below his pay grade.
The nark are there to keep control for the government. They are paid by the government, report to the government and are trained by the government. That's why they kill innocent people at protests and then are protected by government department's like the DPP. Its why they target wheelchair users aswell.
If your one of those people who made Camilla open her mouth in surprise slightly (which must have been terribly draining!), and made Charles look slightly to one side and out of the window (which he doesn't usually do!) and are facing arrest and 500 years in prison for it, then I would suggest not saying too much about it.
Seriously, you have better things to do.
Lord Rees Mogg
Getting back to the point
08.01.2011 10:55
You are under no obligation WHATSOEVER to assist the police in securing a conviction against you and whilst a no comment interview is always the first response the opportunity to give a prepared statement should be considered with your brief
Every room where you live will in reality be subject to a warrant regardless of if it is yours cops cast their nets wide, if CCTV shows a distinct item of clothing and the police find a similar one in your house it will not help, there may be some benefit in having things that you want the police to find - literature that rationally and logically supports your views for action as you can use these should you ever find yourself in court eg a video tape showing the consequences the chenobyl disaster (you get my drift) indeed a prepared statement might support a future claim that you were just on your way in if they do come knocking!!!
If you do get arrested be prepared for the way they will loosen you up and extract information - this may not be the aggressive sweaty CID banging on the table but maybe the kind friendly cop who gives you an extra brew and understands your views
No Comment applies both in and out of the interview room
Croltbopper