The Ferris Conspiracy Forum
Sign up  |   |   |  Calendar
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Bilko

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,480
Reply with quote  #1 
Bilko would like to take the opportunity of wishing Mr Mark Clinton every success in his up-coming claim against Strathclyde Police forensic dept. Mark is claiming compensation of £9,500 for the non-return of the contents of his wardrobe, the over zealous forensic team even snatched Mark's under-pants (will Mark be claiming in the 'smalls' claim court?). Seriously though this isn't a laughing matter. The trial against Mr Clinton collapsed and he subsequently walked free. The personal items belonging to Mr Clinton should be returned OR he should be FULLY reimbursed for the full amount of the items worth.

Bilko notes that this non return of 'items' taken by Police Forensic teams to be used as evidence is far from an isolated case, in fact it happens frequently. All personal Items taken by Police forensic teams should be returned as soon as a case has been concluded. Failure by a Police dept to do so IN BILKO's opinion amounts to theft.

Strathclyde police please take note! Bilko

__________________
Law and justice are not always the same. When they aren't, destroying the law may be the first step toward changing it. :D
Admin

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 3,165
Reply with quote  #2 

Well said Bilko...  Admin agrees that all items seized by Police Forensic Teams should be returned to their owner once the case has  been concluded, and the alleged perpetrator has been cleared on all counts.  You're right, it does amount to theft (isn't that a criminal act? ), but a more sinister thought that keeps running around Admin's head, is that these personal items that are kept by Forensics, might just come in useful to them at a later date??? Or am I being too cynical about our Police Force???


__________________
I'd rather be hated for what I am, than loved for what I am not".
________________________________
Bilko

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,480
Reply with quote  #3 

No, not too cynical at all in Bilko's opinion Miss Admin. In fact there is ample opportunity and nothing to stop any unscrupulous CORRUPT police officer appropriating articles from a case concerning an individual which had long since been tried, and then produce personal items from the old evidence again at a later trial on an entirely different charge. Some would think this highly unlikely, but for some CORRUPT officers desperation can call for desperate measures .............one would assume.

 

Bilko will refrain from suggesting some officers may have found a particular kinky use for Mr Clintons used underwear, thus being the reason they find some difficulty in parting with jocky's in question.........Sniff- Sniff......Surely not? Bilko


__________________
Law and justice are not always the same. When they aren't, destroying the law may be the first step toward changing it. :D
Admin

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 3,165
Reply with quote  #4 

Wouldn't put anything past them, concerning particular personal items belonging to Mr Clinton....  Bilko, you read my mind - I believe (and this is only my own personal opinion), that if 'evidence' seized is kept and not returned to the rightful owner once they have been exonerated, it's a case of, well keep the items anyway, and then if we need his DNA etc etc at a later date when we feel like going after him again, then we already have some in stock, so to speak. I could be wrong, I could just be downright bloody cynical, or there again, I may be telling it like it is.  You decide.


__________________
I'd rather be hated for what I am, than loved for what I am not".
________________________________
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.