Scottish Police take on every crime to be investigated...

In the  first example they give in that article - ‘theft from a garden with no cctv or eye witness’ what would an investigation consist of a what outcome would be most likely? What resources could the police credibly put into it that would be merited by the result

I imagine they are just stating what is already the case

After moving to Southern Scotland, the local paper has Court reports. It is surprising what minor offences end up in Court, shoplifting is one, in Leics.  the Police couldnt even be bothered to prosecute shoplifters.

Anything with violence, or threats of violence get some sentences far greater than I’d expect, one this week, it seems like a domestic, the man shouted and swore at the Woman, threw the remote into the TV, then went out, he was sentenced to 40 days.

4 Drug dealers smashed a front door in,one with an axe, one a hammer, opposite me in Leics. Multiple people rang the police to report it. The Police didnt even show up.

I'm (probably naively) assuming just now they may send someone round to check for fingerprints or the like and (at least) come and take a statement - they certainly have done in all the times my friends have had something stolen - most would be classed as garden thefts (or garden shed thefts).
The article suggests that nothing will now be done other than being contacted to say that nothing is being done.
I'm a bit surprised by it as it feels (to me) like it is giving thieves a green light to crack on with more thefts as many of them won't be bothered about.

Alanl you're sure the police were called highly unusual for them not to turn up for violence and weapons, how did you know they were drug dealers?

<span>Alanl you’re sure the police were called highly unusual for them not to turn up for violence and weapons, how did you know they were drug dealers?</span>

Oh yes, when I rang, the Operator said they had already had a phone call about the thugs trying to smash the door down. Talking afterwards, 3 others had rang the Police. No pOlice showed up.

We know they are drug dealers as we’ve lived opposite them for 5 years now. They are total scumbags. The Police know about them, but don’t do anything. The second time the axe gang came round the Police did turn up, but the lowlife wouldnt let them in the door, because, quite clearly, they had drugs in there. It was around 2 hours later that the Police entered the house, and, of course, by then they had either hid the drugs in the garden ( a jungle), or flushed them away.

I was told to keep a record of the comings and goings,and car number plates. I did that for 2 months, and on one particular Friday night it was like a queue for Glastonbury tickets, so many people were coming and going, making noise, and being , generally, anti-social. I went to the Police stn, and said if you dont do anything, it’ll be me who is arrested when I kick the shite out of all of them. The ****er on the desk said I shouldnt be taking numbers down, as there isnt any evidence that they are dealing drugs. I said just place a plain clothes car up the road, stop anyone who  leaves there after being in the house for a minute, and you’ll soon see that they are Dealers. He told me they havent got time to do that. We stopped ringing the Police eventually, as nothing at all was being done about it. Thats why we are moving.

I’m a bit surprised by it as it feels (to me) like it is giving thieves a green light to crack on with more thefts as many of them won’t be bothered about.

so you think potential thieves are saying “no let’s not Nick that lawnmower because the police will come out and take a statement and we might get caught even though there is no evidence”.  I think it’s very unlikely they are finger printing your average shed break in unless there’s something special.  If they’ve left blood or other evidence that would seem to meet the criteria for when they will investigate.  If you want them to come fit cctv (or possibly tell them your neighbour has it!).

If you want them to come fit cctv (or possibly tell them your neighbour has it!).

Or leave some blood?

I think what's remarkable is that they have clearly and unambiguously announced that they are insufficiently funded to perform the role that the general public expects of them.

I would have expected a far more cynical degradation of what define's "investigation" - to the point that this simple triage (value, violence yes/no, witness yes/no, CCTV yes/no) meets the minimum definition of an investigation.

I can't understand why the opposition parties aren't hammering the Tories with this issue - the statistics must be extremely damning, and it's something that your average ruddy-faced tory voter would get particularly frothed-up about

<p style="text-align: left;">I think what’s remarkable is that they have clearly and unambiguously announced that they are insufficiently funded to perform the role that the general public expects of them.

</p>

in a way they’re not actually saying anything much different to Braverman. There are some carefully placed ‘where reasonable’ s in her announcement. You could argue they are translating her policy from what she wants people to hear into what she’s actually saying.

"I can’t understand why the opposition parties aren’t hammering the Tories with this issue – the statistics must be extremely damning, and it’s something that your average ruddy-faced tory voter would get particularly frothed-up about"

Because policing is devolved and the SNP are in charge of it?

I'm not thinking people aren't stealing stuff because the police will come get a statement and investigate. What I'm saying is that by announcing this, would-be thieves are probably thinking the risk is much smaller now so much more likely to have a go. It is the reality we are in now, but I'm sure this is going to see an increase in crime as more crimes will be carried out knowing that there is a higher chance of getting away with it.

How would the police know there is blood to sample if they are saying they won't be investigating...

SNP should be getting called out by everyone for this (as should the Tories)...but it is like all other public services - getting stretched beyond capacity - it isn't right but needs a significant change of many things to see improvements.

Seem a bit ridiculous as it’s it’s literally a green light for scum bags to nick stuff. Take the garden example, what’s to stop a thief just walking into the garden of any house he fancies. Something nice and you aren’t there, I’ll take that. Something nice and you are there, we’ll unless you are prepared to restrain the guy until the police arrive (I hear beating crap out of them with a spade is probably still going to be investigated), the guy will get away scott free.

I appreciate in most cases that’s not much change from just now, but publicity announcing it, and not even bothering to come round and take a statement or fingerprints seems nonsense to me

@tpbiker has said what I was trying to in a much more eloquent manner...

There was a similar scheme in Strathclyde 20 years ago. Certain crimes police didn't attend and report taken over phone. Car break in for example.

The way it worked though was that after taking the phone report a forensic call was arranged. So any prints or DNA were picked up. Then obviously if evidence was found it was investigated.

Advantages. Saves victims waiting hours at busy times to report. Saves police time where there is no evidence.

The phone call would cover things like any CCTV. If there was then after the initial report was taken by phone it would be allocated for a local cop to follow up and look at CCTaV.

To the forensic guys are pretty good. I got a stolen car solved from a hair found in the imprint in the windscreen of a car after it crashed. Driver not wearing seat belt. Turned out to be the boyfriend of the owner. The satisfying thing was that his DNA was only on record because he had been arrested for punching her a few months earlier. Anywhere else in the car the hair would have been of no value because as her boyfriend he had obviously been in the car legitimately before.

by announcing this, would-be thieves are probably thinking the risk is much smaller now 

I don't think Johnny McJunkie, Nathan McNed or Barry Burglarsson pay that much attention to the Daily Mail one way or the other.

Agreed...but the would-be chancers will be more likely to be chancers...

I think what’s remarkable is that they have clearly and unambiguously announced that they are insufficiently funded to perform the role that the general public expects of them.

im not sure the public considered it news.  I don’t know anyone who would expect the cops to come and actively investigate a shed break in.  Everyone already assumes they just issue a crime reference number for insurance unless you have something to give them a head start.  Presumably the thieves think that too.

As a devolved issue it’s clearly not a Tory problem - the Home Sec had just published exactly the opposite policy last week.  But actually I wonder if the more pragmatic Scottish voter is actually ok with cops not investigating crimes with no evidence, rather than headline chasing nonsense about every crime will be investigated.

the more pragmatic Scottish voter

Sounds like a very romantic view of the Scottish voter.

<span style="caret-color: #ffffff; color: #ffffff; font-family: Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; background-color: #444444;">Because policing is devolved and the SNP are in charge of it?</span>

yes - I mean the more general issue (uk wide) that the sustained underfunding of the police has led to a degredation in the delivery of service.

and no, I don’t think hearing that the police aren’t going to “investigate” a shed break in, is going to be a shock to anyone on here - but it would be a shock to the Tory “base” who still think that theirs is the party of old fashioned law-and-order

Sounds like a very romantic view of the Scottish voter.

Depends if you read it as meaning all Scottish voters are more pragmatic or simply that the pragmatic ones would be less upset… I left in intentionally vague… because obviously the Mail and Express sell newspapers here too, but even the most Tory Scots I know would not be getting upset that the police were not taking statements about crimes with no evidence.   I’m a bit astounded that the Home Sec wanted to go there - I thought the whole point of Police and Crime Commissioners was so they could blame someone else.