Lambeth to name and shame drug tourists?

[Mind]

The suing of the police is one area where the law is anything but inaccessible ...

And yet the police are sued very rarely, for a number of practical reasons. Would a lawyer advise that a case be proceeded with? I doubt it.

Actually you're both right in a way.
It is easy to take the police to court, but it is not easy to successfully sue them.

Most people forget that letting one person sue the police is actually letting them sue us all. It's unlikely any policeman will have his wages docked till the money is repaid. Somewhere though, some school won't be able to afford an extra teacher, another hospital will lose a nurse, and there will be some service somewhere that gets cut and people wonder where all the money's gone.


It's the same with local authorities as well. Law texts are full of X vs Y Police Authority or Z County Council, but even when they get to the European Court of Human Rights, the judges turn it down because no society can afford for the vast majority of people to suffer for a few blunders.

The only people who win are the lawyers. Even if they don't win the suit, they get famous the higher they can take the matter and are usually awarded costs as most cases will have some foundation and that is why you will find someone to take your case if you look hard enough.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Don't they sell drugs in other boroughs?

 

[Stobart Stopper]

Yes they do sell drugs in other boroughs but Brixton is seen as the place for "drug tourists" ie incomers from other areas who go there to score.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Yes they do sell drugs in other boroughs but Brixton is seen as the place for "drug tourists" ie incomers from other areas who go there to score.

Don't people like that invariably end up being sold some sort of non-drug crap: where's the harm?

 

[detective-boy]

And yet the police are sued very rarely, for a number of practical reasons.

You'd be surprised - go and check out the lists at Central London County Court any day of the week ...

 

[detective-boy]

And the bigger problem with even a sustained "crackdown" is that although it may "clean up" a particular area, it often pushes the whole "scene" up the road to somewhere else.

That is the major practical difficulty - whlst demand for street dealers continues that is exactly what will happen. It happened with street prostitution too, hence the inclusion of tactics to name and shame punters to try and reduce demand.

 

[detective-boy]

It's unlikely any policeman will have his wages docked till the money is repaid.

Not only unlikely - there is no easy mechanism for it. The nearest equivalent would be a disciplinary finding of guilt and a financial penalty, but they would never get anywhere near the sums involved in a civil case. There is nothing to stop the individual officer, as well as the force, being sued but that rarely happens as the force is far more likely to be able to pay up.

...the judges turn it down because no society can afford for the vast majority of people to suffer for a few blunders.

Although there is a concept of public policy in UK and European jurisprudence, this is more concerned with setting the boundaries of where the police duty to the public starts and finishes - where it is right that an individual shuld have a case (there is a long line, including a leading case arising from the Yorkshire Ripper murders, concerned with the right of a future victim to sue the police if, through negligence, they failed to catch the offender earlier). These do tend to set the bar very high and part of the reasoning is the fear of opening the floodgates and, effectively, making policing impossible due to fear of lawsuits.

But I have never seen an individual case dismissed because of the fact that any money awarded would come from the public purse. That is not something the courts would concern themselves with.

The only people who win are the lawyers. Even if they don't win the suit, they get famous the higher they can take the matter and are usually awarded costs as most cases will have some foundation and that is why you will find someone to take your case if you look hard enough.[/QUOTE]

 

[detective-boy]

Don't people like that invariably end up being sold some sort of non-drug crap: where's the harm?

Street drug dealers (or street fake drug dealers) have a detrimental effect on an area, not least in attracting violence one way or another. Go read some of the many other threads on the subject from the people who live in Brixton and have to put up with it ...

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Street drug dealers (or street fake drug dealers) have a detrimental effect on an area, not least in attracting violence one way or another. Go read some of the many other threads on the subject from the people who live in Brixton and have to put up with it ...

We actually have our own street drug dealers here. They inhabited a particular area, I guess sort of the way it is there.

One day, the cops decided to do a big sweep. They arrested any street dealer they could find in the area, and tried to have some of them deported back to honduras. Then the cops maintained a heavy presence in the area, with cars parked on every block, and large foot patrols, etc. The area cleaned up real nice. No more street dealers, nowhere near as much open crack smoking.

At least, not there.

What happened, is that the drug addicts didn't magically get clean overnight. Instead, they moved into the adjoining areas, with a new crop of dealers. Whereas before, it was relatively confined, now, it was in a number of areas. It was like it multiplied. One of the areas involved, was the edge of the downtown business zone that abuts the Downtown Eastside. It gave businessmen etc the opportunity to see crack smoked in their alleys; it gave them the chance to step over inert bodies on the sidewalk; it gave them the chance to observe the mechanics of a street buy.

The meth business moved into what had been a relatively quiet residential area. All that changed when the 24 hour outdoor flea markets sprung up.

Drugs are a societal issue, not a Brixton or Downtown Eastside issue. It can't be addressed on an individual area level, without creating new problems elsewhere. Society has to bite the bullet, and assess whether or not the illegality of drugs creates more problems than it solves.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I'd love to hear the police comment about this one.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

When I used to live in Camden, the oregano sellers (displaced from Kings Cross by the aforementioned police 'sweeps') made a tidy income from the drug tourists, which they promptly spent on hard drugs with predictable results. Knife fights along the canal path, used syringes in the gutters, macho dickheads pretending to be 'gangstas', dealer shootings, chopped-up dead bodies in the canal, gang violence, locals getting harrassed, market traders being threatened etc.

The Dutch system isn't perfect, but it's a huge improvement over that shit.

 

[TopCat]

People have been coming to Brixton for decades to buy cannabis with rarely much fuss. Other people buy crack in Brixton and the chaos that their lives produce impacts on loads of people.

The most sensible step forward we could get would be for a clear distinction between cannabis and class a drugs. If I could buy my weed from a shop in Brixton arcade I would. Unfortunately I get it from an off street non local dealer who sells everything from coke to smack.

 

[detective-boy]

The most sensible step forward we could get would be for a clear distinction between cannabis and class a drugs.

Sadly that appears highly unlikely at present ...