Police power to bar suspected domestic violence offenders from their homes

[detective-boy]

This is Labour's usual ineffective authoritarianism, allowing the police to punish the innocent while doing nothing about the guilty.

Apart from the fact that you are in full Daily Mail rant mode, what exactly is it that suggests that ONLY the innocent will be affected by this?

 

[detective-boy]

It's not fair on anybody involved to allow the police deal with it on their own.

It is not a finding of guilt - it's intended as (another) interim measure which can be used whilst an investigation / prosecution is conducted and commenced.

Bearing in mind that it is only to be used where there are reasonable grounds to justify it, the alternative (which has been used thus far, to the detriment of those who would have complied with some interim provision such as this, apparently like at least one poster on this thread) would be to arrest and detain in custody pending any application for injunction, etc.

It is also formalising something that has been done ("Is there somewhere you can stay for a couple of days until it all calms down a bit?") for years and years by cops wanting (a) to get the perpetrator out of the way for a bit but (b) being reluctant to arrest and remand in custody on the basis of what has actually happened so far.

 

[detective-boy]

As an aside, I think many Labour MPs and peers, being idealists, genuinely believe that criminal complaints are automatically true.

As a second aside, I think many Daily Mail ranters, being fuckwits, genuinely believe that criminal complaints are automatically false. The vast, vast majority are not.

Protection for the thousands of totally genuine victims of crime, living in fear of further violent attack, is not something that needs no further bolstering.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Putting on my cynic's hat, anyone else notice how feeble these latest authoritarian measures are? No attacks of cherished liberties, no wholesale removal of rights from the accused. The fight has really gone out of Labour. Anyone who says that another few years of this sorry bunch would be unbearable, take note. I imagine Mr Cameron's brigade, fresh and invogorated by a win, and with an equal disregard for liberty, would be much worse.

Perhaps, but I'd put these measures down to the ongoing fetish for "crime control" on the part of certain policy-makers and Civil Servants, rather than blaming them on politicians. They appear to still labour under the delusion that criminalisation "deals with" a problem, rather than just passing the responsibility for dealing with the problem from one arm of the state to another.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Apart from the fact that you are in full Daily Mail rant mode, what exactly is it that suggests that ONLY the innocent will be affected by this?

Perhaps Azrael is worried that this new rule will impinge on his right to legitimately chastise his wife for not ironing his underpants correctly/making the mashed potatoes too sloppy/being a bitch who ruined his life?

 

[Idris2002]

Perhaps Azrael is worried that this new rule will impinge on his right to legitimately chastise his wife for not ironing his underpants correctly/making the mashed potatoes too sloppy/being a bitch who ruined his life?

If Mr. Azrael is mad at his 'wife', all he has to do is open the spigot and deflate her.

 

[detective-boy]

Perhaps Azrael is worried that this new rule will impinge on his right to legitimately chastise his wife for not ironing his underpants correctly/making the mashed potatoes too sloppy/being a bitch who ruined his life?

That is a possibility ...

 

[detective-boy]

If Mr. Azrael is mad at his 'wife', all he has to do is open the spigot and deflate her.

... and that is another ...

 

[Azrael]

Apart from the fact that you are in full Daily Mail rant mode, what exactly is it that suggests that ONLY the innocent will be affected by this?

I'm sure some guilty people will obey it. But if they're willing to break the law to hit their wife or partner, why will they obey a police order?

As a second aside, I think many Daily Mail ranters, being fuckwits, genuinely believe that criminal complaints are automatically false. The vast, vast majority are not.

Never said otherwise. Regardless of the extent of false allegations, this order seems open to be abused.

Protection for the thousands of totally genuine victims of crime, living in fear of further violent attack, is not something that needs no further bolstering.

I already said it needs further bolstering. I just don't think this will do it, just as ASBOs have become a joke among the thuggisly inclined.

Perhaps, but I'd put these measures down to the ongoing fetish for "crime control" on the part of certain policy-makers and Civil Servants, rather than blaming them on politicians. They appear to still labour under the delusion that criminalisation "deals with" a problem, rather than just passing the responsibility for dealing with the problem from one arm of the state to another.

The criminal law is there as a last resort. It has to try to deal with wife beaters somehow, however far from ideal that response may be.