Met police firearms

[Fedster + 1,307]

Crime team resorts to extreme measures to stop teens working as drug mules.

Wiltshire Police

 

A police force is hoping a new tactic will hit teenage county lines runners where it hurts and stop them working for drugs gangs – taking away their expensive trainers and making them walk home in naff plimsolls.

Wiltshire has seen an increase in the number of children or vulnerable people being used as runners for drug gangs in cities, who are bribed with designer clothes and mobile phones.

The force’s dedicated crime team has found young people who work for county lines gangs are completely unfazed by arrests and investigations and unaware of the serious penalties they are risking so the team adopted a different strategy.

Detective Constable George Booth, of the North Dedicated Crime Team, said: "It's sad, but often, we will see young people arrested, released under investigation while enquiries continue, and then continue to work as runners for county lines drugs gangs.

“Being arrested doesn't seem to have any effect on them. But when we seize their expensive trainers under the Proceeds of Crime Act, we are essentially taking away what they have 'worked for' and we hope it will have an impact.

“For some of these young people, these trainers or designer clothes can be seen as a status symbol, and so losing that is pretty difficult for them to deal with.

"We will always deal robustly with anyone involved in the supply of class A drugs in order to show gangs from out of town that they cannot view our county as a soft target to commit crime in. As part of this, any items believed to have been obtained through criminal activity - whether that is phones, clothing, jewellery or cash - will be seized by our team."

 

Sergeant Georgina Green, of the North DCT, added: "This is certainly one of the most visible signs that a young person is involved in county lines and is being exploited.

 

"We have seen young people from all different backgrounds become involved in county lines and the first their parents know about it is when we turn up on their doorstep. From the first moment they are recruited into these gangs, I don't think these children know quite what risks they will be facing and by that time, it is too late and they are trapped. If they knew what they were falling into, they wouldn't do it.

 

“You may well be offered £100 a day to work for these drugs gangs, but the risks just are not worth it - carrying weapons, transporting class A drugs to vulnerable drug addicts who will do anything to feed their habit, being threatened with violence and expected to travel at unsociable hours." 

 

More than 100 pairs of trainers already seized will be sold at the force’s proceeds of crime auctions. 

View On Police Oracle

 

[SD + 688]

What legal power allows them to do that?

[Hyphen + 693]

It appears they are treating the items as criminal property and seizing them on arrest. Seems a bit of a non starter though surely if challenged? 

[Sceptre + 2,701]

The Proceeds of Crime Act is mentioned in the article, and contains a specific power to seize and retain items pending a confiscation order. I'm all for this, it's about the most impactive way to punish them and strips them of the benefit of having worked for the county line in the first place.

[MerseyLLB 8,426]

If we had more cops and more time we would be able to use these powers more widely and to better effect.

[SD + 688]

How expensive are the trainers? Thought the minimum (cash or asset) that could be seized under POCA was £1000. 

[Sceptre + 2,701]

I believe that the minimum amount of £1000 applies only to cash seizures under Chapter 3, not to the seizure of property other than cash under S47C or subsequent confiscation orders under Part 2. 

[SD + 688]

7 minutes ago, Sceptre said:

I believe that the minimum amount of £1000 applies only to cash seizures under Chapter 3, not to the seizure of property other than cash under S47C or subsequent confiscation orders under Part 2. 

Fair enough. Been a while since a did POCA work and it was always quite high value so never worried about the minimum.

[SD + 688]

Just having a read of it now and items exempt from seizure includes “clothing, bedding, furniture, household equipment, provisions or other things as are necessary for satisfying the basic domestic needs of the defendant and the defendant's family.”

I’m guessing the custody plimsoles are the way around this. 

[MerseyLLB 8,426]

4 hours ago, SD said:

Just having a read of it now and items exempt from seizure includes “clothing, bedding, furniture, household equipment, provisions or other things as are necessary for satisfying the basic domestic needs of the defendant and the defendant's family.”

I’m guessing the custody plimsoles are the way around this. 

I read it that the exemptions were to prevent unscrupulous officers leaving people destitute.

[SD + 688]

16 hours ago, MerseyLLB said:

I read it that the exemptions were to prevent unscrupulous officers leaving people destitute.

There is that but if that’s their only pair of shoes, which for many of these kids it is, it’s a but near the knuckle.

[CountyCop + 178]

On 06/06/2018 at 17:16, SD said:

There is that but if that’s their only pair of shoes, which for many of these kids it is, it’s a but near the knuckle.

I think the issue is that this isn’t there only pair of trainers, I can’t remember the last time I met one of these types of kids with at least 3-4 pairs of trainers. Albeit in very poor taste.

Personally I think this whole stint is a bit of a gimmick, not really effective.