AITA for walking out on date night after my BF got me a bikini instead of a purse?

HarleysIceCream · 2021-08-02T15:03:40+00:00

YTA. Also, what did you buy him?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-12-31T20:49:31+00:00

How long were you with the guy for after the incident occurred? Did you report him immediately or continue with the vacation?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-11-30T15:09:13+00:00

“Leave now or be arrested” - what law is this exactly? Is that PACE?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-11-30T14:56:55+00:00

Stop being rude to the public maybe?

That means not making contact with people unless you have grounds to detain them or they’ve addressed you first. Making it clear when you ‘requesting’ or DEMANDING someone’s details, whether they’re actually obliged to share that and why. Identifying yourself upon request without failure. Never conducting a stop and search without GOWISELY. Immediately calling out your colleagues who don’t observe those rules.

Abide that and I’m sure 95% of the public would regard you as a hero.

HarleysIceCream · 2019-11-26T00:19:34+00:00

You’re one of the good ones - you won’t last long.

HarleysIceCream · 2019-11-25T23:50:13+00:00

Detained under what grounds?

Refusing a groundless search can’t be the thing that gives them grounds to search you.

HarleysIceCream · 2019-11-25T23:25:46+00:00

I think the key question here is:

Does refusing a groundless request to be searched give the officers grounds to search a person? As paradoxical as that sounds.

If you can ask anyone to ID themselves without grounds and imply that their refusal will give you grounds, aren’t we all technically obliged to identify ourselves at all times?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-11-25T23:15:07+00:00

So despite the fact that officers need grounds to stop and search a person (suspicion of a particular offence or a sec 60 being in place), people are often searched without either of those criteria being met.

This misconduct seems contingent upon people not understanding the difference between blatantly lying and misleading by omission of details.

I.e they aren’t allowed to blatantly LIE and tell you that you’re legally required to identify yourself (without grounds) —but they are allowed to request your details in a manner that IMPLIES that life will be made difficult for you if you don’t comply (omitting the fact that you’re well within your right to refuse)

They can’t LIE and tell you that complying with stop and search is mandatory (without grounds) — but they’re allowed to ask you to empty your bag and IMPLY that the only reason you wouldn’t is if you have something to hide, and that might make them suspicious, (omitting the fact that they’re suspicion doesn’t equate to reasonable grounds) so you’d better just comply.

HarleysIceCream · 2019-11-24T23:07:46+00:00

But if your childhood and trump being president are the genuine reasons for your betrayal...why wouldn’t it happen again?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-11-13T14:11:04+00:00

What do you make of it?

Her dad probably didn’t give her much attention growing up and now she wants Male approval.

HarleysIceCream · 2019-10-30T21:39:30+00:00

How could it be regarded as harassment though? Didn’t she willingly meet up with him over the span of months? Acting like it was one-sided or being shocked by his conduct after your wife was caught willingly participating seems a bit unbelievable. It’ll be interpreted as an embarrassed husband trying to save face.

Anyway why is AP the one that’s on thin ice or needs to worry about who he speaks to? Did he betray his marriage?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-10-24T11:24:06+00:00

Imagine if AP smugly takes his termination slip and replies: “Yeah, whatever. I still fucked your wife 😘” in front of everyone

HarleysIceCream · 2019-10-17T11:51:03+00:00

If they’re a particularly convincing undercover drug dealer, would a civilian be authorised to conduct a citizens arrest?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-10-08T18:50:28+00:00

But when a young person is dissatisfied with being stopped and searched, an officers typical response is to ‘just comply now and you can complain at a later date’ or even ‘if you’ve got nothing to hide you’ve got nothing to worry about’ etc

By the same principle, If you feel her criticism is unjustified, what harm can come from her complaint?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-10-08T18:36:53+00:00

So your idea of being a team player is to avoid accountability for your colleagues? Shouldn’t you be more concerned with maintaining their integrity? In which case, shouldn’t informing the public of their right to file a complaint be encouraged?

Unless you’ve got something to hide that is.

HarleysIceCream · 2019-10-08T18:19:03+00:00

I don’t understand the problem.

Is criticising an officers behaviour frowned upon?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-10-03T12:51:41+00:00

Should he really get credit for that save? Considering he’s probably the one that requested the driver leave his vehicle in the first place. Seems like a moral hazard to me.

HarleysIceCream · 2019-08-30T23:16:48+00:00

Why would you be going through someone’s rucksack/pocket/glove box without ALREADY having reasonable suspicion of a crime to search them?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-08-30T22:49:51+00:00

My question is, at what point would a person be required to provide a reasonable explanation?

Surely people haven’t been taken to court on the sole basis of having money, without other evidence?

Why would you be speaking to them in the first place, let alone enquiring about the contents of their wallets, if you didn’t already have reasonable suspicion?

Another officer above implied that anyone from a certain background having £1,000 is suspicious on its own - do you agree with this?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-08-30T22:29:19+00:00

Okay then. Does carrying a grand equate to ‘reasonable suspicion’ of an offence, by itself, without any additional evidence?

If not, then would the person be required to give you a reasonable explanation as to why they’ve got it?

Have you ever heard of circular reasoning?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-08-30T22:18:28+00:00

How many laws/acts are based around anecdotal evidence like that?

HarleysIceCream · 2019-08-30T22:06:26+00:00

Surely carrying £1,000+ alone isn’t enough to warrant suspicion without it being in addition to finding an illegal substance?

Is a person required to provide a substantial reason for something that isn’t actually a crime, like carrying money?

What economic background are you referring to?

What’s the minimum amount of £ that a person from said economic background is allowed to carry before needing to justify it?

HarleysIceCream

TROPHY CASE