Police Out In Force In Norfolk

Welcome To

Police Out In Force In Norfolk

This topic is empty.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 72 total)

← 1 2 3 4 5 →

Author

Posts
February 13, 2008 at 10:58 am

#898611
1

stax

@stax

Member
Riot police used to clear 1,000+ ravers
AURA SABADUS

13 February 2008 09:02

Riot police dispersed more than 1,000 ravers as they flocked to Norfolk to set up an illegal party in the early hours of Sunday.

More than 100 officers handling dogs mounted a massive operation following a tip-off that a rave was planned in Swaffham or Thetford Forest.

The A1122 to the Marham turn was closed to traffic between 10.30pm and 1am as officers worked against the clock to disperse the ravers and seize equipment.

Two people were arrested and a number of revellers issued with tickets relating to traffic offences. Others who intended to offer food and drink during the event will now be investigated by environmental health and the Inland Revenue.

The police helicopter was used to help with surveillance of the area.

Supt Jo Parrett said: “Our actions on Saturday night to Sunday morning were purposefully pro- active and designed to prevent an illegal rave or unlicensed musical event taking place.

“We believe that due to the large number of people who turned up from all parts of the country, they were going to hold their rave at Thetford Forest. We managed however to disperse them as they were congregating at the picnic area near Swaffham.”

She added: “We wanted to send a very tough message out that we will not tolerate such behaviour from large groups of people who congregate in order to spoil other people’s right to peace and quiet and damage their properties.

“Our intelligence in relation to these events is constantly improving and in this case it certainly helped us to fully disrupt this event which would have caused damage and disruption to ordinary law-abiding people in Norfolk.

“We will not tolerate those individuals who choose to break the law and ruin the peace of our county. Once again this should serve as a warning that we will do everything we can, including robust action, to ensure that Norfolk remains a safe and enjoyable place for everybody to be. We would like to thank everybody in the area who supported our action.”

Norfolk has been a notorious hotspot for ravers over the last year, causing great anguish for farmers and landowners who feared for their properties and had raised concerns about potential injuries or deaths on their land.

Tony Bone, speaking for Farmwatch, a scheme set up to prevent rural crime, said there has been a rave “in one part or another of Norfolk” every weekend since Christmas.

Cockley Cley, near Swaffham, has also attracted large crowds recently, and a large number of arrests been made as a result.

“Raves cause a lot of nuisance, debris and damage to farmers and landowners,” he said. “Moreover, there is always a concern about health and safety and we are extremely worried that due to the use of drugs during such events, an accident could occur. We have worked with Norfolk Constabulary to disrupt this event and we want to send out the message that we’re going to be very tough on people who are planning to set up such events.

“We are also concerned with parents who seem to support such events as we have recently heard that they drop their children off to such events. This is not the right attitude.”

http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/story.aspx?brand=EDPOnline&category=News&tBrand=edponline&tCategory=news&itemid=NOED12%20Feb%202008%2020%3A44%3A00%3A787
February 13, 2008 at 3:01 pm

#898582
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
like on eof my m8s said, i think that the OB are starting the work with the telecom services to track down partyline numbers and etc………..

the safest way to do a party nowadays would have to be through word of mouth, if youre a raver and have plenty of m8s who go partying, tell them and keep it hush!!!
February 14, 2008 at 10:46 am

#898593
6

General Lighting

@general-lighting

Moderator
Staff
cops have worked with telecoms services (and even vigilantes with scanners monitoring the old analogue mobiles) even back in the 1980s and 1990s. Helicopters and video survelliance were also available back then.

word of mouth is good but still won’t work if the locals are angry enough to watch for you, and its obvious what multiple carloads of mostly young people driving to Breckland (a vast expanse of fuck all) or Swaffham at 1 in the morning are up to.

Ravers out here need to look at the wider picture and start rethinking their strategies very quickly.

The harsh reality is the locals are so pissed off in some areas they don’t care how much taxpayers money it costs of what level of force is used to keep ravers off their locality. Although I’m fairly new to East Anglia I have reasonable navigation skills and I do think the same areas (within 30-40 miles) are getting targeted each weekend as when I do go out we always seem to be heading in the same sorts of directions.

This is serious stuff, the cops have closed down a public highway in a counntry with relative freedom of movement – and forced a private business (the mobile company) to shut down a profitable service. The last time they did stuff like this was 15-20 years ago after they had found raves to have major links to organised crime and that the first wave of ravers were fucking up big time on overdoing the drugs.

Unfortunately what has also happened is the cops/authorities have become a lot smarter at their surveillance and scrutiny of how this scene works – how its funded, the lifestyles we all lead outside parties (they aren’t daft and when youths aged 16-21 who don’t often have regular employment can get hold of tens of thousands of pounds worth of sound equpment, they do start wondering where the cash comes from and more importantly trying to find out..)

Further, they are linking in the attitudes of raves with other anti-social behaviour because of the way a minority of people in convoys have acted when they end up in public places (nicking stuff out of shops, driving badly etc) plus the practice of vandalising stuff at raves.

I know 90% of the ravers don’t do any of this stuff but some do and we are all judged on the lowest common denominator.

It doesn’t help that people brag about that part of raving and upload stuff to bebo and youtube which may look like fun to us (and TBH I’ve found the rave vids amusing) but when viewed by the “anti’s” often hardens their views especially when they are showing blatant illegal drug use.

Also the lack of proper clear up doesn’t help – what is being done just isn’t good enough.

authorities are also being fed info by NHS and social services about the knock on effects of the “drugs culture” and particularly its affect on young people and their families (I’ve heard of people going psychotic on comedowns and attacking their parents etc even back in the 90s..)

All this is info is being gathered together and used against the party scene here.

Its time to sort yourselves out. in many cases Norfolk’s scene has been a victim of its own “success”, despite clampdowns a lot of parties still happen.

But I’m not even sure myself the current ones are “on the right track”.

I’ve been to a few last year and there were some really good ones in good areas, but in others I’ve thought “hang on, this is someones working farm and ketamine-filled idiots are swarming all over the place and some are trampling crops and fucking around with things they shouldn’t be” – also there have been “incidents and accidents” ranging from ketamine-related injuries to actual fights/violence (not random stuff but people bringing their private arguments to the party).

It might mean smaller parties and/or less often and in places where the locals are prepared to tolerate it (something I have been told used to happen) but its either that or more clampdowns . There is a lot of “anti-terrorist” money (for cops etc) in East Anglia, but no real problem with Muslim extremism. However, terrorism has more than one definition.
February 14, 2008 at 1:56 pm

#898583
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
General Lighting wrote:

I’ve been to a few last year and there were some really good ones in good areas, but in others I’ve thought “hang on, this is someones working farm and ketamine-filled idiots are swarming all over the place and some are trampling crops and fucking around with things they shouldn’t be” – also there have been “incidents and accidents” ranging from ketamine-related injuries to actual fights/violence (not random stuff but people bringing their private arguments to the party).

yeh i totally agree with you, ketamine was fun to try out, but after awhile it started to fuck with my body and i couldnt handle the buzz, hence why i dont do it anymore. but i agree with what you say, ive seen plenty of people at parties get into arguements over K, get hurt by K and even get involved in bad insidents with K

like i went to the welshtek in 2007 over the easter holidays, and my friend happened to have a shit load of K, anyway he was stumbling all over the place and the path in which people were walking up and down, my m8 who was fucked on K just suddenly turned around and put his arm around this group of rude boys and he was like ”’yehhhhh whats goinnn on ya chavss” and they just basically looked at him pushed him of and go ”you what”………….and of course because my m8 was on K, he couldn’t do alot, so when they pushed him, he just sorta stumbled backwards, tripped over a stick and was about a few centimeters away from hitting his head on a log, thus coulda been very serious.

rumour has it that the police can’t close down a rave unless a member of the public makes an offical complaint about the noise levels…………..theres plenty of wooded areas in east anglia, surely the rig owners can’t find a decent enough spot where the trees can block a majority of the sound. but what do i know, ive never held a party before so i dunno what its like. just my two cents thats all.

/Hyper
February 14, 2008 at 2:18 pm

#898647
1

kluska

@kluska

Member
K makes people do stupid stuff but so does alcohol… to be honest people do stupid stuff on their own without any chemical interferance… Its not really fair to scapegoat a specific drug or a specific drug user, most people are capable of finding some way to do foolish things!

Its just the unfortunate truth that the more people you have gathered in one place with the responsibility of policing themselves, the higher the likelyhood of bad things happening.

Which means people looking out for each other – if, in the case of a big free event, there is nobody who is “responsible” or “in charge” then EVERYONE is responsible for EVERYONE else, which means if you see people climbing around on a hedge, or breaking a dry stone wall, or leaving a gate open, or approaching a group of chavs – you’re just as responsible as anyone else for stopping them
February 14, 2008 at 2:33 pm

#898594
6

General Lighting

@general-lighting

Moderator
Staff
hyperSkunk wrote:

rumour has it that the police can’t close down a rave unless a member of the public makes an offical complaint about the noise levels…………..theres plenty of wooded areas in east anglia, surely the rig owners can’t find a decent enough spot where the trees can block a majority of the sound.

Thetford forest is actually like that.

I’ve found books written in the 1930s by local explorer types which mention the sound deadening properties of the area (one chap could see two large lorries from the road but not hear their engine noise and this was in the days there were fewer vehicles about)

The problem isn’t the noise any more.

It is stuff like the way convoys descend on the same area, tons of cars going through tiny villages, everyone stopping and turning back, that in itself is anti social behaviour under todays laws. Its also when a party does happen, carries on until Sunday evening and a lot of the clear up doesn’t get done. (I suspect there is also a backlash due to hundreds of people turning up to work/college tired, sketchy and irritable and its fucking obvious to bosses/tutors/parents what you have been up to.)
February 14, 2008 at 2:53 pm

#898584
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
yeh i totally agree with both of you.

i’m abit devious about going raving (heavily) again, ive given it a breka for awhile and i just fancy going out 2 have a good dance and etc, nothing special. but its my 21st this year and i wanted 2 have a private party on. im just worried that the old bill r gunan turn up, ruin the fun and perhaps take away the equipment. i’m trying to plan some things so i find a spot that will basically invisible to sound, found a few places in suffolk where the nearest house is a good mile away and its surrounded in thick forest.
February 14, 2008 at 3:16 pm

#898595
6

General Lighting

@general-lighting

Moderator
Staff
hyperSkunk wrote:

i’m trying to plan some things so i find a spot that will basically invisible to sound, found a few places in suffolk where the nearest house is a good mile away and its surrounded in thick forest.

if you don’t have permission to be there (or a TENS licens), and just one person from that house or a local complains you will get turned over heavily…

I’ve seen 5 cop cars and a riot van turn up to a planned “squat party” in a large residential house (which would have barely 20 people)

actually last weekend I was at a friends house just on the Norfolk/Suffolk border and their mates had what was a tiny shindig in a field like what you had planned

cops shut that one down as well..
February 14, 2008 at 3:25 pm

#898648
1

kluska

@kluska

Member
It sounds like the police are a bit more hardcore down south??

I’ve been organising parties up here for a couple of years and not one has beens shut down… the police tend to show up on force but then they just have a look round and leave

Maybe its cos we’re in buildings tho, but they’re still pretty big with a number of rigs involved.

I think large outdoor parties have reached such a high profie that the police cant ignore them any more. So many people get to hear about them! And not the nice fluffly people who share cars and clean up after themselves either…
February 14, 2008 at 3:33 pm

#898596
6

General Lighting

@general-lighting

Moderator
Staff
kluska wrote:

It sounds like the police are a bit more hardcore down south??

I’ve been organising parties up here for a couple of years and not one has beens shut down… the police tend to show up on force but then they just have a look round and leave

Maybe its cos we’re in buildings tho, but they’re still pretty big with a number of rigs involved.

this happens in southern city areas provided the building is genuinely disused and unwanted for redevelopment in its present state. However if its a high value “between lets” which has been broken into and is getting trashed the cops will go in in force.

Quote:

I think large outdoor parties have reached such a high profie that the police cant ignore them any more. So many people get to hear about them! And not the nice fluffly people who share cars and clean up after themselves either…

The problem is outdoor parties in east Anglias are often being held on prime farmland – and as you say more people are hearing about them including townies etc..
February 14, 2008 at 4:00 pm

#898613
1

darkstar

@darkstar

Member
General Lighting wrote:

Also the lack of proper clear up doesn’t help – what is being done just isn’t good enough.

We always clean up a site after it’s been used.

I think this is one of the reasons the authorities in Scotland are a lot more tolerant.

And many sites are often cleaner after a party than they were before as we take away all rubbish – not just what we caused.

One of the Edinburgh crews organised a clean up, by volunteers, of a well used public site, as crews from England had come up and trashed the site, vandalised property, and generally caused a nuicance to local residents.

We were all disgusted at the state of the site, as it is part of a beautiful public park used by walkers, dog owners, climbers and families – and these ordinary members of the public should not have suffer due to the irresponsibility of other party crews. Acting in that way just gives the scene a bad name.

Organising the clean up was a way to show non party goers that not all of us are like that.
February 14, 2008 at 4:14 pm

#898642
1

GiantMidget

@giantmidget

Member
Reading all this has made me think. This sat i think i’ll help in the clear up operation!! 😉
February 14, 2008 at 4:14 pm

#898649
1

kluska

@kluska

Member
Yeah but in scotland do they grow crops or grow sheep?

I think further up north where the ground isnt so good for growing crops and there is a lot of moorland the police are a bit less harsh.

Plus there’s a lot less privately owned farm land and more open parkland

They tend to be more hassle at the end of the party when ur trying to drive home!
February 14, 2008 at 4:33 pm

#898614
1

darkstar

@darkstar

Member
kluska wrote:

Yeah but in scotland do they grow crops or grow sheep?

Of course not – the whole of Scotland is covered in heather and we can only grow Haggis :laugh_at:

I think the main difference is that if we use private land, it’s either disused or we have the landowners permission, but most of the time we use public land.

Also we do not have any tresspass laws, and we also have a Right to Roam Act ( the Land Reform Act ) which means we can go just about anywhere we please.

Here’s a summary of your access rights

1. Everyone, whatever their age or ability, has access rights established by the Land
Reform (Scotland) Act 2003. You only have access rights if you exercise them
responsibly.

2. You can exercise these rights, provided you do so responsibly, over most land and
inland water in Scotland, including mountains, moorland, woods and forests, grassland,
margins of fields in which crops are growing, paths and tracks, rivers and lochs, the
coast and most parks and open spaces. Access rights can be exercised at any time of
the day or night.

3. You can exercise access rights for recreational purposes (such as pastimes, family
and social activities, and more active pursuits like horse riding, cycling, wild camping and
taking part in events), educational purposes (concerned with furthering a person’s
understanding of the natural and cultural heritage), some commercial purposes (where
the activities are the same as those done by the general public) and for crossing over
land or water.

4. Existing rights, including public rights of way and navigation, and existing rights on
the foreshore, continue.

5. The main places where access rights do not apply are:

houses and gardens, and non-residential buildings and associated land;
land in which crops are growing;
land next to a school and used by the school;
sports or playing fields when these are in use and where the exercise of access
rights would interfere with such use;
land developed and in use for recreation and where the exercise of access rights
would interfere with such use;
golf courses (but you can cross a golf course provided you don’t interfere with any
games of golf);
places like airfields, railways, telecommunication sites, military bases and
installations, working quarries and construction sites; and
visitor attractions or other places which charge for entry.

6. Local authorities can formally exempt land from access rights for short periods. Local
authorities and some other public bodies can introduce byelaws.

7. Access rights do not extend to:
being on or crossing land for the purpose of doing anything which is an offence, such
as theft, breach of the peace, nuisance, poaching, allowing a dog to worry livestock,
dropping litter, polluting water or disturbing certain wild birds, animals and plants;
hunting, shooting or fishing;
any form of motorised recreation or passage (except by people with a disability using
a vehicle or vessel adapted for their use);
anyone responsible for a dog which is not under proper control; or to
anyone taking away anything from the land for a commercial purpose.

8. Statutory access rights do not extend to some places or to some activities that the
public have enjoyed on a customary basis, often over a long period of time. Such
access is not affected by the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 and will continue.

http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/access/approvedcode050604.pdf

raaa
February 14, 2008 at 4:39 pm

#898615
1

darkstar

@darkstar

Member
kluska wrote:

I think further up north where the ground isnt so good for growing crops and there is a lot of moorland the police are a bit less harsh.

Plus there’s a lot less privately owned farm land and more open parkland

They tend to be more hassle at the end of the party when ur trying to drive home!

I guess you’ve never been to Scotland then ?

TBH – it doesn’t matter where you are in Scotland – the Police are pretty decent about party’s.

And I’ve never seen a Police road block or them stopping anyone after parties.

And virtually all parties are held in Southern Scotland – not in the North.

As you can see approx. 87% of land is privately owned – and most of that is farms or estates.

And here’s some info about private v public land ownership

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]THE PATTERN OF LANDOWNERSHIP IN SCOTLAN[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]D[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Scotland[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]19,068,631 acres[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]100%[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Urban[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]585,627 acres[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]3%[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Rural[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]18,483,004 acres[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]97%[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Of the rural land – in the ownership of public bodies[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]2,275,768 acres[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Of the rural land – in the ownership of private interests[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]16,207,236 acres[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Of this privately-owned rural land:-[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]One quarter is owned by [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]66 landowners[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]in estates of 30700 acres and larger[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]One third is owned by [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]120 landowners[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]in estates of 21000 acres and larger[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]One half is owned by [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]343 landowners[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]in estates of 7500 acres and larger[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Two thirds is owned by[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1252 landowners[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]in estates of 1200 acres and larger[/FONT]

:weee:
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 72 total)

← 1 2 3 4 5 →

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.