Sherlock

Master Johan, I certainly do not mean to be contentious, however, other than two steady roles - one as the hard as nails DS in Ultraviolet (a series far ahead of its time, filled with talent but sadly canned and much missed, by me, at least) and the other a brief role as a scientist in "Dangerfield" - he had no real success in the UK, prior to his stage acting in the US, the reviews for which brought him to the attention of producers of "The Wire". At best, he was a "cult" actor in the UK, something which he has referred to himself in interview or appearances, with some derision and bitter humour at the fact he had to leave the UK to become successful here! That aside, he is a good actor and I thoroughly enjoy "Luther", although Steven Robertson out-acted the entire cast, with his quiet intensity, in his dual villain role(s). Your humble servant

I shall, perhaps, watch the drama (filmed from the third of four novels? Can the producers not count?) in order to see of it is portrayed better than the books, at least from a factual and procedural viewpoint. I do hope it is better than the woeful, clichèd tripe that is "Vera"... However, I do not understand the casting of Doug Henshall, decent actor though he may be, when the obvious choice (for me, at least) would be Shetland's own Steven Robertson. I might have thought some Shetlanders would take exception to a Glaswegian actor portraying one of their own. Or maybe I am being petty (as Watson is always alleging). I merely hope he does not try the accent... But then, what would most of the UK know of the Shetland accent? To them, a Glaswegian is, likely, entirely acceptable, as we "all sound alike" north of Manchester. Time will tell. This detective shall watch and judge the results... In the meantime, I remain, Your humble servant. Post Scriptum: To those who would say Robertson is not well known enough to carry a new series, I would submit that neither was Idris Elba, prior to "Luther" (at least in this country, where he was very much a bit-part actor!) and Robertson stole every single second of screen time in those two episodes with a tour-de-force performance, filled with menace, while brilliantly nuanced and capable of conveying so much with so little.

My dear sir/lady, my fellow scribes are quite correct, in that most drivers forget what may often be the most important aspect of road safety, and the key to safely avoiding accident or injury. I refer, of course, to your braking distance. I always employ a fairly simple and rudimentary formula, which allows me to calculate this in a moment. It is as follows. Take your speed and convert to feet. This is your reaction distance (e.g. 30 mph = 30 feet. Now half the first digit of your speed (i.e. 30 miles per hour, 3 divided by 2 = 1.5; 40 mph = 2; 50 = 2.5 etc). Multiply your speed by this number, e.g. 30 x 1.5 = 45. Add your reaction distance (45 + 30 = 75 feet) This is your total stopping distance. Written as such, it may seem complicated, however, if one stops to consider it, it becomes the simplest of arithmetical sums. You will note, however, that by adding 10 mph to each successive speed, the stopping distance grows exponentially (as pointed out recently, in another thread). Ergo, at 30 mph, your stopping distance is 75 mph (supposing fair weather and road conditions, as well as good reflexes and decent brakes and tyre surfaces in your vehicle). However, at 40 mph, it becomes 120 feet; 50 mph, 175 feet; 60 mph = 240 feet, etc). Try measuring out these distances on foot, in front of your vehicle, sometime. It is a sobering procedure, which should, I hope, provide food for thought and consideration, the next time you may be tempted to "boot it" or tailgate the idling chappie in front of you. Please, one and all, if you value your lives and health, and love your families, please drive carefully and in accordance with road, weather and traffic conditions. It is one of the saddest tasks an Officer must carry out, to knock on a family's door and impart that their loved one is dead or severely injured. In such instances, I would submit (once again) that it is the surviving family that are the true victims, as they shall spend the rest of their lives in mourning. And just because the speed limit may be 60 mph, it does not mean you must drive at that speed, no matter how angry it may make the chap behind to have to follow at 55, or 50 miles per hour (or 40, or 30, etc, if the weather is poor and you feel safer travelling at such speeds). I remain, as always, Your humble servant.

My dear fellow, I haven't been quite so embarrassed by such praise, since Mrs Hudson lost her best bloomers, and I found them in Watson's dresser! (I shall pay dearly for that recollection, believe me. The good doctor shall hide my jar of Mr Barratt's finest, as is his wont, when piqued! ). I thank you, my friend, and return your courtly bow. I remain, as ever, Your humble servant.

"da great detective"? Was he not a mouse, named "Basil"? There is nothing else for it. Watson, be a good fellow and pass the Flying Saucers, would you? I require a "pick-me-up"! Strictly medicinal purposes, don't you know! That's better... Mr Barratt, where would I be without you? Your humble servant Post Scriptum (Of course, that was, in fact, one of my peers, Mr John Wilson Murray )

Mr Andrew Johnson's mp3 or "app" for relaxation or sleep (he has a variety - one for every occasion, it seems!) assist me, between cases. It was Watson's idea, as the gunshots kept alarming the neighbours, somewhat! His website may be found here: www.AndrewJohnson.co.uk or via a search, on the late Mr Jobs' "App Store" thingamybob, or the Android Marketplace thingamajig. I remain, Your humble ssssnnnzzzzzzzzzzzz

"goverment legislation is currently being rushed through in an attempt to silence people such as myself from having an opinion - they intend to lable us climatechange deniers and class it as a crime against humanity on the same scale as Holocaust denial." "These are the same people who control all TV and Media.... " Damn you, Moriarty, you foul and wicked fiend! I shall not rest until your nefarious plots are foiled! (Although, I confess, I may pause for the occasional spot of Mr Barratt's finest sherbet dip-dab! Do be quiet, Watson, there's a good fellow. After all, I am only human. ) Your humble servant Post Scriptum I may be a tad out of touch, however, I was not aware that to deny the Holocaust is, in itself, an unlawful act...?

Master Posiedon, And I believe, once upon a time, old ladies were burned as witches and you could be hung for stealing a loaf of bread... Your humble servant Post Scriptum It may interest you to know that more than a few bobbies of that era were (allegedly) wont to drop pennies into the fingers of their old, heavy gloves. This added a certain "je ne sais quoi" to a smack, or even a tap, around the head with said accessories, I believe, which those so struck were not keen to experience more than once! Or so "they" say. Just think, sir! You may, in fact, have been "coshed"! YHS

Point of order, Chair. As I always strive to make clear, I will not be drawn into the fine points of law, or discussions on such. However, I endeavour to point out or address misconceptions, where my chosen profession is concerned. As always, the following consists of my own views and experiences, and do not reflect the profession, nor the Force, in which I serve. With this in mind, I would like to point out a misconception, which has arisen herein. "If the Police using handcuffs, pepper spray, batons etc, all of which are considered "acceptable", isn't "physical chastisement" I really cannot imagine what is." Handcuffs are used in the physical restraint of any person taken into Police custody. This is for the individual's protection, as well as that of the Officers detaining said individual. It is a requirement on any Officer carrying out such a detention, not a personal option or choice. Police in the UK use CS spray - not gas, spray - which is a dilute form of CS. Not pepper spray, which is intensely painful and entirely debilitating, upon application. CS spray evaporates rapidly, having temporarily disabled any person requiring its use upon them (in most cases). Such use must be answered for and recorded, and will be subject to scrutiny. Any complaint arising from its use would be investigated accordingly. However, both CS and the baton (which also requires justification for, and recording of, the reason even for drawing the baton), along with the stab-proof vest, form the Officer's personal protective equipment. The key word to point out here is "protective", not "chastisement". You do not draw your CS and spray an individual simply for annoying you, nor should you draw your baton and strike them for the same reason. In my experience, only in defence of yourself, or another, or to restrain someone from causing physical harm to themselves or others, or to prevent likely violent conflict or disorder, will these items be drawn and used. To do otherwise is to risk complaint and investigation, with the strong possibility of disciplinary and/or legal action. Once again, these are my opinions, based on my experience. However, I would hope most, if not all, of my colleagues would agree. Here endeth the lesson. As ever, I remain, Your humble servant.

I am aware of a friend whose house was insulated by the chaps from Heatwise very recently. They could not have been more helpful, efficient, cheery or hard-working, he states. They used the new type of roofing insulation in the attic, tidying up after themselves, and had the cavity walls done in just over a day, despite theirs being a fairly large house. He also informed me that one of the fellows, who was particularly helpful, ensured that all doors in the house, which may have been affected by draughts, were fitted with draught-stoppers all the way round the frames. This had never been discussed previously, however, this fellow just thought it would help and so instructed it to be done. This was all done after the mainland fellows had come in and performed the old "sucking air through the teeth" trick, telling my friends that, although the grant covered them, as theirs was a large house, it would cost double the usual, "using up the grant" and leaving them with over £2,000 to pay to have the insulations fitted! Heatwise then came in, under the grant, and did it all well within the grants budget. My friend and his wife are both delighted and have recommended Heatwise most highly to me, citing them as an excellent example of local reliable and efficient service. Based upon their recommendation, I therefore commend them to you, in turn. Your humble servant

Indeed, Master Hanger? Sounds to me more like infamy! ("Infamy! They've all got it in for me!" - My apologies, Watson insisted upon that one! Honestly, he is such a child sometimes... ) Your humble servant

I feature within the pages of a best selling novel (not as Sherlock, I might add). I advised the author for around 18 months, with regards to the nature of his crime scenario, and how this would be investigated. It was most gratifying and fascinating, particularly when the author sent me a draft manuscript to proof read. His agent then requested a few words of opinion, which were presented to his publishers as an endorsement from a "real" detective! I "collect" authors, having had the honour of the above, having met and had coffee with Sir Terry Pratchett several times, the same with Mr Ian Rankin, as well as communicating with a former CIA operative, turned author, and a prolific best-selling American crime writer. Your humble (yet proud) servant

FUrther to my last post, and from our own Shetland Times, dated 5th October 2010:- "Mr Ferguson said that the SFPA, which is now Marine Scotland, had “suspicions that there was widespread illegal landing of pelagic fishâ€. Accountants were brought in to analyse the accounts at all eight processing factories dealing with mackerel and herring landings. The investigation found that the Shetland Catch factory had earnings that could not be supported by its declared landings." In respect of wrongdoings by the Taxman, in taking "his" cut of the declared earnings, as with most crimes or offences, mens rea or "guilty mind" would be a fairly essential element here, I would suggest. To wit, the Taxman would need to have full knowledge of the illicit nature of the scheme, or of the nature of the income declared by the relevant party or parties, in order for there to be any suggestion of wrong-doing. If I extort monies with menaces from businesses, and declare my earnings through my legitimate business, paying the requisite tax on same, the Taxman is not complicit in my criminality. Most fishermen are dealt with on a firm basis by the Inland Revenue, however, they simply do not have the manpower or means to enquire into the "guts" (pardon the pun) of accounts submitted by every fisherman, or every vessel as a limited company. Instead, in my experience, periodically, certain "self-employed" occupations or trades are (or at least were) selected for "dip-sampling" by investigators for the old Revenue, in departments labelled 'Black Economy' investigation units. As the Revenue was cut back and cut back, these units were reduced and removed, until, last I heard, there were only two or three persons, within the entire Highlands & Islands, carrying out such enquiries, while the bulk of resources were shifted to the Central Belt, where financial criminality and money-laundering was steadily growing. The Revenue has obviously changed since this time, however, I do not believe there will have been sufficient funding increases to allow for an even greater presence than they had in previous years, which would have enabled them to examine each set of accounts in detail, and thereby detect the illicit scheme. Instead, it appears likely that, following the suspicions described by the SFPA, forensic accountants would have been tasked by the authorities to enquire specifically into the factories concerned. The vessels and fishermen were simply a logical progression, once the knot began to unravel... But as I say, feel free to enlighten me otherwise. I am a seeker of knowledge, after all. The answer to the OP's question, therefore, is "Yes, however, there is no wrongdoing on the part of the Taxman". You could say that it is the State - i.e. all of us - that benefits from the "honesty" of the individual/s concerned... Your humble servant. Post Scriptum paulb, The Police do not "take their boats". They may seize assets on behalf of the Crown, if there is reasonable cause or evidence to suspect or prove that such assets are the results or proceeds of criminality. The Proceeds of Crime Act is fairly stringent in the requirements for seizure of assets. Unlike our American cousins, you will not find Police units utilising seized Ferraris or Porsches, or our local detectives cutting through the Sound of Bressay, sunglasses on, at high speed in their confiscated Cigar Boat Racer... This is a common misconception, along with "the Police letting someone off", when they have been acquitted or discharged by the Court, or that Police Officers divide up the spoils from various fines issued, for their benefit. Other than running costs and administration fees, the monies gathered go to the Treasury. Just ask these two chappies from down Glasgow way, who have been in the news the last day or so, what their view on PoCA is. I am sure they will be voluble and full of praise for the legislation! YHS

Are you quite sure of this? After all, the BBC news site reported this, regarding the matter:- "The SFPA had launched an investigation due to suspicions of widespread illegal landing of pelagic fish." I am aware that Mr Jackson, QC, has submitted, in the case of his client, that said earnings were put through his books and subject to tax, however, it is not clear (to my knowledge) whether all involved were doing so. Mr Jackson described his client's situation as "quite unique". It appears they may have rumbled by other means, however, feel free to enlighten me otherwise. Your humble servant.

Master Smeeth, "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats" I do not know about "normal", but, believe me, sir, you have noooooo idea... As Master Cumberbatch stated, just the other night, "I may be on the side of the angels...but don't think for one second that I am one of them." And yet, I remain, Your humble servant.