Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sherlock

  1. Master Maywick, There is no training provided to Officers - to my knowledge - in respect of such things. It is a matter of experience, and interest in such matters. Your account amuses me, however it does not surprise me greatly. I had experience from former employment, then, upon joining the good fight, I had the benefit of a tutor constable with a strong road traffic background, who studied such matters, and passed on his interest to me. On a professional level, this has extended to domestic security also. Which brings me to Master Gibber. In a word, sir, no. I shall not pass on my knowledge, as much of this is not readily available to members of the public. Much as an AA or RAC engineer will not (usually) discuss such matters, for the same reasons. As to the pedantry, where an individual feels the need to score points off another over matters, which most, if not all, would already accept, understand and take for granted, without the need for condescension or "superior" comments, I would submit that - at least in this matter - the comment made qualifies as pedantic. Another of Sir Arthur's maxims, which holds true even now... "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." As ever, I remain, Your humble servant.
  2. Master Rider, You have delighted me with your prosaic input, sir. Lightened my day and my mood somewhat, in the face of other obtuse ramblings. My thanks, sir. As to the matter of Punjana, mea culpa, good sir, mea culpa. Your humble servant.
  3. Master Gibber, No sir, it does not. Indeed, it CAN not, unless said representative of the Automobile Association is doing so without your permission. This is the essence of the "unlawful" aspect. If you know an elderly neighbour who has locked themselves out of their house, yet has left a first floor window open, and they petition you to climb up a ladder and in through this window on their behalf, as they are physically unable to do so, would this be unlawful, do you think? The question is rhetorical, Master Peat. Permission has been provided to act in such a manner, yet the house has still been broken into, albeit lawfully, in that the security has been overcome. Unless the Automobile Association representative is doing so without your knowledge and permission, and with felonious intent, there is no unlawful aspect to their actions, else the Association would not permit their staff to act in such a manner. Here endeth the leshon (as Master Connery would say). On the subject of altruism, if you own a vehicle with central locking and I, as your friend (are we not all friends here?) known of a simple and widespread method for overcoming the security of the vehicle, I would think it my duty to inform you of this, so that you might take further precautions - even if this is merely to remove valuables from the vehicle whilst parked, secured and unattended. And, once again, Master Peat, I would suggest that if the method is available on the Web, it could be said to be widespread, as a simple perusal of a reliable search engine page would find reference to same. Following your logic, it might be argued that the originator was irresponsible in even mentioning such a thing, in the first instance. (I wonder how many checked "Google", and the like, for references to the non-existent method? ). It does not take a detective, I believe, to ascertain that you and Master EM enjoy the odd verbal joust... Your humble servant
  4. Out of some sense of public duty, perhaps, Master Peat? There are those still, even in these benighted times in which we find ourselves, who think of others, as well as - or even before - themselves, and might wish to warn them, so as to take additional precautions, if such flights of fancy were true. Or so I like to believe. Maybe that last Meerschaum of Master Barratt's finest was stronger than I believed...? Personally, I care about each task I undertake, and each statement I make. However, in those odd moments when I have no nefarious schemes to foil, or missing heiresses to find, I fill my time with attempts at the viola, or shooting Her Majesty's initials on to the study wall using my son's rubber dart gun. I would recommend such, as it appears slightly more constructive than your own efforts. (A light jest, sir... I think ) Your humble servant.
  5. Madame Fairy, I still do, as my primary ringtone. But then, I must confess a fondness for such things. It shall soon be my favourite time of year, when, for the weeks and months beforehand, Watson once again allows me to adopt "This is Hallowe'en" (from Mr Burton's quite superlative "Nightmare Before Christmas") as my primary ringtone. At least, this year, it seems unlikely there shall be any meetings disrupted by this darkly merry ditty! Your humble servant
  6. Master Peat, my pedantic friend, I would venture that I am better qualified and experienced to pronounce so, regarding any such difference. If a vehicle is secured (i.e. locked), and you overcome the security, whether lawfully or not, this is breaking in to the vehicle. One need not be doing so unlawfully. Utter poppycock. To unlawfully break in to any vehicle - without removing anything or moving the vehicle - is "opening a lockfast place". Have you truly nothing more constructive to do with your time, sir? Your humble - yet amused - servant.
  7. Much to Watson's alarm and disgust, I know many ways of breaking into vehicles; both with and without central locking. Insofar as I am aware, Master M and Master Caster are both quite correct in their assertion that this alleged method is, in fact, an urban myth, and quite impossible. There do exist those with the arcane electrical knowledge or means required to "catch" your vehicles remote key code, if they are close enough to you, much as these "all in one" remote controls "catch and learn" from your television remote control. However, I do not believe Master Jobs and his merry malum munching crew have included an "app" capable of such a feat in their ubiquitous virtual store... yet! Then there is the small problem of the equipment required to generate such a signal. Once again, it is not yet included in any mobile phone handset. Until they do provide such a "service", I would rest easy, my friends - at least, insofar as this particular method of felonious appropriation of other people's property is concerned! Your humble servant.
  8. Ah, but then Harry never worked to the code either, Madame Fairy. Rather he trained the young Dexter to do so... Your humble servant
  9. But, sir, would this not have been his Cocaine (rarely injected, more commonly smoked in the "seven per cent solution", via his shag-filled pipe), to which you refer? His reliance on such a solution, to combat his tedium, was intended to display a weakness, based upon society's mores at the time. The voice of Watson, in disapproving of such, was Sir Arthur's way of calling for such substances to be banned or controlled. Much as a dentist might call for the banning of - gulp! - Mister Barratt's finest! I shall now retire to my Sunday bacon sandwich, with lashings of brown sauce and a strong cup of finest Punjana! Your humble servant
  10. (Sigh ) Cannot a man enjoy a Sherbet Dip-Dab in some modicum of peace, on a damp and dreary Sunday morn, without a political message? I am not sure which edition you may have read, however, in the story of which you speak, Holmes is found, in disguise, holding an opium pipe, in the den, by Watson. He thereafter laughs at the suspicion that he may have added SMOKING opium to his injections of Cocaine. I do not recall injections of morphine, but perhaps I am wrong and you may guide me to this point in the tale, sir? Incidentally, I believe that, although "perfectly legal at the time", Sir Arthur did his best to convey the problem of opium addiction, and it's vile effects upon the victim of such a habit, within this very tale (Mr Isa Whitney and his distressed wife, Kate) ,insofar as 'polite society' allowed at this time in history.
  11. I would further take this opportunity to commend most highly the dual performance given by Steven Robertson, as the rather sinister dice rolling twins, in the intriguing and enjoyable BBC1 crime drama, "Luther". It was, I believe, a superlative performance (or should that be performances?) that positively reeked of quiet menace and insanity. Rather like some correspondents, herein, that I could name! Shetland should be very, very proud of this most talented actor. Your humble servant.
  12. I have attended road traffic accidents and collisions too many times to count. I have witnessed, firsthand, the level of injury which can be caused through not wearing a seatbelt. When I was involved in stopping vehicles, to deal with those within not wearing seatbelts, I would advise them of the following. At 25mph, the force involved in being thrown headfirst from your seat while unrestrained and impacting with the windscreen (and whatever may come next, be it road, wall, tree, etc.) is the same as putting your hands in your pocket and diving headfirst from a second story window. The idea that not wearing your seatbelt makes it safer in head-on collisions, because you will be thrown headfirst through the windscreen and therefore escape with only cuts, scrapes, or the odd broken bone is, quite frankly, ridiculous. It has been mentioned that if the driver is unrestrained and dies in a car accident, there is only one victim. False. Categorically so, unless you have no family or loved ones. Once again, from too many experiences to count, and too unpleasant to recollect, the families and loved ones are the victims in every such instance. They live the rest of their lives grieving for the selfish fool who believed such poppycock, or was too lazy to "belt up". There are other causes of road traffic accidents and fatalities, I know, however I am addressing specifically the issue of seatbelts in such instances.) This is another question I would put to such persons, during roadside stops, assuring them, as I most solemnly assure you, there is no wage high enough to cover having to knock on some unsuspecting person's door and tell them (often a complete stranger) that their son or daughter, mother or father, husband or wife, that their loved one is dead. Yet, all too often, this is a task which must be undertaken by Police, with compassion and tact. I have witnessed the grief, the anger, the denial, the incomprehension, as part of that loved one dies too, with this terrible news. How often do you see the bouquets of flowers, forlorn and terrible in their message of grief and remembrance, tied to the roadside to commemorate another loved one lost? There can be no excuse for such recklessness. A family member is involved in the maintenance of brain-dead persons, whose families have consented to organ harvesting for transplant and donation. This is an extremely unpleasant, although necessary, task for the medical profession. He and his colleagues refer to persons who refuse to "belt up" or obey traffic laws, and to motorcyclists who take chances and do likewise, as "donors". This is through their lengthy experience, dealing with the aftermath of incidents involving such individuals, who never think of the consequences of their actions, however small these may seem. Spend a day in a busy Accident & Emergency department, in any big city, and there is every chance you will come across such individuals, or their remains. Personally and professionally, I would urge each and every person who gets into any mechanically propelled vehicle, if a seatbelt is provided, it is for a reason. Namely to assist in saving your life. It us jot a guarantee of such, however it increases the likelihood exponentially over those willing to take their chances on the "headfirst ejection" alternative. By the way, in my experience, the physics and physiognomy invloved means that the unrestrained person MAY be thrown headfirst through the windscreen (which is fairly tough and at speed may be sufficient to cause serious trauma to the skull, not to mention the cervical vertebrae taking such an impact!), however the lower half of the body tends to remain in the vehicle, resulting in multiple fractures from the ribcage down, as the torso tends to impact on the dashboard, while the legs tend to be caught against the seat. It's not like the movies, I am afraid. Please, I beg you, do not let your families receive that knock from my colleagues, and do your utmost with your children (from an early age) or loved ones, to ensure it is not your door we attend at with such tragic news. As always, Your humble servant.
  13. John Locke's "Donovan Creed" novels, on Kindle. Delightfully dark and slightly perverse and apparently amoral, however all is not as it seems. A recommended set of reads, particularly "Saving Rachel", and all are a snip at under a pound each!! Your humble servant.
  14. Master/Mistress Maywick, Even the best detective (and I shall not lay claim to such hubris) requires some clue. You have altogether lost me on this one.
  15. Apologies, Master Handy, I missed your post, else I would have responded more timeously. Lord knows, sir, Moriarty has tried, time and again! Yet, like a Phoenix from the ashes, I rise again to smite the evildoer and unravel nefarious plots and schemes of Gordian proportions (not to mention enjoying a Meerschaum packed with Mr Barratts finest Sherbet, in front of a roaring fire, while relaxing to Mr Cowell's latest manufactured manure after a successful case! ). I would take this opportunity to compliment Mr Cumberbatch on his quite exceptional portrayal of me. I am very pleased to hear a second set of adapted escapades is soon to be upon us. He captures all my peccadilloes just...so! ). My regards, Master Handy! May you long have that "Vital Spark" (quite one of my most favourite series of my childhood, knowing many Captain Peters as I do! )! Please pass on my regards to MacPhail, Dougie and Sunny Jim! As ever, Your humble servant.
  16. A thoroughly enjoyable series, I must say, and a wonderful use of Mr Logie Baird's gogglebox! In fact, an Officer I know named his son for the lead character, after one of his fellows adopted it as a nickname for the Officer, owing to his manner of thinking! When the time came for the child to be named, it apparently just seemed natural. Your humble servant.
  17. Master/Mistress EM (forgive me, I know not which), I am NOT a forensics ballistics or firearms expert, and so would not comment, lest I misinform you. What I CAN say is twofold: 1) In any such examinations (there will be more than one ongoing) there will be a number of factors of critical importance. Foremost is contamination. The more public a space, the higher the risk of such occurring. Just a thought; and 2) Do not believe everything you see on Mr Logie Baird's gogglebox. It makes for an interesting storyline, whether on the streets of Las Vegas, New York or Miami, however - for the most part - they are no more than fiction (although it would be rather splendid to have such fine toys at one's disposal). Real life is rather significantly more problematic, and the facts more difficult to establish.
  18. Unfortunately correct, Master Handy. "Shoot to stop" means aiming for central body mass, i.e. the torso. Not the hand, arm, leg, foot, hat or any other area. As Master Handy points out, this is real life, not a spaghetti western. Anyone with a knowledge of guns, ammunition, their effect upon animate objects (such as hydrostatic or hydraulic shock effect), etc, will know that, in many cases, this makes such shots lethal. Sad, yet true. Your humble servant. Post Scriptum http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock
  19. But, for the sake of debate, were these Officers reasonably expected to wait until one of them had been shot by someone holding or carrying a firearm, before opening fire? I do not know the full circumstances, nor, I doubt, does any other party contributing here (including "The Independent" or any other newspaper). However - once again, purely for debate - if what appears to be a loaded firearm, capable of killing, is presented at an armed Police Officer by an allegedly known gang member, who is fully aware of the presence of said Officers, and already suspects their intention to apprehend him (the text shortly before his untimely death), is it truly unreasonable to expect these Officers to defend themselves and discharge their firearms? Perhaps a warning was issued? I do not know. Do you? This was a man with known gang affiliations, apparently carrying what appeared to be a loaded firearm in a public place. Whether the starting pistol was capable of firing live rounds, through modification, or not, is immaterial. At a reasonable range, with - for the sake of argument - what appears to be a firearm brandished or pointed at you, it would not be possible to divine the lethal or non-lethal nature of the handgun. Psychic powers are not standard Police issue. Not quite Jean Charles de Menezes, in my opinion. If it was a British patrol in Helmand Province, facing a suspected Taliban member in rather (and unfortunately) the same sort of situation, would you expect them to say, "Okay mate, we'll just wait for you to start shooting."? There is often an accusation leveled that the Police are too quick to judge. I would level the accusation that some members of the public are equally too hasty in their desire to do likewise. I do not know the facts here. If there is a crime, let it be dealt with. However, to those armchair lawyers and "bashers", I would direct you to the words of my signature. They remain true over 100 years after being first penned...
  20. Master Twerto, If a Police Officer in Tottenham behaved in any way unlawfully, my own opinion is he should face the same full weight of the law as that promised to these young roister-doisters partaking in the violence and destruction (and, of course, out and out theft!). Your humble servant.
  21. I merely wish to take this opportunity to greet my "cousin", who originated the thread, and assert to others that we are not one and the same, nor is my "CAPS" key jammed. Your humble servant (Post scriptum - Master Rider, I am wholeheartedly with you on the topic of salads. A modern fad, sir, and one that I shall have no truck with. Does this make you and I the founder members of the League of Extraordinarily Unhealthy (or Grumpy) Gentlemen? )
  22. I would like to begin with my customary disclaimer that the views expressed herein are my own, and do not represent, in any way, those I work with nor the Police service. Ah, me. I had a small wager with my own "Watson" as to how long it would take someone to infer blame upon the Police for the actions of a (semi-organised) mob, intent not on political protests or defending their rights to free speech and congregation as unlawfully obtaining the latest K-Swiss or Blackberry for free while having a jolly good time causing wanton destruction and burning Mrs Miggins' pie shop to the ground. I imagine they were set off by some "hyped up riot police" or "trigger happy plod" and were merely displaying their democratic rights to protest against the tyranny of the "plod". Shame on the Police for inciting such an orgy of violence and destruction, what? Perhaps they should keep all the riot Police on desk duty, lest they spark or incite any more such situations. After all, everyone knows it is always the Police to blame. Correct? Like my somewhat beleaguered colleagues South of the border, I remain, Your humble servant.
  23. Master Peat, I shall be inclined to disagree with you, re Ms Khan. While there is no doubt she had some hard experiences, her somewhat questionably large and almost under-the-counter retirement package, along with her oft stony silence on several key issues, whilst in office, has rather tarnished her halo, insofar as I am concerned. Rather interestingly, I note that a certain Winnie Mandela makes the same list? The same former Mrs Mandela that can, most certainly, be said to have been genuinely "evil" in her abuse of power (she once advocated burning opponents alive with petrol and rubber tyre "necklaces"). Who exploited and perverted the youths in the "Mandela United Football Club" whom she gathered around her and turned into her own paramilitary unit? The same MUFC murdered 14 year old Stompie Moeketsi, allegedly at her behest. The same Mrs Mandela who is a convicted fraudster, stealing from co-operative funeral funds, set up for poor black South Africans, while she sued Nelson for $5 million when he saw the light and divorced her? (She did not get it). Hmmmmmmm... try as I might, I cannot quite recall Mrs T being in the same "to be admired" category. Your humble servant.
  24. On those occasions when the old seven per cent solution (of Mr Barratt's finest Sherbet) does not suffice to lull me into the arms of Morpheus (he of the Oneiroi, not the rather gauche leather-clad Mr Miyagi chappie, a la "Matrix" ) I heartily recommend Mr Andrew Johnson's Relax app. It is free to download, and he also provides it in standard MP3 format, I believe, via something called a "FaceBook page"? Honestly, young people nowadays! I set it to repeat twice, set the volume low, and pop an earpiece just in my uppermost ear before relaxing. I have yet to hear it all the way through. Your humble servant.
  25. "Evidently I didn't, I got to be a comic character from a TV Ad for tea, and a..... ummmm..... Policeman." Why, Master Rider, I am surprised! I would have thought The Man With No Name or Cool Hand Luke would have been more your calling? Still, one imagines you would have been easy to spot, as the "Officer" whose face glowed brighter than his torch. Your humble (and genuinely amused) servant.
  • Create New...