View Full Version : Can anyone educate the Police?
On the UKPoliceOnline forum a question has been posed regarding theft and foraging rights. They appear to have a problem with the answer.
Can any of you fine people help?
I assure you, I'll claim all the credit! :)
"A family are on a day trip to the NEW FOREST HAMPSHIRE.
Mary - Is Mum
Richard - Is Dad
Tommy - Son
Sam - Daughter
They are looking for a place to park in the local town but all the parking spaces are full, RICHARD decides to drive into a residential area and parks up on FOREST DRIVE (A public Highway). It takes the family approximately 20 minutes to walk down FOREST DRIVE. On the way to the forest SAM sees some daisy flowers growing on persons garden and goes to pick them up. She is stopped in her tracks when a dog starts barking so she changes her mind. Meanwhile MARY is picking dandelions from the side of the road and intends to use them to make wine for her Mother. TOMMY is looking for leaves and acorns on the grass surrounding the road and RICHARD has just uprooted a wild daffodil which he intends to plant in his garden at home. They enjoy a walk around the forest and on the way back, TOMMY decides to pick wild mushrooms which he intends to exchange half of them to his next door neighbor for some collectors stickers.
Can you identify any offence(s) committed during this event and explain your reasons."
http://www.ukpoliceonline.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=39075
Anyone out there have an answer for our boys in blue?
Mesquite
07-12-2009, 14:05
I reckon Richard is the offender as he has dug up the daffodil and removed it.
Sam would have been an offender if she had continued onto pick the daisy's as she's entered private property to remove the persons property (said daisy's).
timboggle
07-12-2009, 14:09
A couple of decades ago nobody would have batted an eye lid !!
Go on, tell me they've all been looked up for 48 hours, had their DNA put on file for the rest of their lives, cars been subject to a 'crushing' order and kids are now in care of the social services !!
Id say the daffodil too.
Also pointless as bulbs are freely availible these days.
(And yes my family are persistent offenders in this. Nor will they listen to my protests on this.)
Its bound to be a highways offence. Were they caught walking too fast down the road on one of the many speed camera in Hampshire?
Or they were all done for picking wild produce without written consent and the right insurance and license from defra!
Richard has committed an offense of taking a wild flower's bulb without landowner's permission. I do believe but can't remember it may be theft, but it's been years now since I darkened a law textbook. Tommy picked the mushrooms for commercial gain and so therefore they became legal property, meaning he may have committed theft too.
Sam may have committed burglary in that she intended to enter private property with the intention to steal. However if the owner did not mind the daisies being taken then the act would not have been theft and so therefore there is no burglary having been committed. I cannot remember how intent rather than act affects this though, e.g. Shivpuri. Neither can I remember how 'premesis' vs. 'building' fits int this considering it's a garden. It may be aggrevated trespass... this is confusing...
Plain/regular trespass is a civil matter however aggrevated trespass is a criminal issue and so by performing damage on what is presumably private property (stealing/uprooting the daffodil) Richard may have comitted this offence too. Depends on who owns the grass verge I suppose.
How badly did I do?
I reckon Richard is the offender as he has dug up the daffodil and removed it.
Sam would have been an offender if she had continued onto pick the daisy's as she's entered private property to remove the persons property (said daisy's).
I'll go with that.
My understanding is it's illegal to uproot or dig up any wild "plant" without the landowners permission, so RICHARD is gulity for one, SAM also if she'd been successful with the Daisys, she is guilty of tresspass too. TOMMY is also guilty for picking the shrooms as they are included in the "plants" section and permission should be sought.
Parking in an undesignated area could also be an offence especially if access is hindered. But as it's a public highway and there are no double yellow lines then I think RICHARD could get away with it.
Okay, up here.............parking is fine, so long as access isn't restricted, junctions left clear, etc. Walking with due care on the road is fine.
Taking flowers from someone's garden isn't. That's curtiledge and removal of property from it.
Flowers, fruits, fungi for personal use is fine, and since the fungi are being swapped not for commercial gain that should be fine too.
Leaves and acorn collecting is okay ( we don't do mast grazing rights in forests here now) , bulbs........depends on the bulb iirc. Pignuts, celandines and the like are okay but if it's a true *wild* daffodil, i.e. the native plant, that's a no 'cos that one's on a list somewhere. Local bylaws apply there I think.
How did we do ?
You're going to tell us the whole family are criminals with records and Children's Panel referrals, aren't you ?
cheers,
Toddy
scottisha5
07-12-2009, 14:31
Being retired I couldnt give a hoot, sorry lol
Living it up now though
atb,
John :mexwave::christmas2:
Theft act says you cannot steal wild plants ie stuff not planted by some one or used as a crop etc
it is unlikely the daisys would be considerd theft (however they did not take them ) im assuming they are normal daisiys in the lawn not actual ornimental ones etc
the daffodil stated as wild cannot be stolen BUT under the countryside and wild life act 1981 you are not allowed to Uproot any plant with out specific land owner permmission
he could however have picked the flower with no law being broken (unless its on the protected list )
Unless CROW applies (Highways agency is a signatry tothe CROW act but havent been able to work out if the NO foraging blanket is applied to their land etc )
the mushrooms are allowed to be gathered on the Forest as allowed by the Forestry commission andth CAW 1981 (if they have allowed an exclusion under the CROW act if the area was applicable in which case every thing is illegal :eek::rolleyes:)
However the exchange of these for Goods can be seen to break the CAW 1981 as foraging is only allowed for personnel use
so yes there are offences under several acts
ATB
Duncan
scrogger
07-12-2009, 14:34
I dont think the police even get involved in trespass other than in a witness type capacity as its a civil offence. My thoughts would be on the fellow up rooting the Daffodil.
As Shewie says could be an offence to park in a residential area if a permit system is in place or some such.
Good questions though I will be interested to find out the answer .
bushwacker bob
07-12-2009, 16:08
Walking on the cracks in the pavement.
lavrentyuk
07-12-2009, 16:11
Tommy almost certainly commits theft. (Theft Act not some well hidden Wildflowers/Mushrooms Act I've never heard of). If it was for his personal use/consumption then he is probably okay. As soon as he sells it (or exchanges it for something of value to him) then it becomes a theft. I can think of a local example which involved a bloke dragging in moss from a reservoir and flogging it at a car boot sale for use in hanging baskets.
Taking cultivated plants would also represent theft.
Of course if they were magic mushrooms then we enter a whole new ball park !
Richard
Simple: mushroom - possession is illegal as they are classified as drugs ;)
What about premeditated murder?
Tommy has no idea what shrooms he has picked (or does he?), he gives all the ones he is not sure about to his neighbour and ends up killing him, then obtains all his collectors stickers by default.
WILD LIFE AND COUNTRY SIDE ACT 1981 (http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-3614) in full
page 14 of this PDF is the bit on wild (http://www.jncc.gov.uk/PDF/waca1981_part1.pdf)plants
Fergus has short hand of the laws on his site (http://www.wildmanwildfood.co.uk/pages/foraging%20and%20the%20law.htm )
regardless of teh WAC etc the foristary commission does give permission for mushroom collecting on their land with a limit by weight
tho has unsuccssesfully tryed to prosicute a woman who has been collecting and selling for years
ATB
Duncan
Guys,
Thanks for your input.
This isn't a trick question :) On the Police site they often discuss hypothetical situations or those raised in training/tests. In this case what you see is what you get. No criminal history or parking violations and certainly no "special" mushrooms!
As the officers who frequent UKPoliceOnline come from all regions and branches of the Police there are a number of differing opinions/answers. I thought I'd post the question here as if anyone should know the answer it would be one of your august selves.
If noone minds I'll post a link to this thread onthe Police forum.
Ta,
Nigel
PS: don't forget the distinction between pure and practical applications of the law! In theory someone may have committed an offence if they even intend to commit a crime (pure application of the law), but at that point it would be impossible to prove and therefore would not be arrested (practical application). This distinction can lead to disagreements when people don't appreciate the context of the discussion!
Lordyosch
07-12-2009, 17:18
The uprooting of wild plants is against the Countryside act so the daffodil would be an offence. The mushrooms may not be as they're not uprooted and could grow again (unless they're scheduled species). The collection of leaves and acorns might count as 'tidying up' so should be OK.
The daisy picker had 'intent' to steal.
Other things OK?
Jay
demographic
07-12-2009, 18:53
Every singe one of them is guilty, they were planning terrorist activities M'Lud.
phaserrifle
07-12-2009, 19:27
What about premeditated murder?
Tommy has no idea what shrooms he has picked (or does he?), he gives all the ones he is not sure about to his neighbour and ends up killing him, then obtains all his collectors stickers by default.
I would be supprised if that was murder. more likely manslaughter by gross negligance (failure to check the mushrooms saftey)
if you could prove he knew or strongly suspected that they where poisonous, then murder could be a possibility, but you'd have an absoulte hell of a time proving that in the given scenario.
Every singe one of them is guilty, they were planning terrorist activities M'Lud.
lol :rolleyes:
I can help you with what is an offence. Theft Act 1968 S4(3) states:
A person who picks mushrooms growing wild on any land, or who picks flowers,
fruit or foliage from a plant growing wild on any land, does not (although not in possession
of the land) steal what he picks, unless he does it for reward or for sale or other commercial
purpose.
For purposes of this subsection ‘mushroom’ includes any fungus, and ‘plant’ includes any
shrub or tree.
So Tommy commits an offence under the theft act. However, there may be offences under the Countryside Act as has been mentioned above.
Martin
I can help you with what is an offence. Theft Act 1968 S4(3) states:
A person who picks mushrooms growing wild on any land, or who picks flowers,
fruit or foliage from a plant growing wild on any land, does not (although not in possession
of the land) steal what he picks, unless he does it for reward or for sale or other commercial
purpose.
For purposes of this subsection ‘mushroom’ includes any fungus, and ‘plant’ includes any
shrub or tree.
So Tommy commits an offence under the theft act. However, there may be offences under the Countryside Act as has been mentioned above.
Martin
Sounds like you know your stuff Martin, so I'll go with you on that!
I thought it was going to be one of those "they're all guilty" situations, like Murder On The Orient Express (whoops apologies if you haven't seen read / seen it).
Laurentius
07-12-2009, 20:55
Dunno, but my brother was done many years ago for picking a tulip from a flower bed in town and eating it. Gained a certain notoriety in the paper at the time as a rather silly case.
The reality of the law, is that as a system it is accumulative but does not respond to any law of nature (think Canute) there are many statutes that are mutually contradictory simply because nobody has ever examined it properly.
The reality, as the majority of law breakers know is the 11th commandment "Thou shalt not be found out"
for picking a tulip from a flower bed in town and eating it
Blimey, that was a heavy duty crime, worth bringing the full force of the law onto the culprit..:rolleyes:
I wonder how many answers the officers are giving on the police site? They should be up on it, because they are supposed to know enough of the laws to be able to discerne what is and what isn't not illegal and therefore what and what not to act on?
TeeGeeBee
07-12-2009, 22:40
...
On the way to the forest SAM sees some daisy flowers growing on persons garden and goes to pick them up. She is stopped in her tracks when a dog starts barking so she changes her mind.
Is there a marked boundary to the garden? And are the flowers over hanging said boundary? But even if the flowers overhang the landowner has ownership of the plants. You could cut them on the outside of the boundary but you must offer the landowner first dibbs on the off-cuts.
Meanwhile MARY is picking dandelions from the side of the road and intends to use them to make wine for her Mother.
The verge may well belong to the council and thus the removal of growth is not permited without prior permission but I doubt the Police or anyone else would fuss over a matter such as this. I'd be more worried about consumption of the heavy metals & particulates coating the flowers.
TOMMY is looking for leaves and acorns on the grass surrounding the road
I think you can freely collect acorns? And 2009 or thereabout is a 'Mast Year' for Oaks.
and RICHARD has just uprooted a wild daffodil which he intends to plant in his garden at home.
Wild Daffs though becoming more rare are not presently on the 'Wild Flowers' protected list.
They enjoy a walk around the forest and on the way back, TOMMY decides to pick wild mushrooms which he intends to exchange half of them to his next door neighbor for some collectors stickers.
Don't know but should imagine you'd be ok on this one. Unless the forest is owned and or is in an area of protection. In which case, you would need special permossion to forage within said area. Will he have to declare his barter?
I could be wildly wrong about some of this.
TGB
Jay.in.the.woods
08-12-2009, 00:26
The police would do the same as with most crime today NOTHING!
Tor helge
08-12-2009, 08:53
If your police doesn`t have any more serious problems to attend too, you should consider to vote for a complete shut down of your police force:).
Tor
It's lovely to see how quickly people can turn things into a bashing thread :deadhorse:
Good question and some good answers, questions like this are good because they make us think about our actions
Yes, that is what happened in my area.
Richard stole your daffs?
Found a kind of interesting link.
The link has other links to sites like English Heritage's best practice guidelines for collecting fungi, that kind of thing.
cheers,
Toddy
He he, were you going to share :mexwave:
The New Forest website ON collecting Fungi on their land (http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/INFD-6E3GAZ)
Simples
if your not sure They Run Mushroom collecting/ID days/ courses etc
and theres a downlodable PDF pamphlet (http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/new-forest-fungi-leaflet.pdf/$FILE/new-forest-fungi-leaflet.pdf)
Blimey, that was a heavy duty crime, worth bringing the full force of the law onto the culprit..:rolleyes:
I wonder how many answers the officers are giving on the police site? They should be up on it, because they are supposed to know enough of the laws to be able to discerne what is and what isn't not illegal and therefore what and what not to act on?
Ah but it gets another potential Criminal into teh Police DNA data base goodjob
It's lovely to see how quickly people can turn things into a bashing thread :deadhorse:
Unfortunately you're spot on there Tony.
Over on their forum there are often posts and comments by people not well disposed to the Police. So over time many of the officers on there have become very cynical when it comes to posts and are very sensitive. A few times it's been suggested I'm a troll because I've asked questions that could be taken the wrong way.
To those of you having a bit of a dig, just remember that it is the management of the Police services and the political masters who set the agenda for the front line officers. The Police themselves often get frustrated at what they now have to do to be fully accountable and to satisfy what the politicians think the public demand (or at least what'll get them a few extra votes!).
timboggle
08-12-2009, 14:39
Found a kind of interesting link.
The link has other links to sites like English Heritage's best practice guidelines for collecting fungi, that kind of thing.
cheers,
Toddy
heck Mary, I know the Scots are meant to be tight, but surely you can let us all have a look :lmao: