police raid/shut down brixton club.

[Louloubelle]

I went there about three years ago... And then they started doiing "Last Ever Fridge" nights every two months so they alienated the gay crowd. Have been there for other nights and while its a great venue, shame about the location.

Apart from special events none of my mates have been there for the last two years. I was quite suprised that there was something on there last night...!

Never saw it as rempant drugtaking place. Kind of just average in my opinion...

The nights that I went to weren't gay nights they were trance nights (how I tried to like the music, just couldn't get into it) though so the perception of how druggy it was should be seen in that context

I mean gay clubs on the whole, well the ones that I've been to anyway, have been very, very druggy. They've also been very, very friendly, especially for a woman I could go and not get any hassle from sleazy blokes.
*wishes there was smoke free gay clubs that play jungle*

 

[jæd]

I mean gay clubs on the whole, well the ones that I've been to anyway, have been very, very druggy. They've also been very, very friendly, especially for a woman I could go and not get any hassle from sleazy blokes.

I rarely go to straight clubs, so I can't comment on the comparision...!

 

[jæd]

...i worry that they'll get a rude awakening if they end up on the wrong end of a sniffer dog one day...

Got to wonder about police intelligence when they rely a dogs nose for it...!

 

[Greebozz]

... to sell ... to get money (about £10 if they are lucky) ... usually to spend on ... er ... drugs.

Do you really think that car stereos are stolen by (a) people who haven't got car stereo or (b) organised criminal gangs of car stereo resellers ...

Middle class clubbers in designer gear nicking stereos to go clubbing? In my experience the car stereo nicking crowd is a different class of scum. those with £50 a day heroin habits, fact.

You obviously know the business as it were. why did not the police target some crack house or heroin dealers?

Or was it for the headline grabbing nature on the raid?

 

[Cadmus]

200 police? 200?? for a little nightclub in brixton?? methinks someone's having a laugh.

methinks its a warning to the club owners everywhere to cough up

 

[Louloubelle]

They're doing the 'Movie Premiere Pot Bust' on LA Confidential NOW!

 

[Mrs Magpie]

It changed hands a while ago, not that recently. The previous owner retired.

 

[Badgers]

The Fridge is the graveyard of musical ambition........

 

[Cadmus]

It changed hands a while ago, not that recently. The previous owner retired.

The new one obviously didn't pay enough for protection so the police gave him a warning

 

[laptop]

The Fridge is the graveyard of musical ambition........

You mean it's taken over from the Civic Hall, Dunstable?

(An iconic nadir-venue now, sadly, demolished.)

 

[Louloubelle]

You mean it's taken over from the Civic Hall, Dunstable?

(An iconic nadir-venue now, sadly, demolished.)

Dunstable Civi
Demolished

NOOOOOOO!!!

 

[Louloubelle]

The new one obviously didn't pay enough for protection so the police gave him a warning

I don't think that things are as corrupt as they used to be and while I'm sure that police corruption is still around I really doubt that they would raid a venue with so much press covereage if this was the case.

It could be that the new owners didn't know how to play the game re submitting a certain quantity of siezed drugs per week to the police, (so I've heard) I don't know.

I also think that (while I know next to nothing about Lambeth) corruption is rife in certain London councils, of which the club licensing dept will be a part.

 

[The Groke]

I think you'll find you have used the words "the public" when you meant "my" in that statement.

I think you will find that you are still a patronising cock.

I said "public interest" and I meant "public interest"

As someone who

a) no longer goes clubbing
b) no longer does drugs and
c) no longer lives in England

My own, personal interest (in terms of how it effects me directly) in this can be considered rather minimal.

So John Roberts and those who's views he undoubtedly does represent when he calls for police action aren't "the public" then?

No. They are not.

They are the views of a - seemingly - out of touch minority.

A cross-section of "the public" that matters more in this instance i.e Brixton/London Dwellers have come to the general consensus that this action was not warranted, was not a wise use of police resource and was not "in the public interest"

I would say that this small sample of local feeling was infinitely more relevant that those of John Roberts and his cohorts

Now I am not necessarily criticizing the Police - those who were actually on the ground during the raid - but I am laughing at those who deemed it worthy in the first place.

Their views count for less than yours do they?

Well they certainly count less to me than my own views, but that isn't the point.

I don't recall the public ever being asked how they feel on how the police should be used, what priorities they should have, how they should be distributed or having any kind of say in how the law of the land is upheld.

I read again and again and again (on other sources as well as these boards) on the dealings that people have had with the police system for many reasons - muggings, burglaries, sexual attacks, domestic violence, false arrests etc etc - and it seems that in the majority of cases, the ability, the attitude and the rapidity of the Police response to these real issues has been found wanting.

I appreciate that this is a small selection of tasks that the Bill need to deal with, but every one of the things above is of more concern and benefit to the "general public" - and perhaps equally importantly, far more effective at building bonds and respect between the public and the Police - than wasting hours of time and man-power in raiding just one of thousands of clubs to nab a couple of 3rd or 4th tier E dealers.

The police can ignore their requests for the law to be enforced with impunity then can they?

I don't recall saying that at any point.

No of course not. What I am saying - for the nth time is that this action was a waste - whoever is responsible.

Fucking grow up.

lol

 

[detective-boy]

Personally, I cannot find a dealer for love nor money

Maybe the police activity is working ... but maybe not!

Even if it IS, this demonstrates another downside of "success" in hitting the supply side only. Whilst demand remains all that reduced supply does is raise the price, meaning yet more profits for those remaining (who, by the Laws of Darwin, will tend to be the most determined / violent / ruthless) and meaning more acquisitative crime for those who need to steal to feed an addiction.

 

[detective-boy]

However, you've also got to understand that it's not the same all over and there are 'well fluffy' dealers and people behind them.

I am well aware that there are some really fluffy amateur dealers - in fact perhaps the majority in numbers terms are small-time, make a bit of cash to fund my own type dealers. Sometimes those next up the supply chain are nice guys as well. But (except for entirely self-contained production / distribution networks (co-ops if you like)) of which there are very few, you do not have to go far to find someone who is of the other category.

I have met dozens, probably hundreds of drug suppliers over the years. I have met only one who supplied more than three or four street/club level dealers who could even vaguely be described as "fluffy". Perhaps those you know should have a feature on them in the Sunday supplements raise their profile.

 

[Cadmus]

I really doubt that they would raid a venue with so much press covereage if this was the case.

The press coverage is there to send out a simple message to other club owners to pay up or else....

 

[detective-boy]

.... raiding a club and arresting the small fry who deal there will, by your own admission, only put them at risk of being hurt or possibly killed by the more dangerous people higher up the chain. How is that going to help anything?

I am not arguing for "arresting the small fry". I am saying that your statement that ONLY fluffy small fry operate in clubs is (very) mistaken. Tell it to the doormen who I train week in, week out who tell of having knives and guns pulled on them by dealers they are making life difficult for. Tell it to the fluffy small fry muscled out from their clubs by the bad guys.

I repeat myself: if you think that ALL club dealers are fluffy small fry you are wrong. Very wrong.

 

[goldenecitrone]

200 police raid the Fridge in the wee small hours. Some serious munchies going on in Brixton. I blame the drugs.

 

[detective-boy]

Um... Your experience of dealing only appears to be through being a cop... Gosh... I wonder why its so negative...?

No stereotyping there then.

For your information I have a lot of experience through being an (ex-) cop but I also have a lot of experience of the gay club scene in London (being a gay man); of the users of drugs (I choose not to use drugs myself but I have many friends who do, in a variety of ways) and I would support the idea that they should (with very few exceptions) be legalised.

The negativity comes ENTIRELY from the fact that the drug dealing world IS inhabited by large numbers of very dangerous, ruthless and increasingly powerful individuals who kill people. Lots of people. I make no apologies at all for wanting everything possible to be done to take them out of circulation.

 

[detective-boy]

My experience is that on the gay scene most of the "dealers" are just mates of mates. Shadowy, gun-toting Mr Bigs aren't that common.

Which bit of the distinction between "most" and "all" is it that you are having difficulty with?

 

[detective-boy]

They've also been very, very friendly, especially for a woman I could go and not get any hassle from sleazy blokes.

Don't come to the Richmond Arms (not that I put it in the cateory of gay club, you understand!) then ... the straight boys have cottoned on to this and now flock the place!! (even one of the bar staff, but I think he could be persuaded ... )

 

[Louloubelle]

I am not arguing for "arresting the small fry". I am saying that your statement that ONLY fluffy small fry operate in clubs is (very) mistaken.

I didn't say that only small fry operated in clubs though did I?

My point was that some very dodgy people operate in clubs but that I doubt that the dealers who were arrested in the Fridge raid were of the dodgy (as in possessing firearms etc) variety.

Of course if firearms were siezed in the Fridge raid I'll have been wrong won't I?

Tell it to the doormen who I train week in, week out who tell of having knives and guns pulled on them by dealers they are making life difficult for. Tell it to the fluffy small fry muscled out from their clubs by the bad guys.

Thing is I know a lot of guys who work as door supervisors and am quite good friends with someone who runs a massive club security company that hires out door supervisors to clubs all over London and from what he tells me, even though he's straight himself and doesn't like house music, he'd hapily work exclusively at the kind of gay friendly events that were being held at the Fridge when it was raided exactly because you don't get people turning up with attitude and guns.

I repeat myself: if you think that ALL club dealers are fluffy small fry you are wrong. Very wrong.

I repeat myself, I didn't say they were. I just wondered why the police raided a club on a night which falls in the category of event where you are least likely to have guns or serious crime.

 

[detective-boy]

You obviously know the business as it were. why did not the police target some crack house or heroin dealers?

They do. All the time. And far, far more resources are used on that than on this type of operation. For the umpteenth time it's not "either / or". Please move out of Simplisticville

 

[detective-boy]

The new one obviously didn't pay enough for protection so the police gave him a warning

You jest (I presume) but this is exactly the allegation which is made seriously by the green-ink letter writers when they moan to the police about drugs / sex / noise ... and the police take a tolerant approach and, in the eyes of the complainant, "do nothing about it".

I know. I have been the subject of such complaint (sadly my complainant did not suffer the same eventual fate as another who came up on the Operation Ore list ... Oh dear, what a shame, never mind ... .)

 

[detective-boy]

It could be that the new owners didn't know how to play the game re submitting a certain quantity of siezed drugs per week to the police, (so I've heard) I don't know.

The venue management are responsible for all aspects of the operation of their club. That includes control of drug use and dealing.

The police (despite many of the comments on this thread) are perfectly well aware that there is a high level of drug use amongst clubbers at some venues. They expect the management of clubs to agree an appropriate drug policy with them. Depending on the circumstances this may be: zero-tolerance (anyone found with drugs is detained and the police called); detain for Class A but simply confiscate B or C and refuse entry or eject; confiscate every type and refuse entry / eject or confiscate and allow entry / allow to remain.

The police do NOT want to be constantly running back and forth picking up users found in possession of small amounts and hence most club policies are at the more tolerant end of the scale (unless there is some particular reason in an defined area). The policy cannot be to knowingly allow the use of drugs as that would amount to a criminal offence (of allowing premises to be used or of aiding and abetting possession). It will ALWAYS include the ejection and reference to the police of dealers (another option I had not mentioned previously behind this operation could be that the venue had identified some dealers, had tried to deal with them, had referred them to the police and had co-operated in the operation - I suspect it is unlikley as the management would (probably) have insisted on their co-operation being mentioned in the media releases).

Drugs which are confiscated should be recorded and sealed (in the presence of the person concerned) and then handed to the police. Usually, at clubs where it is a common occurence, this is at a weekly visit. The drugs are then usually disposed of without further examination (other than sometimes weighing for statistical purposes).

There is no "certain quantity" which the police expect from any venue. But they are not stupid. If a venue like the Fridge claims NOT to have found and confiscated any (or very many) drugs despite allegedly exercising their agreed policy then that WILL attract attention. That attention may well be the deployment of undercover officers to find out what is going on there (though this is expensive and will only usually be pursued if some warnings have been ignored). And, if necessary, an operation like this may be mounted - if the management won't manage their premises then the police will.

 

[miss madge]

Oh. So there I was preparing to go / going to / recovering from one of the friendliest club nights I've been to in the last couple of years (Tilted Disco, monthly detroit techno at the Telegraph, very friendly and older crowd) when I wake up and discover I'm not in Kansas anymore. Fire in Brixton? Raid on the Fridge? It was like when I opened the newspapers in a cafe in Spain to discover princess Di had died (though I wasn't so bothered about that).

Am I right in thinking the police are keen to crack down on specific nights, namely RnB nights? Different drugs are prevalent at different nights. If I had my despot-hat on, I'd be happy for anyone to come down on RnB in general, I just don't like the music.

But yes, dealers at clubs are small-scale. At most nights, certainly gay nights, they're unlikely to be dealing crack, which I would have thought is the drug that police should be worried about.

I miss Paddick

 

[Louloubelle]

The venue management are responsible for all aspects of the operation of their club. That includes control of drug use and dealing.

The police (despite many of the comments on this thread) are perfectly well aware that there is a high level of drug use amongst clubbers at some venues. They expect the management of clubs to agree an appropriate drug policy with them. Depending on the circumstances this may be: zero-tolerance (anyone found with drugs is detained and the police called); detain for Class A but simply confiscate B or C and refuse entry or eject; confiscate every type and refuse entry / eject or confiscate and allow entry / allow to remain.

The police do NOT want to be constantly running back and forth picking up users found in possession of small amounts and hence most club policies are at the more tolerant end of the scale (unless there is some particular reason in an defined area). The policy cannot be to knowingly allow the use of drugs as that would amount to a criminal offence (of allowing premises to be used or of aiding and abetting possession). It will ALWAYS include the ejection and reference to the police of dealers (another option I had not mentioned previously behind this operation could be that the venue had identified some dealers, had tried to deal with them, had referred them to the police and had co-operated in the operation - I suspect it is unlikley as the management would (probably) have insisted on their co-operation being mentioned in the media releases).

Drugs which are confiscated should be recorded and sealed (in the presence of the person concerned) and then handed to the police. Usually, at clubs where it is a common occurence, this is at a weekly visit. The drugs are then usually disposed of without further examination (other than sometimes weighing for statistical purposes).

There is no "certain quantity" which the police expect from any venue. But they are not stupid. If a venue like the Fridge claims NOT to have found and confiscated any (or very many) drugs despite allegedly exercising their agreed policy then that WILL attract attention. That attention may well be the deployment of undercover officers to find out what is going on there (though this is expensive and will only usually be pursued if some warnings have been ignored). And, if necessary, an operation like this may be mounted - if the management won't manage their premises then the police will.

That's pretty much what I've heard, as in, at a club where the police know that drugs are being used, they will expect that a certain quantity will probably be handed over each week.

I understood it to be a kind of etiquette between the police and club owners whereby eveyone is seen to be doing their job and the clubs keep on running as usual.

 

[detective-boy]

I said "public interest" and I meant "public interest"

As someone who

a) no longer goes clubbing
b) no longer does drugs and
c) no longer lives in England

My own, personal interest (in terms of how it effects me directly) in this can be considered rather minimal.

[REGARDING THE VIEWS OF JOHN ROBERTS REPRESENTING THE COMMUNITY]

No. They are not.

They are the views of a - seemingly - out of touch minority.

Oh the arrogance! I don't live there. I don't go clubbing there. I don't do drugs. But I know better than a member of an accountable local public body ...

A cross-section of "the public" that matters more in this instance i.e Brixton/London Dwellers have come to the general consensus that this action was not warranted, was not a wise use of police resource and was not "in the public interest"

REALLY? Where was that demographically sound cross-section obtained then? I would put an AWFUL lot of money on the fact that Urban75 is anything but representative of Brixton as a whole.

I don't recall the public ever being asked how they feel on how the police should be used, what priorities they should have, how they should be distributed or having any kind of say in how the law of the land is upheld.

You won't have heard of local and national elections then? Or Community Police Consultative Groups. Local crime and disorder audits carried out by local authorities, local police and other agencies as required by the Crime and Disorder Act. The British Crime Survey ......

Sadly these all take a bit of effort and, for some reason, tend to be dominated by those who "want something done about it". Maybe people like you should participate more (there is a link to the CPCG on the thread on this topic in the Brxton forum - go on, have your say)

I read again and again and again (on other sources as well as these boards) on the dealings that people have had with the police system for many reasons - muggings, burglaries, sexual attacks, domestic violence, false arrests etc etc - and it seems that in the majority of cases, the ability, the attitude and the rapidity of the Police response to these real issues has been found wanting.

And how many cases does that amount to? And what proportion of the hundreds of crimes and incidents reported every week in the Brixton area? Maybe people complain more when things go wrong than write letters of praise? (although I agree the number of examples of poor service IS too high it is not the norm, as demonstrated by one public satisfaction survey after another).

... than raiding just one of thousands of clubs to nab a couple of 3rd or 4th tier E dealers.

You KNOW that is who they got? Or who they were after then do you? If it was mounted for this reason then I would agree that it would be excessive. But I am sure that it will not turn out to be the case. How many operations on this scale do you see now then? Maybe there would be just a few more if they were simply based on your criteria.

 

[detective-boy]

I understood it to be a kind of etiquette between the police and club owners whereby eveyone is seen to be doing their job and the clubs keep on running as usual.

Why do you keep using phrases which suggest that there is something dodgy or wrong about the system. It is, I would suggest a professional, sound working relationship which means that this sort of operation is not needed very often.

Surely it is the sort of system you all WANT to see? And surely you realise that there will be some form of sanction for those who do not take their responsibilities seriously (or, worse, who conspire to break the law).

 

[The Groke]

Oh the arrogance! I don't live there. I don't go clubbing there. I don't do drugs. But I know better than a member of an accountable local public body ... ........plus lots of other stuff.......

lol - I see this argument going on and on unless someone backs out, and I am not sure I have the typing stamina today......



For the sake of a quiet life - you win, you are right.

I should really get some work done today rather than chasing my own tail on an argument I am not sure how I got into in the first place...........