Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
neither does shouting it.
Police tactics/reaction to 'illegal' Raves
- Thread starter ste9
- Start date
dolly's gal
killing things
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
dolly's a proper dealer innit so she'll be coming to your rave and fucking throwing smoke grenades about like a nutter cos she is innit and you won't be able to stop her at all, no way no how 
free spirit
more tea vicar?
As would taping the bin bag round it, for your information (on the basis of causing "a temporary functional derangement" (legal speak for making it useless for it's purpose, albeit not permanantly ... there was a leading case involving throwing a bucket of water over a copper, making their uniform all horrible and wet! (no, the Court couldn't work out why they didn't go for assault either ...))
ay, I'm sure you could, but you'd quite possibly get done for hitting it with paint. so if you're going to get done you may as well at least make sure the thing you're getting done for was effective.
the damage costs would be less with a bin bag and tape than a hammer, so the fine should be less, plus you can always argue you were intending to go back and remove it at the end... didn't know about the 'temporary functional derangement' bit though I must admit.
ps I know people who've been arrested for criminal damage for tying a fucking banner to a lamp post with string - not charged mind, just nicked and held for the weekend then released.
Well this has been a fantastic read, but I don't think I'll be going to this party.
Excellent info free spirit, but I think your post below is somewhat misleading:
The police don't need any noise complaints to issue a Section 63 notice. They do however need complaints before they use a Noise Abatement Order. The CJA allows a Section 63 to be raised pretty much arbitrarily, and once issued it becomes a criminal offence to attend the rave. In other words it is no defence to say there were no complaints.
Excellent info free spirit, but I think your post below is somewhat misleading:
The police don't need any noise complaints to issue a Section 63 notice. They do however need complaints before they use a Noise Abatement Order. The CJA allows a Section 63 to be raised pretty much arbitrarily, and once issued it becomes a criminal offence to attend the rave. In other words it is no defence to say there were no complaints.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
No, not that Gaia. You may also know us as MIR, but everything is underground at the moment. We're only just now entering the public phase. I'll talk about some posters you can print and put up soon.
I, we, Gaia.
david dissadent
New Member
No doubt James Lovelock would be proud of what you are doing.
Mooncat
Hug me - I'm vaccinated
But why does DB need three baths, with some variation in colour? I think we should be told.
The first rule of show business is never question the rider.
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
You vill be told only ven you need to be told!
Until zen, shut ze fuck up and you vill ansver all qvestions zat I vill be asking.
Everysing is unterground at ze moment!
free spirit
more tea vicar?
no, sorry maybe I wasn't very clear on that point.
the police don't need a noise complaint to issue a section 63 notice, however if the party's been running for a couple of hours, and the police show up, and the first thing you ask them (pretty much) is whether they've had any noise complaints, and they say no, then a few minutes later they try to issue a section 63 notice, then at that point you can ask them on what basis they believe the rave is likely to cause serious distress' to local residents given that it's been going on for 2 hours and they've just told you they've not had a single complaint.
bottom line, if someone's seriously distressed by the music then they tend to ring the police to complain - so if it's 1am, you've been going for several hours and there's been no complaints then there's a fair old defence that section 63 shouldn't have been applied.
providing you're not an arsehole about it, if the police sus that you know what you're talking about and that there's a potential that you might actually challenge them legally about it later, then chances are that they'll back off the section 63.
If they've already issued the section 63 when they arrive though, then it won't work.
basically it's not a 100% defence, but 99% of the time if you play it right then you can avoid a section 63 being issued in the first place (providing you aren't taking the piss)
'serious distress' is the key phrase to remember, together with 'by reason of it's loudness, and duration and the time at which it is played'.
not saying this stops them using other laws against you, just not that one, and if they do then you should be able to challenge it later if you have the balls.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
btw the above stuff only works if the police don't find out about the party until it's been running for a while, which is yet another reason for not openly advertising it in advance.
if the police find out about it in advance then they'll have issued a section 63 order / notice / whatever it's called before it even starts, and then you'd have no basis to challenge anything on.
this is a bit of a game of bluff mind, and if the police don't look like they're going for it, then knowing the right moment to back down, back off and live to party another day is crucial.
if the police find out about it in advance then they'll have issued a section 63 order / notice / whatever it's called before it even starts, and then you'd have no basis to challenge anything on.
this is a bit of a game of bluff mind, and if the police don't look like they're going for it, then knowing the right moment to back down, back off and live to party another day is crucial.
Mooncat
Hug me - I'm vaccinated
He who raves and runs away lives to rave another day
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
free spirit
more tea vicar?
don't think I've ever run away like.
turned the rig off, dished out the bin bags and calmly packed away a couple of times, or taken the decks off site and just let it wind down gradually by agreement then cleared up, or walked back through a line of riot police into a building that's been busted demanding to speak to whoever's in charge maybe, running away though ain't my style really.
like I say, being able to sus out what they're about to say / do before they do it and pre-empt them is the key, so if they're about to issue a section 63 or issue a final warning, sussing this is what they're about to say, and getting in first with the offer to turn it down / off should defuse the situation and avoid the need for running.
I also found that saying that, then saying something like
'the thing is though, I've then got a problem on my hands as we've got several hundred people out here who're totally stuck til they're sober enough to drive / public transport starts, and if there's no music to distract them they'll all start getting pissed off and lairy. Is there any chance we could maybe pack the main rig up and just keep some music playing on the monitors for a bit so we can pack up in peace?'
can mean you can actually get to keep a bit of music going with the police's blessing so long as the main rigs off.
The usual proviso in this situation though is that if the main rig does go back on, then you've had your warning and the rig will be impounded without warning if they have to come back, so make sure you have the ability to stay in control of the situation.
(nb the you in this post is a generic you, not aimed at mooncat)
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
Can't believe Ste9's not a fucking troll.
On the DJ being involved thing, it's more recent than the 90's. Can't remember if it's 2001 or 2003 licensing act, but anyone who has aything to do with the party can be nicked for it. As the highest judge that can judge you is a District Judge, you can't get before a jury to explain anything and the precedents have been set that DJs are materially involved in the organisation of the event.
It has also been suggested that if you a juggling or dancing on a podium you can also get done, though no one has as yet.
Licensing is the main thing OB are going for these days, as it's easy for them. Back in the day the organisor was 'Dave' and he's legged it. Now with everyone being responsible for organising the party, all OB need to do is wait for the end and come in and nick those who are packing up. If that's not possible, as in the case of Camelford 2006, they wander round the site, noting reg numbers of vehicles connected to the rigs and nick them at their convenience.
Partying on MOD land leaves you open to getting busted by MOD police as well as that county's police. Also expect MPs to come down too, looking for any squaddies who maybe at the do.
Partying on MOD land where they have the explosives warnings is just asking for a nicking. It's fine to mooch around there with yer dog during the day, but to invite 1000 munters down for the night, well we may well find someone who's fine was bigger than ours.
On the DJ being involved thing, it's more recent than the 90's. Can't remember if it's 2001 or 2003 licensing act, but anyone who has aything to do with the party can be nicked for it. As the highest judge that can judge you is a District Judge, you can't get before a jury to explain anything and the precedents have been set that DJs are materially involved in the organisation of the event.
It has also been suggested that if you a juggling or dancing on a podium you can also get done, though no one has as yet.
Licensing is the main thing OB are going for these days, as it's easy for them. Back in the day the organisor was 'Dave' and he's legged it. Now with everyone being responsible for organising the party, all OB need to do is wait for the end and come in and nick those who are packing up. If that's not possible, as in the case of Camelford 2006, they wander round the site, noting reg numbers of vehicles connected to the rigs and nick them at their convenience.
Partying on MOD land leaves you open to getting busted by MOD police as well as that county's police. Also expect MPs to come down too, looking for any squaddies who maybe at the do.
Partying on MOD land where they have the explosives warnings is just asking for a nicking. It's fine to mooch around there with yer dog during the day, but to invite 1000 munters down for the night, well we may well find someone who's fine was bigger than ours.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
Wow! I missed this before.
Congratulations. You've won most stupid post of the year award. And we've still got 5 months to go.
I bet you're proud of yourself. Have a fucking biscuit mate.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
pretty sure the original case law for a dj being materially involved in the organisation was a 1994 rave in manchester - I've not got a link, but that was the case law they presented me with in my interview, and I read through it twice pretty carefully before accepting they'd got me (I'd foolishly got suckered by the old friendly copper routine, and said I'd been djing... did have my record bag between my legs at the time, but still, shouldn't have fallen for that routine)
and yes, licensing seems to be the standard thing they're going after people with these days as the old excuse of it being a private party, and not charging admission no longer apply.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
I reckon he's having a good go at a clean sweep of the top ten
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
be still my heart
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
Found your minefield then? Got you security sorted with smoke grenades. This is going to be well weapon 
bouncer_the_dog
Well-Known Member
Totally fucking mexico
*subscribes
*subscribes
pinkmonkey
2.4 hour party person
<finds glowsticks and drags out deck chair and thermos>
Shippou-Sensei
4:1:2.5
glow sticks are too pussy we need thermal imaging so when the smoke grenades go off we can still see the rave
