Abuse of police power.

[notcomingbackatall]

This has been bothering me for a number of years.
Around ten years ago 4 police officers knocked on my door and said they Ve had a report that I have a firearm. They asked if they could search the premises or threaten to arrest me. I said fine, I'll get my shoes and let's go because you're not searching the house.

at that point, when I locked the front door the police officer, said you're under arrest for possession of a firearm. We're going to search your house for a Glock 17. Under sec 1 pace 1984
We can search your house under section one of pace. Because she was there Directly before your arrest so they searched my house didn't find anything and dearrested me. I made a complaint and said there was no necessity, or reasonable suspicion for the arrest, and they was looking for evidence. To make the arrest lawfull when I complained the officer in charge, reply and said they was looking for a firearm. They didn't need a warrant. And after they realised there was no firearm in your house or your person. They used common sense and dearrested you. This has affected me for a number of years, and I've always Contended that it was a abuse of pace1984 and they should have gotten a warrant because they didn't even have a witness statement to say I had a firearm. Or any evidence, just a call from a member of the public, does that mean that if anyone was to call the police and say that someone's got a gun, the police would go round their house, arrest them, search their house and then they dearrest them if they didn't have it. I'm talking hypothetically. Like if someone wanted to upset someone.

and to confirm just so, you know how much the police really thought i had a gun, none of them were armed. I thought it was policy to send armed police officers around calls about "dangerous" people in possession with unlawful firearms? Or calls about firearms that warrant an immediate response.


this was the Metropolitan Police. That's all I will say about the area.

 

[Nobodi]

File a complaint with the internal affairs bureau. Also see if a journalist will get your story this very important. I believe the statute of limitations may be up but I don't know the laws in your area. I'm in a similar situation but mine is complex because the events that occurred are hard for me to prove and just waiting because these investigation take time. It plays a role of why im here to begin with. I don't feel comfortable explaining all the details at the moment it's been painful. Fight to the bitter end don't let them corrupt pieces of shit get away with what they did to you

 

[SVEN]

I'm guessing that the fact you were told, "she was there" directly before the arrest suggests that whoever "she" was may have a bearing on why they had a suspicion that an illegal firearm was on the premises. Rather than some random person with no connection to the incident vaguely saying that you had a firearm. The very fact that the type of firearm, a Glock, was cited suggests that they were acting on very clear information, inaccurate or not.
The Police & Criminal Evidence Act does have provision for Police to act in various circumstances, as well as providing numerous safeguards for persons being investigated.
The fact that they were not visibly carrying weapons does not necessarily indicate that they were unarmed, more especially if any were in plainclothes. Armed response is not an invariable when investigating alleged gun offences, if for example it is suspected that a person may be storing a firearm for another but is felt unlikely to be likely to use it, or if the officers tasked with investigating the alleged offence feel it isn't robust enough to warrant a full armed response, but does merit further investigation.