Guilty Until Proven Innocent?

There goes the neighbourhood.

A BURGLARY victim has ended up losing £67,000... to the police.

Officers investigating the break-in seized the cash when the owner of the property on Port Talbot’s Sandfields housing estate could not prove where it came from.

So they nicked it.

Detective Constable Phil Davies said: “It is enough to show the cash is probably related to one of a number of kinds of activity, any one of which would have been unlawful, for example, cheating the revenue, trading in counterfeit goods, drug supply or falsely claiming state benefits.”

Err, no it is not enough, Phil. 'Probably' has never been enough in a society which prides itself on innocence before proven guilt. Your examples are fucking irrelevant until such time as you provide such proof, you lazy fucking Nazi.

Go out and do some fucking detective work before stealing cash, you provincial twat.

This will be the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The one which was designed to catch terrorists and organised crime bosses. Yet this seizure came without even getting within sniffing distance of a court.

He was arrested on suspicion of money laundering and although never charged police have successfully applied to the courts for a confiscation order.

Not charged with a crime, you say? Good fucking grief.

A Puddlecote financial adviser friend had this to say:

"If you have cash lying around, it's probably best to give it to one of the banks. You know how safe they are. They've never fucked up. Ever. At all. That way, you might get charged like fuck for ridiculous reasons, against all principles of fairness, but at least you won't have some woodentop mong come and steal the lot from you just because he is a fucktard with a badge, given authority by a Labour government intent on destroying every aspect of centuries of justice.

In fact, thinking about it, you may as well put the readies under your mattress on the favourite in the 3:15 at Haydock rather than trust the Police"