July 3, 2006
Opinion: Freedom Of Speech Does Not Extend To Criticising The Police
Note: I am breaking with the Londonist 'no first person singular' rule thing because this is an account of a specific incident that affected me and may not represent the views of the entire Londonist team. Also, this post contains naughty words that might warp your fragile little mind; be warned!
I read Thursday's edition of the Independent - the article that could get you arrested - and was vaguely worried by its evocation of the insidious loss of civil liberties, especially infringements on freedom of speech. (In fact, the article almost did get someone arrested.) As a law-abiding citizen, though, I didn't think that I or anyone I knew would be affected by 'terror creep' – the use of the threat of terrists [sic] to stifle criticism of the government and its methods of security enforcement – any time soon. How wrong I was.
My friend Phil and I were going through a metal detector on the way out of Highbury & Islington tube on Friday evening around 8.30pm, on our way to a gig. Phil, who has a degree in physics, said to me in a low voice that the metal detector was a "piece of shit that wouldn't stop anyone". Obviously, someone was listening, as all of a sudden, half a dozen policemen jumped on him and hustled him over to the corner of the tube station, where he was detained for about 20 minutes for the grave crime of swearing in public, and fined £80 for the privilege. For swearing! On the tube! If it's such a crime, then I owe them about a million pounds, as swearing on and at the tube is the only way to deal with the pain of having to travel on the dratted thing every day.
The police were fucking rude, too, and treated Phil like he was a hardened criminal - they were really aggressive, and clearly wanted him to lose his temper so they could charge him with something worse. They said repeatedly he was very close to being arrested. For the terrible crime of swearing and calling their machine a piece of shit - which, as a physics graduate, he actually knows about. Phil co-operated fully and gave them every piece of ID you could think of, and allowed them to search his bag, but that wasn't enough for them - they just had to keep on firing questions. I got really upset and started crying through rage, frustration and fear. I also asked them very politely if this was the UK or the People's Republic of China. They then told me I was very close to being arrested, too.
I'm just glad a local reporter for the Islington Tribune was there and documented the whole thing. Lots of the other passengers who witnessed the pulling-over came and told me how unfair and heavy-handed they thought the police were being, which helped somewhat.
For fuck's sake (oh dear, there goes another £80!). Would wearing a Cradle of Filth t-shirt (WARNING: link is NOT WORK SAFE, picture found on the Peelified forums) be enough to be pulled over and cautioned? How about if I were to quote Philip Larkin's famous line about parents ("They fuck you up, your mum and dad")? Is that not covered by freedom of speech any more? Or were they just fucking with us because we were dressed in goth clothes (oooh, controversial!) and criticising their anti-terrorist machine? I wonder.
Of COURSE stopping suicidal idiots with bombs is justifiably the focus of the police's efforts, as well as protecting the public from ordinary, run-of-the-mill criminals. Of course, they should go to every effort to stop future attacks like the disgusting, cowardly bombings that cost 52 innocent lives almost a year ago. However, I fail to see how fining my friend £80 for the despicable crime of questioning their methods via the use of a four-letter word is making Britain safer. Hands up if you've never sworn in public. Anyone? Anyone at all? Well, watch out – power-tripping police with nothing better to do might decide they don't like the look of you (it took five officers twenty minutes to write up the offence, and to ascertain that Phil is who he says he is – that's over an hour and a half of police time that could have been used to make our streets safer).
I suppose at least we can be grateful Phil isn't a Brazilian electrician. We're looking into a possible appeal, too.
Oh, incidentally, the gig - My Ruin at the Highbury Garage - was excellent. My photos of it are here. Shame it cost £80, though.
Thanks to Londonist Mike for pointing me in the direction of this (video is full of POTTY LANGUAGE, BEWARE!). It pretty much sums up how I feel about the whole thing.
I reckon I owe the Met around £480 quid for this piece. Oh dear!
Picture of foul language courtesy of Dan K, with many thanks.
UPDATE: Hello to everyone reading this who arrived via the kind plug in The Register. Fame at last!
|
Were you required to step through the screening equipment, or was it optional? I wasn't aware that London was forcing passengers to be scanned just yet! I remember they were running an optional test of explosives screening equipment at Canary Wharf but have otherwise ruled out this kind of ineffectual nonsense.
I swear the world cup and the humid heat this weekend has made all sorts of people act like idiots - including, apparently, the cops!
@nic0: We were herded through the metal detector like the cattle the police so obviously think we are. There was, as I recall, hazard tape closing off egress around the famed "piece of shit" (oh drat, there I go again!), as well as around a dozen or so officers, some of them with some rather adorable sniffer dogs. We had no choice but to pass through.
Agree with your point about the heat - I much prefer the city when the tarmac isn't melting and sticking to my flip flops. I prefer it when my friends aren't hassled by little Hitler policemen, too ...
Love your website address btw - you must have been quick off the mark to grab that one! :)
Haha, believe it or not I've only had the domain for a year or so. I guess not too many Nicholas's out there felt like having a vanity domain name :)
Interesting info on the metal detector stuff. I'd like to see them try that on on a weekday rush hour.
I am always extraordinarily disappointed that the metal detectors don't have a sign on them saying "Any terrorist using a Ceramic Knife is really VERY VERY naughty."
I hope your friend doesn't pay up.
And I hope the police aren't tracking my IP address.
I'm shocked, and at the same time, not shocked to come across a story like this, recently it's seemed like The Met has lost all sense of proportion and common sense. They seem obsessed with being high-profile but at the same time are ignoring even the most basic house-keeping jobs like kicking the winos off the benches at Notting Hill Gate or kicking the wanking-pervs out of the west end's public loo's.
The metal detectors are supposed to be entirely voluntary at this point unless I've missed a Met press release, and as far as I know you have to swear at least twice in order to get yourself booked normally for causing 'affray', said under your breath 'shit' could be all manner of other words, so it seems odd that your friend would have been dragged to one side for it... like you said, if they're going to take that line then they should be booking almost every single daily tube passenger at least 5 times a day... I know I swear in the morning at the barriers which inevitably have a tourist or a dodgy oyster reader on them, I swear when the train doesn't arrive for ages, I swear when I'm on the train because it's inevitably packed with rude fuckwits at 40oC and I normally swear at least twice getting from platform to exit... with a little maths that works out at £300 per day for using the tube, plus the price of the ticket: who says' London's public transport is value for money eh!?
Keep swearing, Keep Questioning, and Keep highlighting the gradual erosion of our civil liberties by Bliar and his authoritarian bullies. They never did this when we were being targeted by the IRA, but then back in those days the Yanks were on good terms with our Irish friends with the bomb, so hey; it wasn't a problem for 'the world'...
Thanks for the comments, everyone. Terrifying, isn't it? A friend tells me that the swearing in public law is dusted off whenever the police want to punish people who haven't quite committed a crime (NOT that Phil had, by any stretch of the imagination ... except the Met's) - for example, at football matches.
@Neil: That's interesting about the voluntary nature of metal detectors. I wasn't paying much attention to the set-up - well, you don't do you, you just follow everyone else like a good little sheep - but I do seem to remember there being no other choice but to go through the scanning gate.
I wish I'd had the forethought to get out my camera and take a video but I'm fairly sure they would have arrested me for doing that. It seems like the police can do whatever they want and we, the public, just have to go along with it - no matter how illiberally and unreasonably they behave. It makes me sick as the proverbial parrot ...
This does seem totally uneccessary behaviour by the police - I don't think I would react at all well if the same happened to me.
The Independent articles were interesting reads too, just a shame that the latter one was poorly edited so that it was misleading (she wasn't questioned because she was reading the independent) & factually incorrect (she wasn't cautioned despite what the last paragraph indicates).
But overall this is a worrying development that the police can seemingly do what they like with little recourse...........
An apt place for this? (from Gothamists' comment policy guide)
">http://www.gothamistllc.com/commentpolicy.php
# Good comments respond to the content in the post, or to a comment left by another reader.
Bollocky-cunty-fuck, shit, wank
# Good comments can disagree with the content in the post, but they never insult the writer of the post, other commenters, Gothamist, other websites, etc.
Fucking right on mother fucker, i fucking love your bullshit
# Good comments are usually pretty short, have a positive/constructive tone, and are open to being contradicted by other readers.
don't fuck with me
(£800. £880 with: Crap, thats a lot)
Shocked, yes; surprised, no. Great article Jo. Hope you're well and keep up the good work.
The use of summary justice that has been extended is certainly very questionable because there's nothing summary about it. There are the courts through which you can, and many often do challenge and win against the police. Even the 'real' criminals! Freedom of speech? It is fashionable to talk about this at the moment and its worth considering how liberal we are now with what is tolerated and even encouraged verses, say 20 or 30 years ago. Wearing a tshirt with FUCK OFF on it? Not (very) nice. Jesus is a cunt? What about Mohammed is a cunt?
I think your protest is a good one. But I don't think its got anything to do with civil liberties.
Pierre:
When considering freedom of speech, it's important to make a distinction between freedom to push the boundaries of taste, and freedom to express dissent. Every society has its taboos, and in this area we are indeed a great deal more liberal than before. However, the freedom to make potentially offensive statements, or display potentially offensive images, is different from the freedom to show one's displeasure with current politics or society. The police in this case seem to have used an archaic, outmoded law restricting the former freedom as a foil for discouraging the latter.
In fact, this is a civil liberties issue, as the freedom to go about one's daily business without undue interference and harassment is itself a civil liberty. And as it turns out, more heavy-handed policing is coming alongside increasingly draconian laws specifically designed to stifle political dissent in this country. This kind of policing and legislation breeds resentment among the general, 'law-abiding' public (in fact, cited as the reason the WW2 ID cards were abolished), whilst causing fear, alienation and marginalisation amongst minority groups - inevitably its most frequent victims. Surely the first step in preventing further home-grown terrorism is to ensure that British Muslims (in particular) do not feel the police and the political system are prejudiced and biased against them.
And finally, without wishing to incur any fines myself, I believe it was Lenny Bruce who said,
"Take away the right to say 'fuck', and you take away the right to say 'fuck the government'".
@Pierre: The "Jesus Is A Cunt" t-shirt was chosen pretty much at random as an example; I could have chosen anything from T-Shirt Hell to make the same point.
@Joe: Thanks very much for your support, and the excellent point you make about freedom to offend. If you - or anyone else - has further examples of this (saw one in the Times today about stallholders fined £80 for selling 'Bollocks To Blair" t-shirts), please get in touch as I'm thinking of taking this further.
I am struggling to reply because I feel that this is all writ very large. "My boyfriend gets £80 fine" becomes "Civil liberties in Britain under threat". I find this difficult to resolve since the question has not yet been answered of whether any punishable crime has been committed.
Are we saying this incident has been unfairly picked out and that 'archaic' legislation from the 1980's is criminalizing otherwise 'law abiding' people, or that nothing has been done wrong? Who is in the wrong, the person swearing in public or the state for crafting and executing the legislation? The article tends to blame both, accepting the punishment and blaming the powers that be, which seems like having cake and eating it to me.
There is a parallel made here of the use of terror to justify increased security with apparently heavy handed public order policing. Terror may be used as justification for action by the authorities, which is difficult to wear for some but I think there is justification in it and I’m not alone in feeling safer for it. But this is a distraction and is not the issue.
This isn't about British Muslims uprising or the threat of terror attacks. It’s about swearing in public and about stopping idiots carrying knives (and worse) in London.
Repressive policing policies and "random" searches do not make us any safer, indeed the resentment which they cause only furthers the aims of terrorists, who seek to destroy our liberties and freedoms.
David Mery has documented his experiences last year when he was stopped, searched on the Tube, then he was arrested, fingerprinted, DNA sampled, had his flat was searched, computers and other equipment seized etc.:
Innocent in London – ‘Suspicious behaviour on the tube’
His case has now been taken up by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
He has contributed "real life" evidence to Lord Carlile of Berriew Q.C the independent reviewer of Terrorism legislation in the UK, who is calling for members of the public to contact him
David has also managed to ask a Public Question at the the Metroplitan Police Authority meeting which quizzes Sir Ian Blair, the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police.
Anybody who carries, say, mobile phones, MP3 players, portable computers etc. on the Tube may also be interested in his article:
Techie and terrorist behavioural profiles are the same
How do you feel about the trials of even more intrusive "see under your clothes" Passive Millimetre Wave or Backscatter X-ray scanners rather than just metal detectors?
Thanks wtwu!
Jo, I presume this station is part of Islington? Then you should write to the Council's Chief Executive. I did get a not very satisfying reply to my letter about their anti-terrorism advice. I sent another email but haven't got a further reply.
Regarding using a camera, you're lucky you didn't have such forethought as you were in a tube station. See the links at http://gizmonaut.net/bits/suspect.html#20060118.
br -d
@Pierre: First of all, minor point, Phil is not my boyfriend. Second, I am not trying to conflate all of those disparate things; I am noting a specific instance of what I felt to be excessive, harassing police behaviour, which I decided to write up in order to vent, and in order to warn other Londoners of the financial perils of dissing the detective powers of scanners. I think the main point I was trying to make was that this happened to us, and it could happen to anyone; the fact it fits into a wider pattern of people being fined for offensive language when criticising (even obliquely) the authorities is certainly worrying, but not something I feel qualified to go into detail about. I freely admit I don't know enough - but I think I'm going to try and find out.
@WTWU: Sometimes, they really are out to get you. :)
How very indicative of the Met Police today. So they'll pounce on something so wildly insignificant as a mere (but totally correct) utterance containing a word which many, if not all of the officers involved have probably said before in public or even perhaps on the beat, yet when you call them after you've had two windows shattered by an air rifle in the space of six months by the same suspects (I kid you not), it suddenly takes them a hell of a lot longer to catch the buggers involved.
Metal detectors tend to be incredibly crappy anyway, oddly enough when they're needed the most. At a major British airport (I'll decline to say which one...) I managed to walk through a detector with keys, a pocket full of spare change, chains and other metal regalia without so much as a blip from the machine at all. It'd be somewhat laughable, if it wasn't so potentially dangerous.
I hope Phil appeals and wins. You hear worse language in schools, football stadia and even other public places. And in any case, the language used was hardly threatening or offensive whatsoever, hell it wasn't even aimed at anyone or anything but an inanimate object. Though, I would not be surprised if the clothing he was wearing at the time somehow played a role in the police's reaction to what happened - I'm a Goth myself and before now, particularly at airports, I get the shifty-eyed treatment and stares from customs officials/Police.
The Register has done a bit of fleshing out regarding the metal detector and the justification and requirements for being fined for swearing.
now this is fucking brilliant, almost entirely the reason I moved away from hackney a couple of years ago...
Those wankers just want any reason to fine somebody for any old fucking thing... nevermind... just don't listen to an mp3 player or such on the tube as those wires WILL get you shot.
thanks for reading,
Blue
p.s. this would have cost me £240 to voice on the tube network.... ;)
I live just along from Highbury and Islington but I missed the fun and hi-jinx of this airport-style adventure.
Surely Highbury and Islington station has the built in drawback of an alternative exit to the North London Silverlink line just back from the entrance. Anyone carrying a knife/anything else dodgy could spot what was ahead, and legitimately divert down and take a Silverlink one stop along, with far less inconvenience than being caught with the proverbial red hands... If I remember rightly, Caledonian Road and Barnsbury is the next stop along from there, and one can walk back to Highbury and Islington in about 10 minutes. Who exactly are they hoping to catch by this?
Did he pay? (sorry it's not clear from the article)
Personaly I'd fight it all the way - make sure I'm recording all the details. I'd go down criticising the police - stay calm and factual, but don't be afraid to tell them you think they're wasting their time. If they're meant to be here to catch terrorists then they're not doing a very good job - at least a dozen terrorists could have walzed straight past security while the police have taken it upon themselves to harass a goth for distraction.
I wouldn't fall for the "you're very close to being arrested thing" either, it's their of saying that you're being an annoying little shit, and if they could they'd get great joy of kicking you until you're black and blue. However they can't do that, or arrest you, either (i) you haven't given them cause to arrest you or (ii) they might legally be allowed to arrest you but they'd have to spend the rest of the shift doing paperwork and they know they'll never get a conviction.
Woo, third page of Metro - fame is mine! A link to Londonist would have been nice though. :)
@MikeyK: No, Phil hasn't paid yet, because he, ah, lost the ticket at the My Ruin gig due to overenthusiastic moshing. Ahem. :) He's asked for a new copy, and when he gets it he is certainly not going to take it lying down - he's going to appeal, and we're both going to complain to the IPCC. Being threatened with arrest was no fun at all - thanks for the advice on that ... The frequency with which I swear, especially on public transport (although I usually stick to French - sacré putain de bordel de métro de merde!) I'm bound to need to know that sooner or later.
Maybe they're collecting swearing fines and using them to pay for research into new, better kinds of metal detector. Or maybe it's not. What a joke!
Readers may recall that when the IRA bombed Warrington in 1993 the authorities removed all the litter bins from railway stations. And some people thought that disproportionate.
What a long way we've gone in such a short time.
I'm adding a link to this by posting a comment on a blog to which I contribute - see http://freecommonwealth.blogspot.com and the entry headed "therefore of necessity nameless". While I don't aim to cause offence, I intend to continue using the full resources of the wonderful English language.
I disagreed with this from a law & order perspective. What is known as ‘broken window’ policing (i.e. pursuing the most trivial of offenses) has a marked impact on the incidence of major crime; i.e. in a society where minor offenses aren’t tolerated, then major ones are less likely to be committed too. I have no problem with someone getting busted and fined for swearing in a public place – certainly if I was (and I swear a lot), I’d look on it as part of being a member of a civil society and I really shouldn’t be using naughty words when I’m in a public place with people I don’t know who might not want to hear it. Also, if we bust people for minor civil offenses, fewer people get robbed and mugged and so forth. Strange but demonstrably true.
Moreover, what do people expect the police to be acting like when you shoot your mouth off at them? They’re doing a difficult and stressful job and when was the last time anyone reacted with calm civility to someone slagging them off? If you want people to be decent to you, be decent to them first. The one time I got pulled by the police (In my finest gothery, I'll add before anyone suggests that goths are being picked on), I was polite and apologetic, and they told me not to do it again and let me be on my way. The police are human too - slagging them off is as likely to get you as good a reaction as it does anywhere, whilst recognising them as professionals doing a tough job and offering to get them a cuppa can work wonders.
As for freedom of speech, I regard it as something like me being a bit of a boxer. I’m aware that I’m capable of beating old ladies up in the street, but I also know that if I use that in instances other than self-defense then I’m being a wanker and not big and clever.
Let's face it, the swearing fine is going to get dropped - there's little doubt about that. But the long term effects might make your mate think twice about resorting to witless abuse again. If he's got a physics degree, why not point out the failings in the tech next time instead? I'm reliably informed that constructive criticism is a good way of getting results - except on the internet of course, where it just sets you up for abuse.
Fewer people swearing on the street? A politer society? I'm all for that.
Swearing a lot does not make your knob get bigger, no matter what Adrian Edmondson might have told people.
I wonder how many escaped foreign murderers they could have caught in the 20 minutes wasted on your friend.
Ridiculous.
@dave-o: Fair point about public order, but please, allow me to reiterate: Phil and I were not abusive to the police at the tube station, Phil's comment was aimed at me in a low voice that was unfortunately overheard by a Met officer. After he was dragged off for questioning, he was never less than fully cooperative - even if his disgust at the process he was undergoing came through in the form of the occasional eye-roll, which I hope you'll agree was justifiable under the circumstances. This isn't a case of a couple of weirdoes (well, maybe we are weird ;) ) screaming FUCK DA POLICE!!!1!11 and spitting at officers; this was a couple of people having a normal conversation about the failings of metal detection technology in everyday language (yes, my vocabulary includes a fair dose of the Anglo-Saxon; how terrible!) and being, in my opinion, unfairly targetted for it. The ones who acted rudely, aggressively, dismissively and like thugs, frankly, were the policemen involved. Fine, they do a difficult job (and I bet they all swear like sailors, too, on and off duty), but such a disproportionate response and attempt at intimidation and humiliation deserves to be challenged. If you disagree with any of that, then fine; but I'm hopping mad about it.
@Adam: Oooh, I reckon at least five milion, possibly more. :)
@kath: Brilliant piece - thank you very much for linking to it.
Dave-o, why not nip down yourself and see if you can initiate a constructive discussion about the limitations of the policy/technology. Let us know how you get on.
I got a £80 fine for wearing a gimp mask back from a fancy dress party, as with your experience the Police were rude and aggressive.
Police can pretty much get away with whatever they want to, driven on by a whole host of Home Secretaries that have promoted a climate of fear to drive forward their errosion of civil liberties.
Shooting of innocent members of the public and then attempting to pervert the course of justice afterwards or armed officers threatening not to carry weapons if any of their colleagues are disciplined, not to mention the several cases of wrongful convictions that have arisen due to forged evidence.
It is a vicious circle, when the Police act themselves like criminals they no longer represent a pillar of authority and no longer deserve no respect - they will be sworn at, spat at and if the opportunity arises, assaulted. They will then blame the breakdown on society on anything but themselves.
The Police of this country are the worst I have seen anywhere in the World, I've felt safer in the US, Belize, Mexico, Namibia during a civil war, the Phillipines, Russia, Serbia and a whole host of other countries many people consider 'unsafe'.
I live much more in fear of being stabbed or murdered because there is no effective law-and-order on London's streets or being shot or arrested based on some Policeman's prejudices as I do of being a victim of a terrorist attack.
My girlfriend is ten-years younger than me and has never lived outside of the UK, I spent nearly 3 years in Canada and I long for the day she opens her eyes and sees what this country has become and will finally agree to move away.
Its not the chavs and hoodies we should fear, it is the Government and Police who fertilise their development - God help us.
Those fucking coppers should be bloody well ashamed at this bleeding abuse of power. Go fucking hard with the appeal and complaint in this shitting matter. Perhaps even consider setting up one of those buggering PayPal accounts so that I can throw a few fucking $$$ your fucking way to defray any cunting legal costs you might fucking incur.
Those wanking British police really do fuck all to garner respect from the bleeding public. Tossers.
P.S. Tits.
The police are just reverting to form since islam has launched a terror campaign against the west(Oh no, wait. That's us who have launched a terror campaign against islam :P)
To be honest up until the late 80's(I've more money & a haircut now:P) I've allways had this sort of experience with the police.
I know two guys who quit Hendon not because it was too tough(they both were) but because it was like a private club for nazis.
You do understand that your country is a police state don't you? We over here in the US are not far behind, but really not to the level that you are at.
Not kind of, not sort of, but a real true police state where criticism of the state is against the law, that kind. Might be time to be thinking of getting out.
He is not obliged to accept the on the spot fine. Take it to Mag Court and see what they think.
@dave-o: Sorry, but that's a crock of shit. A society where minor 'offences' - such as criticising police tactics aloud or being a goth - aren't tolerated is called a police state. It certainly reduces crime, with the added side effect or seriously reducing civil liberties and human rights.
You might be the type that welcomes a situation where anyone is a potential target of the abuse of police power, but I think most people find it troubling.
"anyone is a potential target of the abuse of police power,"
But the police weren't abusing their power. That's the point of a police state, they have the power to do what they did. Their actions were legal according to the laws of your country.
You do know how you got to this point right?
"But the police weren't abusing their power."
What a strange point for you to pick up on. Yes, they were abusing their powers: just because their actions were (possibly) legal doesn't mean they weren't an abuse of their powers.
I'm also pretty well aware how we got here, I wrote to my MP on several occassions about the various anti-terrorism bills, but to no avail. My letters don't have the same political sway as the covers of certain right wing tabloids, unfortunately.
We over here in the US are not far behind, but really not to the level that you are at.
You are kidding, right? Some of the stuff coming out of American is really scary. I wouldn't start patting yourself on the back quite yet.
I hope that anyone who gets a fine in this manner exercises their right not to pay it, and have their day in court.
The Magistrates' blog suggests that most of these abuses will be thrown straight out - or never even make it to court, like the "Is your horse gay?" one.
Don't pay! Appeal! These abuses cannot be allowed to stand -- have your day in court.
@ Ricardo - Well said, that man - I am quite amused at noen's comments... "Oh, I'm in a glass house, let's throw a few rocks" - fair enough, we're getting scary over here, but we whereas the illustrious US is leading the world in paranoia we are merely following their lead...
Well, I had planed a holiday in the UK this year, but, if that's how the police react to innocuous comments, I will instead spend my leisure in friendlier surroundings closer to home. I am not a supporter of police states.
U guys are lucky, where I am, you cannot say much on a blog without risking censorship. Would you believe that apart from individual sites and blogs, services like Flikr and Skype are banned and blocked in some countries in the Middle East.
Some bloggers are really frightened ... And, in a couple of countries people have been arrested too.
I just dread to think what would happen if you criticised a policeman's machine ... I suspect that one would be castrated and given a bit part in the Life of Brian II (the new Danish version).
Dump the bloody tea in Boston harbor. Worked for us Yanks. Of course, under our new King George, we're screwed.
Call up London Transport and request the CCTV footage under the Data Protection Act and we need to make sure more stories like this reach the front pages of newspapers. The police wont even chase a man on a stolen bike if hes not wearing a helmet but they will waste my fucking tax on things like this while someone is probably being mugged 100 feet from the station. That reminds me - find out if any crimes were reported near-by at the time and make sure its pointed out if those crimes are not solved.
Tangential in comparison to the important issues raised by your story, but I still need to say this: kudos to you for bucking the *ist ass-backwards, institutionalized daftness of not allowing authors to use the accurate and sensible first-person voice for their writing.