The Fate Of The Camouflage Boat.....

[Delta9]

The defensive attitude of some forum members makes me think they are expecting to be next on the list of scrotes for removal. Having read the previous topics I would have expected strong support for enforcement.

Well until I see a valid reason for why his boat was removed I would consider all boat owners to be next on the list. If he didn't have a license then I understand, but the OP makes no reference to the boat being unlicensed.

[luctor et emergo]

I've. Been called worse than a scrote. He who throws etc. Etc...

 

And just to spell it out really clearly for those who can't use their brrain cells without help, I'm not defending these individuals. I don't know them.

 

I'm calling into question the message that crt have brought out, on the back of this.

[FidoDido]

Is it really common knowledge? I've seen no actual evidence of his thefts and apparently neither have the police or they would have arrested him for it some time ago.

 

The boat is well known in the area. He has been in clink several times.

 

What behavior around others? I have seen people complain about him cutting trees on the towpath or the smell of him smoking weed, hardly the crimes of the century.

 

What rules was he trying to bend? I see no mention of the boat being unlicensed and he appears to be moving about sufficiently as we saw by the thread tracking him. BW gave them a licence from what local heresay says.!

 

Others were shocked at his behavior? How terrible for them. What was he doing that was so shocking,?

 

The only thing I can see that he did wrong was the theft which is a police matter and not related to the removal of his boat. I still can't figure out what he actually did to get his home taken from him.

 

Breach rules persistently, it seems.. I suspect the list of breaches is decades long, not a simple matter of a few days overstaying...

[Paul C]

Well until I see a valid reason for why his boat was removed I would consider all boat owners to be next on the list. If he didn't have a license then I understand, but the OP makes no reference to the boat being unlicensed.

 

Revoke a licence --> boat has no licence.

 

 

 

"we had no alternative but to revoke the licence and issue notice that the boat had to be removed from the water.

..........the enforcement team seized 72 craft for either no licence or ................”

[Naughty Cal]

Is it really common knowledge? I've seen no actual evidence of his thefts and apparently neither have the police or they would have arrested him for it some time ago.

 

What behavior around others? I have seen people complain about him cutting trees on the towpath or the smell of him smoking weed, hardly the crimes of the century.

 

What rules was he trying to bend? I see no mention of the boat being unlicensed and he appears to be moving about sufficiently as we saw by the thread tracking him.

 

Others were shocked at his behavior? How terrible for them. What was he doing that was so shocking,?

 

The only thing I can see that he did wrong was the theft which is a police matter and not related to the removal of his boat. I still can't figure out what he actually did to get his home taken from him.

No licence

 

Antisocial behaviour

 

Theft

 

You see nothing wrong with any of this?

 

Do you live on a different planet?

 

Or are you the camo boater?

[Guest]

Revoke a licence --> boat has no licence.

 

I don't think the op I copied and pasted from boaters update actually said the boat was not licensed.

 

Does it?

[Delta9]

No licence

 

Antisocial behaviour

 

Theft

 

You see nothing wrong with any of this?

 

Do you live on a different planet?

 

Or are you the camo boater?

His license was revoked because he didn't move enough. We have plenty of sightings of him moving about a lot so if he was overstaying it wasn't as much as plenty of others seem to get away with.

 

I haven't seen any evidence of his antisocial behavior or even any examples of it.

 

His theft is a police matter and wouldn't lead to the confiscation of his home

 

I see plenty of things wrong with this. Apparently this mans home was taken away from him for committing petty crime. That sounds like a cruel and unusual punishment to me.

 

No, I am a resident here on Earth.

 

No, but I would quite like to paint my boat camo, I think it looks quite nice.

[Wanted]

http://www.shouldireadthedailymail.com/

[Delta9]

 

Revoke a licence --> boat has no licence.

 

so that means that he did have a license before they revoked it, meaning that a lack of license was not the reason for the boats removal, just a consequence of it.

[Grace and Favour]

Well until I see a valid reason for why his boat was removed I would consider all boat owners to be next on the list. If he didn't have a license then I understand, but the OP makes no reference to the boat being unlicensed.

Maybe the persons aren't guilty until you have seen the evidence? - Should we advise the legal system that you have a role to play in their processes - - or have you already informed them?

[Guest]

so that means that he did have a license before they revoked it, meaning that a lack of license was not the reason for the boats removal, just a consequence of it.

Correct.

 

It was the alleged lack of boat movement plus CRT threw in the alleged anti social behaviour.

 

At least that is how I read it.

[Paul C]

so that means that he did have a license before they revoked it

 

Its not complicated!

 

 

meaning that a lack of license was not the reason for the boats removal, just a consequence of it.

 

The lack of licence is an intermediate state of affairs.

 

Break the law (on CCing guidelines) ---> licence is revoked ---> boat is removed from CRT waters

[junior]

"all occupants were arrested enabling us to continue with the removal."

 

Anybody know what the occupants were charged with?

It doesn't say or suggest they were charged with anything.

 

It is quite possible to be arrested and de-arrested without even going near a police cell.

[blackrose]

Surely the "antisocial behaviour" adds a good deal of weight to this?

 

 

 

My thoughts too - personally I couldn't really care less how far or how little a boat moves as it doesn't really affect me but 'anti-social behaviour' would and whilst I could move why should I if I have found a nice spot to moor.

 

I agree. If it's true that the occupants engaged in anti-social behaviour (assuming it really was anti-social) then I have little sympathy. If people have no consideration for others and are even actively anti-social then I don't really care what happens to them. If you're living on your boat and CCing around a small cruising range you're in a grey area. You can get away with it but you have to be NICE to people and don't become a pain for others! What's so difficult about that?

 

When I was living in Brentford several years ago, a drug dealer moved onto a boat on one of the residential moorings. He was renting it. It was apparent straight away that he was a neighbour from hell and within a few months he'd threatened a couple of other boaters. Eventually he tried to intimidate the rest of us by leaving a loaded crossbow chained to the bow deck of the boat. Then one morning the Firearms Squad turned up - now they really were scary! They dragged him, his mates and his weapons off the boat, turned the boat over and we never saw him again. I'm not normally the vindictive type, but it did feel good to see the bully getting intimidated himself. Not that this has anything to do with the camouflage boat of course, just a little anecdote.

[Delta9]

Maybe the persons aren't guilty until you have seen the evidence? - Should we advise the legal system that you have a role to play in their processes - - or have you already informed them?

You have taken my comment out of context. It was a response to someone claiming that those defending camo boat man are "scrotes" that must think they are next on the list.. Of course they can be guilty without me seeing the evidence, but I refuse to jump on the band wagon, tastelessly celebrating the fact that this man has been made homeless, without personally seeing this evidence.

[alan_fincher]

The defensive attitude of some forum members makes me think they are expecting to be next on the list of scrotes for removal. Having read the previous topics I would have expected strong support for enforcement.

 

I'm certainly not defending what it is claimed these people did, (if they did).

 

However CRT should always seen to be acting within the law and their powers, and I think quite a few people might feel uncomfortable if they selectively used one reason to actually deal with a quite different problem.

 

As they have taken this to court, I assume they have convinced at least one judge they are acting within their powers, but the explanation given seems decidedly odd in the circumstances.

 

Surely if someone is theiving, and you can produce evidence they are theiving, it is a police matter, and they should be pursued for that, and taken to court for thieving, if a case exists? If these people are theives, taking their boat away is hardly going to stop that behaviour when they have to find somewhere else to live is it?

 

This certainly isn't me condoning what they are claimed to have done - how could you? - but whilst the action taken may have solved a problem for CRT, and boaters in that vicinity, it is hard to see how it has solved a problem for society generally.

[Delta9]

Correct.

 

It was the alleged lack of boat movement plus CRT threw in the alleged anti social behaviour.

 

At least that is how I read it.

Does anyone have any examples of this anti social behavior? I still can't figure out what he did, other than shocking some of Naughty Cal's friends.

It doesn't say or suggest they were charged with anything.

 

It is quite possible to be arrested and de-arrested without even going near a police cell.

Any idea what he was arrested for then?

[mark99]

Why don't you go on a mission and find out a bit more in the way of the facts you want and report back to the forum?

 

Perhaps you may discover that CART and other authorities have gone to all this trouble to pick upon a completely innocent person who was going about his business in a normal and lawfull manner.

 

 

What behavior of his have you had to put up with? I've seen a few allegations of theft in the previous threads, but no actual evidence, and confiscating someones home is not usually the punishment for theft. He even seemed to be moving about a lot, so not a continuous moorer, and there is no mention of the boat being unlicensed. I would like to know what offense he committed that has led to his home being taken from him and his arrest.

[Delta9]

Why don't you go on a mission and find out a bit more in the way of the facts you want and report back to the forum?

 

Perhaps you may discover that CART and other authorities have gone to all this trouble to pick upon a completely innocent person who was going about his business in a normal and lawfull manner.

 

 

But everyone seemed so sure of the facts that they were happy to celebrate his homelessness, I thought it would be a simple case of asking these people for the facts.

[mark99]

 

 

His theft is a police matter and wouldn't lead to the confiscation of his home

 

I see plenty of things wrong with this. Apparently this mans home was taken away from him for committing petty crime. That sounds like a cruel and unusual punishment to me.

 

 

Ok I'll extend your argument into a theoretical analogy.

 

I am homeless, and live in an untaxed, and uninsured car, but I supplement my income by being a ram raider and part time getaway driver using my car/home.

 

I get arrested, car impounded yet "you cant' take my home from me" argument is used by my lawyers. Who you you think will win?

They make the rules, interpret the rules and enforce the rules, I feel uncomfortable with that. However, it seems a nuisance has been removed so that is a `good thing` albeit ultimately a subjective view, why then am I worried about `mission creep` ?

I don't know, but when you discover there is something real, based upon some evidence be sure to advise us.

[Delta9]

Ok I'll extend your argument into a theoretical analogy.

 

I am homeless, and live in an untaxed, and uninsured car, but I supplement my income by being a ram raider and part time getaway driver using my car/home.

 

I get arrested, car impounded yet "you cant' take my home from me" argument is used by my lawyers. Who you you think will win?

That is a terrible analogy and not comparable to this situation at all.

[nicknorman]

... it is hard to see how it has solved a problem for society generally.

Of course it hasn't, and if it were feasible to do so, we would all be living in utopia. However the fact that a perfect solution can't be found is no reason to do nothing. Just like you grind the rust off your boat and repaint it, in the full knowledge that it will go rusty again!

 

Anyway, I've been chatting to those nice folk at CRT and apparently this is phase 1. Phase 2 makes any boat not adorned with rivetting decorations game for removal, and phase 3 makes any boat not built by SMH fair game. So his open day is next weekend, you'd better get your order in!

Edited July 19, 2013 by nicknorman

[mark99]

Is that how Hudson does it?

 

He just reprints another one?

[nicknorman]

Is that how Hudson does it?

 

He just reprints another one?

Damn, too slow with the edit, but anyway these new 3d printers are pretty good!

[mark99]

That is a terrible analogy and not comparable to this situation at all.

 

Perhaps, but in the unlikely event this is just a terrible mistake by CART, I'd say it's up to you to find out more and put your counter argument forward.

Edited July 19, 2013 by mark99