Please don't tell my Mum how much time I waste..I'll be sent to
bed on dry bread and water.
On Mar 23, 6:03 pm, Trevor Hughes wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 6:33 PM, David Raphael wrote:
> > This my first comment on this time wasting issue.
>
> I am sorry David, then perhaps you should
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 6:33 PM, David Raphael wrote:
> This my first comment on this time wasting issue.
>
I am sorry David, then perhaps you should not have bothered wasting
your time with your post as you added nothing to the conversation.;)
(Smiley does this no justice - think of me saying th
Neighbourhood watch
Cc: Brian Amery; Knarf Boatmaker; Insp H Piedt; Woodstock SAPS
Subject: [obsnw] Re: Police harassment
I have been following this discussion with a great deal of interest.
My opinion for what it is worth (and it may be worth very little), is
that there is a lot of energy
elated a personal experience he had and objected to,
> > >>> which is his democratic right. He did not make any attempt to
> > >>> indicate that the views he expressed were representative of any
> > >>> organisation or community.
> >
> > >&
e gratuitous insult to the Observatory
> >>> community that you decided to throw into your last paragraph is
> >>> offensive and untrue, and I think deserves an apology from you.
>
> >>> Regards
>
> >>> Justin
>
> >>> *From:* obsnw@g
2010 08:55 AM
*To:* Trevor Hughes
*Cc:* obsnw@googlegroups.com; Brian & Sue Amery; Woodstock SAPS; David
Raphael; Cedric Thomas
*Subject:* [obsnw] Re: Police harassment
As I said: I'm not an expert. Let's wait for the police reply.
Still does not take away the fact that appare
t; Thank you Teun.
>
>
> - Original Message - From: "teun"
> To: "The Observatory Neighbourhood watch"
> Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 1:34 PM
> Subject: [obsnw] Re: Police harassment
>
>
> Open letter to Mr Marais (and other Observatory res
the best info I have so far found is here
http://www.legalcity.net - just use the search function to search for
police. They claim the info is from 1997 so some changes may have been
made to the laws and the article may not be up to date.
trev
--
You received this message because you are subscr
watch
Subject: [obsnw] Re: Police harassment
Open letter to Mr Marais (and other Observatory residents)
Dear Mr Marais
I have noted your e-mail and those of the other people in Observatory.
You accuse me of being disingenuous, so let's be candid.
I originally reacted rather angrily to an e
Thank you Teun.
- Original Message -
From: "teun"
To: "The Observatory Neighbourhood watch"
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 1:34 PM
Subject: [obsnw] Re: Police harassment
Open letter to Mr Marais (and other Observatory residents)
Dear Mr Marais
I have noted your
That was big of you Teun.
Bev
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Observatory Neighbourhood watch" group.
To post to this group, send email to obsnw@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to obsnw-unsubscr...@googlegroups.co
gt; > Behalf Of *Teun Baartman
> > *Sent:* 19 March 2010 08:55 AM
> > *To:* Trevor Hughes
> > *Cc:* obsnw@googlegroups.com; Brian & Sue Amery; Woodstock SAPS; David
> > Raphael; Cedric Thomas
> > *Subject:* [obsnw] Re: Police harassment
>
> > As I said:
APS; David
Raphael; Cedric Thomas
*Subject:* [obsnw] Re: Police harassment
As I said: I'm not an expert. Let's wait for the police reply.
Still does not take away the fact that apparently the Obs community is
in two minds about what it wants.
Regards
Teun
On
ite manner. Julia.
- Original Message -
From: Bev P
To: obsnw@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 5:22 PM
Subject: Re: [obsnw] Re: Police harassment
I understand Trevor(‘s democratic right to speak his mind).
I understand where Teun comes from.
What bothers
I understand Trevor(‘s democratic right to speak his mind).
I understand where Teun comes from.
What bothers me is this…..
As an ONW patroller I have seen many potentially suspicious folk around in
Observatory.
Some with very long poles.
Some with trollies (….which, potentially, contain st
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Rob Gaylard wrote:
> I am open to correction but as far as I know the police are allowed to
> stop and search someone if there are reasonable grounds for suspicion.
Walking along a Lower Main Road at 3am is not reasoanble grounds for
anything but a "Good evening S
I am open to correction but as far as I know the police are allowed to
stop and search someone if there are reasonable grounds for suspicion.
i.e. They can't stop and search you for no reason.
I suspect that Trevor, Teun and others are in fact all on the same
side. Did you see Teun's excellent let
Hi Trevor,
In Observatory, as you may have noticed we have a serious problems
that need to be solved:
- relating to Drug dealing
- public disorder
- a few murders
We most certainly do not live in an impending or de facto police
state. if we did , the problems in Observatory could be solved
overn
ael' ; 'Cedric
Thomas'
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 9:25 AM
Subject: RE: [obsnw] Re: Police harassment
Teun, Trevor related a personal experience he had and objected to, which is
his democratic right. He did not make any attempt to indicate that the views
he expresse
Sent: 19 March 2010 08:55 AM
To: Trevor Hughes
Cc: obsnw@googlegroups.com; Brian & Sue Amery; Woodstock SAPS; David
Raphael; Cedric Thomas
Subject: [obsnw] Re: Police harassment
As I said: I'm not an expert. Let's wait for the police reply.
Still does not take away the fact that
its job
CORRECTLY, ETHICALLY, AND IN LINE WITH THE LAW.
- Original Message -
From: Teun Baartman
To: Trevor Hughes
Cc: obsnw@googlegroups.com ; Brian & Sue Amery ; Woodstock SAPS ; David
Raphael ; Cedric Thomas
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 8:54 AM
Subject: [obsnw
Hi
On 19 March 2010 07:46, Teun Baartman wrote:
> I am sure the police will come with an explanation. As far as I know (but I
> am not an expert) the police is entitled to do random searches. If you had
> nothing to hide, it would have been over in two seconds and everybody would
> have been able
Police act. See chapter Five. No mention of random searches!
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:p9BDN_QWRngJ:www.info.gov.za/view/DownloadFileAction%3Fid%3D70987+police+act+south+africa&hl=en&gl=za&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShZF1CgLAH1JSvOCjtIVp7pkobueV6c4F3Mi2FLybN_PVUvp-_3GWwVQr2_oh9osIeRTKajZ8wW
As I said: I'm not an expert. Let's wait for the police reply.
Still does not take away the fact that apparently the Obs community is in
two minds about what it wants.
Regards
Teun
On 19 March 2010 08:42, Trevor Hughes wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Trevor Hughes
> wrote:
>
> > Quo
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Trevor Hughes wrote:
> Quoted from the constitution:-
>
> 14. Privacy
>
> Everyone has the right to privacy, which includes the right not to have
>
> 1. their person or home searched;
> 2. their property searched;
> 3. their possessions seized; or
> 4. t
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Teun Baartman wrote:
> Dear Trevor
> I am sure the police will come with an explanation. As far as I know (but I
> am not an expert) the police is entitled to do random searches. If you had
> nothing to hide, it would have been over in two seconds and everybody wou
Dear Trevor
I am sure the police will come with an explanation. As far as I know (but I
am not an expert) the police is entitled to do random searches. If you had
nothing to hide, it would have been over in two seconds and everybody would
have been able to be on their way. You have now turned the
27 matches
Mail list logo
