Common law v Statute Law

Any other 'PCSO issues' that do not fit in to the other forums. Recruitment of PCSOs, day to day PCSO duties, questions about law, joining the regular police, becoming a special, anything else remotely PCSO orientated!!

Moderator: national-PCSOs

User avatar
powdermonkey
Committee Member
Committee Member
Posts: 462
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 9:07 pm
Location: West Yorkshire

Common law v Statute Law

Post by powdermonkey » Mon May 26, 2014 5:25 pm

This cropped up in an office conversation after a fellow PCSO said she had been asked by a member of the public if she knew the difference between the two. Her response was that the two are the same. It prompted me to do a bit of internet reading & it appears to me that they are, in effect, treated equally in court. Common law being based on previous judgements and statute being set by an Act of Parliament.

I've come up with a couple of questions and I'd be very interested in other people's comments.

Firstly, what would your response be to the question the member of the public asked?

Secondly, during my reading I came across a number of articles & videos from or about people who call themselves "Freeman on the land" who seem to be saying that as statute law is a contract & they never consented to that contract (plus something I can't get to grips with about its origins in Naval Law) then they are bound only by common law and not statutes. So, the second question is has anyone come across this and how would you deal with a person making such a claim?
I have seen the truth and it makes no sense.

User avatar
falkor
Navigator
Navigator
Posts: 5061
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 11:39 am
Alignment: 'Xevious'
Location: Surrey
Contact:

Re: Common law v Statute Law

Post by falkor » Tue May 27, 2014 9:23 pm

PCSOs started out in 2002 and at that time David Blunkett was pleased to report that PCSOs only got 3 weeks training

and that was a plus, because 3 weeks training is cheap

Blunkett launched PCSOs as they were in his eyes "a cheap" way of getting "Police out onto the streets and into neighbourhoods"

3 weeks training didn't last long though, in the following 10 years it was increased again and again across England - "Diversity" being one of the biggest drivers there

Anyway - my answer to the above - is that PCSOs were never intended to be solicitors or lawyers

The public cannot expect PCSOs to know every foundation that Police Officers carrying out their lawful duties are based on, even with 8 weeks training that I believe PCSOs now get
This cropped up in an office conversation after a fellow PCSO said she had been asked by a member of the public if she knew the difference between the two
I would be highly tempted as a PCSO to say 'No' but I understand why that is not a desirable outcome, PCSOs don't wish to be seen in a light that suggests they have a "lack of knowledge" when in fact they never had the training to give them that knowledge and it is quite unfair to expect this of PCSOs generally

what do other members think?

JimmyRiddle
Elite Member
Elite Member
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 6:59 pm

Re: Common law v Statute Law

Post by JimmyRiddle » Fri Jul 25, 2014 3:25 am

An act is a statutory instrument making something law when passed by parliament/HRH.

Common law are judicial decisions dating back to around 1,100 AD (Alfred the Great) which were set out to make the law of the land all the same. Decisions from same level courts for similar cases (e.g. two magistrates courts) are persuasive, a decision from a higher court (e.g. civil court of appeal to a standard civil court) is binding.

The people who claim to be "Martin of the family Smith" are idiots. Tell me one occasion when they've got off their charges? I saw a doc on BBC3 ages ago where the judge sentenced a conman to 5 years for ID fraud and said as part of the sentencing "We still don't know exactly who you are, but you're still getting sentenced" or words to that effect. Where does it say you have to give them your legal name to get sent down?

They have taken the consent part of the law to being "I don't consent to being arrested". It actually means you have control i.e. give consent by taking an active part in politics.
Power of arrest for PCSOs for 'as and when' - s24a PACE & common law (i.e. BoP) using s3 CLA 1967

I'm a PCSO, I will WATCH you get your head kicked in (as per force policy)

User avatar
Big Brother
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 2:36 pm
Examiner: XIII
Location: Somewhere

Re: Common law v Statute Law

Post by Big Brother » Sun Aug 17, 2014 5:48 am

I was asked once.

My response,

"common law is the basis for almost all of our modern law and has been formed over the centuries by decisions made by the judiciary. Statute laws are laws enacted by parliament that are given power because the majority of the population have consented to be governed, and those laws have been further cemented by being tested at court. Laws that aren't, are removed from the statute books or the police are told not to enforce them.
There is no provision to pick and choose which laws you follow, and which you don't. Just because you don't personally agree to abide by statute law, does not mean it cannot be enforced against you, simply because of the will of the masses. You might like to know that even offences like murder and theft are no longer common law offences, but have been codified in the statutes and have been shaped into what they are today by parliament and the judiciary."

It shut the guy up.
Big brother is watching you.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic