Thames Valley Police is appealing for witnesses after a man was seriously assaulted in Newbury Market Place.

The incident happened on Wednesday evening (15th November), at around 10.25pm, a 27-year-old man and two of his friends were outside Strada, Market Place, when they were approached by three men, one of whom knocked the man to the ground, causing facial injuries which required hospital treatment.

Detectives believe the incident was unprovoked and are looking for a white man, in his late twenties, tall, with short blonde hair. He was wearing a white top and spoke with a local accent. He was accompanied by another white man, in his late twenties or early thirties, who was wearing a dark coat and blue jeans, and carrying a bottle of wine.

Anyone who witnessed the incident or has any other information which may assist police with their investigation is asked to contact PC Elizabeth Saunders via the 24-hour Police Enquiry Centre on 101. If you don’t want to speak to police or give your name, please call the Crimestoppers charity on 0800 555 111.

I wonder if this would have happened had the taxis been there!



*Joke* Sorry, I couldn't resist!  

When B***y M****e was beaten up in the Market Place the cameras tracked his assailant all the way down to the Broadway where he was arrested.

Let's hope that's what's happened here. Oh no, Windsor wasn't monitoring at that time. Blast.

Still, not to worry, it'll all be on camera. Ah, not all the cameras are working. Damn.

Nevermind, they'll have it on disc and using the zoom function they'll see who the assailant was. Oh no,  the zoom gives rotten quality pictures compared to the old analogue cameras. Rats.

Still, I expect there was a group of cabbies standing around who might act as witnesses, or maybe one of them actually took the assailants to their home and can give the address.. Job done. Ah....what's that? no cabs? Knickers. We'll have to ask the public.

How much did the CCTV move cost? and we're still virtually blind.

Quoted from Greenham Common

I wonder if this would have happened had the taxis been there!



*Joke* Sorry, I couldn't resist!  

Might not have stopped it, but would have provided witnesses!!

I thought we've got this high res CCTV network for that, coupled with the Pubwatch thing!

Quoted from Greenham Common

I thought we've got this high res CCTV network for that, coupled with the Pubwatch thing!

So, do we have CCTV in the Market place or not. ?

There are what look like digital cameras in the Market.

However, believe it or not, Windsor have their own screens to monitor at that time of night and not all of ours are actively monitored all the time.

Recordings of incidents are now clearer due to not having to re-record over old tapes. But, as we know, if you try and zoom in on a digital rather than an optical system you lose definition. (it becomes pixelated). Plus, night time images are still a bit manky. (That's if the camera is even pointed the right way).

The WBC party line is "don't tell no-one nuffin' otherwise there may be trouble if the bad guys get to know what's going on".

Ffs,  how much worse could it get? In less than a week we've had three stabbings and a violent assault........so a big thank-you to WBC for doing their bit to make our streets safer.


Threep.

Quoted from Threepwood

There are what look like digital cameras in the Market.

However, believe it or not, Windsor have their own screens to monitor at that time of night and not all of ours are actively monitored all the time.

Recordings of incidents are now clearer due to not having to re-record over old tapes. But, as we know, if you try and zoom in on a digital rather than an optical system you lose definition. (it becomes pixelated). Plus, night time images are still a bit manky. (That's if the camera is even pointed the right way).

The WBC party line is "don't tell no-one nuffin' otherwise there may be trouble if the bad guys get to know what's going on".

Ffs,  how much worse could it get? In less than a week we've had three stabbings and a violent assault........so a big thank-you to WBC for doing their bit to make our streets safer.


Threep.

Cue idiot23 and a defense of WBC

Quoted from Threepwood

But, as we know, if you try and zoom in on a digital rather than an optical system you lose definition. (it becomes pixelated). Plus, night time images are still a bit manky. (That's if the camera is even pointed the right way).

Pixelation only happens with digital zooming - which isn't really zooming at all, its just looking at a small portion of the same picture.  However, any decent camera system would have a zoom lens for the operator to use to zoom in to an incident (admittedly not much use for evidential purposes after the event).  Presumably the cameras are pretty low res (ie not as good as a modern mobile phone) in the first place, making digital 'zooming' a pretty pointless exercise.

The whole move to Windsor wasn't really to do with quality of service at all, it was about the cost of the service.  The Newbury control centre may have needed a bit of updating (some new tapes might have been an idea) but its real problem was running costs. It is no surprise to me to learn that the level of service we are getting is considerably lower than that supplied from the Nebwury centre - after all we are paying a lot less for it.

I suppose we could just be reassured that big brother is actually watching us less ...

Pretty much swings and roundabouts.

Less of the Big Brother stuff is probably a good thing. Unless of course, it's you getting stabbed.


Threep.

It was claimed, which I have little doubt is true, that the service could be migrated with out a drop in service level.  Initial suggestions are, that they have actually wasted more money moving, when they could have saved money by switching it off.  We seem to be getting the same results regardless.

Meanwhile, the same old people, mates, etc, will keep voting in these Tories and Lib Dems every few years.

Quoted from Threepwood

Pretty much swings and roundabouts.

Less of the Big Brother stuff is probably a good thing. Unless of course, it's you getting stabbed.


Threep.

It beggars belief that WBC are paying for a system that would appear to be about as much use as a chocolate fire guard?
That is not saving money, if true, it is actually paying for something for nothing.
Why not be honest and say they were scrapping the sytem alltogether.

Still; just about what we have come to expect in Newbury.  

Regardless of quality considerations, if you go from a system using 120 cameras to one only using 40 there just has to be a diminution in service. Only WBC would try and convince us otherwise.

Where it becomes dangerous is when WBC start to believe their own propaganda.


Threep.

Worse when they lie to the constituents, or are incompetent to understand the issues.

Quoted from Threepwood

Regardless of quality considerations, if you go from a system using 120 cameras to one only using 40 there just has to be a diminution in service. Only WBC would try and convince us otherwise.

Where it becomes dangerous is when WBC start to believe their own propaganda.


Threep.

Let's keep it in perspective. It's a triumph of spin over substance.

There are 14 violent crimes every week in West Berkshire.
http://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/performance-pdfs-west-berkshire.pdf

Reported crime is down 13% in our area (-17% for violent crime).

The police have only issued 3 violence related witness appeals during the same period - so there's a 99% chance that these crimes do not get reported in the media.

I don't understand the love affair with surveillance cameras. Time and again they're shown to be useless, but people still swallow the propaganda. They've done a bit of work on this in London, but TVP don't hold stats for how CCTV is used to solve crime (FOI request denied anyway).

Maybe this helps.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new.....t-Police-admits.html

I think CCTV is a valuable tool, but certainly does not do the Police's job for them.

It's not just having the system it's being able to use it properly. Like, for instance, having it manned by people who know the areas covered and how to use it. As to whether the idea is a good one or not, let's ask the majority or of those arrested during the summer riots, shall we? Just over 70% of those brought before the courts were picked up because of CCTV images.

Here's a chap who knows what he's doing..

http://www.sussexpa.gov.uk/latest/news.aspx?articleid=177


Threep.

A valued aspect of the old system was its ability to monitor trends and advise authorities of the movements of people (Pubwatch and the like).  This aspect seems to have been destroyed by the council's move to the new nice but apparently useless system.

I'm always amazed by those who complain they're not monitored enough by the authorities.

Quoted from user23.3

I'm always amazed by those who complain they're not monitored enough by the authorities.

You are obviously not at all surprised by the lies that come out of Market Street!

Quoted from user23.3

I'm always amazed by those who complain they're not monitored enough by the authorities.

And yet WBC charged the Parkway developers Section 106 money to help pay for a CCTV system. Wonder if they told them it would be inadequate?


Threep.

Quoted from MontyP

You are obviously not at all surprised by the lies that come out of Market Street!

Are any of us?

Quoted from Threepwood

And yet WBC charged the Parkway developers Section 106 money to help pay for a CCTV system. Wonder if they told them it would be inadequate?


Threep.

This is a great example of what I was referring to.

Quoted from user23.3

I'm always amazed by those who complain they're not monitored enough by the authorities.

I'm always amazed by those who don't complain enough and monitor the authorities.  

Quoted from user23.3

I'm always amazed by those who complain they're not monitored enough by the authorities.

As I have nothing to hide, I am more than happy for my own security, to be monitored whenever I move about in the town.

Quoted from user23.3

I'm always amazed by those who complain they're not monitored enough by the authorities.

Like on this forum?

Quoted from user23.3

I'm always amazed by those who complain they're not monitored enough by the authorities.

Quite. I particularly despise the "I've got nothing to hide" defence that authoritarians put out.

We have 1% of the world population, but 20% of the world's surveillance equipment. This is a very expensive placebo....useless at fighting crime but makes people feel better...that someone's looking out for them. When some people find out they're not being watched, they get upset. Perhaps a real example would help.

A few weeks ago, a pensioner I know in Greenham took her dog to the shop in Nightingales to get some cigs for her husband. She tied her dog up and walked past the hoodies to get in to the shop. Upon returning, the dog had gone. One of these nice young men explained that she could have her dog back if she gave them the cigarettes she'd just bought. She duly obliged, got her dog back, and made her way home where she called the police.

It turns out both the cameras are out of action. She's not political or anti-WBC,but as a 77 year old, she can't understand why her council switches off CCTV cameras to make her less safe, while spending £2m cobbling the town centre.

She hasn't been out of the house since....I think that's why people feel we all need more monitoring.

Quoted from brian

As I have nothing to hide..

Of course you have, everyone's got something to hide.

For example, the PINs of your bank cards.

Quoted from user23.3

Of course you have, everyone's got something to hide.

For example, would you like to post the PIN to the bank card you most use on here?

We don't need CCTV to see you are trying to deflect the debate on here! Again.  

So taxpayers are paying good money for CCTV that has either not been switched on or is about as useless as a a camera with no power cable installed?

When asked if the new CCTV is up to the standards of the old system. The council spokesperson gave the, now, standard reply No No No Yes!  

Quoted from user23.3

Of course you have, everyone's got something to hide.

For example, would you like to post the PIN to the bank card you most use on here?

I think he means from the state. But in a country where ANPR cameras monitor where you go in your car, supermarkets using RFID tags to track where else you go shopping, compulsory taping of your conversations in taxis, eavesdropping on your phone calls,  rummaging through your bin to see what you throw away, etc etc, I am still surprised how many people are so willing to give up being free so...er...freely.

Quoted from Muddler

rummaging through your bin to see what you throw away,

Apparently, WBC will soon be employing a team of inspectors to ensure that we are all using our food caddies properly. Anyone failing to use them correctly will be financially penalised.

What seems to be concerning most of us, is an apparent conspiracy of the authorities that the CCTV operation we pay for is working and was sold as an up-grade.  People raised concerns about its efficacy and the wisdom of moving the operation out of town.  It seems the council have deceived the tax payer and the system is not doing its job, despite reassurances.  It also seems the political opposition have nothing to say either.  Stale governance

Quoted from BrianB

Apparently, WBC will soon be employing a team of inspectors to ensure that we are all using our food caddies properly. Anyone failing to use them correctly will be financially penalised.

Sounds about right from our crap council.  Austerity, what austerity?

Quoted from Cognosco

We don't need CCTV to see you are trying to deflect the debate on here! Again.  

So taxpayers are paying good money for CCTV that has either not been switched on or is about as useless as a a camera with no power cable installed?

When asked if the new CCTV is up to the standards of the old system. The council spokesperson gave the, now, standard reply No No No Yes!  

Trailing everything back to WBC's door is perhaps more a diversion here (but at least you've moved on from SLI!)

Quoted from Greenham Common

What seems to be concerning most of us, is an apparent conspiracy of the authorities that the CCTV operation we pay for is working and was sold as an up-grade.  People raised concerns about its efficacy and the wisdom of moving the operation out of town.  It seems the council have deceived the tax payer and the system is not doing its job, despite reassurances.  It also seems the political opposition have nothing to say either.  Stale governance

But you didn't pay for it did you?

Newbury retailers paid for most of it, with the rest coming from private developers (s106 money).

To upgrade the town hall control room was around £240k. To outsource cuts spending by £250k EVERY YEAR. That's £4 off my tax bill every year from now on! And for all of us.

I don't care if it's worse/fewer/slower/non-local/an abuse of power. CCTV doesn't work anywhere near as well as it should even when it's on.

Take the bouncer of a Hungerford pub. Drunk lad tries to get in late one night. Bouncer refuses, lad wanders off giving some verbal. Bouncer then follows him and kicks the sh#t out of him. All captured on CCTV at Newbury town hall. Never made it to court.

Or the two bouncers outside a Market Place nightclub a few years ago. Someone gets kicked out, put in a headlock while the other bouncer kicks customer in the head. Customer reports it to police, who go to CCTV to get the footage. But the next day it had...er...vanished.


The old system was just as crap as the new one.

Quoted from Muddler

But you didn't pay for it did you?

Newbury retailers paid for most of it, with the rest coming from private developers (s106 money).

To upgrade the town hall control room was around £240k. To outsource cuts spending by £250k EVERY YEAR. That's £4 off my tax bill every year from now on! And for all of us.

I don't care if it's worse/fewer/slower/non-local/an abuse of power. CCTV doesn't work anywhere near as well as it should even when it's on.

Take the bouncer of a Hungerford pub. Drunk lad tries to get in late one night. Bouncer refuses, lad wanders off giving some verbal. Bouncer then follows him and kicks the sh#t out of him. All captured on CCTV at Newbury town hall. Never made it to court.

Or the two bouncers outside a Market Place nightclub a few years ago. Someone gets kicked out, put in a headlock while the other bouncer kicks customer in the head. Customer reports it to police, who go to CCTV to get the footage. But the next day it had...er...vanished.


The old system was just as crap as the new one.

So begs the question why are we paying for the running costs of something that according to you is useless?

Why did the council pay for the so called upgrade why not just scrap CCTV all together?  

Quoted from Muddler

But you didn't pay for it did you?

Newbury retailers paid for most of it, with the rest coming from private developers (s106 money).

To upgrade the town hall control room was around £240k. To outsource cuts spending by £250k EVERY YEAR. That's £4 off my tax bill every year from now on! And for all of us.

I don't care if it's worse/fewer/slower/non-local/an abuse of power. CCTV doesn't work anywhere near as well as it should even when it's on.

Take the bouncer of a Hungerford pub. Drunk lad tries to get in late one night. Bouncer refuses, lad wanders off giving some verbal. Bouncer then follows him and kicks the sh#t out of him. All captured on CCTV at Newbury town hall. Never made it to court.

Or the two bouncers outside a Market Place nightclub a few years ago. Someone gets kicked out, put in a headlock while the other bouncer kicks customer in the head. Customer reports it to police, who go to CCTV to get the footage. But the next day it had...er...vanished.  The old system was just as crap as the new one.  

How many times will I need to post this until someone reads it?  The CCTV's use was in coordinating events, not just IDing people.  It was used to alert security of people who looked up to mischief.  But at the end of the day, I don't like being lied to by the authorities and 106 is effectively 'our' money.

The bottom line is, did we get any money from SLI??? (s106)

Quoted from Muddler

Trailing everything back to WBC's door is perhaps more a diversion here (but at least you've moved on from SLI!)

But only temporarily!  

Ha.

OK. Looks like those left in this thread all have fixed positions, so going to move on until any new info comes to light.