# police and evening standard outside the albert/house of bottles in huge police raid



## tufty79 (Apr 7, 2009)

just to let y'all know there's apparently a "drugs raid" going on outside the house of bottles and the albert, on coldharbour lane ....

there are evening standard photographers there an' all.
and polis photographers.....
be careful if you're out that way tonight, folks .

xxx


----------



## Melinda (Apr 7, 2009)

I love these 'Five -O' threads!


----------



## editor (Apr 8, 2009)

Apparently it was something that was planned by the Plod for some time with several faces getting their collars felt.


----------



## RaverDrew2 (Apr 8, 2009)

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2367052.ece


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 8, 2009)

that's good money they're on.  do you think i could get a job with them?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 8, 2009)

There'll be a few vacancies now.


----------



## maomao (Apr 8, 2009)

bluestreak said:


> that's good money they're on.  do you think i could get a job with them?



It says they work 24 hour shifts though.


----------



## porno thieving gypsy (Apr 8, 2009)

"CI Sedgemore said that it is common practice for veteran dealers to hide the majority of their stash in their anus."

Eww!


----------



## editor (Apr 8, 2009)

I'm loving The Sun's hyperbole:





> *THIS is the dramatic moment 220 cops staged a complete "lockdown" of  Britain's most notorious drug-dealing street.  *
> 
> Hundreds of people were were stopped and searched in Coldharbour Lane,  Brixton, South London — an area notorious with the illegal trade  for 30 years.
> 
> ...


And here's another reason to never do crack. Or kiss a dealer.





> DCI Sedgemore said that it is common practice for veteran dealers to hide the  majority of their stash in their anus.
> He said when a sale is near they then remove some and put it in their mouth.  This can make it difficult for officers to find stashes as "intimate  searches" cannot be generally carried out on the street.


----------



## gabi (Apr 8, 2009)

Was this the new Commissioner who fucked up the raid in east london a coupla weeks ago (the target had already been arrested by another force in London in that case). He seems to like to travel with photographers in tow, a la Gotham City.


----------



## Melinda (Apr 8, 2009)

Whoa! The Sun article says 220 police?!

Them Poots and Bodies wont be taking humbles today


----------



## zenie (Apr 8, 2009)

> Undercover detectives have been secretly filming the multi-million pound operation outside a KFC restaurant since January.


 
A whole 3 months, how long's it been going on? 

Well at least they caught some of them, how long before a new group do exactly the same? 

Just leagalise it all FFS


----------



## ajdown (Apr 8, 2009)

... or repeat it until the area is cleaned up, for the benefit of the rest of us?


----------



## boohoo (Apr 8, 2009)

I could see something going on last night on the way home but didn't seem that many police.


----------



## zenie (Apr 8, 2009)

ajdown said:


> ... or repeat it until the area is cleaned up, for the benefit of the rest of us?


 
Don't you think you're being a bit naiive?


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 8, 2009)

ajdown said:


> ... or repeat it until the area is cleaned up, for the benefit of the rest of us?


 

Hey, you moved _here_.  If you don't like it, stroll on


----------



## Melinda (Apr 8, 2009)

Ive no time for ajdown, but are you two actually down on him for objecting to blatant dealing?

Residents should put up with it or move?


----------



## zenie (Apr 8, 2009)

Melinda said:


> Ive no time for ajdown, but are you two actually down on him for objecting to blatant dealing?
> 
> Residents should put up with it or move?


 
where did I say anything like that? 

I just think it's naive to think the probkem will go away by a couple of police raids, all it will do is move the problem.


----------



## Melinda (Apr 8, 2009)

Fair enough mate, I conflated your comment with Bluestreak's. 

However, while police action isnt going to solve anything on its own, for the people who actually live there and have to experience the trade every day around their homes and their families- it must be a damned relief to have those people gone, well until the next crew move in. 

The life sapping baggage the trade brings with it, cant be good to grow up around, even if its a small part of an area's culture.


----------



## Pie 1 (Apr 8, 2009)

> cocaine street dealers whose clients include middle-class professionals who come from as far as Bournemouth






Translated as: 
The Sun asks someone who's bought some where they're from & they say, 'Originally Bournmouth, but I've lived in Clapham for 2 years since graduating & getting a job in marketing'


----------



## London_Calling (Apr 8, 2009)

The game got fierce.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 8, 2009)

ajdown said:


> ... or repeat it until the area is cleaned up, for the benefit of the rest of us?



it's been repeated over and over and over for the last 50 years, and nothing's got any cleaner. that approach just doesn't work


----------



## Melinda (Apr 8, 2009)

London_Calling said:


> The game got fierce.




I wanted to call it a jump out!

They grind and the police try and stop them, its the game, yo.


----------



## London_Calling (Apr 8, 2009)

aye, shorty.


It's about the politics init; everyone knows its pointless but the police and Mayor have got to be seen to be doing something on the ground.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 8, 2009)

There's *no way* that street dealers are making £20,000/week.


----------



## editor (Apr 8, 2009)

The House of Bottles is now closed for 28 days.


----------



## Bob (Apr 8, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> There's *no way* that street dealers are making £20,000/week.



That's roughly 125 quid an hour even if you're working 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. That sounds like quite a rate to me - even if the figure refers to turnover rather than profits

From my experience living on Coldharbour Lane not many people at all are around in the early morning (5-7am) - hence me being offered coke when I'm looking for bread for my breakfast.


----------



## Bob (Apr 8, 2009)

editor said:


> The House of Bottles is now closed for 28 days.



What's the story there? I always got the impression that the location made them convenient to hang out outside, rather than them being complicit in anything.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Apr 9, 2009)

Pie 1 said:


> Translated as:
> The Sun asks someone who's bought some where they're from & they say, 'Originally Bournmouth, but I've lived in Clapham for 2 years since graduating & getting a job in marketing'


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 10, 2009)

Bob said:


> What's the story there? I always got the impression that the location made them convenient to hang out outside, rather than them being complicit in anything.



The story there is piss-poor intelligence if you ask me. The owner put up CCTV ages ago because he was so alarmed that the dealers used the fact that the Lambeth CCTV couldn't see his shop frontage. 

He was involved in getting the police and CSOs to help him clear the front of ne'er-do-wells. They did for a bit and then seemed to lose interest and the proprietor, despite instigating dialogue, felt he was getting nowhere in getting consistent support from the police. 

He's been raided (they found nothing because there was never anything there to find, if you ask me) and his livelihood has been removed. I'm appalled by the way he's been treated. No wonder local people are cynical about the police.

There's a meeting on Tuesday 14th at 2pm at the Town Hall. I shall re-arrange my diary to be there because it's important to me to support the proprietor who has been wrongly implicated.


----------



## pboi (Apr 10, 2009)

one dude with 4 people working under him might pull in those figures


----------



## nick h. (Apr 10, 2009)

There's a petition in support of Tony, owner of the House of Bottles. It was being passed around at the Albert last night, don't know if it will be tonight. But you can definitely find it a few doors along at the cab office - speak to whoever's at the front desk, probably Jenny. Please sign - it's a terrible injustice and Tony needs everyone's support to keep his business going.

e2a: Don't miss today's SLP! Their account of the raid has valuable inside info about how the dealers operate. They hide two mobile phones and a charger up their bottoms.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 10, 2009)

nick h. said:


> They hide two mobile phones and a charger up their bottoms.



 Not even sure goatse could manage that to be fair!


----------



## London_Calling (Apr 10, 2009)

Brings a whole new meaning to 'ring tone'.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 10, 2009)

nick h. said:


> There's a petition in support of Tony, owner of the House of Bottles.


When I rang him today he told me he was really moved when he discovered that.


----------



## fleepish (Apr 11, 2009)

My husband and I have been buying cigs, diet coke, etc from the House of Bottles for 5 years. Tony is a brilliant member of the community-always nice with a kind chat about my day or something in the news. I sometimes come back from work quite late (11pm) and he is always actively trying to police the people outside his shop. I’ve also seen him intervene in fights that originated in the Albert or just across the street, having absolutely nothing to do with his own concerns. We’ve both witnessed him trying to throw people-off-their-face or being disruptive out of the shop and the pavement. When the crack-heads or potheads come into the shop he kicks them out and doesn’t take any guff. We’ve both witnessed him refusing to serve drunks or assholes. I can’t imagine how hard it is to run a shop on the feral nights in Brixton!

What I don’t understand is everyone in Brixton knows that in front of KFC and along the high street there are people openly selling drugs –how could you not-on the pavement and these businesses were not closed but the House of Bottles was. We’ve many a time witnessed Tony and the rest of the staff trying their best with the situation at hand to be pleasant but with the “what are you bloody doing, you bastards” tone. Frankly, a police patrol down Coldharbour every hour would sort a lot of the problem.


----------



## i'mnotsofast (Apr 11, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> There's *no way* that street dealers are making £20,000/week.



South London Press says the figure the police gave for the value of the weekly street trade was £20,000, total, split between about 17 dealers.  Half of this would be profit.  So they'd make about £500-£600 a week each.

The Sun just made shit up, as usual.


----------



## editor (Apr 11, 2009)

Have to say, having an an off-licence right next to a pub is not the greatest idea in the world.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 11, 2009)

Doesn't mean he has to lose his licence. He's a good man trying to make a living. His biggest problem is the recess that hides people who are a pain in the arse. To be honest, I use House of Bottles more than I use the Albert. Cigarettes, my favourite juice that he got specially, brands of alcohol not available in supermarkets or pubs (good things, not gut-rot). He even tried really hard to get me a drink only available in France or really posh expensive places in the centre of Town.


----------



## editor (Apr 11, 2009)

Mrs Magpie said:


> To be honest, I use House of Bottles more than I use the Albert.


That's not really the point. I'm just making a general point about the wisdom of having a late night off licence inches away from a pub. It's really not a good idea, IMO. 

I've signed Tony's petition so it's nothing against him.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 11, 2009)

i'mnotsofast said:


> South London Press says the figure the police gave for the value of the weekly street trade was £20,000, total, split between about 17 dealers.  Half of this would be profit.  So they'd make about £500-£600 a week each.
> 
> The Sun just made shit up, as usual.



I don't believe those figures either.  I don't know much about the workings of the drug trade in Brixton, but I do know a little about how it works in Soho.  The guys in the street are usually users themselves, funding a habit, not earning much cash.  The people making the real money don't ply their wares on the street.  You contact them by phone and arrange to meet.  I wouldn't imagine Brixton is much different.


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 11, 2009)

Surely 28 days closure for House of Bottles will do nothing to sort out dealing on CHL - if the shop is closed that recess will be even less supervised.  

The problem is the infamous recess, not the shop.  It has to be possible to vary the planning rules and agree to a shopfront extension for the ground floor of House of Bottles - so that it lines up with the front of Binal's Newsagents next door.   (AFAIK the current building line relates to some abandoned 1920s road widening plan.)    Obviously any extension would need to be carefully designed on the side by the Albert to avoid creating a new recess there.  (possibly a curved frontage?)

The sightlines for CCTV would also be helped if the various boxes and signs  projecting from Binal's shopfront were removed/relocated.  

I can't imagine Gyoza's large projecting sign helps either?


----------



## gabi (Apr 11, 2009)

Fucking ridiculous! I've seen Tony throw people out of his shop for dealing. He's one of the cleanest guys in brix... If the pigs had the balls to actually walk up CHL after sunset they might have noticed this themselves. fucking idiots.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 12, 2009)

I can't help feeling that this is a stitch-up. It isn't actually illegal to sell alcohol. I've seen him refusing to serve people that look a bit young for alcohol & cigarettes. If Lambeth don't want alcohol sold there they should have opposed an alcohol licence in the first place. They are destroying a man's livelihood and I think it stinks.


----------



## tarannau (Apr 12, 2009)

Maybe I'm missing the point, but why is it awful to have an off licence next to a pub? A pub's just a off licence with 'on' sales inside in essence. Given the amount of licensed premises on that stretch the fact it's next door rather than a few short steps away doesn't concern me greatly

I really feel for Tony. He manages to run that shop firmly and in good humour - in that place the fact that it feels welcoming and safe is no mean feat. He deserves so much better.


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 12, 2009)

What fucking cunts.  Another reason to fucking hate the forces of order in this fucking borough.  What is their reasoning?  I'm going to see what I can find out.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 12, 2009)

tarannau said:


> Maybe I'm missing the point, but why is it awful to have an off licence next to a pub? A pub's just a off licence with 'on' sales inside in essence. Given the amount of licensed premises on that stretch the fact it's next door rather than a few short steps away doesn't concern me greatly
> 
> I really feel for Tony. He manages to run that shop firmly and in good humour - in that place the fact that it feels welcoming and safe is no mean feat. He deserves so much better.


Agree with all of this, plus Tony is a one-man-band and the pub is owned by a big powerful chain. I suspect the reason that Tony is being given a hard time is that he hasn't got corporate lawyers behind him. If something similar had happened to the Albert the full force of highly paid lawyers would swing into action. That's why it's important that those who can, attend the meeting at the Town Hall on Tuesday at 2pm.


----------



## getonit (Apr 12, 2009)

what's the deal with the meeting on tuesday? is bottles' licence on the agenda?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 12, 2009)

I'm not a local but I've been into that shop quite a few times when I've been in the area, and always felt that the people there were very good, certainly given the stress of having a whole load of twats hanging around outside at all hours. Agree with tarannau that it felt welcoming and safe - well, you know, as much as a shop where you're just going to buy fags will ever be, but for that minute or two it was noticeable.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 12, 2009)

getonit said:


> what's the deal with the meeting on tuesday? is bottles' licence on the agenda?


 I believe so.


----------



## colacubes (Apr 12, 2009)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Agree with all of this, plus Tony is a one-man-band and the pub is owned by a big powerful chain. I suspect the reason that Tony is being given a hard time is that he hasn't got corporate lawyers behind him. If something similar had happened to the Albert the full force of highly paid lawyers would swing into action. That's why it's important that those who can, attend the meeting at the Town Hall on Tuesday at 2pm.



Can you pm me the details.  I'm away but will try and get back in time for it


----------



## editor (Apr 12, 2009)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Agree with all of this, plus Tony is a one-man-band and the pub is owned by a big powerful chain.


I'm not quite sure why you're bringing the Albert into this. 

Tony enjoys considerable support from its patrons and there's a petition supporting him going around the pub.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 12, 2009)

I was just using the example of how Tony is a small businessman, without the backing of a company, he needs all the support he can get.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 12, 2009)

...and you mentioned the pub first, albeit obliquely, but in a bit of a random way that might be regarded as not particularly supportive, in a way that made me think, what's he saying that for?

I know this wasn't your intention as you've signed the petition.

It just goes to show that without voice tone and body-language, written sentences can be misinterpreted.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 12, 2009)

The Albert's irrelevant really.  Its proximity isn't part of the Police case and Wojtek's not taking their side, even though the dealers and junkies give him problems.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 12, 2009)

Which I think is primarily due to the hidey hole caused by the recessed frontage. The dealers and junkies, I mean.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 12, 2009)

I notice he's tried to block the recess off sometimes, with milk trolleys and 'display' racks. It never lasts.
I'd be there on tuesday if I could


----------



## nick h. (Apr 13, 2009)

.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 13, 2009)

nick h. said:


> *Lambeth Community Police Consultative Group*
> 
> admin@lambethcpcg.org.uk  You could try marking it FAO Roger Toohill - I don't have his personal email



It's JAMES TOOHILL, not Roger.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 13, 2009)

editor said:


> That's not really the point. I'm just making a general point about the wisdom of having a late night off licence inches away from a pub. It's really not a good idea, IMO.



why?


----------



## nick h. (Apr 13, 2009)

Mrs Magpie said:


> It's JAMES TOOHILL, not Roger.



Thanks. Don't know where i got that from.


----------



## netbob (Apr 13, 2009)

nick h. said:


> And of course:
> 
> *MP*
> 
> jowellt@parliament.uk



Kate Hoey is still the MP for this area (the boundry change doesnt come in till the election):

http://www.writetothem.com


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 13, 2009)

what boundary change?


----------



## editor (Apr 13, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> why?


I'm kind of amazed you can't work it out for yourself, but I'll be happy to answer by PM.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 13, 2009)

yes please!


----------



## netbob (Apr 13, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> what boundary change?



Brixton is becoming part of Dulwich (I shit you not) rather than Vauxhall.


----------



## tarannau (Apr 13, 2009)

To be honest I don't know why you're being so covert either, but PM me if you can. Having a pub and off licence next door doesn't seem an issue, unless you're a licensee having to deal with cheaper tinnies being smuggled in.


----------



## netbob (Apr 13, 2009)

From my experience the issue isn't really dealing so much an issue of dealing as of aggressive behavior resulting from people drinking heavily outside late into the night. I've seen 3 or 4 threats of violence, or actual violence outside the House of Bottles / The Albert in the last year or so from people drinking outside. As well as people getting off their faces outside then trying to make trouble inside the pub.

That's mainly a lack of policing issue (both Tony and various landlords from the Albert have been on at the police for decent patrols for ages), but I think there is also a licensing angle too. 

I don't have a problem with having an off license there (I use Tony's loads and he's a top bloke and have signed the petition). But I wonder if curtailing the license hours on certain nights as well as a commitment form the police to beat policing (as opposed to shock and awe operations every few years) is the way forward of reducing trouble and safeguarding the future of Tony's and the Albert's businesses.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 13, 2009)

memespring said:


> Brixton is becoming part of Dulwich (I shit you not) rather than Vauxhall.



fuck! even SW9? Who's the MP for Dulwich?


----------



## netbob (Apr 13, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> fuck! even SW9? Who's the MP for Dulwich?



Tessa Jowell


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 13, 2009)

oh christ, not another Tory


----------



## Foucault's Wife (Apr 13, 2009)

This situation is really crap - to say the least - I agree with everyone whose been speaking up for Tony.  

When I was in there the other week just before the big 'sting' he was filling in some kind of legal looking forms that looked like he was trying to stop certain people hanging around outside Bottles.  ASBOs? Restraining orders?  Something like that.

If I can swing it I'll work from home tomorrow and attend the meeting at 2pm.


----------



## editor (Apr 13, 2009)

memespring said:


> From my experience the issue isn't really dealing so much an issue of dealing as of aggressive behavior resulting from people drinking heavily outside late into the night. I've seen 3 or 4 threats of violence, or actual violence outside the House of Bottles / The Albert in the last year or so from people drinking outside. As well as people getting off their faces outside then trying to make trouble inside the pub.
> 
> That's mainly a lack of policing issue (both Tony and various landlords from the Albert have been on at the police for decent patrols for ages), but I think there is also a licensing angle too.
> 
> I don't have a problem with having an off license there (I use Tony's loads and he's a top bloke and have signed the petition). But I wonder if curtailing the license hours on certain nights as well as a commitment form the police to beat policing (as opposed to shock and awe operations every few years) is the way forward of reducing trouble and safeguarding the future of Tony's and the Albert's businesses.


Yep. Agree 100%.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 13, 2009)

OK, I've just spoken to Tony and he's not been given details of which room in the Town Hall tomorrow (Tuesday14th April), just to be there at 2pm for a meeting regarding licensing that is open, which means people can turn up and watch. Whether there can be any supporting statements I have no idea. I suggest people get there a little bit earlier.


----------



## jayeola (Apr 13, 2009)

> rx -e   'puts "those chaps are making #{20000 / 10/ 6} pounds a __day__, assuming six ten-hour days"'
> those chaps are making 333 pounds a __day__, assuming six ten-hour days


That's working a ten hour day six days a week. Forgive me for saying so, but I've always thought that drug dealers are __lazy__ that's why they sell drugs. I wouldn't have put them down as having stamina or staying piwer of any kind. The gov't should make that stuff, (what ever they sell), legal so people stop making this kind of money.


*Poll* Would you write code for a drug dealer if he was paying you that kind of money?

and besides, if I wanted drugs the last place that i would look would be the HOB. Any where outside on CHL is fine for that. Why close his shop?


----------



## nick h. (Apr 13, 2009)

memespring said:


> Kate Hoey is still the MP for this area (the boundry change doesnt come in till the election):
> 
> http://www.writetothem.com



Oh, OK. I got the info from a page at Lambeth's site which, now I look at it more closely, lists three MPs for Coldharbour http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/Services/CouncilDemocracy/ElectedRepresentatives/MPs.htm


----------



## nick h. (Apr 13, 2009)

jayeola said:


> Forgive me for saying so, but I've always thought that drug dealers are __lazy__ that's why they sell drugs.



I'm no expert, but doesn't it have something to do with a lot of them being addicts themselves?


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 13, 2009)

jayeola said:


> That's working a ten hour day six days a week. Forgive me for saying so, but I've always thought that drug dealers are __lazy__ that's why they sell drugs.


Hardly - long hours, outside work, huge risks, danger of violence


----------



## netbob (Apr 13, 2009)

The £20,000 thing - that could be some creative reporting by the Sun, and actually refer to the total amount? The statement by the police talks about dealers (plural):

"the dealers were making up to 1,000 sales a week" and "These dealers are making about £20,000 a week from about 1,000 deals".

... but that's not as good a headline (not that I'm saying I have much confidence in the met's maths either, but might explain where it came from).


----------



## London_Calling (Apr 13, 2009)

Of course the police have no idea about earnings. The policy is to get your message out there first regardless of the acuracy - we've seen it enough to know.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 13, 2009)

There's so much fantasy in this whole thing that I would ignore all the 'facts' in it. Except for the bit about how many phones you can fit up your arse. I've just proved that.


----------



## editor (Apr 13, 2009)

nick h. said:


> There's so much fantasy in this whole thing that I would ignore all the 'facts' in it. Except for the bit about how many phones you can fit up your arse. I've just proved that.


Two phones *and* the charger too according to the SLP.

I'd imagine you'd have to develop quite an unusual walk to accommodate that lot.


----------



## fleepish (Apr 14, 2009)

I was a D’s –the store down the street – tonight at 8 pm to sign the petition and the rabble have moved on to in front of this business. The owner is the nicest guy and the crowd was clearly doing his head in. 

What hope do these small businesses have unless there are police patrols to disperse the people off their heads? If there is an exclusion zone (as there is on Rushcroft Rd) it needs to be enforced by a police presence. Tony shouldn’t be expected to police his own frontage anymore than he already does (which is a lot). Certainly KFC is not expected to see off the skunk dealers on the pavement outside. Unlike every other part of Brixton, I’ve never been offered drugs outside House of Bottles –just had to get through the crack heads (who don’t give a shit about anyone but use the blind spot to hide) to get cigs.


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 14, 2009)

I have a copy of the petition which I am going to stick in the shop downstairs from me.  hopefully that will drum up some more community support.  Keep us informed as to what happens at the licensing meeting today Mrs M.


----------



## pk (Apr 14, 2009)

tufty79 said:


> just to let y'all know there's apparently a "drugs raid" going on outside the house of bottles and the albert, on coldharbour lane ....
> 
> there are evening standard photographers there an' all.
> and polis photographers.....
> ...



About fucking time. Hate the crack peddlars, I does.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 14, 2009)

bluestreak said:


> Keep us informed as to what happens at the licensing meeting today Mrs M.


Will do.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Apr 14, 2009)

editor said:


> Two phones *and* the charger too according to the SLP.
> 
> I'd imagine you'd have to develop quite an unusual walk to accommodate that lot.



Don't they manage to get the most fantastic quantities of stuff up their arses in Papillon?


----------



## Yetman (Apr 14, 2009)

DCI Sedgemore said that it is common practice for veteran dealers to hide the majority of their stash in their anus.
He said when a sale is near they then remove some and put it in their mouth. 



A2M'ing yourself is fucked.


----------



## editor (Apr 14, 2009)

Donna Ferentes said:


> Don't they manage to get the most fantastic quantities of stuff up their arses in Papillon?


I'm sure they did, but I'm not quite sure why anyone would want to put a phone's _charger_ up their arse. 

I mean, those three prongs are going to smart and chaff, and make no mistake.


----------



## London_Calling (Apr 14, 2009)

"You're nicked, son"
"Why?"
"Illegal possession of a phone charger"


 . . . not happening is it.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Apr 14, 2009)

editor said:


> I mean, those three prongs are going to smart and chaff, and make no mistake.


 

You've not tried it have you?


----------



## editor (Apr 14, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> You've not tried it have you?


You don't need to stab yourself in the jacksi with a kitchen knife to know it's going to hurt.


----------



## RaverDrew (Apr 14, 2009)

well they believed the police lies. review hearing on 5th may 2pm


----------



## nick h. (Apr 14, 2009)

.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Apr 14, 2009)

What did he want, a mission statement?


----------



## shakespearegirl (Apr 14, 2009)

What a pity.. I've never seen Tony do anything other than kick dealers/troublemakers out.


----------



## Not a Vet (Apr 14, 2009)

Now I know why those lads whistle so much. I thought it was to attract attention but in fact it turns out they are like kettles with that all that pressure up their arse.


----------



## RaverDrew (Apr 14, 2009)

Not long after the hearing this afternoon, 2 OB were in Dee's stores, and it looked like they were giving the owners similar bullshit.  

The local Police are a complete joke atm Fuck knows what their real agenda is ?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 14, 2009)

RaverDrew said:


> review hearing on 5th may 2pm


I'm so upset about this and sorry I had to leave before the decision. It was clear there was absolutely nothing we could do and anything relevant we had to say wasn't allowed to be said.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 14, 2009)

This does seem strange to me.  If the problem was dealers using the recess of the storefront out of cameras, wouldn't it have been much less bother to simply install a camera somewhere that catches this area?

It's odd that an innocent storekeeper is being affected, when the real problem would be solved by getting the dealers off of the streets.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 14, 2009)

It wasn't so much the dealers, but the users (drugs and alcohol) who hung around infront of HoB


----------



## pboi (Apr 14, 2009)

has Tarannau been in the thread sticking up for all the cunty dealers and drunks yet?

FO if you have


----------



## ajdown (Apr 14, 2009)

Crispy said:


> It wasn't so much the dealers, but the users (drugs and alcohol) who hung around infront of HoB



Either way, it's hardly the shopkeeper's fault who decides to hang around outside is it?  If, as it seems, it's a known problem in that area, then surely a more visible police presence (especially with the "drop in cop shop" just along a bit) would have, using existing powers, been able to deal with most of the problem?

Or is it simply a case of "the easiest solution is too much like hard work"?


----------



## colacubes (Apr 14, 2009)

pboi said:


> has Tarannau been in the thread sticking up for all the cunty dealers and drunks yet?
> 
> FO if you have



Why don't you read the thread and find out?  As it happens I don't think he's been on this thread at all but even so do you really need to bring your cross-thread beef here ffs


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 14, 2009)

pboi said:


> has Tarannau been in the thread sticking up for all the cunty dealers and drunks yet?
> 
> FO if you have



don't be a cunt


----------



## tufty79 (Apr 14, 2009)

well.. i went to the meeting.
after the decision was announced, it was heartbreaking to see tony and his family's reaction.. i kind of expected that they'd take it to review, but still.. not a fun day 

he seems to have a fairly decent solicitor, which is a good start. and the police's evidence for closing his shop down was flimsy/woolly to say the least... 

5th may, 2pm


----------



## editor (Apr 14, 2009)

pboi said:


> has Tarannau been in the thread sticking up for all the cunty dealers and drunks yet?
> 
> FO if you have


Stop now, please.


----------



## editor (Apr 14, 2009)

ajdown said:


> It's odd that an innocent storekeeper is being affected, when the real problem would be solved by getting the dealers off of the streets.


Because the police won't commit enough resources, the problem gets moved up, down and around Coldharbour Lane. In Tony's case, it seems that because they haven't got the resources to sort out the problem with police legwork, it's easier just to blame his shop and close it down - not that I can see that making any difference at all.

Saying that, outside KFC seems to have enjoyed 'untouchable' status for some time now - I can't recall passing there at night and not being offered drugs/oregano by _really_ blatant dealers.


----------



## pboi (Apr 14, 2009)

somebody raised sticking some cameras up...do we know why that hasnt been done?   budget restrictions etc?   KFC corner would do well getting CCTV'd heavily


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 14, 2009)

there was a camera in the empty flat above the alcove that was involved in a big sting a couple of years ago. I don't know why they didn't just keep it. I would have said they must have had a good reason to get rid of it, but maybe not....


----------



## pboi (Apr 14, 2009)

hell, even fake obvious cams might be a deterrent!


----------



## Stoat Boy (Apr 14, 2009)

Surely it would be cheaper, and a lot more effective, to just put uniformed coppers on permanent patrol on that stretch of CHL to act as a deterrent ? 

I mean a raids all good and proper but no doubt the unit doing it will be moved on to another job and within days people will be back again dealing ?


----------



## ajdown (Apr 14, 2009)

editor said:


> Saying that, outside KFC seems to have enjoyed 'untouchable' status for some time now - I can't recall passing there at night and not being offered drugs/oregano by _really_ blatant dealers.



I've had people offering me "weed, skunk" going up and down the bus queues in the middle of a saturday afternoon.

You are right, of course, that "moving them on" simply does just that, rather than actually doing anything about it.


----------



## netbob (Apr 14, 2009)

http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/moderngov/mgEPetitionSubmit.aspx might be worth a go - I started setting one up, but am no wordsmith ...


----------



## Foucault's Wife (Apr 14, 2009)

This is really rubbish to put it mildly 

Is there anything else we can do, aside from the petition [well done folks who set that up], writing to the councillors, MPs etc.  Can we do anything else?

Just feeling really powerless about the injustice of all this.

What the fuck are the police for if it isn't to serve the community, including protecting the livelihoods of local business people trying to make a living?

Without small local businesses communities become soulless.  Do they want us to buy our booze in Tesco or Sainsbury?  Actually I bet I know the answer to that.  

Is this because the powers that be are annoyed because they can't turn the Market into an identi-kit purgatory mimicking shopping mall?

I'm up for getting involved in organising something more.  Thinking caps time...


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 14, 2009)

Tony installed loads of cameras, put in bright outside lighting, told the police they were free to look at any footage, and indeed gave footage to the police when there was a serious assault outside, liaised with local beat coppers but what the higher ups did instead was to get a warrant and seize the cameras.
The police were insisting that Tony's premises was 'the hub of dealing on Coldharbour Lane' but refused to show any evidence for this as it's 'an ongoing inquiry'.
I understand that the Officer authorising all this was the one that arrested the freegans for distributing food.

As most people on this board know, I have never been anti-Police, but I'm publicly stating that their actions here fall well below what I expect of policing that serves my community and I believe they are scapegoating Tony because they have not been doing their job effectively at all.


----------



## netbob (Apr 14, 2009)

> Allow the House of Bottles off license on Coldhabour Lane, Brixton, to resume trading, and to urge the police to resume effective beat policing on Coldhabour Lane and central Brixton, and to work with license holders to counter anti-social behavior near their premises.



..... Thank you for submitting your ePetition request. It will be reviewed by a member of the Democratic Services team and you will be contacted in due course.


----------



## Stoat Boy (Apr 14, 2009)

As an owner of small business in Lambeth I can tell you that nobody in officaldom has the slightest interest in helping us out. 

Recently had a visit from no less than 3 uniformed Lambeth officals to tell me the non-smoking sign on the door to my office was illegal because people might not understand what it meant as there was no writing underneath and that they could give me a £200 fine. When I pointed out that if people where to stupid to understand the sign then I doubted they could read I got the usual 'we are only doing our jobs line'.

And the old Bill are next to useless. We have massive problems with school kids who can, on occassion, make the immediate area a no-go area for an hour a day when they go home and who actually attacked a local cafe along with often assaulting cyclists who object to them running into the road and knocking them over.

 When plod turned up they threatened to arrest the shop staff because they had to resort of throwing the kids out after they started lobbing stuff at customers.

Nobody employed in an offical capacity in Lambeth  gives toss about local businesses outside of trying to stitch us up for as much money as they can.


----------



## Foucault's Wife (Apr 14, 2009)

*House of Bottles - campaign*

I've started a thread for people interested in getting together to start a campaign for the House of Bottles.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 14, 2009)

.


----------



## netbob (Apr 14, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Elias at D has suffered some eye-popping victimisation over the last couple of years. You just would not believe it. He's a fantastic bloke but I'm seriously worried that if they provoke him much more he'll snap. Something must be done. It's getting to the point where we need a neighbourhood watch on Coldharbour Lane to keep an eye on the damn Police. Are there enough of us to put together a rota?



There is a safer neighbourhood panel for the town center (to work with and monitor the town center police, which is a separate policing team from coldhabour). It helped setup some sane parameters for the dispersal zone,  but is currently in mothballs I think due to lack of interest.

Edit: since the town center police arent attached to a particular ward (despite being probably the largest police team), there's no requirement for an oversight/safer-neighbourhood panel. All the 5 (?) wards that part make up the town center have their own individual ones, but their focus tends to focus on the center of those wards. It's an anomaly rather than a conspiracy, the town center is at the crossroads of too many different areas (wards, policing areas, constituencies).


----------



## nick h. (Apr 14, 2009)

I think we need something that just focuses on the misdeeds of the Police. 

Copwatch.


----------



## fleepish (Apr 15, 2009)

My husband and I were also at the meeting –and thought Tony did a great job standing up for himself and how tough it is to self-police that bit of CHL. It was very clear that Tony has put CCTV both inside and out of his shop and given full police access to the shop. Anytime I went into the shop over 5 years, Tony was trying his hardest to control the situation outside –but it’s outside of his legal jurisdiction. The idiots didn’t come into the shop –he threw them out.

It is a real shame that essentially the figure of how many hand-to-hands go on in CHL are being used as a justification for closing down the shop (well that is what I can garner from the statistics used at the meeting by the police). It means that any place on CHL can be closed- in their logic- as a meeting place because of those who “hang out” at the front of the shop on council owned pavement. 

I live on Rushcroft so know how ludicrous the situations can be –either from the street theatre of Brixton or first hand experience of crackheads breaking down the building door to get a fix in bad weather. 

We just think if the councillors actually went to but a pack of Doritos at 10 pm on a Tuesday night on CHL they would see just the sort of problems the off-licences face (independent from what the police report) which have nothing to do with the sales of alcohol. When I lived in the East Village in NYC, the absolute key was regular beat cop patrols for the all night offies, since at that point 2 blocks away was THE heroin market in the city. 

We both think that shopowners, councillors, residents, and the police are and should be on the same side of the issue… none of us like the rabble but especially shopowners like Tony need to be protected (as much as the authorities can) from the frankly destructive, “don’t give shit about anyone but myself” arseholes around Brixton.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Apr 15, 2009)

Is there likely to be a wider agenda of wanting to move pretty much all the existing businesses (and for that matter, clientele) out of that area in order to replace them with something considered to be a bit more upmarket?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 15, 2009)

fleepish said:


> It is a real shame that essentially the figure of how many hand-to-hands go on in CHL are being used as a justification for closing down the shop (well that is what I can garner from the statistics used at the meeting by the police).


Those figures were flawed. They could have been ridiculed by anyone with a Maths A level, or even a bright GCSE student.

Their use of the word 'extrapolation' was a pathetic justification for bad maths.


----------



## editor (Apr 15, 2009)

The supermarket further down Coldharbour Lane (opp the Barrier Block) suffers horrendous problems from nasty racist fuckwits and wildly out of control kids.


----------



## tufty79 (Apr 15, 2009)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Those figures were flawed. They could have been ridiculed by anyone with a Maths A level, or even a bright GCSE student.
> 
> Their use of the word 'extrapolation' was a pathetic justification for bad maths.



it did tickle me when he claimed that someone else had extrapolated the data for him.. lots of non-quantative language (how many _is_ several) etc etc...   the figures were well skewed.  anyone know if they're available to the public?



Foucault's Wife said:


> This is really rubbish to put it mildly
> 
> Is there anything else we can do, aside from the petition [well done folks who set that up], writing to the councillors, MPs etc.  Can we do anything else?
> 
> ...



tbh i reckon tony should get some kind of interim income - loss of takings for around a month, combined with a wife and kids to support, is going to be well tough on him (and yes, i *know* we're meant to all be in the credit-crunchy boat at the same time, but still...).
house of bottles benefit?


----------



## matt m (Apr 15, 2009)

Both begging and bicycle theft are illegal. Both of those regularly occur outside Sainsburys. I don't imagine anyone's planning on forcing Sainsburys to close.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 15, 2009)

.


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 15, 2009)

Fucking pigs.  Seriously, fucking pigs.  It makes me want to start taking pot-shots at them.  They're a worse cancer on this community than the dealers are when they behave like this.  I mean, I've seen him throw them out, I've seem them threaten him, and now the pigs are shutting him down.  Fuck them all.

The dealers are back there again, btw.  But now no-one is moving them on.


----------



## tarannau (Apr 15, 2009)

I'm really annoyed by this and the acceptance of the 'mystery' evidence that Tony is permitting dealing in his shop.

Certainly not my experience - I've seen him throwing out dealers and customers firmly whilst officers stand by doing precisely fuck all a few feet away. The bloke deserves some help and appreciation for doing a difficult job very well, not a stabbing in the back from people who should have been doing more to back him up in the first place. 

Does anyone honestly think that closing his shop will suddenly miraculously disappear the problems outside that sheltered stretch? If anything things are going to get worse around there - I know that Tony's been kind enough to come to the assistance of my better half and others when trouble's outside.


----------



## Foucault's Wife (Apr 15, 2009)

*Benefit for Bottles*

I think a benefit is a good idea and perhaps it will stop the police's hoped for tactic of Bottles going bust.

Shall we discuss this at the meeting on Monday?


----------



## editor (Apr 15, 2009)

nick h. said:


> 1) the bedrock of the police case is that Tony turns a blind eye to dealing *inside the shop*.


I hope they've got good evidence to back that one up because I've _never _seen dealing going on inside the shop. Ever.

Outside in the street is a different matter, but never inside to my knowledge.


----------



## gabi (Apr 16, 2009)

editor said:


> I hope they've got good evidence to back that one up because I've _never _seen dealing going on inside the shop. Ever.
> 
> Outside in the street is a different matter, but never inside to my knowledge.



I mentioned that to some coppers I met who were busy inspecting the lowered door of the place the other day. They told me they had video evidence of Tony tolerating plain clothes cops buying drugs in there after a 3 month sting operation...

I've lived on and around coldharbour for ten years and the house of bottles is my local booze joint. I've never ever seen anything like these particular pigs described. He runs a tight ship, hard but fairly.

When I heard they'd busted him I thought it was a joke. I mean - it aint rocket science figuring out where on CHL the deals are going down. It aint in the house of bottles, any dear police who are reading.


----------



## Jonti (Apr 16, 2009)

RaverDrew said:


> Not long after the hearing this afternoon, 2 OB were in Dee's stores, and it looked like they were giving the owners similar bullshit.
> 
> The local Police are a complete joke atm Fuck knows what their real agenda is ?


Culture wars, I think.


> I understand that the Officer authorising all this was the one that arrested the freegans for distributing food.



Someone should tell the baby blue it's all over now.


----------



## tufty79 (Apr 17, 2009)

i only want tony back cos i owe him three quid on the tick 

oh - and he was a good neighbour, looked out for me, and it made me feel safer out at night knowing that if i got shit i could just run into his shop.


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 18, 2009)

memespring said:


> There is a safer neighbourhood panel for the town center (to work with and monitor the town center police, which is a separate policing team from coldhabour). It helped setup some sane parameters for the dispersal zone,  but is currently in mothballs I think due to lack of interest.
> 
> Edit: since the town center police arent attached to a particular ward (despite being probably the largest police team), there's no requirement for an oversight/safer-neighbourhood panel. All the 5 (?) wards that part make up the town center have their own individual ones, but their focus tends to focus on the center of those wards. It's an anomaly rather than a conspiracy, the town center is at the crossroads of too many different areas (wards, policing areas, constituencies).



There is a new Town Centre Manager now.The old Brixton Forum has now just been restarted as a "Stakeholders" forum.Ive just managed to get myself on it.U have to be part of a "legitimate" community group. (Perhaps U75 could have one-im serious). 

As part of it local cop turns up to give a report.Ill see if I can ask about Hof B next time if I can. From the report he gave they are rolling together street drinkers ,graffiitii people and dealers.He did say they are making a move to rid the area of street drinkers.Or in the jargon "help them". So id say that the police are using this to reduce the number of off licences in Brixton. 

I was talking to someone else who has offy who isnt sorry that HB has gone.But thats business.He did point out that the Council/Police should not have allowed so many off licences to be granted in Brixton.There used to be a few know there are loads.So there may be a general issue that needs addressing.

However I agree with those posts that KFC does not get the same treatment.Dealers didnt hang around there until KFC came along.

Also dealers got into the habit of hanging about that part of CHL as they did a lot of trade when the Living Bar was open.

If the Council/Police want to get rid of Street drinkers because the dont like them they should say so.

This police evidence of dealing in the shop seems a bit dodgy to me.Like other posters Ive never got that impression.


----------



## shygirl (Apr 18, 2009)

The Community Police Consultative Group meets on the first Tuesday of the month - the next one is Tuesday 5 May in Lambeth Town Hall.  You may want to go along and air your concerns there, as it's the forum where, among other things, concerns about policing are raised.  The meeting starts at 6 pm, and is attended by the top echelons of Lambeth police, as well as community members, cllrs, council officials.


----------



## Jonti (Apr 19, 2009)

I agree with everything Gramsci says, particularly about U75 being a stakeholder in Brixton and its Town Centre, and I'm pretty certain that Stephanie Butcher would unhesitatingly agree.  Can't say for sure, of course, someone should ask her.


----------



## Bob (Apr 19, 2009)

Has Memespring got the petition accepted yet?


----------



## netbob (Apr 19, 2009)

Bob said:


> Has Memespring got the petition accepted yet?



Refused:



> Thank you for your e-Petition request. Unfortunately we have been unable to accept this request as it involves a case which is being dealt with by the Council in its role as Licensing Authority. As stated in our e-Petition guidance, we will reject an e-Petition if it 'relates to the Council's Planning or Licensing functions as there are seperate statutory processes in place for dealing with these matters'.


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 19, 2009)

Did the form applying for a "Summary Licence Review" sent to Lambeth by Acting Superintendent Wallace get made public at the licensing committee meeting.

The claims made to substantiate "association of the premises with serious crime, serious disorder or both" are made in a way that would have given the Licensing Committee little option but to agree to a Closure Order.

I have a pdf copy, but I won't cut and paste it here, as the allegations are potentially defamatory of House of Bottles staff.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 19, 2009)

Bits of it were read out I believe and it made H of B sound as if all drug activity on CHL was directly to do with H of B, which is patently nonsense. Also as I mentioned earlier the figures mentioned were 'extrapolated' in the manner of lies, damn lies and statistics.


----------



## Jonti (Apr 21, 2009)

I cannot help but wonder why the cops are pushing patent nonsense about drug dealing on CHL. 

It seems from reading this thread that they've picked on a guy who publicly stood up to the crack heads.  It's almost as if money talks, and the guys making the money have spent some to cause trouble for a guy that got in their way. Of course, such a thing would never happen here, oh, no!  

But whether that's what's happened or not, the message is loud and clear. Stand up against the crack-dealers and you'll get trouble from the local Police.


----------



## editor (Apr 21, 2009)

Jonti said:


> I cannot help but wonder why the cops are pushing patent nonsense about drug dealing on CHL.
> 
> It seems from reading this thread that they've picked on a guy who publicly stood up to the crack heads.  It's almost as if money talks, and the guys making the money have spent some to cause trouble for a guy that got in their way. Of course, such a thing would never happen here, oh, no!


I never saw dealing in his shop and have no evidence that he was ever involved in any kind of dealing himself, but there was certainly 'nuff activity right outside his shop and all along that strip. The corner of Electric Lane is particularly lively.

I can't say I ever saw him "publicly standing up" to crack dealers either - but then I can't think of many shop owners who would want to take that risky job on (past kicking them out of their shop). I certainly wouldn't endeavour to go out of my way to take on crack dealers as they're generally a pretty dangerous and unpredictable lot.


----------



## Jonti (Apr 21, 2009)

Yeah, other people have said above that he did not tolerate the crack dealers in his shop.  

It does seems from this thread that his attempts to co-operate with the police ended up with them raiding him and trying to shut him down


----------



## Gramsci (Apr 23, 2009)

lang rabbie said:


> The claims made to substantiate "association of the premises with serious crime, serious disorder or both" are made in a way that would have given the Licensing Committee little option but to agree to a Closure Order.
> .



The police have been using the same claims in Soho against clip joints and brothels.Seems to be a catch all phrase. "Association" can mean direct involvement to helping to encourage an environment where "serious crime" can flourish.

Seems to me that this is a version of "Zero Tolerance" policing. 

Also it reminds me of "kettling".You scoop up everyone there regardless of whether they are violent or not.You are tainted by being there.

Its IMO a bad road to go down for Policing.


----------



## hipipol (Apr 23, 2009)

The cops in Brixton seem to lurch from one idiotic initiative to the next with absolutely zero understanding of what effect their actions may have - primarily as the ones I've talked to in Brixton are from all over the country and regard the area in much the same way as the troops did in Basra

Tony never permitted dealing in his shop and was firm in keeping the Rock Men out - another peice of made up bollocks, bit that geezer just happening to have a heart attack at the G-20, etc, etc

Sadly in seems the Filth are lying to cover their fuck ups again


----------



## Foucault's Wife (Apr 23, 2009)

Following the meeting on Monday, I have set up an e-petition to compliment the others also in circulation.

http://www.petitiononline.com/160682/petition.html


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 23, 2009)

editor said:


> I can't say I ever saw him "publicly standing up" to crack dealers either - but then I can't think of many shop owners who would want to take that risky job on (past kicking them out of their shop). I certainly wouldn't endeavour to go out of my way to take on crack dealers as they're generally a pretty dangerous and unpredictable lot.


Well, I used his shop often for cigarettes and juice and the occasional bottle of booze and I saw him stand up to them and he got open hostility back. He also was one of the main advocates of backing 'The Beat' although that turned out to be (beyond its initial fanfare at opening) a totally damp squib.


----------



## King of Prussia (Apr 25, 2009)

According to these minutes there were 769 observations of drug dealing. That's quite an accusation!

Together with the 200 complaints, it seems to me that the police actions were justified.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 25, 2009)

There was certainly lots of dealing outside the premises.  Not sure how that's the shop's fault though.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 25, 2009)

King of Prussia said:


> According to these minutes there were 769 observations of drug dealing. That's quite an accusation!
> 
> Together with the 200 complaints, it seems to me that the police actions were justified.


This rebuttal is being distributed around Brixton at the moment. I am not the author btw, but I agree with it from what I've seen and heard myself.


PART ONE

On 7th April the police staged a 'drugs swoop' on Coldharbour Lane with 230 officers, accompanied by invited journalists. People in the street were searched, 13 were arrested and 6 have been charged with supply of class A drugs.

The only premises searched was House of Bottles. Nothing was found. The customers were taken outside and searched. (The police have not since spoken to Tony about these customers, so it seems unlikely they were arrested.) The CCTV recorder was seized. A police guard was put on the shop overnight to prevent the removal of evidence.The next day another search was done with a sniffer dog - nothing was found.

The police closed the premises instantly, depriving Tony of his livelihood. One week later at an interim review Sgt. Strange employed a rarely-used expedited process to persuade the councillors on the Lambeth licencing committee to suspend Tony's licence immediately. This was on the grounds that Police had evidence of dealing of class A drugs inside the shop and it would continue if the shop were to reopen.

Sgt. Strange said the evidence was from video surveillance and plain clothes officers, but declined to disclose it because it was part of an ongoing investigation.

It seemed clear at the review that this is not just a slap on the wrist; the Police want to take away Tony's licence for good. This will be determined at a full review on 5th May at which the public will be allowed to speak. (I don't know whether they will have to get permission in advance.)

The case against Tony is stated on a section 53A certificate signed by Acting Supt. Suzanne Wallace. Nearly everything in it is false:

"this venue has been under police surveillance...during 4 weeks of surveillance police have witnessed 769 exchanges. It is estimated that police have observed directly only about 20% of the actual exchanges. This means the true figure could be approximately 1000 deals a week. All these exchanges have taken place in or directly outside the premises."

This is a muddle of half-truths:

- exchanges cannot be clearly seen on a surveillance video. Street dealers operate in full view of council CCTV cameras - they just conceal the drugs under their fingertips. In most cases all the camera can see is two people having a conversation, moving their hands. At best, a small fraction of these 769 filmed "exchanges" may show a glimpse of a tiny item which could be a class A, B or C drug or a fake. (This is why such video is not used in court except to support testimony from plain clothes officers who have bought drugs.)

- Sgt. Strange stated at the hearing that the reason why the shop needs to be closed is not the deals outside, but deals inside, of Class A drugs. The Police case is that they have evidence of such deals. If this meets the standard of legally admissible evidence it cannot be on video: it must be testimony from plain clothes officers who have bought drugs themselves. So the entire Police surveillance operation of "1000 deals per week" for four weeks has probably yielded hard evidence of no more than one or two class A drug deals: deals conducted by the Police, which Tony cannot be held responsible for.

- the police seem to have contradicted their claims when talking to the press. The South London Press printed that 1000 deals per week took place in a large area from the Dogstar to the KFC and Saltoun Road. The Sun printed that these deals took place outside KFC, 90 yards away. But the Police certificate alleges they all happened in or in front of Tony's shop

- the Sun also reported the Police as saying that they had been secretly filming outside KFChttp://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2367052.ece But Tony's shop and front yard are in a recess and cannot be seen from anywhere in the KFC area.

- the Police have not stated how they extrapolated from 769 deals in four weeks to 1000 deals every week. Sgt. Strange was asked to explain this at the hearing but could not. It seems shoddy for a superintendent's written allegation of serious crime to be based on unexplained guesswork.

It is worth noting that the case against Tony cannot include evidence from council CCTV cameras because the recess prevents them from seeing the shop. (This is why the Police asked Tony to install cameras overlooking the yard. There used to be a council camera across the road with a perfect view of the yard. It was removed about two years ago.)

"staff have condoned or turn [sic] a blind eye to this activity"

This is false:

- Tony estimates that he has been throwing dealers out of his shop at least twice a day for the ten years he has been running the shop: a total of at least 10,000 ejections. Those officers who visit his shop frequenttly (such as Sgt. Dean Hancock and Insp. Malcolm Noone) are well aware of this. Many customers have witnessed this and have come forward asking to testify about it

- Tony estimates he has phoned the station to report the dealers about twice per month. Phone records will be provided to substantiate this.

- Tony visited Brixton Police Station three times last year to complain about the dealing outside and to request more police patrols. The Police will have records of these complaints.

"there is a reported history of drug dealing and associated crime in and around this venue"

This is false:

- in Tony's ten years running the shop there has never been an arrest for any crime committed inside it

- officers visit the shop at least once a week. Never have they suggested, even informally, that dealers operate inside it.

- Tony is so confident that no dealers stash drugs in his shop that he consented to the sniffer dog search even though there was no warrant for it

- the most serious complaint ever made to Tony by an officer was by Inspector Noone about a year ago: he said that Tony should stop exchanging the dealers' coins for notes. (Tony has not done so since.)


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 25, 2009)

PART TWO


It is worth noting that neither Tony nor any current or former members of staff have criminal records

"staff and the DPS have failed to engage with police despite numerous attempts in the past"

This is false. (Sgt. Strange conceded this at the review after comments by Tony and his solicitor)

- in December Tony was requested by Sgt. Dean Hancock of the street team to install two CCTV cameras outside. These were up and and working by February

- Tony has also fitted an external light at the request of the Police

- Tony has also given Sgt. Hancock standing permission to inspect the premises or take the CCTV recorder at any time without an appointment or a warrant

- the CCTV recorder is Police property. It was lent to Tony two years ago because the Police wanted his to investigate a murder. (Tony has asked for the return of his recorder many times, without success.)

- the only piece of Police advice not taken by Tony was a suggestion by Supt. Musker to hire a security guard. This was declined as not cost-effective: Tony is already doing a good job of preventing dealing inside the shop, and a security guard would have no effect on what goes on outside

- Tony was asked by A/Supt. Wallace to lend his support to the opening of The Beat in order to make it seem credible to other shopkeepers on Coldharbour Lane. This he did, with enthusiasm.

- a few days ago PC Errol Patterson suggested that Tony install a hatch to serve all the customers through. Tony is not keen on this - it would not prevent dealing in the yard and he believes he is already preventing all dealing inside. A hatch would give his shop the feeling of a fortress and reduce his sales by preventing customers from browsing

"it is apparent that the management of the premises is not robust enough to deal with this criminality"

Tony has proved this to be false. He would appear to be a good deal more robust than the Police:

- he has been labelled an informant, has been threatened many times over the years and had cups of hot tea thrown in his face. But this has not deterred him from throwing dealers out every day, without any assistance.

- three years ago he was arrested for assault when tackling a known dealer who tried to leave the shop without paying for a can of beer. A local officer in plain clothes who happened to be in the shop arrested Tony for assault and let the dealer go. Tony was offered a caution, refused it and was released without charge

"I believe that a Closure Order...is the only possible option. Whilst this venue is open and selling alcohol it will continue to attract chaotic drug users and drug dealers and all the associated crime "

This is absurd. There are many alternative options. The same could be said of dozens of other venues. Why single out Tony's shop? And why not police the streets better so that honest shopkeepers like Tony can trade?

The Closure Order has turned Tony's front yard into an unlit, unsupervised dealer's paradise with no cameras. Below are a few options which would be far more effective. No doubt the police, the professionals in this area, can think of many more:

- the CCTV camera opposite the shop on the lamp-post outside Twin Barbers could be replaced. (Tony has suggested this to Sean Mattel, Sgt. Green and Dave Musker at least six times ove the last two years and been fobbed off.)

- officers could respond to calls more quickly. Tony was requested to report dealers on the Town Centre Team phone number. It is never answered. Voicemail messages are never returned.

- officer foot patrols could be increased

- officers could be based at The Beat. At the moment The Beat is nothing more than a lifeless shopfront. The PCSOs based there leave Coldharbour Lane as soon as they walk out of the door.

- PCSO foot patrols could be increased. Until January the PCSOs were far more helpful and supportive to Tony than the police officers; they would sometimes stand in the front yard for up to 45 minutes, despite verbal abuse from dealers. But they suddenly stopped doing this and have barely been seen outside the shop since

- an increased presence of officers and PCSOs would intimidate the dealers and allow Tony to combat them when they are outside. Currently the dealers think of the pavement and the yard as their territory. If they see Tony picking up the phone to call the Police, they threatens him for informing on them

- members of the public could be prevented from standing in the yard. Tony has investigated several possibilities:

1) a barrier could be formed of shrubs/pot plants/hedging, but this would be used as a toilet by dealers, drinkers and junkies. They would also throw rubbish over the top of them. The area would become a stinking mess within hours and be impossible to keep clean

2) small concrete pyramids as used to keep pedestrians off central reservations could be laid. These would also become a stinking rubbish-strewn ugly mess and be hard to clean

3) the area could be let to a stallholder. Tony tried this, but two Police officers told him it was illegal. They didn't know what law applied, promised to return to tell him, but didn't. (The stallholder quit anyway because he was threatened by the dealers.)

4) the area could be fenced off. Tony asked the Council if he could install railings similar to the ones in front of The Prince Albert next door, but they said he could not do so without planning permission. Tony has been given to understand that the Council do not approve of the Prince Albert's railings and are seeking their removal, so this seems like a dead end.

Tony remains open to suggestions and would hope that the Police and the Council working together can come up with a more constructive solution than a Closure Order.

It is worth noting that no police officer has ever asked Tony for his suggestions on how to get rid of the dealers.

Police misuse of procedure

The powers used by the Police under Section 53A came into force on 1/10/07. They were drawn up primarily to fight gun and knife crime. They allow a license to be suspended without the police showing any evidence.

This is the first time these powers have been used in Lambeth, which may explain why councillors did not spot that the police have breached government guidelines. The police are well aware of these guidelines; they gave Tony a copy. The full text is here: http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/pub...nceOct2007.pdf

Below are extracts which the police have not satisfied:

"the new powers are aimed at tackling serious crime and serious disorder, in particular (but not exclusively) the use of guns and knives."

"In deciding whether to sign a certificate the senior officer will want to consider the following:

- the track record of the.. premises..and whether the police have previously had cause to give advice about serious criminal..conduct (or the likelihood of such conduct). It is not expected that this power will be used as a first response to a problem.

- should an alternative power be deployed?... Could the police trigger a standard licence review?

- what added value will the use of the expedited process bring? How would any interim steps that the licensing authority might take..address the problem?"

"In triggering the process, the police will wish to take into account the fact that an intended use of the power is to tackle the use of dangerous weapons."

It seems clear that the Police deliberately made false statements on the Certificate to give the impression that they have satisfied these guidelines.

If Tony's misconduct is as serious as the police allege, the standard licence review process would result in him being stripped of his licence in due course anyway - but it would have allowed him to trade in the meantime. So what is the real reason why Police have chosen this strategy? Could it be that they know their case is weak, so they are seeking to bankrupt Tony before he gets justice?

Is Tony being victimised?

- why was his the only premises to be searched and the only one to be shut down? The pollce know that dealing takes place outside scores of businesses in the area and inside all the pubs and McDonalds.

- South London Press reported the officer in charge of the raid, DCI Sedgemore, as saying the raid was in response to complaints from locals. Did any of these complaints single out House of Bottles? If so, what were the motives of the complainants? What do they have to gain if Tony goes under?

- About six weeks ago a heavy crack user told Tony that a plain clothes officer in Coldharbour Lane asked her "which of the off-licences around here can I buy drugs in?" This suggests that the Police have been targeting Tony and were looking for an excuse to arrange a deal in his shop

- why did PCSOs discontinue their habit of standing outside the shop in January? Were they ordered to stay away so that Police could facilitate dealing there during the surveillance period?


----------



## nick h. (Apr 25, 2009)

King of Prussia said:


> Together with the 200 complaints, it seems to me that the police actions were justified.



What complaints?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 25, 2009)

King of Prussia, they're not "complaints" (which in this context would be complaints from the public). The minutes you linked to say they are "police reports of concern". There's a big difference between the two. 
I am really worried by the way the livelihood of a man (and his wife and three small children) has been removed using legislation never before used in Lambeth. Why are the police so reluctant to back up what they say by refusing to show any evidence? 
I have been using Tony's shop for over a decade and I have never witnessed anything dodgy at all. I've seen Tony eject ne'erdowells firmly and swiftly and any drug-dealing activity I have witnessed has been on Coldharbour Lane between the Dogstar and KFC. Do the police intend to close down all businesses on this stretch?

I would add that according to Tony not one of these 200 police reports was conveyed to him. If the police were so concerned they should have discussed it with him, so I am utterly baffled as to why they didn't do so.


----------



## ymu (Apr 25, 2009)

It's sounding an awful lot like he's being victimised for being tough on the dealers ...


----------



## editor (Apr 25, 2009)

I heard a whisper that he's reopening today, somehow.


----------



## gaijingirl (Apr 25, 2009)

editor said:


> I heard a whisper that he's reopening today, somehow.



I'll go down to see if he sells good cider.. 

(good luck to him - this whole things sounds really dodgy and v. unfair)


----------



## nick h. (Apr 25, 2009)

Yes he's opening, but not to sell alcohol. He's still allowed to sell fags and crisps.  I shall drop in to hear his side of the story


----------



## tufty79 (Apr 25, 2009)

^^ yup.
i've asked him if he'd mind stocking milk as well - i'm too lazy to walk "far" when i'm making a midnight cuppa 

it was really nice to see his shop open last night


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 25, 2009)

I'm glad he's been allowed to reopen, albeit not allowed to sell alcohol. I shall be bulk buying juice, ciggies and sweets. I hope it will be enough to keep him afloat until this sorry mess is resolved.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 25, 2009)

If only he sold fruit! My banana budget alone could feed his family.


----------



## tufty79 (Apr 25, 2009)

i know! fruit and veg would be lovely.  
i will suggest it


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Apr 29, 2009)

Well, well, well.

House of Bottles update. This has just popped through my door.

1. DCI Nick Sedgemore, who led the raid, said at the Safer Lambeth Partnership meeting last week that dealers (plural) have been using the shop to reload.  He also said he has met Tony several times and tried to engage with him. Tony was at the meeting (much to the DCI's surprise) and says he has never seen Sedgemore in his life. 

2. PC 709LX Howell came to Tony's shop yesterday. A user who was hanging around outside walked off. Howell said "I notice you didn't stop that woman from loitering. Is it a problem moving people off your forecourt?" Tony: "the last thing on your mind when serving a customer is looking outside to see who is standing there." Howell (sarcastically): "I take it this is a problem then, that's all I wanted to know."

3. Tony was today shown the video evidence against him by Sgt. Strange. It was fifteen minutes' worth of clips, shot from an empty flat opposite the shop and from PJ's roof.  None of it was shot by Tony's four internal cameras or his two external ones. Strange said that this was all he would be showing the councillors at the hearing. It will be seen in private - Tony's solicitor can see it, but nobody else. It shows:

- Tony laughing with a user who is standing in front of the newsagent next door. (Tony says he was actually laughing AT her because they had been discussing how Tony does not allow her to loiter in front of his shop.)

- suspicious behaviour by two known dealers in front of the shop who are obscured from Tony's view. (Tony is at the till.) They talk to other people who might be users and it's quite possible that they conduct up to 15 exchanges. But hands are hidden and little packages are not seen being passed. One of the other people is seen counting his money. 

- one known dealer entering and leaving the shop five times. Tony remembers serving him something (drinks, cigarette papers..) on three of those occasions. He can't remember the other two. On at least two occasions the dealer spends five minutes or so in the shop. Tony says they were chatting. 

That's it. The cameras are unable to show what's happening inside the shop because of camera angles and stuff blocking the window.


----------



## Ms T (Apr 29, 2009)

It seems that Tony is being seen by the police as collateral damage.  They have identified the shop as a problem and want to shut it down even though Tony has done his best to discourage dealing and regularly throws dealers out of his shop.  He can't prevent people from standing on the pavement outside ffs. 

I really wish the police would focus their efforts on the blatant dealing which goes on outside KFC, for example, and on the corner of Saltoun Rd.  I regularly go down that street at 1.30 in the morning in a cab on my way home from work and there are always dodgy people hanging around dealing drugs.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 30, 2009)

The Tony story is shaping up to be a prime example of how not to police the brixton drug trade. It seems to me that it's genuinely unpoliceable - unless the community is willing to  take on the job. I'm going to write about it all ~ suggestions and sources welcome.


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 30, 2009)

It's a fucking disgrace, is what it is?  What have we got to do, form up community vigilante groups and hang around Cldhbr Lane waiting until someone gets stabbed?


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 30, 2009)

Ms T said:


> It seems that Tony is being seen by the police as collateral damage.  They have identified the shop as a problem and want to shut it down even though Tony has done his best to discourage dealing and regularly throws dealers out of his shop.  He can't prevent people from standing on the pavement outside ffs.
> 
> I really wish the police would focus their efforts on the blatant dealing which goes on outside KFC, for example, and on the corner of Saltoun Rd.  I regularly go down that street at 1.30 in the morning in a cab on my way home from work and there are always dodgy people hanging around dealing drugs.



Last time I walked down Coldharbour Lane in the small hours was after an Offline at The Albert.  Left at about 3am, and the smell of crack on that stretch of road between the 414 the corner of Coldharbour Lane/Atlantic Rd was unbeliveable.  I'm amazed the police let such blatant using go on.


----------



## Winot (Apr 30, 2009)

Mrs Magpie said:


> the most serious complaint ever made to Tony by an officer was by Inspector Noone about a year ago



This would be funny if it wasn't tragic.


----------



## pk (Apr 30, 2009)

Of course the people to blame for Tony and the House of Bottles demise aren't the cops - it's the crack dealer scum.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Apr 30, 2009)

Christ, it's like the wire.

But with no good police


----------



## shygirl (Apr 30, 2009)

It seems like shop-keepers have been given the (dangerous) task of calling police every time they see dealing on their door-step.  Isn't it the police's job to patrol and apprehend street dealers?  And failure to move people on - is this another part of the police's job that the business community is having to take on?  Where will it all end....?


----------



## shygirl (Apr 30, 2009)

I asked on of the barmen in the albert if he thought there was any substance to the police allegations.  In a slightly hushed tone, he said he thought there probably was.  I thought that the two establishments had an ok rapport, shame that. 

<ed: material removed>


----------



## wurlycurly (Apr 30, 2009)

shygirl said:


> I asked on of the barmen in the albert if he thought there was any substance to the police allegations.  In a slightly hushed tone, he said he thought there probably was.  I thought that the two establishments had an ok rapport, shame that.  <ed: material removed> .



Yeh, like a slighly-hushed barman is cast-iron proof of anything  . Still, seems firmer than anything the police have got.


----------



## tarannau (Apr 30, 2009)

wurlycurly said:


> Yeh, like a slighly-hushed barman is cast-iron proof of anything  . Still, seems firmer than anything the police have got.



Hmm, the Albert bar staff should shut up really. They're in the same boat as anyone else in that stretch - the police could find evidence of dealing (by their standards) in pretty much any building on that stretch, let alone a city centre pub.

This whole situation stinks to high heaven. I'd wager that, with access to the CCTV footage, I could count far more examples of deals going on depressingly near to police officers and PCSOs than in Tony's store. FFS I've seen coppers repeatedly turning a blind eye whilst the dealers tease PCSOs by playing football around them. Tony's always been nothing but firm ime, genuinely helping to protect his customers and bystanders when things become edgy at times.

This whole saga makes me angry. He's a fundamentally decent, hard working man that we could do with more of. Frankly the police are a having a fucking laugh, the incompetent arses.


----------



## editor (Apr 30, 2009)

shygirl said:


> I asked on of the barmen in the albert if he thought there was any substance to the police allegations.  In a slightly hushed tone, he said he thought there probably was.  I thought that the two establishments had an ok rapport, shame that. <ed: material removed>


That's the kind of wild defamatory accusations that gets websites closed down.


----------



## editor (Apr 30, 2009)

tarannau said:


> The Albert ....


You're really not thinking this through, are you? Maybe you'd like to edit your comments?


----------



## tarannau (Apr 30, 2009)

I don't think I've said anything controversial or that the OB aren't already aware of tbh.   But post amended to clarify


----------



## editor (Apr 30, 2009)

tarannau said:


> Hmm, the Albert bar staff should shut up really.


Have they actually said anything to you - or are you going on a rumour?


----------



## phildwyer (Apr 30, 2009)

According to the Sun:

"DCI Sedgemore said that it is common practice for veteran dealers to hide the majority of their stash in their anus.  He said when a sale is near they then remove some and put it in their mouth. This can make it difficult for officers to find stashes as "intimate searches" cannot be generally carried out on the street." 

Does DCI Sedgemore speak the truth?


----------



## gabi (Apr 30, 2009)

editor said:


> That's the kind of wild defamatory accusations that gets websites closed down.



There's a couple of fucking idiots working in le albert at the mo so it wouldn't surprise me if they did say shit like that. They ship these guys in from pubs outside brixton, they work for a few months there and think they know the area. Then they either get sacked or sick of it. Grain of salt.


----------



## editor (Apr 30, 2009)

phildwyer said:


> According to the Sun:
> 
> "DCI Sedgemore said that it is common practice for veteran dealers to hide the majority of their stash in their anus.  He said when a sale is near they then remove some and put it in their mouth. This can make it difficult for officers to find stashes as "intimate searches" cannot be generally carried out on the street."
> 
> Does DCI Sedgemore speak the truth?


According to the SLP, dealers also have two mobile phones _and_ a charger up their chuff.

Oh hang on. This isn't the forum for you, phil, is it?


----------



## netbob (Apr 30, 2009)

gabi said:


> There's a couple of fucking idiots working in le albert at the mo so it wouldn't surprise me if they did say shit like that. They ship these guys in from pubs outside brixton, they work for a few months there and think they know the area. Then they either get sacked or sick of it. Grain of salt.



about a quater of the barstaff are long term locals, the rest have been there for some time too as far as i can remember


----------



## gabi (Apr 30, 2009)

memespring said:


> about a quater of the barstaff are long term locals, the rest have been there for some time too as far as i can remember



eh? only one's long term local, at last count. depends on what u mean by long term i guess.


----------



## phildwyer (Apr 30, 2009)

editor said:


> Oh hang on. This isn't the forum for you, phil, is it?



Dayum you're on the ball today.  But I'll find a way around your petty-bourgeois rules and regulations.  Smash the system!


----------



## ymu (May 1, 2009)

Can anyone verify the facts given in the rebuttal reproduced by Mrs M here and in the post after that? Such as Tony making regular requests to the police to have more done about the dealers, the House of Bottles being the only premises searched that night, Tony being arrested after tackling a dealer in his shop ... shit like that.

If it is substantially true, is this not a tad suspicious, or have I turned into a conspiraloon?


----------



## shygirl (May 1, 2009)

editor said:


> That's the kind of wild defamatory accusations that gets websites closed down.



Hello!  What part of my post is defammatory?!!!


----------



## wurlycurly (May 1, 2009)

shygirl said:


> Hello!  What part of my post is defammatory?!!!



It's defamatory because it may give an individual or a business a negative image. Rocket salad etc


----------



## old dog (May 2, 2009)

i was in (ed: err, no)  on tursday and ther was 3 or 4 big mumas at the back and thay wer doing it selling


----------



## editor (May 2, 2009)

shygirl said:


> Hello!  What part of my post is defammatory?!!!


You made unsubstantiated and rather serious allegations concerning the brewery's activities. It's got nothing to do with 'image' but everything to do with ensuring this site isn't the subject of a law suit.


----------



## nick h. (May 2, 2009)

old dog said:


> i was in (ed: err, no)  on tursday and ther was 3 or 4 big mumas at the back and thay wer doing it selling



(that) security don't keep the dealers out - not worth making enemies of them for £8.50 an hour.


----------



## nick h. (May 4, 2009)

*Busy tomorrow?*

Come along to Tony's hearing at which he may or may not lose his licence - 2pm at the town hall.

Later at 6 pm in the town hall is the CPCG monthly meeting - all welcome - our commander, Supt. Sharon Rowe will be there to answer all your questions about House of Bottles, street dealing and so on.


----------



## Foucault's Wife (May 5, 2009)

Success  Tony has his license back.

I'll report more later, I have to go to another work meeting now.


----------



## tufty79 (May 5, 2009)

excellent news foucault's wife - cheers for letting us know (sorry i couldn't make the hearing, but glad to hear it all went well)


----------



## Crispy (May 5, 2009)

Foucault's Wife said:


> Success  Tony has his license back.
> 
> I'll report more later, I have to go to another work meeting now.


awesome news


----------



## shakespearegirl (May 5, 2009)

That's great.

Will make sure to stop by and make a purchase soon..


----------



## quimcunx (May 5, 2009)

good news.


----------



## pk (May 5, 2009)

Good stuff. Well done all those concerned.


----------



## nick h. (May 5, 2009)

A most surprising victory - the police caved, much to their disgust, on the advice of their barrister. Just before the hearing he offered a deal - the police would seek some extra conditions on Tony's licence and drop their attempt to revoke it. Most puzzling, as the police seemed highly likely to win. They had video showing dealers lingering in Tony's shop, and they maintained their story that the dealers were reloading.  

Tony's only excuse for letting the dealers in and passing the time of day with them is the unwritten rule on Coldharbour Lane which all shopkeepers adhere to for their own safety: dealers can be treated like other customers if they behave. Tony has already been pushing the boundaries by throwing them out if a user happens to be in the shop or if the dealers talk to anybody but him. If he tries to bar them they get violent. 

Those are the rules. But I doubt the councillors would have seen it that way. Although there was no evidence of reloading they seemed of a mind to believe whatever the police said. 

Those extra conditions:

1) cameras inside (Tony already has them)
2) cameras outside (Tony already has them)
3) railings, like the ones in front of the Albert (Tony wanted those ages ago,  but was discouraged by the council's attitude. The Albert's ones required planning permission but it wasn't applied for.  I hear retrospective permission is being sought.)
4) Tony to be replaced on the licence by somebody else (funnily enough, Tony wasn't on the licence - his sister was. It seems the police hadn't noticed. Anyway, this was a moral victory and a PR win for the police - a way for them to signal that Tony is not responsible enough to be a licensee. It will make no difference to his ability to run the business.)
5) individuals on a list provided by the police to be barred.

The fifth condition is a tough one. Some of those individuals will cut up rough. They will be named and shamed on the police list which will have photos of them and Tony will have to display it on the wall next to his licence. 

Tony reckons the police will tell some of the people on the list to attempt to gain entry. No doubt a few of them are police informers anyway. 

Chief Insp. Wallace attended the hearing and didn't seem best pleased with the deal - Tony will have to work very hard and take plenty of risks to hang on to that licence. 

Tony will be back in business in the morning - so please come on down and stock up!


----------



## Crispy (May 5, 2009)

I'll put my liver on the line!


----------



## colacubes (May 5, 2009)

Yay - that's brilliant (although all the police stuff is a little odd )


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 5, 2009)

Someone told me as I was on my way home today that 800 letters in support of Tony were sent. Has anyone else heard this? I hope it's true because that's a veritable flood of support.


----------



## nick h. (May 6, 2009)

Tony is really miserable about the way the police have sulllied his name - so please drop in and say hi. I have been invited by Supt. Musker to look at the evidence - which nobody but Tony and the police have yet seen - so that I can be persuaded  of his guilt. (This was because I questioned the evidence against him at the CPCG mtg tonight.) So I will report back.


----------



## Bob (May 6, 2009)

tufty79 said:


> excellent news foucault's wife - cheers for letting us know (sorry i couldn't make the hearing, but glad to hear it all went well)



Great news. 

BTW Foucalt's wife did anyone ever welcome you to U75? If not then welcome, have a cup of tea and don't lend Dub a crutch.


----------



## tufty79 (May 6, 2009)

and have a hobnob


----------



## shakespearegirl (May 7, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Tony is really miserable about the way the police have sulllied his name - so please drop in and say hi. I have been invited by Supt. Musker to look at the evidence - which nobody but Tony and the police have yet seen - so that I can be persuaded  of his guilt. (This was because I questioned the evidence against him at the CPCG mtg tonight.) So I will report back.



Isn't it a bit strange that the police are trying to convince people of his guilt? Bit witch hunty.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 8, 2009)

It just shoes how woefully out of touch they are.


----------



## tufty79 (May 8, 2009)

yup.

thank you tony - good to have you back. and nice to see you (unexpectedly) this evening.

not that you read the boards.  but he did say thank you to 'the internet people' the other day


----------



## passpat2 (May 9, 2009)

After chatting in depth to parties involved the other day I can't help but get the impression that many posts on here have hit the nail on the head. Tony has been naieve and has offered little resistance to the problem outside his premesis in the past which we both believe has lead to the current situation. 

But certain people in the area certainly have not helped resolve, but maybe assisted the authorities view of the situation.


----------



## evilkitty (May 9, 2009)

passpat2 said:


> Tony has been naieve and has offered little resistance to the problem outside his premesis in the past which we both believe has lead to the current situation.



Ummm...I think the point is actually that it isn't Tony's job to police the pavement outside his shop and he does the best he can with little help and oftentimes hindrance from the powers that be.  

How happy would you be to have to tell numerous unsavoury characters to remove themselves from outside your house night after night?  How safe would that make you feel?  

I think Tony has done the best he can with a difficult situation and then been shat all over by the Police. 

kitty


----------



## cybertect (May 9, 2009)

Why do I get the impression that I'm hearing more and more stories about the police acting like this?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 9, 2009)

passpat2 said:


> Tony has been naieve and has offered little resistance to the problem outside his premesis in the past which we both believe has lead to the current situation.



I think he has done his level best, but many people running businesses in this area are acutely aware that standing up to threats is a dangerous activity and the type of incident in the link below is a constant worry...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7234194.stm
..it happened only a little way away....
I've heard people make threats against Tony. He has handled it in a non-aggressive way which is actually a very brave stand.

The police are fully aware of the problem but do not support local businesses in the way they should. Remember, the police do not live locally. In all the years I have lived in Brixton I have met only one officer who was from Brixton. They generally are woefully uninformed about what goes on.

They are often very cynical about people who live here. One officer really upset me because his attitude was that this area is a hell-hole and all the decent people have moved away


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 9, 2009)

evilkitty said:


> Ummm...I think the point is actually that it isn't Tony's job to police the pavement outside his shop and he does the best he can with little help and oftentimes hindrance from the powers that be.
> 
> How happy would you be to have to tell numerous unsavoury characters to remove themselves from outside your house night after night?  How safe would that make you feel?
> 
> ...



^^^
This


----------



## nick h. (May 9, 2009)

I don't think the police would have targeted Tony if he had barred the dealers from his shop. Which he is now compelled to, as a condition of his licence. The police have given him about ten photos of dealers who he must not allow through the door. Let's hope these people realise Tony's got no choice and don't try to punish him.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 9, 2009)

Well, and I hope that he if has to call police for assistance they actually respond, which has not been the case before.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 9, 2009)

nick h. said:


> The police have given him about ten photos of dealers who he must not allow through the door.


I fail to understand why the police didn't do this before....it's not as if Tony hasn't tried to have dialogue with the police over a number of years. They're the ones who are supposed to know this sort of thing, not Tony.


----------



## nick h. (May 9, 2009)

They could quite easily have imposed all these new conditions on his licence in the normal way, without shutting his business down.  But what they really wanted to do was chuck him out of Brixton without a court hearing. I know of two other occasions when they've done this successfully.


----------



## tufty79 (May 9, 2009)

TBH he deserves an apology from the police for the way hes been treated.

would it be a bit too rocking the boat to ask for one on his behalf?


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 9, 2009)

They don't do apologies on the whole because it's an admission of liability. I know someone who spent 20 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit (involving the biggest non-disclosure of evidence to the defence in legal history; to whit, 201 witness statements) and he's never had an apology even though he said he'd rather have an apology than any compensation.


----------



## linerider (May 10, 2009)

nick h. said:


> I don't think the police would have targeted Tony if he had barred the dealers from his shop. Which he is now compelled to, as a condition of his licence. The police have given him about ten photos of dealers who he must not allow through the door. Let's hope these people realise Tony's got no choice and don't try to punish him.


Is it just me that finds it stupid that the old bill have pictures of 10 dealers and it's Tonys job to keep them out of his shop.If they know these people they should nick them,if they don't have any proof then why should Tony have to take action against them when the police don't.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 10, 2009)

There was something in the South London Press about Tony's shop. There was a police spokesperson who said something along the lines of Tony turning a blind eye to criminal activity in the area. To be honest I had no idea that the police no longer have responsibility for sorting out crime in the area and it's now shopkeepers who have to do it. Does this mean I now have to pay a proportion of my council tax to Tony?


----------



## editor (May 10, 2009)

I wouldn't fancy being a shopkeeper (or pub landlord) anywhere along Coldharbour Lane.


----------



## pboi (May 10, 2009)

peasants everywhere..shame as there are some cracking establishments. fck it, imagine if it was pedestranised and more bars/restaurants came in. would be the making of brix


----------



## nick h. (May 10, 2009)

.


----------



## gabi (May 10, 2009)

.


----------



## nick h. (May 10, 2009)

.


----------



## gabi (May 10, 2009)

nick h. said:


> How's that?
> .


----------



## FridgeMagnet (May 10, 2009)

Nice to know nothing seems to have changed with the local Vice since I used to live in the area.


----------



## gabi (May 10, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Done.
> ---



.


----------



## editor (May 10, 2009)

Can folks perhaps do a little thinking before posting up (or requoting) rumours, allegations and potential law-suit bringing comments about unrelated businesses please? The police read these boards.

Thanks.


----------



## nick h. (May 11, 2009)

nick h. said:


> I have been invited by Supt. Musker to look at the evidence - which nobody but Tony and the police have yet seen - so that I can be persuaded  of his guilt. (This was because I questioned the evidence against him at the CPCG mtg tonight.) So I will report back.



I've now been uninvited because this post suggests I wouldn't have treated the evidence (or absence of it) confidentially.  It makes no difference because I would never have agreed to view it on the basis that I was not to discuss it with anyone. It seems that the offer to let me see it was just a pretence of transparency at the CPCG meeting.  

It's hard to escape the conclusion that the police themselves have no confidence in this evidence. Evidence that doesn't stand up to public scrutiny (even after a case has closed) isn't really evidence, is it?  The police are now proposing to show it to Rachel Heywood (a councillor for Tony's ward) instead of me. But if she's not allowed to tell the public what she sees I can't see how this will help persuade anybody that the police weren't going after the wrong target all along.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 11, 2009)

Jesus wept. Words fail me.


----------



## linerider (May 13, 2009)

I was just walking past the HoB and there was 3 old bill in the shop,an inspector and a couple of plod,they seemed to be in there just to intimidate at one point they said that they were checking that there weren't any drug dealers out the front and then started asking about why the licence wasn't on show(it hasn't been returned yet).the inspector said about 6 times that he wasn't trying to intimidate them.How intimidating is that?.


----------



## Foucault's Wife (May 13, 2009)

Tony said yesterday he felt he was being harassed by the police   It looks like the whole issue isn't over and he still needs our support.


----------



## Bob (May 14, 2009)

nick h. said:


> I've now been uninvited because this post suggests I wouldn't have treated the evidence (or absence of it) confidentially.  It makes no difference because I would never have agreed to view it on the basis that I was not to discuss it with anyone. It seems that the offer to let me see it was just a pretence of transparency at the CPCG meeting.
> 
> It's hard to escape the conclusion that the police themselves have no confidence in this evidence. Evidence that doesn't stand up to public scrutiny (even after a case has closed) isn't really evidence, is it?  The police are now proposing to show it to Rachel Heywood (a councillor for Tony's ward) instead of me. But if she's not allowed to tell the public what she sees I can't see how this will help persuade anybody that the police weren't going after the wrong target all along.



Quite a few posters here will know Rachel Heywood - basically the Labour activist ones since she's a Labour councillor. Plus Memespring & Nipsla know her I think. So maybe one of them can ask her on to explain? 

In fact come to think of it I think she may have posted her once or twice at some point.

I've met her but her reaction to me being a Lib Dem was cool. Not in the  way.


----------



## Jonti (May 22, 2009)

ymu said:


> It's sounding an awful lot like he's being victimised for being tough on the dealers ...


That's certainly the impression I've received. 

I'm struggling, frankly, to apply Hanlon's Razor.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 22, 2009)

pboi said:


> peasants everywhere..shame as there are some cracking establishments. fck it, imagine if it was pedestranised and more bars/restaurants came in. would be the making of brix



troll?


----------



## Pip (May 22, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> troll?



Blatantly.


----------



## editor (May 22, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> troll?


He was being a bit of a prick elsewhere today too. Oh well...


----------



## pboi (May 22, 2009)

nah im being serious.  A pedestrianised street would be great, Coldharbour seems as good as any!


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 22, 2009)

As long as it's pedestrianised and not one of those 'shared space' places like in West London where it's hellish for the visually impaired. The idea is to make eye contact with vehicle drivers so they don't run you over....

http://www.gdba.org.uk/sharedstreets/index.php?id=204


----------



## Crispy (May 22, 2009)

it'd make driving from clapham to camberwell a bit tricky...


----------



## Kanda (May 22, 2009)

Crispy said:


> it'd make driving from clapham to camberwell a bit tricky...


 
Sth Circular. Too much traffic down Coldharbour as it is.


----------



## pboi (May 22, 2009)

exactly. as far as roads go, coldharbour lane can be bypassed.  Think of all the restaurants and bars and the shared space they could all have.  Some real gems of places on that road already, they could flourish


----------



## hipipol (May 22, 2009)

pboi said:


> exactly. as far as roads go, coldharbour lane can be bypassed.  Think of all the restaurants and bars and the shared space they could all have.  Some real gems of places on that road already, they could flourish



yep, just what the ol place needs, MORE bars!!!

I think I will show solidarity with Tony (if he'd stuck with his Sax lessons he'd be rich and famous by now and the cops would be killing themselves to be nice to him!!) by buying loads of White Star


----------



## RaverDrew (May 22, 2009)

pboi said:


> exactly. as far as roads go, coldharbour lane can be bypassed.  Think of all the restaurants and bars and the shared space they could all have.  Some real gems of places on that road already, they could flourish



Here's an idea, why don't you just fuck off to East Dulwich or summink.... Plenty of fancy restaurants and bars, and I've heard there's less "peasants" for you to get riled at down them ends.


----------



## tufty79 (May 22, 2009)

we've enough bars on this stretch of CL.
and possibly enough restaurants 

moar shared space. and grass verges. not that they'll fit anywhere


----------



## pboi (May 22, 2009)

brixton needs more bars and restaurants, cafes, delis. would be nice

not fcking nail bars and hair salons


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 22, 2009)

No, pboi it should be wall-to-wall bloke shops innit? Sod giving the ladies places, we've closed down all the puiblic toilets women can use and put in pop-up pissoirs, why don't women take the hint and stay in the kitchen where they belong.


----------



## Kanda (May 22, 2009)

Mrs Magpie said:


> No, pboi it should be wall-to-wall bloke shops innit? Sod giving the ladies places, we've closed down all the puiblic toilets women can use and put in pop-up pissoirs, why don't women take the hint and stay in the kitchen where they belong.


 
She-pee


----------



## tufty79 (May 22, 2009)

not quite the same thing though, is it?


----------



## pboi (May 22, 2009)

eh?  I just imagine it could be a real nice space thats all.  Brixton is saturated with some shops and not enough of others. Fact


----------



## Pip (May 22, 2009)

I'm on my way out so won't get drawn into a ting (ner ner), but can I just say how much it riles me when people move to an area and then complain about the kind of shops the natives frequent? There are nail shops and hair shops because it's a poor black area you fools, if you don't like it fuck off somewhere else.


----------



## RaverDrew (May 22, 2009)

pboi said:


> brixton needs more bars and restaurants, cafes, delis. would be nice
> 
> not fcking nail bars and hair salons



If you don't like it, just fuck off why don't you ?


----------



## Kanda (May 22, 2009)

kitty_kitty said:


> not quite the same thing though, is it?


 
I was joking!!


----------



## tufty79 (May 22, 2009)

*irony fail head on today*


----------



## Jonti (May 22, 2009)

At the time of Betty Windsor's Jubilee that part of Coldharbour Lane was closed off for a nighttime street party.  Not your traditional Queen's Jubilee street party* it's true, the dirty dancing was  

heh! that reminds me how one guy went utterly ape-shit 'cos "his girl" was doing the sexy bum rubs and all.  The crowd closed ranks against the testerical chapie to leave him foaming and raving on the fringes while the rest of us cheered on the dancers.  Good times!

Aaanyways, there is a much simpler, cheaper and less disruptive way enormously to enlarge the effective pedestrianised space in Brixton's Town Centre.  Simply make a walk-thru out of the end arch of the railway line that blocks and pinches the pavement down to a bottleneck for visitors who turn right when they come out the tube.

Imagine it: come out the tube, turn right, cross Atlantic Road, walk through the opened up end archway into Brixton Station Road.  That's pedestrians only already.  Then down Brixton Station Road to Pope's Road, across Atlantic Road into Electric Avenue and back up to the main road to near the Tube again. A huge loop of pedestrianised public space right in the heart of Brixton, leading people right to the entrances of the covered markets!

All it needs is for Railtrack and LB Lambeth to work together to get that end arch opened.


* I'm not entirely sure any of the requisite paperwork was done either


----------



## Crispy (May 22, 2009)

That end arch has been bugging me for years 

Space Syntax do good analysis of this sort of thing. Lambeth hired them to analyse Brixton: http://www.spacesyntax.com/en/projects-and-clients/urban-projects/brixton.aspx (the PDF has more info)


----------



## editor (May 22, 2009)

pboi said:


> eh?  I just imagine it could be a real nice space thats all.  Brixton is saturated with some shops and not enough of others. Fact


If you want a "nice" area stuffed full of little delis and trendy restaurants without a 'peasant' in sight, perhaps you'd be better off moving up to Cla'am. Or maybe another country.


----------



## pboi (May 22, 2009)

Clam is horrible. Carts everywhere.

Where did I ask for peasant removal?  You lot are talking about it


----------



## pboi (May 22, 2009)

*testerical*

word of the day!! amazing


----------



## Jonti (May 22, 2009)

Crispy said:


> That end arch has been bugging me for years
> 
> Space Syntax do good analysis of this sort of thing. Lambeth hired them to analyse Brixton: http://www.spacesyntax.com/en/projects-and-clients/urban-projects/brixton.aspx (the PDF has more info)


I was dismayed and surprised the opportunity to repurpose it as a pedestrian walk-thru was not taken years ago.  Long-timers will recall the Jackets baked potato shop that jutted out under the bridge outside the Tube blocking the pavement.  

That part of the pavement outside the Tube was widened by knocking down Jackets. But the widened pavement doesn't really lead anywhere.  Opening up the end arch would give us a pedestrianised Town Centre without needing to close roads.

It's long overdue in my opinion.


----------



## Orang Utan (May 22, 2009)

pboi said:


> Clam is horrible. Carts everywhere.
> 
> Where did I ask for peasant removal?  You lot are talking about it




http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=9116259&postcount=224


----------



## RaverDrew (May 22, 2009)

pboi said:


> Clam is horrible. Carts everywhere.
> 
> Where did I ask for peasant removal?  You lot are talking about it



http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=8855376&postcount=15

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=9116259&postcount=224

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=9104724&postcount=184

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=8898763&postcount=1670

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=8670730&postcount=34

I could go on pboi... it's clearly a bit of an obsession of yours


----------



## Orang Utan (May 22, 2009)

you're quite clearly a wally pboi, a despicable duurbrain


----------



## editor (May 22, 2009)

RaverDrew said:


> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=8855376&postcount=15
> I could go on pboi... it's clearly a bit of an obsession of yours









LOL.


----------



## pboi (May 22, 2009)

in this thread though?   I just brought up a pedestrianised street.

pwned yourself


----------



## Orang Utan (May 22, 2009)

pboi said:


> in this thread though?   I just brought up a pedestrianised street.
> 
> pwned yourself


see post 264, you fanny


----------



## editor (May 22, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> see post 264, you fanny


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 22, 2009)

pboi said:


> I just brought up a pedestrianised street.


You puke up pavements? A sort of concrete bulimic? I always knew you were a wrong 'un, but now I know you're a weirdy wrong 'un..


----------



## Mrs Magpie (May 22, 2009)

...and I dread to think of what you do with bollards 



...in fact lets not go there....


----------



## tufty79 (May 22, 2009)

15 litres of veg oil from aziz supermarket for about fifteen quid. if it assists with the bollard problem 

last tango in.. er.. brixton?


----------



## pboi (May 22, 2009)

just gotta take that one!! total pwn!


----------

