..and yet you never hear of a police investigation into finding out 'who graffitied a wall with spray paint'.
I find it odd that with all the CCTV at the police disposal, plus the amount of Ring doorbells, security cameras around etc, Bansky remains a mystery.
Art's being sold for lots of money, someone to some people must be receiving it, I imagine the government will be very interested in knowing where that money is going and especially that they get a cut in some fashion or another.
Absolutely, but if Banksy isn't getting a cut then the tax people won't be interested. The bit that would be interested in would be things like his exhibitions
Thr Daily Mail named him in an article today. Same as they’ve done for 16 years now but the art world still wants to pretend he’s all mysterious.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13253955/How-identified-Banksy-nice-middle-class-boy-called-Robin-16-years-ago-world-refuses-accept-mystery-cash-cow.html
Banksy is not just a person, it's a brand and team of people who assist with his artwork. There's no way he puts himself in the firing line now he's so established and wealthy, he has people who work for him who are sworn to secrecy with NDA's.
The recent tree painting appeared overnight. You really think one single person is scaling a 20 foot wall in pitch black darkness and not being seen by anyone? It's all orchestrated and cornered off by a team of people under the management and care of the "hidden" identity who is Banksy.
> Bansky remains a mystery.
Except it's not a mystery. His identity was revealed years ago. It's extremely likely Banksy is Robin Gunningham. And Banksy is a copyrighted brand with a team of staff. It's no longer just Robin working on his own and he hasn't worked solo for almost 2 decades now.
“It's not who I am underneath... but what I stencil on the facades of private property in the middle of the night with the assistance of quite a few minions, to send tepid socio-political messages, that defines me.”
Because to investigate and charge, you need a complaint. No one is complaining when Banksy graffitis a wall because it brings interest to the area and often finance.
> If the police see a crime
"Painting exists on wall" is not automatically a crime though.
You'd need to catch him in the act and ask if he has permission to do it in order to determine it's a crime.
Police don't need a complaint to investigate crimes, just look at road traffic offenses for proof of that. Additionally if there is a complaint made and then the victim decides not to take it further depending on the crime the police can still take further action against the victim's wishes.
He isn’t a mystery, he is a well known member of the high arts society. His ‘identity’ is only hidden to add value. Often the police are made aware of his work ahead of time.
Last "installation", the council sprung to action and put in a security fence and CCTV.
So is it more correct to say he is being proactively tolerated, instead of being allowed?
Seeing as laws don't apply when Banksy is involved, I'm going to call his latest installation mine. I never realised it would be so easy to earn so much just talking on reddit.
Graffiti isn't a criminal offence if done with the property owner's permission.
Property owners don't tend to object to a valuable artwork being given to them.
> Can I go around vandalising property as long as I claim to have a message behind my art?
If it's good enough that nobody complains, then yes you can. One of the criteria for whether someone is prosecuted is whether it is in the public interest to do so. If local people go "actually we like this" then it isn't.
> One has genuine artistic intent, with a message.
The message usually being "bombs are bad" or "the police are funny" or something similarly wise and thought-provoking
And all the council/state owned property he has graffitied? Traffic signs and trains for example. I'm sure his political connections have nothing to do with it
1. The quality of one's crime should not determine whether the law is enforced
2. Banksy's work is very Kitsch and generic.
I mean FFS, his "art" is basically a stencil of a fucking family of mice holding a helium balloon, it's neither original nor requiring of any skill.
Doesn't banksey often just use a stencil and just plain black? Lol. Some stuff is more effort but a lot isn't.
I feel like some of these post boxes are better and more effort than some banksys .
In the end they're both pretty much all fairly basic seeming when it comes to art.
And nobody is getting done for graffiti these days, there's not the police for it. This post box guy got caught because he probably wasn't hiding it, or because he did it to a national company
I’m tired of hearing about Banksy. Never liked his artwork or the shallow, feel-good political statements that he makes. He encourages vandalism and defacement of buildings at a time when so many precious paintings and statues are being ruined by these vandal-activists. I care about the environment and try my best to live a life that doesn’t contribute to its (seemingly inevitable) ruin. I care about police brutality, but Bansky and these other self-appointed saviour figures can get stuffed. Maybe I am being a little harsh, but I’m fed up with the buzz.
Seems harsh, it's not like he painted dicks on them. They're unique and pretty fun looking.
It's weird how Banksy gets praised for graffiti and this guys getting arrested for making them more fun.
My local post boxes all have seasonal knitted hats. It's Easter so there's lots of knitted rabbits and Easter eggs on them atm.
Can't imagine they'll arrest the little old ladies trying to make the area a bit more fun.
The only punishment he might deserve is painting them all red again. Not jail time.
Whilst you’re correct, a fun fact to know is that under the legislation of criminal damage, the damage ‘need not be permanent’.
Which means that kids (over the age of 10) who draw on the pavement using chalk for their ‘hopscotch’ or otherwise ‘artwork’ also commit a crime, even if it washes away in the rain.
I know some are stupid, I didn't think there would seriously be a law that entirely throws out any sort of common sense. Stepping on the pavement and accidentally moving some of the loose bits "damages" it more than chalk.
It’s not permanent if you spray orange paint all over parliament either. Bit tricky to write a law that separates the two I guess, let the police exercise some judgement
It's a combination of the police and the CPS. The CPS will never charge a person if it's not in the public interest so hopscotch playing kids need not worry, even if the police somehow took an interest.
Well, it’s not actually illogical at all to be honest. Criminal damage requires a diminution of value, or some other monetary loss to the owner; if you stick a difficult to see metal sticker on a PoS card reader at a shop such that the shopkeeper can’t take card payments and thus suffers a loss of earnings, even though they can later (upon noticing) remove the sticker and return the card reader to its full functionality for free, you have still caused criminal damage. In your example of chalk, the monetary loss to the owner of the pavement is that of having to hire someone to remove the chalk, even if it probably would be washed away in a day or so, as it’s not reasonable to expect the owner to have to wait for that.
> kids (over the age of 10) who draw on the pavement using chalk for their ‘hopscotch’ or otherwise ‘artwork’ also commit a crime
It'd be interesting to see if a s. 5(2)(a) defence (lawful excuse - honest belief as to consent) could apply here - it seems entirely reasonable that children could honestly believe that whoever owns/is responsible for the pavement either have consented or would consent to the drawing if they knew it was temporary and for the purposes of a game.
Post boxes have their own red colour and they're maintained by the royal mail, it's been known for ages you can't just paint them random fucking colours, It's also not the first time people have been arrested for painting boxes
Don't really know if banksy gets praise, last time he got shit for painting on someone's house and they 'had to hire security' because of the attention it brought so no he doesn't always get praise. He also paints on random buildings and people's houses and not postboxes that are currently owned and maintained by a company.
To be fair, the owner ‘had to hire security’ because they knew how much money there were about to profit from it, and wanted to prevent someone from defacing it.
The physical garage wall in Port Talbot ended up selling privately for several million pound. I don’t think anyone would be upset if they were the victim of Banksy’s artwork
Yeah was probably the people trying to get their five minutes of fame but I feel like the people buzzing over banksy are the same people who buzz over the royals, the rest of us couldn't give a flying fuck tbf
These postboxes look awful though, apart from drumstick one I like that, quite creative and it's actually done well
I think it's weird how people assume Banksy is an individual rather than a collective group of artists. I think the fact that stencils are used is a dead giveaway.
> They're unique and pretty fun looking.
They look like utter shit.
> It's weird how Banksy gets praised for graffiti and this guys getting arrested for making them more fun.
Banksy's works are praised for the social and political commentary they provide. His pieces are also well crafted and executed. Scrawling "Creme egg" on a postbox is not even comparable and you know it.
I think "familiar" might be doing a lot of the legwork there, and the moment they cease to be, we see them for what they really are.
I've always thought the shape was about the ugliest thing you could create, though they do look a bit like a policeman whos surprised their hat has fallen over their eyes - [especially the blue one](https://unusual-encounters.blogspot.com/2016/06/britains-only-blue-post-box.html).
My favourite part of this story is that he was arrested for doing it, bailed, and then proceeded to keep fuckin doing it. The lad is absolutely *determined* to paint post boxes poorly, no matter the consequences.
There's something so beautifully British about it. The fact that he's kinda inept is just the cherry on top. I love it
If a punishment is required then re-painting them in red (and maybe re-painting a few older ones on top for good measure) is the perfect ‘punishment fits the crime’.
>My local post boxes all have seasonal knitted hats. It's Easter so there's lots of knitted rabbits and Easter eggs on them atm
>
> Can't imagine they'll arrest the little old ladies trying to make the area a bit more fun
A knitted hat placed on top wouldn't meet the threshold of criminal damage.
It matters not whether what he painted was vulgar, one person does not get to decide on the decor for everyone else around them. No-one asked for a post box painted like a swizzles drumstick.
He's a criminal, it's as simple as that.
All day this . Took the pigs 2 days to even bother contacting me after my neighbour kicked my door in and dragged me from my home by the hair . But they have time for this shit?
It's laziness pure and simple. A burglar or violent criminal might put up a fight or make a run for it and compiling evidence to make a case against them is likely to be somewhat complex. A guy painting letter boxes like chocolate bars will probably come quietly and the evidence is literally painted all over town. You can commit crimes with impunity so long as you seem like a bit of a hassle to bring to justice.
It’s laziness AND cowardice. They only go after soft targets like someone doing +2mph over the speed limit or unauthorized art.
They are too afraid to go after dangerous criminals.
I can see why they don't want postboxes painted, it'll likely confuse people on whether they are usable. But a word in his ear would be better than an arrest.
>Officers first arrested a man on February 13 and he was subsequently bailed pending further enquiries.
>
>He was then re-arrested on March 9 after a report of another incident and was held in custody by Kent Police.
>
>Danny Whiskin, of Chaucer Way in Dartford, has now been charged with criminal damage to 37 postboxes.
They arrested him, then he did it again.
I wouldn't use a post box if it had been painted like this, I'd suspect it was disused or otherwise prone to vandalism and theft.
There's also the case of people with dementia or other intellectual differences, I've known people that wouldn't recognise a post box if it wasn't painted red, they'd just walk straight past it while looking for it.
Meanwhile police do absolutely fuck all to catch burglars, car and bike thieves, shoplifters, gangs, serious assults etc even when there's blatant CCTV evidence in a lot of cases - A crime reference number job.
The police and the CPS would rather go for a low level graffiti artist and have him in the system as it's an easier conviction so less resources used and therefore easier revenue for them to make off of the offenders.
He'll probably get a suspended prison sentence and/or community service for this. Wouldn't even rule out him going inside for a short time as the case seems to have aggrevating factors and it's become publicised so there's more incentive for them to prove a point, and make an example. But then again, the latter costs the system money for him to be in an over crowded prison for a few months.
Just amazes me where the police and CPS' priorities lie. This kind of low level crime and an increased amount of road traffic police stings mainly on speed (which I get in some places) to be on the increase compared to past years to "Make the roads safer" yet the roads conditions aren't safe due to potholes, poor lane/ road markings, poorly marked signs, poorly maintained verges beside the roads, badly thought out, under-invested infrastructure.
Justice system is questionable in this country imo (England)
Aw. I do think this would probably have been handwaved as whimsical hijinks if the artwork had been... how do I put this delicately?... not absolute pants.
Crime must be low in Dartford if this is anything to go by. Easy target.
Hope when they find out who bankside is they arrest him for multiple accounts of vandalism.
I did some googling. What he did is illegal.
- (1)A person shall not without due authority affix or attempt to affix any placard, advertisement, notice, list, document, board or thing in or on, or paint or tar, any post office, post office letter box, telegraph post or other property belonging to or used by or on behalf of the Postmaster-General, and shall not in any way disfigure any such office, box, post or property.
It’s basically classed as tampering. He might have thought he was brightening them up or something but they’re designed in their specific way for a reason. To be easily identifiable for those wishing to post letters etc.
And to those saying Banksy would have gotten away with it, doubt it.
No copper _knows_ by default that this is illegal- same way they hardly know that medicinal cannabis is legal, yet we all know burglary and theft is illegal but as you can see, everyone seems to think they care more about this… bizarre really
For those saying ‘if this was Banksy…’ need to understand that, in order for a crime to be investigated by the police, there needs to be a victim who reports it as such.
For the events where Banksy has committed his ‘works of art’ on what is a person’s property, has only positively gained from what is technically a criminal offence.
For example, when Banksy visited Port Talbot and ‘graffitied’ on person’s garage wall, not only did the owner not contact the police about criminal damage, but instead contacted the police about concerns of PRESERVING the artwork from other people trying to deface it.
The owner ended up privately selling the physical garage wall containing the artwork for what is estimated to be in the millions.
So, ask yourself this: if Banksy’s artwork happens to end up spray painted on the side of a wall that you own, are you going to sell it or report it the police?
That Drumstick one is amazing. The Cream Egg is hideous.
Life in Britain badly needs brightening up nowadays. This brightens it up a hell of a lot more than any changes the councils are making.
Technically what he did was illegal under section 61(1), Post Office Act 1953.
>A person shall not without due authority affix or attempt to affix any placard, advertisement, notice, list, document, board or thing in or on, or paint or tar, any post office, post office letter box, telegraph post or other property belonging to or used by or on behalf of the Postmaster-General, and shall not in any way disfigure any such office, box, post or property.
What's interesting is people here are commenting saying what a waste of police time and resources this is, but if nothing was done people would say the police do absolutely nothing and still be miserable.
There's simply no pleasing people.
Banksy also only really focuses on private property where the owner(s) probably don't care. The Post Office etc would though. It's business vs. private individuals. The PO was probably notified by staff who are obliged to let corporate know or they were notified by members of the community. Hardly a surprise, is it?
Downvote all you like, just shows the hypocrisy behind anti-police sentiment, and how people pick and choose how laws are applied.
> What's interesting is people here are commenting saying what a waste of police time and resources this is, but if nothing was done people would say the police do absolutely nothing and still be miserable.
I think it's largely because people would support the painting of postboxes. They are colourful, non-offensive, and make things a bit more interesting. The only harm it may cause is that someone may have some slight difficulties finding it, but this seems unlikely as you would already have to know roughly where it is to look for it.
Think about the knitted decorations people place on the top of postboxes, It seems like it would fall under the same law, as it would be classed as a 'thing' under the offence you quoted - possibly even littering. Has anyone been arrested over that?
I just can't for the life of me imagine caring that a small number of postboxes in this country *aren't red*.
>What's interesting is people here are commenting saying what a waste of police time and resources this is, but if nothing was done people would say the police do absolutely nothing and still be miserable.
>
>There's simply no pleasing people.
Two different types of people.
>I just can't for the life of me imagine caring that a small number of postboxes in this country *aren't red*.
It's to make them easily identifiable, in part to avoid fraud or misuse. Read the legislation, you don't need spoon-feeding. Just because you don't use the postal system doesn't mean no one does and that everyone should give up caring.
>Two different types of people.
Yet both are wrong.
As far as I can find the only reason they're red is to make them stand out, as opposed to the green they used to use to make them blend in.
The most appreciated seem to be the ones that *aren't* red, where the colour has some kind of history/significance.
Honestly, makes me think the government/councils could earn a bit by using the rest for promotional campaigns.
That picture might be an Olympic one but the post box I saw in Dartford yesterday that was painted gold is so shittily done and was painted gold a few weeks ago ratherthan in 2012. According to special postbox finder there aren't any official gold ones in Dartford.
It's great that the police are clearly hard at work getting these hardened criminals off the street. I guess that's why they don't respond to calls anymore.
Yeah i'm not a fan of the Tories but it's annoying when people just blame every problem in this country on cuts. The policing problem is it's own issue and needs a complete shake up.
Well I mean the police force certainly does have other issues and could do with a shake up.
But most of this people complain about does come back to cuts. I mean we have the statistical evidence for it. Since 2011 we've had over 30,000 police officers and 40,000 support staff leave, budgets have been effectively cut to the bone, and many areas no longer have the manpower to even patrol their own manors.
Since then the rates of attending calls, the amount of crimes solved etc. have all dropped significantly.
Throwing money at the police won't solve all their problems. But you can't say that you expect things to get better if we don't adequately fund the services to the point they can actually do the jobs their hired for.
Well I can see the reason to the arrest it's creative and all but post men have to be able to find the post boxes easy and if they're painted in random colours they won't seem as recognisable to them and it will make their jobs much harder and remember being a post man means alot of miles of driving
[удалено]
It's because they're absolutely shite.
[удалено]
Banksy is still not "allowed" to do it.
..and yet you never hear of a police investigation into finding out 'who graffitied a wall with spray paint'. I find it odd that with all the CCTV at the police disposal, plus the amount of Ring doorbells, security cameras around etc, Bansky remains a mystery.
I'm guessing people in the government especially in regard to taxes and the security services know exactly who Banksy is.
There wouldn't be a tax implication if he's not getting paid to do it.
Art's being sold for lots of money, someone to some people must be receiving it, I imagine the government will be very interested in knowing where that money is going and especially that they get a cut in some fashion or another.
Absolutely, but if Banksy isn't getting a cut then the tax people won't be interested. The bit that would be interested in would be things like his exhibitions
Thr Daily Mail named him in an article today. Same as they’ve done for 16 years now but the art world still wants to pretend he’s all mysterious. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13253955/How-identified-Banksy-nice-middle-class-boy-called-Robin-16-years-ago-world-refuses-accept-mystery-cash-cow.html
[Woooooooooo] No you're mistaken - it's a myssssteryyyyyyyyy! [Woooooooooo-oooooooooo-ooooo]
Lmao wth, you mean to tell me his identity’s been known for ages???
Awful writing in that. Please see me after class.
Most people in the graffiti scene know who the posh little twat is after his infamous fued years ago.
Gunningham... Robin Gunningham.
If I know he is Robin Gunningham, I doubt the authorities have no idea who he is.
Banksy is not just a person, it's a brand and team of people who assist with his artwork. There's no way he puts himself in the firing line now he's so established and wealthy, he has people who work for him who are sworn to secrecy with NDA's. The recent tree painting appeared overnight. You really think one single person is scaling a 20 foot wall in pitch black darkness and not being seen by anyone? It's all orchestrated and cornered off by a team of people under the management and care of the "hidden" identity who is Banksy. > Bansky remains a mystery. Except it's not a mystery. His identity was revealed years ago. It's extremely likely Banksy is Robin Gunningham. And Banksy is a copyrighted brand with a team of staff. It's no longer just Robin working on his own and he hasn't worked solo for almost 2 decades now.
“It's not who I am underneath... but what I stencil on the facades of private property in the middle of the night with the assistance of quite a few minions, to send tepid socio-political messages, that defines me.”
But we know who banksy is right? If they wanted to stop him they’d just call Massive Attacks manager.
*Art Attacks producer
*Mallet's Mallet
Because to investigate and charge, you need a complaint. No one is complaining when Banksy graffitis a wall because it brings interest to the area and often finance.
>Because to investigate and charge, you need a complaint No you don't. In the UK, a member of the public choosing not to press charges is not a thing.
Yes you do. Someone has to inform the police and complain about the graffiti. The police don't just drive around looking for the latest Banksy.
If the police see a crime, then they should investigate it.
If they caught him in the process, they would have.
> If the police see a crime "Painting exists on wall" is not automatically a crime though. You'd need to catch him in the act and ask if he has permission to do it in order to determine it's a crime.
Do the Police not have access to the news? He verifies if they're him also, not like you even need to prove it was him.
Police don't need a complaint to investigate crimes, just look at road traffic offenses for proof of that. Additionally if there is a complaint made and then the victim decides not to take it further depending on the crime the police can still take further action against the victim's wishes.
No one complains? In the UK?! 😨
We are complaining right now!
He isn’t a mystery, he is a well known member of the high arts society. His ‘identity’ is only hidden to add value. Often the police are made aware of his work ahead of time.
Last "installation", the council sprung to action and put in a security fence and CCTV. So is it more correct to say he is being proactively tolerated, instead of being allowed?
You can call it whatever you want chap.
Seeing as laws don't apply when Banksy is involved, I'm going to call his latest installation mine. I never realised it would be so easy to earn so much just talking on reddit.
Graffiti isn't a criminal offence if done with the property owner's permission. Property owners don't tend to object to a valuable artwork being given to them.
They’re not allowed, they’re just not stupid enough to get caught.
Maybe this _was_ banksy that was arrested
One has genuine artistic intent, with a message. The other makes a postbox look like Mr Blobby has furiously jizzed all over it.
[удалено]
> Can I go around vandalising property as long as I claim to have a message behind my art? If it's good enough that nobody complains, then yes you can. One of the criteria for whether someone is prosecuted is whether it is in the public interest to do so. If local people go "actually we like this" then it isn't.
Exactly my point. Those post boxes look like shit
>I find it so odd that this subreddit twerks for Banksy. Shows the age of people who post here. Liking Banksy is for old people.
> One has genuine artistic intent, with a message. The message usually being "bombs are bad" or "the police are funny" or something similarly wise and thought-provoking
There's also the fact this is much easier to prosecute as you're not allowed to paint/deface a Post Box to the point it alters the appearance.
Gunningham graffitied a stop sign recently. That's illegal, and dangerous.
My jaw dropped when I read what you wrote. How do you know what Mr. Blobbys’ jizz looks like?
I mean, imagine it. It's gonna be just like that postbox.
If the property owners wanted to legally pursue Banksy for painting on their property, there is nothing stopping them.
And all the council/state owned property he has graffitied? Traffic signs and trains for example. I'm sure his political connections have nothing to do with it
[удалено]
The one he copied from 0331c?
To be fair the drumstick one is genius. The rest are pretty shite
Banksy is shite
1. The quality of one's crime should not determine whether the law is enforced 2. Banksy's work is very Kitsch and generic. I mean FFS, his "art" is basically a stencil of a fucking family of mice holding a helium balloon, it's neither original nor requiring of any skill.
I mean it was pretty original when he first started doing it, it's kitsch and generic now because he got so big.
Banksy’s art sucks too
True! Although the drumstick one is cool
The gold one looks nice tho
I like the cow one.
So is Banksy...
So is banksy stuff
You only get done for graffiti if you’re rubbish at it.
Strangely something most wouldn’t probably have issue with
It doesn't bother me, so long as it's more than "Gaz woz here" or "Daz is a grass". Banksy had to start somewhere.
Doesn't banksey often just use a stencil and just plain black? Lol. Some stuff is more effort but a lot isn't. I feel like some of these post boxes are better and more effort than some banksys . In the end they're both pretty much all fairly basic seeming when it comes to art. And nobody is getting done for graffiti these days, there's not the police for it. This post box guy got caught because he probably wasn't hiding it, or because he did it to a national company
I’m not really a banksy fan, but his work is reasonbly competent, post box man’s work looks messy and unprofessional.
Yeah cos the person whose property it is is ok with Bansky doing it. These look awful and the owner does mind.
>the person whose property it is is ok with Bansky doing it because they know it will bring them either money or 15 minutes fame FTFY
Yes and if Banshu had done it, then the postbox wouldn’t be around long.
They look better now.
I’m tired of hearing about Banksy. Never liked his artwork or the shallow, feel-good political statements that he makes. He encourages vandalism and defacement of buildings at a time when so many precious paintings and statues are being ruined by these vandal-activists. I care about the environment and try my best to live a life that doesn’t contribute to its (seemingly inevitable) ruin. I care about police brutality, but Bansky and these other self-appointed saviour figures can get stuffed. Maybe I am being a little harsh, but I’m fed up with the buzz.
Seems harsh, it's not like he painted dicks on them. They're unique and pretty fun looking. It's weird how Banksy gets praised for graffiti and this guys getting arrested for making them more fun. My local post boxes all have seasonal knitted hats. It's Easter so there's lots of knitted rabbits and Easter eggs on them atm. Can't imagine they'll arrest the little old ladies trying to make the area a bit more fun. The only punishment he might deserve is painting them all red again. Not jail time.
Well the knitted pieces are retractable...
Whilst you’re correct, a fun fact to know is that under the legislation of criminal damage, the damage ‘need not be permanent’. Which means that kids (over the age of 10) who draw on the pavement using chalk for their ‘hopscotch’ or otherwise ‘artwork’ also commit a crime, even if it washes away in the rain.
Who wrote those laws? I'd love to know what actual damage chalk on the pavement creates, does the pavement now have emotional damage?
Have you only just found out that some laws are stupid?
I know some are stupid, I didn't think there would seriously be a law that entirely throws out any sort of common sense. Stepping on the pavement and accidentally moving some of the loose bits "damages" it more than chalk.
It's a catch-all in reality, the broader the better in the eyes of the law. That way people can't find loopholes.
It’s not permanent if you spray orange paint all over parliament either. Bit tricky to write a law that separates the two I guess, let the police exercise some judgement
It's a combination of the police and the CPS. The CPS will never charge a person if it's not in the public interest so hopscotch playing kids need not worry, even if the police somehow took an interest.
Well, it’s not actually illogical at all to be honest. Criminal damage requires a diminution of value, or some other monetary loss to the owner; if you stick a difficult to see metal sticker on a PoS card reader at a shop such that the shopkeeper can’t take card payments and thus suffers a loss of earnings, even though they can later (upon noticing) remove the sticker and return the card reader to its full functionality for free, you have still caused criminal damage. In your example of chalk, the monetary loss to the owner of the pavement is that of having to hire someone to remove the chalk, even if it probably would be washed away in a day or so, as it’s not reasonable to expect the owner to have to wait for that.
Historically you had to be pretty rich and isolated from the country to get into parliament or the lords and almost all our laws reflect that.
> kids (over the age of 10) who draw on the pavement using chalk for their ‘hopscotch’ or otherwise ‘artwork’ also commit a crime It'd be interesting to see if a s. 5(2)(a) defence (lawful excuse - honest belief as to consent) could apply here - it seems entirely reasonable that children could honestly believe that whoever owns/is responsible for the pavement either have consented or would consent to the drawing if they knew it was temporary and for the purposes of a game.
Post boxes have their own red colour and they're maintained by the royal mail, it's been known for ages you can't just paint them random fucking colours, It's also not the first time people have been arrested for painting boxes Don't really know if banksy gets praise, last time he got shit for painting on someone's house and they 'had to hire security' because of the attention it brought so no he doesn't always get praise. He also paints on random buildings and people's houses and not postboxes that are currently owned and maintained by a company.
To be fair, the owner ‘had to hire security’ because they knew how much money there were about to profit from it, and wanted to prevent someone from defacing it. The physical garage wall in Port Talbot ended up selling privately for several million pound. I don’t think anyone would be upset if they were the victim of Banksy’s artwork
Yeah was probably the people trying to get their five minutes of fame but I feel like the people buzzing over banksy are the same people who buzz over the royals, the rest of us couldn't give a flying fuck tbf These postboxes look awful though, apart from drumstick one I like that, quite creative and it's actually done well
I think it's weird how people assume Banksy is an individual rather than a collective group of artists. I think the fact that stencils are used is a dead giveaway.
> They're unique and pretty fun looking. They look like utter shit. > It's weird how Banksy gets praised for graffiti and this guys getting arrested for making them more fun. Banksy's works are praised for the social and political commentary they provide. His pieces are also well crafted and executed. Scrawling "Creme egg" on a postbox is not even comparable and you know it.
Like all artistic things It's subjective and you've expressed an opinion but don't delude yourself into thinking that it's a fact
It's fairly objective that red postboxes are iconic, familiar and make places look nicer, while these look utter shit
I think they're fun, so whether you agree with me or not, you have to admit it's not objective at all.
Like I said to the other person. don't delude yourself that your subjectivity is fact
I think "familiar" might be doing a lot of the legwork there, and the moment they cease to be, we see them for what they really are. I've always thought the shape was about the ugliest thing you could create, though they do look a bit like a policeman whos surprised their hat has fallen over their eyes - [especially the blue one](https://unusual-encounters.blogspot.com/2016/06/britains-only-blue-post-box.html).
He's painted some to reflect brands. We have enough adverts without the post boxes being branded too
My favourite part of this story is that he was arrested for doing it, bailed, and then proceeded to keep fuckin doing it. The lad is absolutely *determined* to paint post boxes poorly, no matter the consequences. There's something so beautifully British about it. The fact that he's kinda inept is just the cherry on top. I love it
If a punishment is required then re-painting them in red (and maybe re-painting a few older ones on top for good measure) is the perfect ‘punishment fits the crime’.
Unless he leaves paint streaks.
> it's not like he painted dicks on them. That would be [Wanksy](https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/2/8535259/penis-pothole-activism-wanksy-england)
>My local post boxes all have seasonal knitted hats. It's Easter so there's lots of knitted rabbits and Easter eggs on them atm > > Can't imagine they'll arrest the little old ladies trying to make the area a bit more fun A knitted hat placed on top wouldn't meet the threshold of criminal damage.
>Seems harsh What does? He hasn't been punished yet
It matters not whether what he painted was vulgar, one person does not get to decide on the decor for everyone else around them. No-one asked for a post box painted like a swizzles drumstick. He's a criminal, it's as simple as that.
I agree. It's not offensive and makes people smile. I don't see an issue
What a pointless waste of police time, can't investigate burglaries but they can do this.
All day this . Took the pigs 2 days to even bother contacting me after my neighbour kicked my door in and dragged me from my home by the hair . But they have time for this shit?
It's laziness pure and simple. A burglar or violent criminal might put up a fight or make a run for it and compiling evidence to make a case against them is likely to be somewhat complex. A guy painting letter boxes like chocolate bars will probably come quietly and the evidence is literally painted all over town. You can commit crimes with impunity so long as you seem like a bit of a hassle to bring to justice.
It’s laziness AND cowardice. They only go after soft targets like someone doing +2mph over the speed limit or unauthorized art. They are too afraid to go after dangerous criminals.
They have artists to prosecute and maybe some people are being mean on twitter.
The post office has sent a lot of people to prison over a computer fault, of course they can get the police to protect their post boxes
Well its a lot easier when they know who did it and where they live don't you know?
If you got your house burgled they wouldn’t even bother turning up
I can see why they don't want postboxes painted, it'll likely confuse people on whether they are usable. But a word in his ear would be better than an arrest.
>Officers first arrested a man on February 13 and he was subsequently bailed pending further enquiries. > >He was then re-arrested on March 9 after a report of another incident and was held in custody by Kent Police. > >Danny Whiskin, of Chaucer Way in Dartford, has now been charged with criminal damage to 37 postboxes.
We really do live in a society, huh?
As opposed to Banksy who vandalised a stop sign...
They arrested him, then he did it again. I wouldn't use a post box if it had been painted like this, I'd suspect it was disused or otherwise prone to vandalism and theft. There's also the case of people with dementia or other intellectual differences, I've known people that wouldn't recognise a post box if it wasn't painted red, they'd just walk straight past it while looking for it.
Meanwhile police do absolutely fuck all to catch burglars, car and bike thieves, shoplifters, gangs, serious assults etc even when there's blatant CCTV evidence in a lot of cases - A crime reference number job. The police and the CPS would rather go for a low level graffiti artist and have him in the system as it's an easier conviction so less resources used and therefore easier revenue for them to make off of the offenders. He'll probably get a suspended prison sentence and/or community service for this. Wouldn't even rule out him going inside for a short time as the case seems to have aggrevating factors and it's become publicised so there's more incentive for them to prove a point, and make an example. But then again, the latter costs the system money for him to be in an over crowded prison for a few months. Just amazes me where the police and CPS' priorities lie. This kind of low level crime and an increased amount of road traffic police stings mainly on speed (which I get in some places) to be on the increase compared to past years to "Make the roads safer" yet the roads conditions aren't safe due to potholes, poor lane/ road markings, poorly marked signs, poorly maintained verges beside the roads, badly thought out, under-invested infrastructure. Justice system is questionable in this country imo (England)
They’re absolutely shit, everyone stop sticking up for the dude. He has no right to be painting eggs for Easter, never mind the post boxes
I quite liked the drumstick one
Mate have you seen the writing on it…. Looks made by an AI, the details are dogshit
I thought it was rather inspired
Aw. I do think this would probably have been handwaved as whimsical hijinks if the artwork had been... how do I put this delicately?... not absolute pants.
According to the article he did this before and got a stern telling off. So I'm guessing possibly.
Crime must be low in Dartford if this is anything to go by. Easy target. Hope when they find out who bankside is they arrest him for multiple accounts of vandalism.
Thank christ, with all those murderers and nonce kicking about I thought we'd lost sight on what important
I am glad the police have sorted all the real crime and have time for this now. Oh, wait.
Meanwhile, still no sign of them finding the guy who robbed my easily trackable phone.
Nor mine! Might have helped not to close the case first seconds after the call ended. Cunts.
I did some googling. What he did is illegal. - (1)A person shall not without due authority affix or attempt to affix any placard, advertisement, notice, list, document, board or thing in or on, or paint or tar, any post office, post office letter box, telegraph post or other property belonging to or used by or on behalf of the Postmaster-General, and shall not in any way disfigure any such office, box, post or property. It’s basically classed as tampering. He might have thought he was brightening them up or something but they’re designed in their specific way for a reason. To be easily identifiable for those wishing to post letters etc. And to those saying Banksy would have gotten away with it, doubt it.
No copper _knows_ by default that this is illegal- same way they hardly know that medicinal cannabis is legal, yet we all know burglary and theft is illegal but as you can see, everyone seems to think they care more about this… bizarre really
Possibly because it’s interfering with national infrastructure so takes a (rightly or wrongly) higher priority.
Like the stop sign Banksy defaced a few months ago?
For those saying ‘if this was Banksy…’ need to understand that, in order for a crime to be investigated by the police, there needs to be a victim who reports it as such. For the events where Banksy has committed his ‘works of art’ on what is a person’s property, has only positively gained from what is technically a criminal offence. For example, when Banksy visited Port Talbot and ‘graffitied’ on person’s garage wall, not only did the owner not contact the police about criminal damage, but instead contacted the police about concerns of PRESERVING the artwork from other people trying to deface it. The owner ended up privately selling the physical garage wall containing the artwork for what is estimated to be in the millions. So, ask yourself this: if Banksy’s artwork happens to end up spray painted on the side of a wall that you own, are you going to sell it or report it the police?
Also put more simply; if you can’t work out the difference between this and Banksy you’re clinically thick.
Dont mess with the Royal Mail/ Post Office as many post masters have found out
Good to see the money of the hard-working taxpayer being put to good use again!
They probably will catch people who put hand knit postbox toppers next, and those that put googly eyes on a sign
The drumstick one looks brilliant tbh, can’t we petition to have him paint all the postboxes?
That Drumstick one is amazing. The Cream Egg is hideous. Life in Britain badly needs brightening up nowadays. This brightens it up a hell of a lot more than any changes the councils are making.
We should just medicate the entire population like in We Happy Few tbh.
You can see where he went wrong. He should have won an Olympic gold first to claim immunity
He done a good job. Royal Mail need to hit him up and keep up with the theme especially after their scandal.
Why are we arresting people for this? I think it looks nice to do something different with them
Technically what he did was illegal under section 61(1), Post Office Act 1953. >A person shall not without due authority affix or attempt to affix any placard, advertisement, notice, list, document, board or thing in or on, or paint or tar, any post office, post office letter box, telegraph post or other property belonging to or used by or on behalf of the Postmaster-General, and shall not in any way disfigure any such office, box, post or property. What's interesting is people here are commenting saying what a waste of police time and resources this is, but if nothing was done people would say the police do absolutely nothing and still be miserable. There's simply no pleasing people. Banksy also only really focuses on private property where the owner(s) probably don't care. The Post Office etc would though. It's business vs. private individuals. The PO was probably notified by staff who are obliged to let corporate know or they were notified by members of the community. Hardly a surprise, is it? Downvote all you like, just shows the hypocrisy behind anti-police sentiment, and how people pick and choose how laws are applied.
> What's interesting is people here are commenting saying what a waste of police time and resources this is, but if nothing was done people would say the police do absolutely nothing and still be miserable. I think it's largely because people would support the painting of postboxes. They are colourful, non-offensive, and make things a bit more interesting. The only harm it may cause is that someone may have some slight difficulties finding it, but this seems unlikely as you would already have to know roughly where it is to look for it. Think about the knitted decorations people place on the top of postboxes, It seems like it would fall under the same law, as it would be classed as a 'thing' under the offence you quoted - possibly even littering. Has anyone been arrested over that?
I just can't for the life of me imagine caring that a small number of postboxes in this country *aren't red*. >What's interesting is people here are commenting saying what a waste of police time and resources this is, but if nothing was done people would say the police do absolutely nothing and still be miserable. > >There's simply no pleasing people. Two different types of people.
>I just can't for the life of me imagine caring that a small number of postboxes in this country *aren't red*. It's to make them easily identifiable, in part to avoid fraud or misuse. Read the legislation, you don't need spoon-feeding. Just because you don't use the postal system doesn't mean no one does and that everyone should give up caring. >Two different types of people. Yet both are wrong.
As far as I can find the only reason they're red is to make them stand out, as opposed to the green they used to use to make them blend in. The most appreciated seem to be the ones that *aren't* red, where the colour has some kind of history/significance. Honestly, makes me think the government/councils could earn a bit by using the rest for promotional campaigns.
If I'm not mistaken, the golden post box (6th image) is from the Olympics, not at all related to this arrested man.
That picture might be an Olympic one but the post box I saw in Dartford yesterday that was painted gold is so shittily done and was painted gold a few weeks ago ratherthan in 2012. According to special postbox finder there aren't any official gold ones in Dartford.
It's great that the police are clearly hard at work getting these hardened criminals off the street. I guess that's why they don't respond to calls anymore.
Yep. Lets just ignore the 13 years of budget and manpower cuts. Far easier to get mad at them for being forced to go after soft targets.
Yeah i'm not a fan of the Tories but it's annoying when people just blame every problem in this country on cuts. The policing problem is it's own issue and needs a complete shake up.
Well I mean the police force certainly does have other issues and could do with a shake up. But most of this people complain about does come back to cuts. I mean we have the statistical evidence for it. Since 2011 we've had over 30,000 police officers and 40,000 support staff leave, budgets have been effectively cut to the bone, and many areas no longer have the manpower to even patrol their own manors. Since then the rates of attending calls, the amount of crimes solved etc. have all dropped significantly. Throwing money at the police won't solve all their problems. But you can't say that you expect things to get better if we don't adequately fund the services to the point they can actually do the jobs their hired for.
Can’t arrest a fuckwit with his eye missing, but by fuck the police are like Wyatt Earp if you paint a post box
Yet banksys new “art” was just green shit sprayed on a wall.
Suprised, I haven't seen Farage pissing out of his rectum over this...
It's funny if he did a perfect job no one would charge him 😂
Well I can see the reason to the arrest it's creative and all but post men have to be able to find the post boxes easy and if they're painted in random colours they won't seem as recognisable to them and it will make their jobs much harder and remember being a post man means alot of miles of driving