Final 3 greens.
I fail to see how it is the Police's responsibility to feed/water if the airline have abdicated it. Your contract with the airline is noted, you of course have no contract with the Police.
Dixon of Dock Green never happened. 24 years ago, I heard the same stories of how it used to be, Police walking not in cars etc. I think you will find that before Police cars there were less Police about, becuase they were at major junctions directing traffic. I accept its a romantic notion that people have, forget it.
The resposiblity to feed pax is the airlines, irrespective of what you may think.
B Sousa sums it up, the airline is an air carrier not a restraunt, the Police are a branch of Burger King now are they?
Is it that reasonable? No probably not, welcome to reality.
Backtrack, Why should Police refuse to allow food in? No reason that I can think of.
The Disco Volante
Yes you are correct 89(1) does apply to NI, my mistake. However try section 43(1) and possibly section 1 PACE. Your opinon that you are either under arrest or free to go is not strictly correct, you can be detained for the purpose of a search.
I have not quoted section 44, as I have no idea if this was specificly authorised by a ACC.
Paper tiger, most things Police attend are false alarms. However not being blessed with ESP there is no way of knowing this until you arrive and deal with it. As for the 20 something etc discription of a police officer you give...interesting but cobblers.
Feel free to rejoin the real world any time you like.
No one seems to know what the cause of this was, therefore speculating as to why this or that could or didn't happen is pointless. There are reasons why it may have not been appropriate to announce what the problem was, it may be that that decision was wrong. I don't know and niether do you.
At the end of the day which would you all rather.....People getting killed so you can enjoy a few 'freedoms' or a a bit of inconvience?