Wow; I bet the heating had to be turned down with all the red faces:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-21868251

I must admit, I read that on another site, but it did tickle me.

Just think of the saving on the heating bills in there for a short time

It could have been an inside job: http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/local-news/retired-officer-faces-trial-accused-9190325

I would most likely think so Lex.

The court case might be interesting.

Definitely a story to keep an eye on!

I had a relative in the force. He once told me an interesting little tale...

"When you attend a break in, such as at a Jewellers, there's always the opportunity to help yourself to a little, just don't be greedy. If the news report says that there were 105 watches stolen, the thief is hardly likely to contact anyone saying, 'Oi, I only stole 101, you thieving B******* have had the rest' is he?"

Over the years I got to know the head of corporate security of a UK car manufacturer. I often used to build him little electronic surveillance devices to help him out in his work. Rarely did I ever find out the details of what had happened, but he did tell me that most of his cases were 'inside jobs' and that most were perpetrated by management using paperwork fraud. I do remember one case very well, a very senior manager was using his fuel 'key' to fill up a small fleet of Taxis at half price. - Sheer stupidity and greed.

There's a lot of the same in the insurance industry: parents declaring themselves main drivers of their kid's cars; adding a few pounds to the value of their 'lost' valuables, and spurious whiplash claims. The usual 'reasoning' is that the insurance companies premiums are too high, and why shouldn't 'the man on the street' scrape a few quid back. Do you know why premiums are so high? It's because the idiot 'man on the street' makes so many exagerated and outright fraudulent claims, insurance companies have to raise their premiums to cover the cost!!!!!!!

Well, the retired officer didn't do it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36748323

Technically, all that means is that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he did it. It doesn't actually mean he didn't do it.

Interestingly, the case remains open...