PC jailed for "being lazy"

Admiral Huddy

Admiral Huddy

Admiral Huddy

Man of Honour
Joined
17 Feb 2003
Posts
29,640
Location
Chelmsford
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/873551-policewoman-jailed-for-being-too-lazy-to-arrest-a-burglar

Is it me or does this sound a bit harsh? Sure she may have "arguably" neglected her duties but she claims that she had been called elsewhere. It seems that she was well respected yet the judge appears to have made an example her...

Not sure what this achieves other than further diminishing and undermining our police force, which is pretty bad timing really. Seriously, who'd be a police officer now days when you could at some point be in a situation which results in litigation. If I make a mistake in my job i get my knucles wrapped and in the worst case I'll be dismissed.. but a custodial sentence. What message is being sent here?
 
What exactly would be the mistake you make in your job though, anything even remotely comparable to this?

She is a police officer who is turning a blind eye to crime because she can't be bothered? I think she got off lightly.
 
Gross incompetence of that level deserves a harsh punishment, when combined with the social responsibility of her job, it results in a custodial sentence.

You complain that our Police forces are being diminished, when applicants are lining up around the block multiple times over, the budget will now be spent on someone who is willing to do the job and can do it competently.

I just wish there was more accountability in the civil services like this frankly!
 
Losing her job would be enough imo, getting a jail sentence for that is just a mockery.

hurfdurf said:
You complain that our Police forces are being diminished, when applicants are lining up around the block multiple times over, the budget will now be spent on someone who is willing to do the job and can do it competently.!
Click to expand...

Some of that budget you speak of will have to pay for her to be in prison :D
 
She was very wrong in her judgement and should have arrested him but a custodial sentence is grossly disproportionate.

It will cost the taxpayer a lot of money to house her as she will have to be kept in a high security unit, probably solitary. In the public interest and proportionate ? I don't agree.
 
A case of gross incompetence deserving of employment termination and nothing more. I really can’t see how this is in the public interest.
 
If they'd gone lightly on her, the press would have been all over the Police Force for shirking their responsibilities and not giving a stuff.... The Police can't win so a harsh punishment is the only way really.
 
Losing her job would have been punishment enough, the jail term in my opinion is too harsh, we now have to spend money on keeping her locked up :(
 
Admiral Huddy said:
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/873551-policewoman-jailed-for-being-too-lazy-to-arrest-a-burglar

Is it me or does this sound a bit harsh? Sure she may have "arguably" neglected her duties but she claims that she had been called elsewhere. It seems that she was well respected yet the judge appears to have made an example her...
Click to expand...

Being simply too lazy to arrest somebody with 6 previous convictions, who is clearly trying to break into somewhere and throwing the evidence in the bin after not arresting him is irresponsible. I think that an example had to be made however I am with you on the precedent that is now set with a custodial sentence for a repeat offender is a bit harsh. Will make them think about leaving a criminal on the street again though.
 
Custodial sentances are exactly what the Police need, for too long they have acted above the law and policed themselves, this sentence sends a clear message that incompitance and willfull corruption will not be tolerated.

It's about time Police officers had an attitude rearrangement and I hope this is the start of that, it is a privilege to be a Police officer and if you cannot hack it one should quit, if you don't enjoy it the option is there to quit, if you are corrupt in a position of power you need to be punished to show others with the same power that they will not get away with abuse of that power.

With great power comes great responsibility.
 
Sack yes, jail no. Minimise the cost to the taxpayer, and to help with this strip her pension too. Not sure if this is automatic now for a dismissal from the police.
 
hurfdurf said:
Custodial sentences are exactly what the Police need, for too long they have acted above the law and policed themselves, this sentence sends a clear message that incompetence and willfull corruption will not be tolerated.
Click to expand...

Incompetence with the individual yes but corruption no. Dismissal or suspension would have been enough as with any job. Corruption is a completely different matter, normally where a fraud offence has been committed in which case a custodial sentence would have been apt. but this wasn't the case.


Spektor said:
What exactly would be the mistake you make in your job though, anything even remotely comparable to this?
Click to expand...

I work in IT for a Bank.

If i where incompetent, then I could prevent the bank from trading. I could face a disciplinary if i was was found to be negligent and/or the situation could have been averted.

Corruption on the other hand would suggest that I've conducted myself in profiteering either from fraud or supplying outsider information. This would mean prosecution.
 
hurfdurf said:
Custodial sentances are exactly what the Police need, for too long they have acted above the law and policed themselves, this sentence sends a clear message that incompitance and willfull corruption will not be tolerated.

It's about time Police officers had an attitude rearrangement and I hope this is the start of that, it is a privilege to be a Police officer and if you cannot hack it one should quit, if you don't enjoy it the option is there to quit, if you are corrupt in a position of power you need to be punished to show others with the same power that they will not get away with abuse of that power.

With great power comes great responsibility.
Click to expand...

I think you may be reading more into this than is actually present, unless I'm missing something from the article there is no suggestion of corruption, incompetence and laziness maybe but not anything further.

I think her decision not to arrest the suspect was poor and probably alone would be enough to merit dismissal but anything beyond that strikes me as too harsh a punishment if the facts as laid out there are correct. Police officers are in a position of responsibility and should be expected to behave in accordance with this but equally we do have to remember that they are human and not seek to impute an impossible standard of behaviour on them - this woman fell well short of the standards we should expect but we cannot demand the police to be perfect either.
 
I don't get it. I can only imagine there was more to it than the article. Surely the police are empowered to chose to arrest someone or not using their own judgement, you see it all the time on the news and the half dozen "cops on camera" type programs.

Sometimes they will arrest someone, sometimes they'll just get a telling off and let on their way. I can't believe that not arresting someone who "might" have committed an offence rather than using the PCs judgement in the situation to take his tools off him, and give him a warning is even a disciplinary matter let alone a criminal offence with a custodial sentence.

Serving officers here will be able to clarify I guess but I can't believe it's compulsory to arrest someone under the suspicion of "going equipped", carrying the risk of prosecution of the PC if they don't.

Surely there must be more to it?
 
You can't jail someone for not doing their job properly, this is unlawful and will be overturned and compensation will need to be paid by... yes you guessed it... all of us.
 
Dan Dan said:
Being simply too lazy to arrest somebody with 6 previous convictions, who is clearly trying to break into somewhere and throwing the evidence in the bin after not arresting him is irresponsible. I think that an example had to be made however I am with you on the precedent that is now set with a custodial sentence for a repeat offender is a bit harsh. Will make them think about leaving a criminal on the street again though.
Click to expand...

in some other european countries its considered a crime its witness a crime and do nothing it should be the same for police over here for them to witness a crime and then let and obvios career criminal loose:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom