PC jailed for "being lazy"
- Thread starter Admiral Huddy
- Start date
True, but through the example it sets, think how much more value we will be getting from what we spend on our current and future police officers.
"I didn't start my shift and say I'm going to defeat the ends of justice today."
The context is missing, however, as written in the article that comes across as arrogance.
The better question here, is why are trained police officers doing letter delivery ? Is that not something we have mail delivery persons for, who, I imagine, don't cost anything like what a police officer is paid per hour.
Heck, if they are willing to pay police officer wages for letter delivery - sign me up ;O)
The context is missing, however, as written in the article that comes across as arrogance.
The better question here, is why are trained police officers doing letter delivery ? Is that not something we have mail delivery persons for, who, I imagine, don't cost anything like what a police officer is paid per hour.
Heck, if they are willing to pay police officer wages for letter delivery - sign me up ;O)
She sounds like she was a bit of a lazy what not so she may have been doing it to waste some time. I doubt it was her job just to deliver letters.
Can't say that I have any sympathy for her. There are certain jobs in which you are held to higher standards than others and you accept that when you take the job.
It seems like more and more people feel that if they don't enjoy a job, that its perfectly acceptable to do a poor job and not really bother. My mum worked at a school and she said that the number of young teachers that took days off after going too heavy on the booze or just wanted a day off was amazing.
I don't see how we can realistically change the police due to the high level of responsibility and risk that the job carries coupled with the relatively low wages and large numbers of officers required. The people I know that have gone into the forces are certainly not the sharpest tools in the shed.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
And that makes you an authority on how the policing world turns or qualifies you to cast quite untrue generalisations ?
Have I ever suggested that I am ?
If only you knew me on a personal and professional level. I have had one complaint ( malicious ) in 11 years. Does that suggest my attitude is bad ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jean_Charles_de_Menezes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ian_Tomlinson
Mr de Menezes' death was a tragedy of errors and you and I have the luxury of hindsight.
Ian Tomlinson's death was a tragedy but I can't comment further as a criminal trial is pending.
Show me any proof of malice aforethought when it comes to the officers actions in the JCd Menezes incident. He wasn't murdered and that is not to belittle his death, far from it. It also highlighted why I will never carry a firearm.
Mr Tomlinson. See above as to why I won't say any more.
Where have I ever said it is non existent ? Where have I said all have perfect attitudes ? A former officer on my old shift was convicted of corruption so I know it goes on but not on a scale that you seem to think. I have seen bad attitude first hand as well but it is the minority.
Maybe if the paperwork wasn't lapped on ever officers lap, they would feel a bit better and have more time patrolling.
Though im not entirely sure how they will fix this, usually bureaucracy lingers for quite a while.
Although its not even remotely close to a solution and may just be another problem, but something on the level of the FBI (recent years have made me respect them more), to oversee (as a shadow, nothing more annoying...though i doubt it could be kept from ending up like that) the police forces work and take over the Serious Organised Crime force or maybe simpler to just give the SOG more powers.
Though im not entirely sure how they will fix this, usually bureaucracy lingers for quite a while.
Although its not even remotely close to a solution and may just be another problem, but something on the level of the FBI (recent years have made me respect them more), to oversee (as a shadow, nothing more annoying...though i doubt it could be kept from ending up like that) the police forces work and take over the Serious Organised Crime force or maybe simpler to just give the SOG more powers.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,759
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
Well actually he is unique and he most definitely has a unique insight when it comes to policing.
In all his years of policing no other copper will have had exactly the same experiences that he has had.
Give some respect.
Trite bull****, you were going well before that.
You suggested a ride along with you would suddenly eradicate the negative opinions a lot of the general public have began to develop, I pointed out how I had been on a ride along, so wondered if one with you would mean something special?
I was just pointing out it is hardly a surprise that a serving police officer does not recognise the flaws within the current system from a member of the publics point of view.
Completely understood. Won't bring him up to you again.
Immediately after the shooting the Met tried to block any external investigation under the guise that it would affect intelligence gathering, this was both untrue (as the subsequent investigations prove) and was at best a stalling tactic, at worst an attempt to avoid any investigation and cover up any wrong doing.
During the hand over of the investigation is was found that Ian Blair had lied repeatedly in attempts to cover up the gross incompetence.
During the delay in the investigation an officer deleted computer evidence showing the gross incompetence and that there was an order that would have allowed Menezes to live.
Many officers lied both about him jumping a turn style and whether or not they gave any warning what so ever. This has since been recanted as members of the public and CCTV have shown this. No officers have been punished for lying to the media and public about this.
The officers who shot the man were being told different accounts of what was happening to that which was actually being logged. No one has been punished for this and it has not been successfully investigated.
The Police issued an official statement that they issued a warning before firing, they did not, they have since recounted that statement. No one has been punished for the lies and spin in the initial press releases.
Initially the Police tried to hide the fact that there was a lot of CCTV of the incident, claiming that it had all broken at the time. This was a lie. There was CCTV and it later turned out the Police had known there was CCTV. The CCTV showed footage of events which contradicted the initial statement of events the Police issued. No one has been punished for trying to hide the CCTV.
During the investigation a random woman came forward and claimed Menezes could be a rapist, the Police released this information with no fact checking, something completely out of procedure. It was proven to have nothing to do with Menezes. No one has been punished for this attempted smear campaign.
You say Mr de Menezes' death was a tragedy of errors and that you and I have the luxury of hindsight. I have shown that not only was gross incompetence involved, but the Police actively tried to cover up their incompetence, span the initial media as much as they could with lie after lie, lied to forensic examiners and pathologists, tried to hide evidence, tried to obstruct an external IPCC investigation and then later tried to smear Mr de Menezes' as much as possible to reduce the PR nightmare that resulted from the facts of what happened that day.
Armed gun men followed a completely innocent man, gave no warning, shot him 8 times in the back of the head at point blank range. No one has been punished for it
It is not a simple case of errors, we are dealing with corruption of the highest magnitude, and no one has been punished for it.
At no point did I ever intend to be disrespectful, I realise now that sentence came across as rude and uncouth, I do apologise Von Smallhausen.
Did you actually read what the enquiry uncovered? Or are your anti-police blinkers so narrow that all you can see is the little white card in front of you that says "pigs"? To point out the mildly obvious, the police doing the actual shooting relied on word from the tactical HQ, which told them he was a terrorist. They had no other information. The police at HQ had conflicting reports about whether he was the man they were after, and little time to make a decision. The principle cause of the confusion was senior Met officers not authorising more than one surveillance officer - hardly a huge conspiracy. The tossed a coin and it fell wrong. You get a huge luxury the Met did not: hindsight.
M
Nice one, now try responding to my whole post without taking the end bit and trying to justify that as a simple mistake anyone could have made. What about all the other mistakes and corruption I pointed out?
I am not anti Police, I would have been a special for over a year by now if I hadn't of turned it down because of the length of the commitment they were asking.
All of which were after the event. I've no doubt a lot of CYA went on afterwards, but to call the event murder you are saying conspiracy went on before the shooting.
M
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 12,681
- Location
- Tyneside
Am apology isn't what I wanted nor was a demand of respect. I thank you all the same.
As for your break down of the JCd Menezes shooting, there were indeed errors and failures in the operation and the command structure and that is where my criticism is aimed at.
The cops that shot him escape my criticism because I know how a command structure and intel is vital to their task although I have never been involved on an operation of that magnitude.
Those officers threw themselves over his body in the hope that they would reduce the blast and knowing that they would die. The press seem uninterested in that fact for some reason.
Not to mention the scrutiny into your personal life which probably wouldn't gel well with a police career...
I am not calling or criticising the officers that physically shot him, but what about all the other corrupt ones involved in the cover up?
well no, the offender can't even be arrested for this now as she destroyed the evidence.
From the legal side because of her actions the man is now free and clear of this crime (if it was one) so the course of justice has been changed.
Same as if a police officer busted a guy for carrying a huge amount of pills realised they knew him and just dumped the pills and let him off.
No they're not judge or jury, they're the people that decide who even gets put in front of the CPS let alone a judge or jury. If they hide or cover up a crime it wont even see a prosecutors desk.
Last edited:
Called elsewhere?
She was delivering mail to another precinct
IMO she got what she deserved maybe if they were a bit harsher with the police then a lot of them would lose the can't be bothered attitude I see in police officers all the time and things may start to improve.
How do you expect crime rates to go down and places get safer if the people hired to protect those places can't be bothered to do their job properly.
Sorry but I'm glad they threw the book at her.