South Yorkshire police paid £425,000 in 1991 to settle civil actions brought by 39 miners for what happened at and after Orgreave, including for assault, wrongful arrest and malicious prosecution, but no police officer was ever disciplined for any misconduct. The operation and prosecutions were given unqualified backing, even after they collapsed, by the chief constable, Peter Wright. Last month, the Hillsborough Independent Panel’s report revealed that Wright personally oversaw the South Yorkshire police operation to blame supporters for the 1989 Hillsborough disaster, including by briefing false stories to the media, and the wholesale changing of junior officers’ statements.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/21/hillsborough-investigation-extend-orgreave-miners

I’m sure I’ll get accused of police-bashing or whatever but is this a similar scandal to Hillsborough (except this time the police were actively attacking the victims, as opposed to just discrediting them)?

Given that they systemically managed to re-write and falsify statements, scandalously discredit witnesses, fabricate evidence and completely corrupt the judicial system, yet get away with it, against constant opposition, for 25 years, this would sort of suggest that they may have – to use their term – ‘a bit of previous’ when it comes to that type of thing

I’d love to see people up in court for both Hillsborough and Orgreave

Unfortunately I suspect we’ll just see the usual. A lot of senior officers ‘retiring due to ill health’ on big, fat, gold-plated pensions.

same as the battle of the beanfield and many, many other incidents back in the 80s and early 90s.

I think we should make the distinction between individual police officers on the ground who were undoubtably following orders (albeit some were acting illegally) and senior management who were clearly in bed with the politicians.

Thats the bit that makes me sick, a hidden agenda and systematic cover ups by our rulers and senior members of a force that should exist to protect us.

I think we should make the distinction between individual police officers on the ground who were undoubtably following orders (albeit some were acting illegally) and senior management who were clearly in bed with the politicians.

The officers on the ground were the ones dishing out the beatings, they are very very far from innocent.

ps. I wonder how many other revelations are in the pipeline, the current commissioner elections seem designed to place a firewall between government responsibility and the actions of the police.

I’d love to see people up in court for both Hillsborough and Orgreave

This is the thing that gets me – the same laws that apply to you or I don’t seem to have been applied, and I’m sorry but you have to wonder how many other cases there are that we don’t get to hear about for whatever reason.

Not even a single disciplinary handed out FFS – kind of implies ‘institutional corruption’ really doesn’t it.

And before it starts I’m not ‘anti-police’ – I’ve worked with quite a few in my job and most are decent, sensible people – it’s the culture of ‘look out for your own’ I have a problem with. The attitudes of even seemingly sensible people on here show worrying tendencies that way TBH.

I hope that there is a significant difference between this situation which exists today when wrong doing at a pretty low level is uncovered, and the situation 20 – 30 years ago, when hillsboro and the miners strike occured. I continue to live in hope.

Hillsborough cover-up – isolated incident right?

Even without knowing of the other incident you mention, if you believe that then presumably that’s because the fairies at the bottom of your garden told you so?

Even without knowing of the other incident you mention, if you believe that then presumably that’s because the fairies at the bottom of your garden told you so?

I don’t believe that but I’ve seen it claimed on here, usually by serving officers – e.g. stop ‘police-bashing’, it’s just a few bad apples, we get treated so unfairly, etc etc

It’s understandable but very unhealthy that there seems to be a kind of siege mentality in the police force.

Anyone who was involved with the miners’ support movement knows the truth…

ohnohesback – Member
Anyone who was involved with the miners’ support movement knows the truth…

+1

As usual the silence is deafening from the officers on here. I should have included something about pensions in the thread title. 😛

grum – Member
As usual the silence is deafening from the officers on here. I should have included something about pensions in the thread title.

Amazing, after the officers down in Manchester posts pages and pages. Anything negative you would think nobody works in the police force uses this forum.

Amazing, after the officers down in Manchester posts pages and pages. Anything negative you would think nobody works in the police force uses this forum.

This is the thing I find worrying. There’s a pretty obvious lack of desire to ever criticise a fellow officer seemingly whatever they’ve done – you’d think that honest, decent police officers would be the most offended by those tarnishing the reputation of the force.

Human nature is as human nature does.
Hillsborough wasn’t the first cover-up and it won’t be the last.

The police have a long and inglorious history when it comes to dealing with ‘enemies of the state’– after all it is their job– protecting the interests of the ‘state’.

So if you are not aware of this position, if may well come as a surprise that they act as they do, but as others have said, if you were involved in the miners strike it was very black or white.

Same as the West Midlands Serious Crime Squad in the 80s, they just wandered round till they found a bunch of petty criminals and they fitted them up for whatever crime they had on their books. Frigged the evidence and made up all the statements. Corruption seems to have been endemic at the time.

I watched Red Riding on tv a few years ago and found it pretty bleak and depressing.

It seems that it was not as far from fiction as it might have been.

Amazing, after the officers down in Manchester posts pages and pages. Anything negative you would think nobody works in the police force uses this forum.

perhaps they are at work, keeping us safe…?

…just a thought

Because they ALL work dayshift?

I think there was a lot of things went on in the hard drinking and fighting years that they’d rather stay buried.
I’m reasonably happy that such things are much rarer these days.

For the record, I was a striking miner’s son

Hillsborough wasn’t the first cover-up and it won’t be the last

not sure this is a cover up more of a hatchet job with coppers breaking the law then lieing to implicate the miners.

Basically Hilsborugh was an accident/incident where they messed [ trying to avoid swearing it was far worse than that ]up that they then tried to cover up. This was a planned operation that they lied about and therefore much much worse given the politics of the time.

db – Member
Amazing, after the officers down in Manchester posts pages and pages. Anything negative you would think nobody works in the police force uses this forum.
perhaps they are at work, keeping us safe…?
…just a thought
POSTED 50 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST
Great reply
As posted above about working shifts. Should be a 24 hour opportunity to responded.
A bit like the real world when you report an act of violence and they take forever to appear:)
I’m sure a post stating “the ones slating the police are the first ones to call then for help” will appear

As usual the silence is deafening from the officers on here.

Perhaps none of the officers on here disagree with the criticism SYP are getting for Hillsborough, or that the Met got for the way they dealt with the aftermath of the De Menezes and Tomlinson incidents?

I haven’t read the Hillsborough report yet, although I will at some point.

My opinion of Harwood’s actions in 2009 is no secret.

It doesn’t bother me when people criticise the police. EDIT – bad choice of words – I have no objection if people want to criticise the police. Some of it’s justified, some not, but that’s the case whatever the subject. But I’m not going to apologise for other people any more than I’m going to try and justify their behaviour.

I usually only comment on police related threads if I think I have something useful or explanatory to add, rather than just comment for the sake of it.

EDIT – And yes, I agree that there is no place for bullies, thugs and liars in the police. I don’t like them either. Just to be clear.

Perhaps none of the officers on here disagree with the criticism SYP are getting for Hillsborough, or that the Met got for the way they dealt with the aftermath of the De Menezes and Tomlinson incidents?

Thanks thegreatape, appreciated.

What do you think about my point though that there seems to be a wider culture of ‘protect your own’ in the police force, and even amongst the majority of decent police there is a huge reluctance to ever criticise fellow officers. Is that inaccurate? Unfair?

It does seem interesting from certain threads how many officers there are who clearly use this forum, yet there was very little comment from any of them on any of the Hillsborough stuff or on this. I’d be interested to know why that is.

I usually only comment on police related threads if I think I have something useful or explanatory to add, rather than just comment for the sake of it.

Oi, we’ll have none of that kind of talk here, this is STW don’t you know!

What do you think about my point though that there seems to be a wider culture of ‘protect your own’ in the police force, and even amongst the majority of decent police there is a huge reluctance to ever criticise fellow officers. Is that inaccurate? Unfair?

In my experience, most police officers are quite happy to criticise other officers, it happens all the time. Obviously much of this is peer-to-peer stuff, but it’s not at all uncommon for people to raise concerns about their colleagues to senior officers. This is within the police though!

I think the type of job it is, and the things you sometimes have to do, creates a degree of camaraderie that perhaps doesn’t exist in some other jobs. Maybe you get the same sort of thing in the armed forces or the fire brigade? This is probably where the loyalty comes from, which at times will lead to the ‘protect your own’ situation you describe. Similar, although obviously to a lesser degree, to the way a family might stick together in the face of criticism/adversity? So for police officers to publicly criticise the police is rare. Having said that, no obvious mechanism springs to mind by which a police officer could publicly criticise the police?

Loyalty is a good quality, to a certain extent. When it reaches the point at which police officers lie for their mates, cover things up, fit people up, perjure themselves, then clearly it has gone too far. This happens, and the public are right to be angered by this. It is entirely logical that dishonesty from the police leads to mistrust from the public, and it’s a shame.

Today’s senior officers cut their teeth in the late 70’s/early 80’s. Some have moved with the times, some haven’t I guess. Today’s whippersnappers are learning the job in a very different culture, and hopefully they will learn from the mistakes made in the past and present.

It does sometimes make me chuckle when we have a news story about a police officer who has been dismissed, or convicted, for one thing or another – Sean Price and his deputy most recently, sacked and still under criminal investigation – and we get comments to the effect that ‘shows what a bunch of crooks they are’ and so on. Even when the police catch and deal with the bad ones, they’re still wrong somehow!

I’m not really sure if that answers your question at all though?

Kinda yeah – pretty measured response really and interesting to hear first hand. I can understand the thing about camaraderie etc, and I can understand why there must be a bit of a bunker mentality sometimes, I’ve just been a little disturbed by seeing seemingly sensible people trying to ignore or brush under the carpet some pretty awful stuff.

People in the police are pretty keen to suggest that most of these things are in the past and hopefully they are, but some of the attitudes I’ve seen create a nagging worry that might not quite be the case.

Loyalty is a good quality, to a certain extent. When it reaches the point at which police officers lie for their mates, cover things up, fit people up, perjure themselves, then clearly it has gone too far. This happens, and the public are right to be angered by this. It is entirely logical that dishonesty from the police leads to mistrust from the public, and it’s a shame.

I suppose what I am really asking is to what extent is there a problem with ‘loyalty gone too far’? Are the public wrong to be suspicious/cynical? Obviously there will still be ‘bad apples’ but is there an institutional problem?

I guess if there was you probably wouldn’t want to talk about it on a public forum anyway (and you’re probably just generally bored of all my questions). 🙂

So for police officers to publicly criticise the police is rare. Having said that, no obvious mechanism springs to mind by which a police officer could publicly criticise the police?

Genuine question, but how do police whistleblowers get treated, if there are any – how would your average officer view someone who spoke out about malpractice?

Why do you think very few if any police posted on the various big threads about Hillsborough, despite there being lots of serving officers on here?

I suppose what I am really asking is to what extent is there a problem with ‘loyalty gone too far’?

I can’t really say, because there’s no way for me to know if what I’ve seen in my time is representative of ‘the police’ as a national organisation. After that, I’m like everyone else – I get to read about whatever is deemed newsworthy, which by definition does not accurately reflect the reality of 99% of what the police do or are involved in.

Are the public wrong to be suspicious/cynical?

No, regrettably. How can the public not be when there have been incidents like this?

how would your average officer view someone who spoke out about malpractice?

It would range from hatred/disgust, through contempt, disapproval, ambivalance, agreement, support to delight – there’s probably no such thing as an average officer. I’m in favour of admitting mistakes and acknowledging when things have gone wrong. I think it’s better to be thought of as honest than perfect. Some people think that it’s better to lie rather than admit you got something wrong. Anyone can make a mistake, make a bad decision in the heat of the moment, it’s human.

Perhaps if our responses to mistakes were more reasonable and balanced, people would be more inclined to admit them? And this applies to everything, not just the police – social work, NHS, whoever.

I differentiate between making a genuine mistake, or a split-second decision that in hindsight was wrong, and deliberate dishonesty.

Why do you think very few if any police posted on the various big threads about Hillsborough, despite there being lots of serving officers on here?

I don’t know.

Thanks for taking the time to answer my tedious questions – this is a worryingly civilised thread so far. 🙂

I can’t really say, because there’s no way for me to know if what I’ve seen in my time is representative of ‘the police’ as a national organisation. After that, I’m like everyone else – I get to read about whatever is deemed newsworthy, which by definition does not accurately reflect the reality of 99% of what the police do or are involved in.

I notice you’re not really giving much away here!

Perhaps if our responses to mistakes were more reasonable and balanced, people would be more inclined to admit them? And this applies to everything, not just the police – social work, NHS, whoever.

I differentiate between making a genuine mistake, or a split-second decision that in hindsight was wrong, and deliberate dishonesty.

Yeah that’s a good point. Though I think people’s reactions to police wrongdoing are perhaps intensified when there’s a perception (sometimes justified?) that the police can do things that would be considered criminal by anyone else, and get away with a slap on the wrist if that.

I notice you’re not really giving much away here!

Just trying to be objective. I can say that I’ve never seen, or been involved, or been aware of any police officer I’ve worked with perjuring themselves, fabricating or planting evidence, lying in a statement and so on. It would be intellectually dishonest to say ‘I’ve never seen…and so on, so I can assure you that it doesn’t happen anymore‘, for the reasons I gave.

Though I think people’s reactions to police wrongdoing are perhaps intensified when there’s a perception (sometimes justified?) that the police can do things that would be considered criminal by anyone else

I am inclined to agree that there can be a perception of double standards. I wonder if this is sometimes down to a lack of understanding of the complexities of the law? Something that some people would consider excessive force or an assault, might be found by the CPS or a court as lawful, once all the evidence is seen/heard and considered in the context of the finer detail of the law. Most of the time, all we (the general public) can base our decisions or opinions on is the details the press want to tell us of what they actually know, which in both cases is rarely everything.

Remember when the CPS initially said they were not going to prosecute Simon Harwood? There was uproar and nobody could understand why he wasn’t being prosecuted for something. The CPS issued a lengthy document explaining, for every potential charge, the legal reasons why they couldn’t at that time prosecute him (a decision which was reviewed and which changed following evidence heard at the inquest). Anyone of reasonable intelligence who read that document would be able to understand why. Not agree that it was right, necessarily, but understand the legal basis for that decision. That understanding could not be (so easily) reached from what the layman could read in the Sun, Telegraph or Guardian.

I digress somewhat, but in essence the point I am trying to make is that it is my sometimes appear that police officers have got away with things, when in fact the outcome was legally correct. Of course, I will stress that I am not saying this is always the case – police officers will almost certainly sometimes get away with things when they shouldn’t, just as members of the public do – the legal protections available and burden of proof required to convict being the same for us all.

Teo very principled buddies of mine have both contested Police evidence in court and won. In both cases the officer giving evidence was committing perjury.