police fudging the truth..

Home Forum Chat Forum police fudging the truth..

Viewing 40 posts - 121 through 160 (of 175 total)
  • police fudging the truth..
  • Premier Icon jamj1974
    Subscriber

    andymc06

    …Jamj1974 what contributory job do you do? I look forward to your contribution about respect and society…….

    Thanks for reinforcing my point. I’m not a policeman – so obviously it’s not a worthwhile job in your eyes. It’s not so much about what you do but how you do it perhaps…?

    Currently I am a management consultant – own my own business. Funnily enough I have helped save lives – of strangers and of a colleague and of a friend. Four people in total. The two strangers were in separate incidents being brutally attacked when I intervened. My colleague was a medical emergency and I stopped my friend from committing suicide. Oh and as a small child I revived my dad who was on the point of entering diabetic coma. Is that enough…?

    andymc06
    Member

    Management consultant? I look forward to casting sweeping generalisations based on limited facts about your career. Oh that’s right. I wouldn’t be so conceited as to do that knowing so little about your job……

    I really don’t understand why you are asking about lives saved.I am a retired nurse worked in acute medicine for 30 years,I probably saved hundreds of lives,I don’t know,how do you define saved?I don’t understand why you think saving lives means that you are an important person,whose lying and bullying and conspiring must be accepted,I saved lives because I was there and it was my job,I’m no hero.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    Management consultant? I look forward to casting sweeping generalisations based on limited facts about your career. Oh that’s right. I wouldn’t be so conceited as to do that knowing so little about your job……

    I knew it was coming, and finally it’s time. Here’s a nice smiley one for you:

    Premier Icon jamj1974
    Subscriber

    I’m not making sweeping generalisations based on your job. I’m commenting on your confrontational and frankly disrespectful posting here on this thread. I suggested that if you used the same approach for your job as you’ve used here – it wouldn’t be positive. I hope you are more positive in your interactions offline.

    I’ve never been a police officer – but a couple of my childhood friends are officers and we are still friends now so they talk a bit about it. I would say I have a small idea – but nothing extensive or deep.

    big_n_daft
    Member

    especially for grum

    I wonder whether he had quite such a problem with the police lying when it was about striking miners, or dead Liverpool fans.

    watch this and see what you think
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23128129

    andymc06
    Member

    Hmmm. Thanks for not reading any of the thread. How many times do i have to repeat that dishonest
    Cops and mp’s should be sacked. I DO NOT agree with any of them and at what point did I say lying and bullying should be tollerated??? What I take exception to is keyboard warriors (management consultants and the like) casting judgement about things they have never experienced!)

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    tge – it seems to me you need to try using google.

    Premier Icon jamj1974
    Subscriber

    thejesmonddingo – Member
    I was there and it was my job,I’m no hero.

    Well I’m grateful you did it anyway!

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    What I take exception to is keyboard warriors (management consultants amd the like) casting judgement about things they have never experienced!)

    Would you like another pic, andy – I can do a less smiley one if you prefer?

    andymc06 a word of advice,when you’re in the bottom of a hole,stop digging.

    andymc06
    Member

    No. I’m fine. Thanks anyway. 🙂
    (And I’m not in a hole nurse).

    thegreatape
    Member

    aracer – ISWYDT

    Thanks

    Premier Icon jamj1974
    Subscriber

    What I take exception to is keyboard warriors (management consultants amd the like) casting judgement about things they have never experienced!)

    Notice I’ve not commented on policing – just your approach here. That’s because I know little about policing (as a management consultant – I wouldn’t.) but I do know how you’ve presented yourself today. In fact I
    would probably agree with your point regarding corruption but I take issue with how you’ve gone about reducing the value of what others have said.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    watch this and see what you think
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23128129

    Mr Davies appears to have a real issue with dishonesty in the police – he should get a life.

    Interestingly in that clip he does start off by pointing out that most police officers are honest and doing a good job (iplayer doesn’t yet have newsnight from tonight 👿 )

    andymc06
    Member

    Thank-you for your comments. I’ll them take them on board…….

    Premier Icon jamj1974
    Subscriber

    andymc06. To be fair to you you’ve probably had a crap day with all this going on. People have a tendency to tar all police officers with the same brush. So I imagine you might be feeling a little persecuted just for your choice of career – before you even came on this thread.

    I’m not bashing the police. I can honestly say that despite not having experience of your job – I am grateful that you do it. Just as I am grateful to those in the fire service and NHS who put themselves on the line.

    So for what it’s worth you have my support in what you do.

    Take it easy dude.

    J

    P.S. Management consultancy can be tougher than you think! 😉

    ernie_lynch
    Member

    would probably agree with your point regarding corruption

    I didn’t think he’d made a point regarding corruption. As I understood it he claimed that it was nonsense to suggest that the coppers had deliberately conspired to set up Mitchell. TBH I tend to agree with that.

    I think it’s much more likely that Mitchell set himself up by losing his rag and swearing at the coppers, for what was after all a fairly reasonable request that he should the pedestrian gate. They didn’t arrest him for a public order offence.

    The question is did certain coppers after the event collude and conspire to deliberately misinform and lie about events when they realised that as a result of Mitchell losing his rag and swearing they had a senior government politician by the bollocks, at a time when the Police Fed. was in dispute with the government? There appears to be some evidence to suggest that this might have indeed happened.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    The question is did certain coppers after the event collude and conspire to deliberately misinform and lie about events when they realised that as a result of Mitchell losing his rag and swearing they had a senior government politician by the bollocks, at a time when the Police Fed. was in dispute with the government? There appears to be some evidence to suggest that this might have indeed happened.

    Is that not a conspiracy? He might have given them the initial ammo (I don’t believe anybody is claiming he wasn’t in the wrong), but I don’t see a huge difference between that and them conspiring to set him up before he did anything.

    You do make a good point though – having checked back through this thread, andy’s complaints do seem to have originally been aimed at posts suggesting a more sinister conspiracy. He might have helped himself by making posts explaining his position better rather than single word ones before retreating to being defensive.

    Premier Icon jamj1974
    Subscriber

    Andrew Mitchell is a waste of space.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    …though in his defence he’s not Michael Gove (or Eric Pickles, who would be first up against the wall for me).

    allthepies
    Member

    robdixon, not aware of that whistle blower- links?

    Google “plebgate whistleblower”

    pdw
    Member

    I didn’t think he’d made a point regarding corruption. As I understood it he claimed that it was nonsense to suggest that the coppers had deliberately conspired to set up Mitchell. TBH I tend to agree with that.

    I think it’s much more likely that Mitchell set himself up by losing his rag and swearing at the coppers, for what was after all a fairly reasonable request that he should the pedestrian gate.

    Well, I don’t believe that the officers involved were making a reasonable request. I believe they did it to wind him up. Day in, day out, Mitchell had been allowed to cycle through the main gate, then one day they decide to change the rules on him.

    Whether they were winding him up as part of a planned attempt to get him to say enough to stitch him up, or just because, like the previous commenter, they thought Mitchell was a waste of space and as such it’d be a fun thing to do, I don’t know.

    There do now number of reports suggesting that the former may be true – but we should treat those with the same level of skepticism as should have been applied to the differing reports of the original incident.

    The sad thing about this affair is amount of damage the officers involved have done to the police. The reason that it was so easy to stitch Mitchell up was because people in this country generally have, or rather, had, a high opinion of the police, trusting them to act with integrity, and trusting the institution to deal effectivity with rogue officers, making a conspiracy of the type apparently seen here more or less unthinkable.

    dannyh
    Member

    Interesting how the police are ‘automaton enforcers of a fascist state’ when clearing travellers from Dale Farm, for example, but ‘just ordinary working folk’ when allegedly abused by a public school educated Tory.

    A bit like the red-faced old fart who chuckles and applauds when the police wade in at Dale Farm, yet tell the police to ‘eff off and arrest some real criminals’ when they pull him over driving home from the golf club pissed.

    My points are two-fold.

    There is a lot of wilful hypocrisy on the part of people with political agendas when it comes to treating organisations like the police as faceless entities. It takes a wilful care on the part of reasonable people not to be sucked into these ‘them and us’ childish politics.

    The second point is that these are not faceless entities. They consist of individuals with the same mix of prejudice, hang-ups, chips on shoulders and individual agendas as the population they serve. Individual cases need to be assessed on their merits. You cannot simply say ‘well if they don’t like Mitchell, then they must be in the right’ just the same as you can’t say ‘all coppers are ****s, so they must be lying’.

    Premier Icon jamj1974
    Subscriber

    ^^ wise words dannyh.

    Premier Icon nano
    Subscriber

    Dannyh + 1

    You can pretty much predict the line that certain people will take about a subject on here, so coloured is their political hue..

    Stay reasonable out there 😀

    crankboy
    Member

    The very worst thing about this is I have just found myself agreeing with Theresa(cat flap) May, oh well stopped clocks and all that.

    grum
    Member

    especially for grum

    watch this and see what you think
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23128129

    But that’s from the last few months – where was he when the innocent victims at Hillsborough were being fitted up and striking miners being assaulted (then fitted up too) I wonder? If he was part of the Tory government in the 80s he was probably cheering the police on/helping them cover things up.

    Certainly Thatcher wasn’t up for criticising the police:

    “What do we mean by ‘welcoming the broad thrust of the report’? The broad thrust is devastating criticism of the police. Is that for us to welcome?” (See sections 2.6.122 through to 2.6.135 of the Report of the Hillsborough Independent Panel.)

    And a Tory MP at the time colluded with the police and The Sun to smear dead Liverpool fans:

    The sources of the notorious and discredited front page splash were the Sheffield-based news agency “Whites” and a local Tory MP Sir Irvine Patnick

    – The Police Federation met on 19 April 1989, the day the Sun article was published
    – The Federation representative apparently confirmed then that “putting our side of the story over to the press and media” had been his priority
    – Chief Constable Peter Wright had said “the truth could not come from him” but that he had given the Police Federation a“free hand” in briefing the press
    – Peter Wright said “drunken ticketless individuals” should be blamed

    Surprisingly David Davis doesn’t mention the role of a Tory MP in the disgraceful smear he appears to be so outraged about.

    Perhaps due to all the criticism from police chiefs over cuts, and then Plebgate, the Tories have decided to break with long-standing tradition and not automatically side with the police over any issue.

    Premier Icon easygirl
    Subscriber

    There are times in a police officers service when he will be asked to lie by his peers, now some of these lies may be of a minor nature, however some are life changing for both the polce officer and the people involved.
    Ive been in these situations on many occasions, and I hope always made the right decisions
    Unfortunately police officers are all human beings, some weigh up the pros and cons of their decisions, some just go with the flow, and really don’t think things through.
    Ive seen some unbelievable errors of judgement over the last 25 years, but what I can say is that 99% of the officers I have worked with have been honest men and women who do the job to help out the public.The others do get away with it for a while, but almost always get caught out.
    Im sure no-one believes that a police officer tells the truth 100% of the time, im sure no-one on this planet tells the truth all the time

    cybicle
    Member

    If looked at dispassionately, all that originally happened was that someone got arsey with some coppers who he felt were being **** (but who decided he hadn’t committed any offence worthy of arrest). The real crime, and far, far more serious than someone getting arsey with some coppers, is that several members of Her Majesty’s Police Force then colluded to force a democratically elected Member of Her Majesty’s Parliament into a position which was untenable, which led to his resignation. Serving police officers lied to achieve a political end. Other, more senior police officers then lied in an attempt to cover up the original lies, and compounded matters by seeking to further denigrate said MP.

    As much as I despise pompous arrogant **** like Mitchell, the only question that should be asked is why none of those lying scumbags (who have abused and soiled the reputation of the police and created widespread distrust of a public office which operates by Public Consent) have yet been sacked.

    The actions of Andrew Mitchell are largely irrelevant. The actions of a number of Public Servants have undermined Democracy. Whatever your political leanings, this must be seen as a very worring issue and great cause for concern, and it’s our duty as a society to ensure such a thing must not and cannot happen again.

    As for the accusations of ‘cowardice’; the only cowardice here is that shown by the police officers who betrayed the trust placed in them by the society which they are meant to serve.

    slowoldgit
    Member

    Was it the coppers who changed the rules? Preventing big ego riding through the big gate was a safety issue, right? Lest some naughty person with a van full of fertiliser drive through the other way as it’s opened for him. In which case Mitchel would be the first victim, flattened by the vehicle. The police would then be second. It’s in their interest too. Let them change the rules if they want to, risks alter, repetition is a weakness.

    What happened to the video, you remember, only a heavily edited portion was released.

    I think the delay works in Mitchel’s favour, and no-one’s asking the right questions. It stinks.

    ninfan
    Member

    Well, they seemed to have opened the gate on every other occasion!

    Perhaps the more likely scenario is that they couldn’t be arsed to open the big gate, and when asked to open it came out with the tried and tested public service answer for everything from not stepping in a puddle to rescue a drowning child through to banning conkers:

    “its Elf and safety, innit!”

    grum
    Member

    As much as I despise pompous arrogant **** like Mitchell, the only question that should be asked is why none of those lying scumbags (who have abused and soiled the reputation of the police and created widespread distrust of a public office which operates by Public Consent) have yet been sacked.

    I’m happy with police who blatantly lie being sacked. And there is quite clearly a problem with the police pulling together on this and probably lots of frankly far more important issues.

    The only reason this particular issue is getting such press though is because it happened to a Tory MP who has some clout when it comes to whinging about it. If it had happened to an ordinary member of the public we’d never have heard about it and the Tories who now claim to be outraged about police corruption would have never said a word.

    ninfan – you’re like a crap parody account for Zulu-Eleven. If you’re going to troll at least try a bit harder.

    ninfan
    Member

    If it had happened to an ordinary member of the public we’d never have heard about it

    Well, there was the Macpherson report!

    pdw
    Member

    Let them change the rules if they want to, risks alter, repetition is a weakness.

    Sure, but given what we know now, I don’t think their opening line was, “I’m sorry sir, but the rules have changed.” Whether part of a pre-planned conspiracy or not, I believe that they were deliberately antagonising him.

    robdixon
    Member

    One of the comments above suggests that the police effectively helped the Tories / Thatcher do a cover up on Hillsborough. This comes up quite a bit but the information released into the public domain last year shows that quite before anyone updated the relevant secretary of state at the time, Douglas Hurd, or the Prime Minister, records were falsified – by over 150 police men and women.

    After the records were falsified (this it turns out even included video evidence) the then government were given further false information.

    It’s quite interesting that for the 20 or so years since it happened the suspicion has been that Government ministers tried to mislead the public when what increasingly seems to have happened is that the police conspired to cover up what had happened and their role in causing it.

    The parallels with the Plebgate are obvious – at the time of Hillsborough Thatcher’s press chief is reported to have described the behaviour of the police , in notes obtained by the panel, that the police’s “defensive – and at times close to deceitful – behaviour” sounded “depressingly familiar”.

    For me the issue in hand isn’t about individual officers who by and large are trying to do the right thing, often in very challenging situations, but more to do with leadership, a “closed shop” culture, a lack of transparency and the need for forces to do a lot more to hold themselves to account against the standards the public require of them.

    grum
    Member

    One of the comments above suggests that the police effectively helped the Tories / Thatcher do a cover up on Hillsborough.

    No, it was the other way round.

    at the time of Hillsborough Thatcher’s press chief is reported to have described the behaviour of the police , in notes obtained by the panel, that the police’s “defensive – and at times close to deceitful – behaviour” sounded “depressingly familiar”.

    But seeing as the police were useful attack dogs in the fight against the miners they didn’t want to do anything about it did they.

    robdixon
    Member

    but Grum – Thatcher’s response reflected what she was directly told by amongst others, the Chief Superintendents of the day. Should she not trusted such senior officers, and if not, which individuals who had relevant accountability should she have listened to and given weight to?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/03/15/hillsborough-files-margaret-thatcher-merseyside-police_n_1347336.html

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    The only reason this particular issue is getting such press though is because it happened to a Tory MP who has some clout when it comes to whinging about it. If it had happened to an ordinary member of the public we’d never have heard about it and the Tories who now claim to be outraged about police corruption would have never said a word.

    I’m sure you’re right, and it’s good that they’ve been found out because of that on this occasion. The worrying thing is that it does make you wonder how often the minority of bad ones do get away with it. That and the closing of ranks around those officers who’ve clearly done wrong which does appear to be an institutional cover up reaction.

    ernie_lynch
    Member

    pdw – Member

    Well, I don’t believe that the officers involved were making a reasonable request.

    What are you, some sort of expert on anti-terrorist security ?

    I’m not, and I don’t know what the logistics are involving the opening of the vehicular gates in Downing Street. But I am a cyclist and know how easy it is to push a bicycle on a pavement and through pedestrian access.

    And I also know that the gates are there to stop a terrorist attack. An attack in which for example, a car loaded with explosives detonates taking the front of Number 10, the Prime Minister, the cabinet, one or two foreign dignitaries, and perhaps half a dozen of coppers.

    I assume that every time the gates are opened they are no longer providing the same level of security as when they are shut. I have no idea what the security threat level was was on that particular day, nor do I know if the armed officers had been told to keep gate opening to the absolute minimum.

    Clearly the gates have to be occasionally opened to allow cars and commercial vehicles through, presumably the presence of a vehicle passing through reduces the access for possible hostile action in a way that a cyclist on a bicycle doesn’t.

    But perhaps the police were in fact unreasonable and should have opened the vehicular gates specially for Mitchell to cycle through majestically, instead of the humiliation of having to push his mother’s shopping bike through the pedestrian gate.

    Perhaps the security gates and the armed police are all just completely unnecessary nonsense which should be scrapped.

    But if Mitchell had issues then I’m sure there is a procedure to make representations, he did after all say to them “you haven’t heard the last of this” so he presumably believes that there is.

    What he shouldn’t have done was loose his rag, swear at them, and by his own admission, show a lack of respect. All of which is totally unacceptable behaviour from a government Chief Whip. I don’t swear at coppers and I don’t see why senior Tory politicians can’t control themselves similarly when they feel aggravated.

Viewing 40 posts - 121 through 160 (of 175 total)

The topic ‘police fudging the truth..’ is closed to new replies.