Tag Archives: Police Bashers

And So It Is Told…!

Posted on by
Reply

daily_mailAnd so it seems that the Daily Bog Roll Mail story, as predicted, was a pre-cursor for another kick in the teeth and here it is.

The Country’s Cops look set to take another financial hit with news that the Home Office wants pension contribution rises to 13.5 and 11.5% from 1 April 2013. The Majority of English and Welsh officers – on the 30 year pension scheme (PPS) – face a 1.25% rise to their monthly contributions – up to 13.5%. If Police officers are on the newer 35 year scheme (NPPS), they face a 1% increase to a monthly contribution rate of 11.5%. In July 2011, the Home Secretary Theresa May consulted the Police Negotiating Board (PNB) on her proposals to increase the amount paid by police officers into the police pension scheme (PPS) and new police pension scheme (NPPS) by an average of 3.2 % over a three year-period beginning in April 2012.

Two Faced Politicians

Two Faced Politicians

Following representations by the Police Federation of England and Wales and Staff Side, the Home Secretary decided only to implement the proposed increase for the year 2012-13, with contribution rates for most officers rising by 1.25% for those in the PPS and by 1% for those in the NPPS. In making this decision, the Home Secretary did state that the Government was still committed to increasing police officers’ pension contributions in the following two years, but that she would consult the PNB on any further increases.
On Thursday (24 January) Police Minister Damian Green wrote to the Independent Chair of the PNB asking the Board to consider an increase in contribution rates for 2013-14, which would take effect from 1 April 2013.

The consultation on these increases will close on 20 February. The Police Federation of England and Wales stated it “will work with Staff Side colleagues to formulate a response to these proposals.”

Bloody Ridiculous!!

Posted on by
Reply

I have been extremely busy over the past couple of days which has meant that I have had my thunder stolen in respect to the latest plebgate events. Having said that, the Chair of the Metropolitan Police federation is only saying what I was going to say. What a complete and utter waste of everyone’s time the investigation into the incident involving Andrew Mitchell on Downing Street whereby 30 officers from the Metropolitan Police’s Professional Standards Department are to interview 800 Diplomatic Protection Officers. In case you missed it, Andrew Mitchell was reported by Police Officers as having sworn at them when they refused to open a gate on Downing Street asking him to use the pedestrian access. His response in swearing was the old I pay your wages type comment and also that the officers were plebs.

Andrew Mitchell pictured on CCTV leaving Downing StreetIn fairness to him, he denied it. There is no independent recording of the actual conversation so you made your own mind up. It intrigues me that Mitchell did not deny the abusive language but seriously denied the use of the word pleb. I often apply the missive, having been accused of making up stories in my own career, that if the officers on the gate really wanted to stitch him up would they use an innocuous word such as pleb? Of course not, so my opinion of the incident for what its worth sides with the officers at the gate.

Then came the cctv footage which showed that Mitchell was forced to use the pedestrian gate. Somehow, even experienced journalists managed to infer that from a silent video the words attributed to Mitchell could not have been used! However, it did call into question the evidence of one person who happened to be an off duty cop posing as a member of the public and present at the scene. Unfortunately for him, the cctv does not appear to show him there. Of course, the utter b*llocks being spouted now is that because he is accused of lying it must be the case that all the cops are lying. The reality of it is that the behaviour which Mitchell admitted should have led to his resignation not just the use of the word pleb.

mitchellIf it is true that now 800 officers are to be interviewed in this case then it is an expensive joke. However, we know that this witch hunt fishing for information over a poxy dispute instigated by a pompous MP will cost hundreds of thousands of pounds and will demoralise all those involved. Why doesn’t Andrew Mitchell do the decent thing and insist to Hogan-Howe that the Met Police Professional Standards Department should wind their necks in and get on with law enforcement. That way he gets a bit of credibility back – far more than a pathetically posed snog of an Inspector in his local constituency

The Daily Wail Motto:

Posted on by
3

Earlier today I was thinking about what I was going to blog about. I do most of my thinking in the bog because I am too bloody busy to do any thinking anywhere else, being run around like a blue a*se fly. I suppose that it is the same for most of us. There was a momentary panic when I thought the bog roll had run out but then I saw a Daily Wail Mail on the floor and knew that I was safe. Wiping my a*se on it would be symbolic of a newspaper who support the unfounded criticisms of the police simply to get a story . They are the hatchet wing of a government hell bent on running down the great tradition that is the police. On this occasion the reporters were James Slack and Jack Doyle, a dynamic duo who, in emulating the Sun, use a pair of tits in their attempt to sell the paper.

Their scoop was to reveal that nearly 200 police officers are full time Federation officials representing over 134,000 Federated members. A quick analysis reveals that nearly 200 actually means 176!! I suggest their superiors check their expense claims just in case they round up their beer and fags bill, oh, and their informant payment account! Wow! How many years does it take at journo school, guys, to come up with that piece of detective work? By the way, whilst we are on the maths issue the true representation of 176 for 134,000 officers comes back as 1 paid officer for 761 police members or 1 in nearly a thousand using the Daily Wail Mail mathematical formula. Then, to reinforce their newspaper story, they quote their old friend Dominic Raab MP for Esher and Walton who declares that, “The hard-pressed taxpayer will  be gob-smacked that millions of pounds of their money is being squandered subsidising the  activities of the histrionic Police Federation, rather than mitigating pressure on local force budgets.” A little over 12 months ago Raab was subject to scurrilous accusations by the same paper he uses to attack the Police Federation.

Future Home Secretary????

Nice to know that the Tories believe that workplace representation of Crown Servants with no right to strike, who cannot be unfairly dismissed, can be imprisoned simply for trying to do the job to the best of their ability, have spineless ACPO idiots changing policy dependent upon which way the wind blows and are often killed or seriously injured in the course of their work protecting the rights of idiots like Raab, is considered money that has been “squandered.” Just goes to show that we must be winning the argument when they cannot come up with balanced and evidenced views in support of their attitude.

Keep trying guys. You are beginning to give me great heart. Then I wiped my bottom with you and flushed you down the pan!!!!!

Corruption on the Grandest Scale!!!

Posted on by
9

What is it about Tom Winsor that makes him so reviled and offensive? Is it his looks? You have to admit that the gods dishing out looks significantly passed him by but that is not really an issue. I have got loads of friends and colleagues who are ugly as sin but I still get on with them and enjoy their company. Is it that he singularly failed to realise the unique nature of being an unarmed police officer in the United Kingdom and that is why his proposals should be banished to the dump that contains previous attempts at so called “reform?”

The real reason why Winsor will be so reviled and offensive is the fact that he is a Partner in White and Case and they just happen to be advising G4S on winning a £200 million Police Authority Contract for Lincolnshire Police. It is so bloody obvious now. All this talk of privatising great swathes of police work to companies like G4S and we wonder why Tom Winsor was so in favour of running down the office of Constable. It is all so clear now. Undermine the very fabric of the police under the guise of modernisation, disaffect the police to such an extent that the efficiency is tested to the very limit and step in, hand in hand with G4S to take up the slack. Everyone’s a winner except the police and the public.

This latest example of Noble Cause Corruption of the highest order should be shouted from the rooftops and we should be letting our MP’s and the press know of the conflict of interest in a report which is simply designed to line the pockets of private industry.

Of course…….I could be wrong!!!!!!!

I Told You So…!

Posted on by
1

So, do you feel taken for granted and lied to? I do. Finally an ACPO idiot has broken ranks to show exactly what ACPO think about the men and women under their command who risk their lives day in and day out for the benefit of the public. That’s right, ACPO don’t give a toss!

How proud South Yorkshire chief constable David Crompton must feel about his latest missive to replace police officers patrolling the street with personnel with limited powers and often limited ability. Despite there being some very good PCSO’s around, people prefer police officers . It must have taken all of his 10 days or so in office to come up with this bolleaux. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious. ACPO want to effectively break up and rebuild the principle and model of policing. Ladies and Gentlemen, these are the idiots in charge. I have warned you regularly but clearly you are not listening. It is about time you sat up and took notice. 

Should we worry. Yes we should!

If idiots like this get their way then the police will become a storm trooper force, simply bashing down doors and responding to fights, arresting and penalising. They will not be policing by consent but would just be enforcers of the law. No police officer joined to perform that role. It tires me when I hear the crap often trotted out by uninformed senior officers that many of the tasks performed by officers could be performed by someone who is not warranted. What they fail to recognise is that most of the thing cops do is all part of the service, it is visible and provides reassurance to the public and a deterrent to errant miscreants.

If Cops werem only tasked to respond in a shock and awe fashion then the police would be feared, disrespected and the consent they need to exist would be removed. David Crompton looks old enough to have been instructed that the first duty of every cop is:

“The protection of life and property. The prevention and detection of crime”

Note the order the duties come in. Pseudo cops like Crompton should be admonished for the abandonment and dereliction of the duties of officers. They are so far removed from the real principles of real policing, seeking comfort in balance sheets over and above the safety of the general population. He should be fighting for more constables not banishing them out of view.

Mark my words, this is the thin end of the wedge. That is until the next idiot comes up with replacing police functions by using security firms. Hang on a minute…….!!!!!!!

Don’t Hold Your Breath….!

Posted on by
1

It really did not come as a surprise that the Police were found to be to blame for the riots that blighted this country this year. Of course, the ordinary cop on the ground suffered the greatest indignity having to stand idly by whilst gangs of feral youths burned and looted their way to an early Christmas present. The liberal bleeding hearts then roundly criticised the still weak sentences preferring to try and rehabilitate these morons in the community at your expense and at my expense.

What a pity for their morale when it was proven that crime actually dropped after the riots for a short period of time leading me to consider the following mathematical formula:

Average criminal moron + longer prison sentences = less crime?

As experienced cops, we all know that the Average criminal moron is basically a coward who seeks to take what they are not entitled to in the anonymity of a crowd. They care nothing of the community they destroy nor do they care who picks up the bill for their crimes. They just simply want!

In Safe Hands...?

However, I wonder whether there is a bigger fish to fry! The report from the Select Committee talks of a lack of leadership. The ordinary street cop facing the violent crime wave without direction or command. Does this mean that our ACPO leaders are actually sh*te at their job? Should they be looking for the culprits within their own ranks and issuing Regulation 15 notices to those who neglected their duty or brought their force into disrepute? If you are an ordinary member of the public, you can rest assured that these bastions of incompetence will not investigate their own shortcomings. They will reserve that for the front line officer who will pick up the pieces of their ineptitude.

Where are the IPCC and the Police Authorities of this country who should now be disciplining our incompetent leaders who failed to control the riots. They failed to provide proper communication, proper leadership and direction and they failed the public costing the taxpayer an arm and a leg in the process. Will any be disciplined for this costly incompetence? Don’t hold your breath!

 

Chomping at the Bit

Posted on by
Reply

I was desperate to post about this subject matter but I thought I would let the dust settle before opening my gob and maybe putting my big foot in it. My issue today is about the South Wales matter involving the retired cops taken to court for conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and ancillary offences because it was alleged they fabricated evidence against men subsequently found not guilty of a local murder. It matters not to me whether they were guilty or innocent. I would like to think that they completely innocent but the case is a classic example of the Noble Cause attitude of investigations of Police Officers.

You may disagree that the result was the right result but, being magnanimous, I would have hoped that a jury had found them not guilty rather than a judge on a point of law. However, the point of law serves to prove my assertion that, when police officers are in the frame suspected of offences, the uPSD tasked with investigating them is tainted against investigation and relies upon prosecution of the individual.

The question to be asked is, “Why else would the uPSD investigators deliberately destroy evidence which the defence believed and the judge believed would have allowed a fair trial to be heard? I’ll leave you all to answer that question yourselves.

There are too many cases where the officer ends up in court to find a judge dismissing the case at the outset or before the matter gets any where near a jury. This matter only cost about £30 million. I ask that politicians, reporters, members of the public and decent people stand up and take notice. If there are bent cops out there we want them arresting convicting and sacking. However, we don’t want them cocked up by errant and misguided stormtroopers of ACPO and other senior ranks because they believe that the public supports their stance.

Men Behaving Badly

Remember John, our sacked colleague who was the victim of 18 incidents of domestic violence only to defend himself, get convicted and then be sacked. His story can be read here if you wish to view it. Last week, it appears that his wife, who he has had nothing to do with for over two years except through solicitors and divorce court proceedings, has got her dad to photograph the clothing on his mum’s washing line in her back garden! The reason for it is that his wife erroneously believed he had police uniform hanging there drying.

Firstly, John doesn’t live with his mum. Secondly, the washing belonged to his sister. Thirdly, wife’s dad was copped taking the photo’s by a neighbour who confronted him. The local police attended and did a pretty good job in fairness. They got dad to admit his part in the debacle and the fact that his daughter was so insistent on him obtaining the evidence that he felt obliged to take action. An example of her obsession with John, perhaps or does she still want to hurt him just a little bit more?

How reassured John felt, however, when he received a letter from a senior officer in the relevant force (that sacked him) outlining that the matter was being treated as a domestic incident and a specialist unit were now available to him should there be a repeat performance. Unfortunately, it is 18 incidents and one sacking too late.

Still hanging in for a criminal case review.