Very sad, but perhaps not unexpected, outcome to the search for Sarah Everard as it seems that the police have found body parts in Ashford, Kent.
A serving Met Police officer has been arrested on suspicion of Murder. One newspaper is reporting that the connection was made to the serving officer after reviewing a bus's dashcam.
I feel for the lady's family. The distress must be intolerable.
I also feel for the police dealing with the case. Searching / finding remains must be very unpleasant, especially when the suspect is one of their own.
As an aside, while out for a walk on Tuesday we saw a number of police cars racing towards Ashford with blues and twos. We thought there must be a major accident but they kept coming. Perhaps extra manpower required for searches / to secure location.
|
|
They are unable to identify the body, and are searching in other places? And a woman as been arrested? This is a very very strange tale indeed.
|
I think the key may be that said they discovered human remains, not a body.
He got arrested so quickly really, something must have given him away. Still, we oughtn't speculate...
|
|
Looks like he's had to go have head injuries treated whilst in custody, perhaps he fell up the stairs whilst being arrested.
|
|
Again speculation but there are familiar patterns. I would imagine he's on 24hr cell watch.
|
|
More than likely been banging his head against something.
|
>> Again speculation but there are familiar patterns. I would imagine he's on 24hr cell watch.
>>
No doubt they'll be some sort of ex/stalker angle to this.
|
I take it that if he was diplomatic protection, he was armed?
If so, does he have to leave his gun at work or can he take it home with him?
|
|
It'd be kept in a police armoury, drawn out at the beginning of the shift.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Thu 11 Mar 21 at 19:10
|
'It'd be kept in a police armoury, drawn out at the beginning of the shift.'
And hopefully a robust system to ensure its return at the end of a shift.
|
>> And a woman as been arrested?
She knew he'd done it. And didn't know what to do with the information. I feel for her. She needed another week to come to terms with it before she could contemplate telling somebody.
Unless of course it was done in front of her, for her delectation. Ughhhh.
|
>> She knew he'd done it.
Fairly common scenario I think. A partner or relative of the suspect is themselves suspected of, in one way or another, assisting them. All sorts of possibilities from driving to helping clean clothing.
|
>> She needed another week to come to terms with it before she could contemplate telling somebody.
A lot of truth in that I think. There is a long and difficult transition from loving and trusting partner to accepting and dealing with the horrible reality.
|
>> >> She needed another week to come to terms with it before she could contemplate
>> telling somebody.
>>
>> A lot of truth in that I think. There is a long and difficult transition
>> from loving and trusting partner to accepting and dealing with the horrible reality.
Extremely long on the case of Rose West and Myra Hindley.
|
|
Or could be she felt physically at risk in some way from someone who she could see had become slightly unhinged.
|
|
Every sympathy with her friends and family but it is thought she took a route home - alone, in the dark - through Clapham Common. Surely a high risk?
|
>> Every sympathy with her friends and family but it is thought she took a route
>> home - alone, in the dark - through Clapham Common. Surely a high risk?
>>
That's the point isn't it. It should not be high risk. It should be a totally normal thing to do.
(Says a dad who has chastised his own kids for calling at stupid o'clock whilst walking home alone in on of several UK and foreign cities over the years.)
|
>> Or could be she felt physically at risk in some way from someone who she
>> could see had become slightly unhinged.
Slightly? Blimey you have a high threshold.
|
"She knew he'd done it. And didn't know what to do with the information. I feel for her. She needed another week to come to terms with it before she could contemplate telling somebody."
Where did that come from? I would have thought that it was rather early in the investigation to release that sort detail.
|
>> Body now identified:
>>
Sad but inevitable outcome.
|
>>Where did that come from?
My conjecture. Very difficult when the person whom you love, and with whom you share your life, suddenly becomes Britain's most wanted. Imagine having to deal with it. You'd be in complete shock.
Bit like the Rausing drugs death where he was being (going to be?) prosecuted for not delivering the body to the coroner immediately.
I wouldn't walk across Clapham Common in the dark on my own; don't much like walking around it as I occasionally do. That was where Ron Davies' political career ended, wasn't it?
|
|
He was on the look out for Badgers (or even Badger's) ;-)
|
>>
>> Bit like the Rausing drugs death where he was being (going to be?) prosecuted for
>> not delivering the body to the coroner immediately.
>>
Crikey, conspiracy theories are made of this stuff...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eva_Rausing
|
|
He has been charged with kidnapping and murder.
|
One press report states that the accused has been admitted to hospital a second time with head injuries stated to be acquired while alone in his cell.
I wonder whether fitness to plead will be an issue?
|
|
I assume when/if he's remanded there's a secure unit in London somewhere for people that are danger to themselves?
|
>> One press report states that the accused has been admitted to hospital a second time
>> with head injuries stated to be acquired while alone in his cell.
>>
>> I wonder whether fitness to plead will be an issue?
>>
He knows what he is facing if found guilty. So he is either trying to make himself look mad (Broadmoor?) or kill himself.
|
>>
>>
>> He knows what he is facing if found guilty. So he is either trying to
>> make himself look mad (Broadmoor?) or kill himself.
>>
Why not just let him? That is assuming he is guilty of course and the only person who knows that for certain is himself. His life as a free man is over and the cost of keeping a high profile ex-cop safe in prison for the rest of his life will be eye watering.
If he choses to take the quick way out, his decision.
|
Difficult to draw the line between enabling a suicide and simply not preventing it. We would treat him if he had a physical illness, we'd force feed him if he tried to starve himself so one has not much choice but to stop him killing himself if one can.
|
>>
>> Why not just let him? That is assuming he is guilty of course and the
>> only person who knows that for certain is himself. His life as a free man
>> is over and the cost of keeping a high profile ex-cop safe in prison for
>> the rest of his life will be eye watering.
>>
>> If he choses to take the quick way out, his decision.
>>
To my mind, he can do whatever he wants to himself, after the trial.
Without the trial, there can be no justice for Sarah's family.
|
|
Many years ago, I was doing a survey of a mental hospital and was shown a padded cell. Rather thought provoking.
|
Presumably he has a clean history, getting into the Force in 2018.
Wasn't there mention of an indecent exposure investigation too?
Bit of an odd age to start doing that.
Wonder if he's got a brain tumour or somesuch.
(Of course, more likely he's a self-centred POS)
|
>> Presumably he has a clean history, getting into the Force in 2018.
>>
>> Wasn't there mention of an indecent exposure investigation too?
>>
One would think so, but being a suspected nonce didn't stop this person from being allowed to join:
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/15/police-officer-who-raped-girl-13-joined-force-to-identify-victims
|
>>One would think so, but being a suspected nonce didn't stop this person from being allowed to join
.**********
One force suspected him, the other force employed him.
However, if you're saying that suspicion is sufficient to justify action, then you might want to look back at your previous criticisms of the police and reconsider your stance.
|
There is a huge distinction between a member of the public and those in a trusted position like a police officer, social worker, teacher etc.
The enhanced checks were specifically meant to identify people like this so that a proper judgement could be made before employing them. Considering what he was accused of, he should not, imho been allowed to be in a position of so much trust.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 13 Mar 21 at 21:09
|
>>
>> Presumably he has a clean history, getting into the Force in 2018.
>>
>> Wasn't there mention of an indecent exposure investigation too?
That's what was being reported. The MPS have referred themselves to the Complaints Authority over that and how the investigation was conducted.
No doubt more will emerge as the case progresses.
|
|
Apparently exposed himself to two women at a Mcdonalds drive through and his car number clearly visible on CCTV but not followed up by investigating officers....begs the question why??
|
Must admit I assumed early days, wasn't it only a week or so ago? In which case " hadn't YET been followed up....".
They can't prioritise everything....
|
>>
>> They can't prioritise everything....
>>
In normal circumstances, I agree.
But this guy was an armed diplomatic police officer.
Alarm bells should have been ringing off the wall.
Hindsight is of course 20/20.
|
>> But this guy was an armed diplomatic police officer.
>>
>> Alarm bells should have been ringing off the wall.
But this was presumably in the queue for follow up, so they didn't know he was an officer till they cross referenced in the murder enquiry.
|
"indecent exposure"
"No doubt more will emerge"
Hahahahaha
|
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56389824
>>
>> Well that went well...
Lets just say some of those who attended achieved what they set out to achieve.
|
I'm a pretty libertarian sort of chap but these fuds weren't evwn attempting to keep 2 metres apart.
I wonder how much of the public/emotional response to this horrific crime has been heightened by several days of Sarah's very beautiful face looking straight into the camera being page 1 on the news.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Sun 14 Mar 21 at 08:47
|
>> Sarah's very beautiful face l
As a male you dont have the right to comment on the physical aspects of her beauty by doing so you are objectifying her gender.
Or summink like that.
|
|
As a reactionary Neanderthal I have every right to have skipped the story if the face looking out was Anne Widdecombe's
|
>> I have every right to have skipped the story if the
>> face looking out was Anne Widdecombe's
Thats of course would have been outright discrimination, on loads of grounds, far too many to fit on a single placard.
|
>> >> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56389824
>> >>
>> >> Well that went well...
>>
>> Lets just say some of those who attended achieved what they set out to achieve.
>>
>>
The professional protesters? Probably been a bit bored in lockdown, only BLM and anti-vax protests to go on, at least they got chance to stretch their legs last night.
|
|
I'm unclear what they expect to achieve by protesting but more importantly I don't think they show much respect for the family. I know if I were the father I'd sooner people didn't rise up on my behalf at such a time.
|
"The professional protesters? ............."
Yep - rentacrowd was there alright but I thought the unannounced appearance of Kate Middleton earlier to quietly lay flowers, pause, then walk away, spoke volumes about the class of the lady.
|
>>I thought the unannounced appearance of Kate Middleton
>> earlier to quietly lay flowers, pause, then walk away, spoke volumes about the class of
>> the lady.
How many folk thought that if she could go there then why shouldn't they.
|
>> >>I thought the unannounced appearance of Kate Middleton
>> >> earlier to quietly lay flowers, pause, then walk away, spoke volumes about the class
>> of
>> >> the lady.
>>
>> How many folk thought that if she could go there then why shouldn't they.
None probably, they had already planned to turn up for a ruckus as soon as they knew it had been banned.
|
>> Yep - rentacrowd was there alright but I thought the unannounced appearance of Kate Middleton
>> earlier to quietly lay flowers,
How do you lay flowers noisily?
|
"How do you lay flowers noisily?"
You shout out to everyone "Oi, everyone - look at me, I'm going to lay some flowers - aren't I truly amazing"
|
|
Exactly Haywain. Exactly.
|
No doubt there were trouble makers there.
I like to think some went in solidarity with Sarah.
|
>>
>> Lets just say some of those who attended achieved what they set out to achieve.
>>
>>
Exactly.
There are people who are delighted with the Sarah Everard murder for political reasons, and many of them were out on the vigil last night.
The others were made up largely of grief groupies, a type who revel in the chance to show how "Caring" they are.
|
|
To me and, I suspect, the majority of the women there, a vigil means that you stand in silence with others to express solidarity over an issue. Being told that you can't have one in this instance is like having salt rubbed into a wound, given that the issue is about women not feeling safe to be alone on the street. In addition, it appears that Sarah Everard wasn't even safe from one of the people who are supposed to protect us all. In the circumstances, as I can see them at the moment, the police should have stood back. It was obvious that they couldn't make all those women disperse. They stood back at Black LIves Matter protests last year and more recently at Rangers stadium in Glasgow.
|
I was trying to compose a response to the assertions of rent-a-mob but I think John Boy has given me a starter.
First of all the media coverage does seem to show a handful of participants in balaclavas (unless of course they're 'undercover' police). The vast majority however seem to be ordinary women intent on vigil/protest.
Is it right that Covid precautions mean that such a vigil is impossible? Other forces, West Midlands and Nottinghamshire are quoted as examples, were willing to facilitate such a thing. A Judge, asked to rule on the point, appears to have declined to do so; it looks as though he metaphorically knocked their heads together and told them to sort it out.
Was it foreseeable that, ban notwithstanding, people would turn up to protest peacefully?
Although distancing appears to be being breached was there a real risk of transmission in the open air on a cool breezy evening?
Was the level of police reaction justified?
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 14 Mar 21 at 13:53
|
When the family bury the poor girl they will not be allowed more than 30 people at the funeral and no after-event AIUI.
So to me it seems perfectly reasonable that this should not have been allowed, in accordance with police advice in line with the law.
Whether the law is right or not is another matter. And I'm still not sure quite what they hoped to achieve.
|
>> When the family bury the poor girl they will not be allowed more than 30
>> people at the funeral and no after-event AIUI.
>>
>> So to me it seems perfectly reasonable that this should not have been allowed, in
>> accordance with police advice in line with the law.
I cannot see the link between Covid restrictions on funerals and the right to protest. The word whataboutery is overused but it seems appropriate to that comparison. The news coverage today suggests other forces were less rigid in their interpretation.
A protest is designed to raise the profile of an issue and get it on the media and political agenda. Have you never felt strongly enough on an issue to join a demo or march?
With the assistance of the MPS last night's vigil has achieved that end summa cum laude.
|
|
I can I can see no difference at all give the reasons for the restrictions. And to argue otherwise is really quite perverse.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 14 Mar 21 at 20:40
|
>> I can I can see no difference at all give the reasons for the restrictions.
No, you're comparing Bananas with Elephants
>> And to argue otherwise is really quite perverse.
The only person being perverse here is yourself and that's just your liking for being contrary.
|
>> The only person being perverse here is yourself and that's just your liking for being
>> contrary.
Cobblers, look in the mirror.
|
I'd agree with zero, groups are either allowed or they aren't.
Likewise protests/vigils are allowed about any reason or they aren't allowed at all. No one should be picking and choosing which issues are allowed to be protested about.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 14 Mar 21 at 20:41
|
>>>> I can I can see no difference at all give the reasons for the restrictions.
>>
>>No, you're comparing Bananas with Elephants
A gathering you agree with versus one that you don't?
The gathering was not permitted, the police beforehand said that it was not permitted, the people turned up ignoring that.
Why would protestors believe that they have greater rights than mourners?
I'm with the police on this one. The problem is, as soon as the Police said they would stop it it was a red flag to rent-a-mob and they were guaranteed to turn up.
Trying to justify/confuse/conflate rent-a-mob with the legitimate points of the others is ridiculous.
|
>> A gathering you agree with versus one that you don't?
I genuinely don't get what you mean. Covid restrictions affect both funerals and gatherings. My question was with Smokie (I think) conflating a private gathering with a public vigil.
Tragically, the need for forensics is likely to mean it will be some time before Sarah Everard's funeral. I've every sympathy with family and friends who cannot attend.
It's not remotely a case you could portray as agree/disagree.
>> The gathering was not permitted, the police beforehand said that it was not permitted, the
>> people turned up ignoring that.
>>
>> Why would protestors believe that they have greater rights than mourners?
False dichotomy for reasons already stated.
>> Trying to justify/confuse/conflate rent-a-mob with the legitimate points of the others is ridiculous.
I'm not denying that habitual/professional protesters were present but I'll wait before accepting that the young woman in all the press pictures was one of them.
|
It's not very difficult.
If there had been a funeral yesterday would several hundred people have been permitted to attend? Because you deem one a private gathering and the other a public vigil? And, by the way, vigil my a***. It was largely a bunch of habitual protesters and over emotional virtue signallers.
>>I'm not denying that habitual/professional protesters were present but I'll wait before accepting that the young woman in all the press pictures was one of them.
I have not the slightest idea who you are referring to nor do I see the relevance. Protesters turned up for publicity, attention and fun and devalued any real point in the process.
|
>> I have not the slightest idea who you are referring to nor do I see
>> the relevance. Protesters turned up for publicity, attention and fun and devalued any real point
>> in the process.
I don't know what you're seeing but our media are flooded with a picture of an inevitably photogenic redhead pinned to the ground by male officers. She says she was there only for the vigil and was pulled out without warning. Given a £200 FPN.
If 'rent a mob' were present and attacking the police that's one thing.
If the police weighed in to enforce distancing that's another.
And of course the politicians who called for forceful action over masks and distancing are now running for cover.
|
>>our media are flooded with a picture of an inevitably photogenic redhead pinned to the ground by male officers
No, we haven't seen that. Or certainly, I haven't.
|
>> No, we haven't seen that. Or certainly, I haven't.
Picture here is one of a few doing the rounds. The Guardian article includes the subject's take.
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/14/woman-pinned-ground-clapham-vigil-policing-disgraceful-sarah-everard
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 14 Mar 21 at 21:26
|
|
Single photographs should be viewed with a large pinch of salt, out of context they can give a totally false impression of what really happened.
|
I don't often agree with Bromp on such matters but I certainly do here.
Those of us with daughters who are vulnerable to out of the blue attacks (of any description) by a an unknown male are very concerned that women feel constantly threatened when out alone. I even worry when my daughter walks home from school and her location is on my phone constantly.
To hold a quiet vigil in a huge open space is perfectly reasonable. Starting speeches was unwise but the Police made it worse. There could have been a satisfactory compromise.
|
The vigil was going well until darkness descended then the Police were attacked.
This outcome was 100% guaranteed. Although 'banned' it was a racing certainty that a large gathering would take place and the Police were overseeing that. The important part, was that the law had deemed it an illegal gathering supporting the Covid issues but the Police have facilitated all these events to an extent to acknowledge freedom of speech.
This event has been infiltrated by feminist Police haters, rent a mob who have tipped up at every opportunity for a protest against the corrupt establishment and rumours of Antifa then it was only heading in one direction and boy are they milking it. Its a no win situation but an opportunity to continue to rebel against law and order. Unfortunately because the offender in this case is a rouge PC then in their twisted psych it justified attacking the Police.
As for the feeling of vulnerability of our female population and the behaviour of males. This is not something any vigil is going any way to address. Predatory people, predominantly males, intent on seizing and murdering a random victim will never be eradicated. They are and will always be out there.
The breakdown of discipline, morals, standards and values over the last 2/3 decades, maybe further, underpins the issues. Constant pushing the boundaries of acceptability under the banner of 'freedoms' has resulted in the obscuring of acceptability and of norms.
Social media, press and particularly TV has played a massive part. Look at the constant diarrhea that is fed through TV in the name of entertainment. Love Island, Jeremy Kyle and Naked Attraction as examples that immediately come to mind. Why are they so popular? Its now classed as entertainment to exploit others in a public way. This must lead to a certain mindset in those who are easily influenced.
Maybe the quest for total equality has also skewed some perceptions of how females should be treated?
Its a massive massive issue and one that is not going to be fixed any time soon.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Sun 14 Mar 21 at 15:33
|
>> The vigil was going well until darkness descended then the Police were attacked.
>>
>> This outcome was 100% guaranteed. Although 'banned' it was a racing certainty that a large
>> gathering would take place and the Police were overseeing that. The important part, was that
>> the law had deemed it an illegal gathering supporting the Covid issues but the Police
>> have facilitated all these events to an extent to acknowledge freedom of speech.
Not in London they didn't.
>> This event has been infiltrated by feminist Police haters, rent a mob who have tipped
>> up at every opportunity for a protest against the corrupt establishment and rumours of Antifa
>> then it was only heading in one direction and boy are they milking it. Its
>> a no win situation but an opportunity to continue to rebel against law and order.
>> Unfortunately because the offender in this case is a rouge PC then in their twisted
>> psych it justified attacking the Police.
Is there the slightest real evidence of that?? Antifa??? Is that even a real thing in the US never mind the UK. I think you're reading too many US influenced websites.
>> As for the feeling of vulnerability of our female population and the behaviour of males.
>> This is not something any vigil is going any way to address. Predatory people, predominantly
>> males, intent on seizing and murdering a random victim will never be eradicated. They are
>> and will always be out there.
So women should just live with it?
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 14 Mar 21 at 15:35
|
I really struggle to understand your world sometimes Bromp. When I retired I looked forward to going back to the bubble where a majority of the population live.
I think you will find there are numerous examples of gatherings and protests where the Police have been standing round in the vicinity but as usual the boundaries are pushed to the extent where they are forced into taking action. Speakers corner week after week. Plenty of evidence on Youtube.
I said 'rumours' of Antifa that means that I cant corroborate that. We do however have enough other groups with their agendas.
Did I suggest women should have to live with it? No I didn't. It's an evil bad world out there unthinkable acts will occur on a daily basis. Nasty twisted viscous people wired differently who take the opportunity to exploit others for their own ends. Unless we identify them and exterminate them there will always be tragedies. If you have a solution feel free.
|
>> As for the feeling of vulnerability of our female population and the behaviour of males.
>> This is not something any vigil is going any way to address. Predatory people, predominantly
>> males, intent on seizing and murdering a random victim will never be eradicated. They are
>> and will always be out there.
I - as a married man - utterly empathise with how women feel about being safe, and like any others on here will go out of my way to ensure a partners feelings of, and actual safety.
However, the facts about safety seem to be completely forgotten. 75% of murder victims are men, and in London young black males are 25 times more likely to be assaulted than women.
I accept the argument that a lot of female assault goes unreported. Doesn't change the facts that as thats applies the other ways as well.
|
>>Those of us with daughters who are vulnerable to out of the blue attacks (of any description) by a an unknown male are very concerned that women feel constantly threatened when out alone. I even worry when my daughter walks home from school and her location is on my phone constantly.
I have daughters and I have sympathy with your view. However, I am unclear how picking a fight with the police at an illegal gathering would help that?
>>To hold a quiet vigil in a huge open space is perfectly reasonable. Starting speeches was unwise but the Police made it worse. There could have been a satisfactory compromise.
There could have been, but that wouldn't have suited the agenda of rent-a-mob would it.
|
>>
>> To hold a quiet vigil in a huge open space is perfectly reasonable. Starting speeches
>> was unwise but the Police made it worse. There could have been a satisfactory compromise.
But not a vigil during a pandemic. It was always going to be a complete waste of time. What useful purpose could it possibly have served?
|
Np doubt the majority were sincerely wanting to show concern and were affected by what has happened to Sarah Everard but anybody who thought about it should have known that it was likely to turn into a massive gathering with the potential for trouble. I would have sought another way of paying respect.
Police intervention is always going to look more or less heavy handed when people don't want to comply, but I'd rather see four officers grabbing an arm or a leg each and hauling somebody off with overwhelming force than people being bashed on the head with batons.
The police should be looking for a better way to respond but it's hard to see how they can please everybody.
It will be counter productive if the debate focuses on how to police vigils/demonstrations rather than the safety of women.
|
Is it right that Covid precautions mean that such a vigil is impossible? Other forces,
>> West Midlands and Nottinghamshire are quoted as examples, were willing to facilitate such a thing.
I wonder if it were anti-vax vigil they would have been so ready to facilitate?
|
>>Last 2/3 decades
The world has always been a violent place towards women.
I don't think that it has got any worse because of soft porn on TV. There have always been dark alleys and murders of women, it's just that it gets advertised better nowadays.
>>Police action
The police cannot chose the laws they enforce. But they do don't they. They don't always enforce laws look at the recent football crowds in Scotland or BLM or is it a case of choosing softer targets?
>>Inequality.
I would like to see Kate Middleton be asked to explain if her trip meets the reasonable excuse requirements.
|
"I would like to see Kate Middleton be asked to explain if her trip meets the reasonable excuse requirements."
As far as I know from reports, she laid her flowers and went; she didn't hang around. To my mind, she acted with dignity. I don't think police were objecting to that sort of thing.
I'm not sure what those protesting actually want ........ a nightfall curfew for males?
|
|
Group forming outside New Scotland Yard at this moment in time. Police standing on the periphery. Will be dark soon. See how this pans out.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Sun 14 Mar 21 at 17:22
|
"See how this pans out."
Let's hope for more rain.
|
>> Group forming outside New Scotland Yard at this moment in time. Police standing on the
>> periphery. Will be dark soon. See how this pans out.
They seem to have moved on to Parliament Square. They're also focussed on a separate issue; the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill.
The bill is a serious concern from a civil liberties point of view as it appears to curtail the right to protest and place significan power in the hands of the Home Secretary. It's not just the left who are concerned; the doyen of legal correspondents Joshua Rozenberg is keeping up a narrative on the subject.
It should not though be conflated with Sarah Everard and women's safety.
Yesterdays policing has though encouraged those who seek to conflate.
|
>>I'm not sure what those protesting actually want ..
Confrontation, attention and a hope of 15 minutes of fame.
|
>>The police cannot chose the laws they enforce. But they do don't they
Not in my experience. I think you are just totally coloured by your own anti-Police views. I know, I know, many of your best friends are Policemen, but you still criticise everything the Police do, depending on your own point of view.
>>I would like to see Kate Middleton be asked to explain if her trip meets the reasonable excuse requirements.
So you are quite comfortable the protestors but think a lone woman needs to be justified.
Is it because one fought the police and one did not?
|
"Priti Patel calls for investigation of vigil policing"
www.bbc.com/news/uk-56389824
Patel is becoming a proper pain in the a***.
"Met Police chief Dame Cressida Dick, who has faced calls to resign, said she was not considering her position."
FFS, calls of resignation? t***s.
|
She sums it up well.
"Calls of resignation". "Claims of Police over reaction and violence"
Headline grabbing statements which are actually quite shallow with no real substance. Any anonymous person can make those statements even if untrue and thus they become 'calls' and 'claims'.
|
>> Headline grabbing statements which are actually quite shallow with no real substance. Any anonymous person
>> can make those statements even if untrue and thus they become 'calls' and 'claims'.
The calls for resignation have come from some decidedly non anonymous politicians (Lib Dems) and suggestions of over reaction from Tory MPs including Caroline Nokes.
No particular view on merits of calls for Cressida Dick's head, less so on suggestion of over reaction; but they're not just 'calls' or 'claims'
|
Whilst I believe the police should have stayed at a distance on last night's gatherings, I do think they were in one of those damned if you do and damned if you don't scenarios.
Priti Patel has grown another face imho and all of them need a good slapping (a sentiment that would apply equally to a male Home Secretary). She has been such an ardent supporter of hard line police action in many areas, to suddenly cave at this juncture is nothing but pandering to public opinion. She is not the calibre of person that should hold such a high Office of State.
As for Cressida Dick falling on her sword for this, I think we would be better served if the police looked at ways of handling the situation better, as has been shown to be possible elsewhere.
|
>> She is not the calibre of person that should hold such a high Office of State. be allowed out on her own without a minder.
|
>>They're also focussed on a separate issue; the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill.
Police State coming?
publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-01/0268/200268.pdf
Have a look at section 59 (page 52), subsection 2:
"For the purposes of subsection (1) an act or omission causes serious harm to a
person if, as a result, the person—
(a) suffers death, personal injury or disease,
(b) suffers loss of, or damage to, property,
(c) suffers serious distress, serious annoyance, serious inconvenience or serious loss of amenity, or
(d) is put at risk of suffering anything mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (c)."
Nothing there open to abuse I guess.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Sun 14 Mar 21 at 21:50
|
>> Nothing there open to abuse I guess.
But plenty to argue in court. Any good barrister is going to make sure the police have to get someone affected in to testify and prove the degree of seriousness.
|
|
Watching the scene on the news last night, there seemed to be an awful lot of blokes with faces covered up pushing and shoving women into the police lines.
|
What was the point in the protest? Everybody knows the Covid law; probably nobody or very few there actually knew here so it was the crocodile tears of mass hysteria, not grief. And the suspected person to protest against is behind bars. And who wouldn't agree with the observation that it would be nice if the streets were safer? Notwithstanding the point that women are statistically safer on the streets than men, of course, the fact that it's a pretty, nice, educated girl makes it newsworthy. I have no doubt she and I had friends in common.
Agree with Brompton, he's quite old to start offending like this; one must wonder about brain tumours etc.
|
>> What was the point in the protest?
It was intended to be a vigil not a demo.
The point at issue is male violence against women and the extent to which the law could/should do more. The full gamut form verbal harassment through unwanted touching to rape.
Have you talked to your female relatives about it? Zoom chat with son/daughter and their partners had all 3 female participants recollecting incidents and actions taken to mitigate the possibility of unwanted male attention.
The Victims Commissioner, Vera Baird QC, was on Radio 5 Live at about 10:15 on the subject. Worth listening again.
|
>>The point at issue is male violence against women and the extent to which the law could/should do more.
I am well aware of unwanted male attention. We men get it too though on nothing like the level women do.
The odds of being a victim to a stranger in Everard's way, whether a child or a grown woman, are vanishingly small; you're more likely to win the lottery. I'm far from convinced that encouraging a climate of fear and hysteria, in a way an event such as that does, helps anybody at all.
But more specifically, there is nothing more the law could have done in Everard's case, short of supplying crystal balls to the Met. What the bloke did was stonkingly illegal, and carries a life term.
You cannot legislate to stop men (or people in general) from behaving in such a manner; you can only legislate to punish them. This is what I don't understand about the point of the protest.
|
>> Watching the scene on the news last night, there seemed to be an awful lot
>> of blokes with faces covered up pushing and shoving women into the police lines.
I mentioned them yesterday. Part of rent-a-mob or part of the Police?
|
>> I mentioned them yesterday. Part of rent-a-mob or part of the Police?
This isn't Russia... or am I missing something?
|
>> This isn't Russia... or am I missing something?
You're missing something.
The presence of Police officers in the sort of clothing seen there and without insignia or numbers visible is a constant comment from participants in/witnesses to demonstrations.
|
Brompton I am all ears.
I Googled this phrase
masked police officers inciting violence uk
and there are no obvious hits. Have you evidence for your assertion that masked police officers dressed otherwise than in uniform act to provoke violence? If the police were regularly organising something like this it would be in the Guardian/Mail within moments, surely?
|
>> Have you evidence for your assertion that masked police
>> officers dressed otherwise than in uniform act to provoke violence? If the police were regularly
>> organising something like this it would be in the Guardian/Mail within moments, surely?
I don't think I asserted that they provoked violence. Certainly I did not intend to do so. If you searched with that 'tag' then you're probably going to draw a blank.
The complaint is that officers thus dressed use their anonymity to manhandle protestors in ways that would earn them a report if they were identifiable.
There are plenty accounts of officers concealing their rank insignia and or service numbers for example at G20 and Mayday marches. Environmentalists report similar at Kingsnorth Power station and Fracking sites. Examples here:
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8518828.stm
www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/jul/22/kingsnorth-protest-police-tactics
I'm pretty sure they were a feature at BLM protests last summer.
Allegations of such behaviour go back at least as far as the Miners Strike in the eighties and probably Grosvenor Sq. long before that.
|
>> There are plenty accounts of officers concealing their rank insignia and or service numbers for
>> example at G20 and Mayday marches. Environmentalists report similar at Kingsnorth Power station and Fracking
>> sites. ............
>> Allegations of such behaviour go back at least as far as the Miners Strike in
>> the eighties and probably Grosvenor Sq. long before that.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_protests_in_the_United_Kingdom
You missed out the Merthyr Rising of 1831 and The General Strike of 1842. Trust a civil servant to do half a job.
|
Oh yes, police officers with their service numbers removed is a sign that there's going to be a fight and it's time to get the hell out of there. I remember somebody pointing this out to me at a hunting demonstration in Parliament Square and we absolutely did get the hell out of there (just in time). If there had been no police there it would have been a polite gathering, violence was entirely initiated and provoked by the police. The irony being that hunting people would generally regard themselves as being more on the side of the police than not, and there was none of the rent-a-crowd mob of Marxists there (shouting Fascist **** at both the police and those who hunt!)
However that is very different from asserting that masked and un-uniformed police officers are pushing protestors into the police lines. I know they were not your words but when you quoted them you said you'd mentioned these people yesterday.
">> Watching the scene on the news last night, there seemed to be an awful lot
>> of blokes with faces covered up pushing and shoving women into the police lines."
|
I am rather split on my attitude to the Clapham protest.
It was inevitable that it couldn't go ahead without Covid rules being breached, so letter of the law should have been banned, as it was, and policed.
It was also obvious the protest would go ahead in some form, so common sense says that agreeing to a compromise of some sort with the vigil groups would have been good politics. Whether that would have stopped things getting out of hand after dark , I am not so sure.
But at least then Cressida/the Met would have been seen to try.
|
>> However that is very different from asserting that masked and un-uniformed police officers are pushing
>> protestors into the police lines.
Yesterday at 13:52 I said First of all the media coverage does seem to show a handful of participants in balaclavas (unless of course they're 'undercover' police)
That was in relation to suggestions of rent-a-mob.
I responded to Zero's question this morning.
I'm not saying the guys in balaclavas were police, just that it was possible they were.
They could have been interlopers attempting to get women arrested for jostling the police.
OTOH pushing/manhandling people into a kettle or cordon would be consistent with actions of police in previous demos.
|
>>I'm not saying the guys in balaclavas were police, just that it was possible they were.
Brompton, forgive me, I thought you had denied this possibility. It turns out that you repeated it!
This is an extremely serious allegation to make, don't you think? And don't you think that if the police were in the habit of being on 'both sides' in a fight that this would have leaked to the press somewhere? I am utterly astonished that this could even be considered to be a possibility in the UK.
I am not suggesting that the riot police are a gentle bunch; poets, musicians, composers and artists. But there's a world of difference between over-reacting and actually having agents provocateurs in the crowd pushing the unsuspecting victims towards the waiting policemen. Marxist activists, more like, don't you think?
|
>> But there's a world of difference between over-reacting and actually having agents provocateurs
>> in the crowd pushing the unsuspecting victims towards the waiting policemen. Marxist activists, more like,
>> don't you think?
Let me try again
It is possible the people in Balaclavas are activists, whether Marxist or otherwise, trying to create a fight.
It is possible they are Police Officers assisting in having participants driven into a kettle or corral with a view to them being detained.
I'm not persuaded that the latter is unprecedented or impossible.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 15 Mar 21 at 15:02
|
>> I'm not persuaded that the latter is unprecedented or impossible.
>>
Given the nature of the event, I would. Given the nature of the event I would say you are flogging a dead horse. keep digging my ole son, you are starting to sound like a covid denier or Q anon groupie.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 15 Mar 21 at 15:07
|
"probably Grosvenor Sq. long before that. "
Evidence, Brompt - or are you just guessing? I can tell you that I was there, and I don't recall any such police measures being mentioned at the time.
Is any of this true? I have great difficulty is assessing what is truth and what is fake, these days ....
youtu.be/RfyfK_hx6hk
|
>> "probably Grosvenor Sq. long before that. "
>>
>> Evidence, Brompt - or are you just guessing? I can tell you that I was
>> there, and I don't recall any such police measures being mentioned at the time.
Speculation as to how far back assertions of police without insignia/numbers being deployed at demonstrations go.
As Duncan points out allegations of the practice go back into history.
|
>> As Duncan points out allegations of the practice go back into history.
>>
Perhaps my sarcasm was too subtle for you?
|
>> Perhaps my sarcasm was too subtle for you?
Or much nearer the truth than you intended.
|
"Speculation"
So, there you have it, M'lud, Brompt is guessing. He has not a shred of evidence and, as far as we know, he wasn't there because he was only 8 years old.
On the other hand, we have an actual witness - Haywain, was there - but he can't remember why. It may have been something to do with the Vietnam war - but it was more likely to have been because he was an immature student.
|
>> So, there you have it, M'lud, Brompt is guessing. He has not a shred of
>> evidence and, as far as we know, he wasn't there because he was only 8
>> years old.
I said allegations were made; no more than that.
|
In the comments underneath that article Lawrence Ernest Balderstone says
"So much about what preceded Saturday's vigil/protest is not known and can only be guessed at. Yes, we know that RTS say that the Met failed to engage, and this may well have been the case. Equally though, it may not. I haven't yet read anything from the Met in terms of an explanation for its position in negotiations, nor how/why it got to an apparent point of its position being solidified into one of the vigil/protest not being able to take place lawfully.
"Yet here and elsewhere, having heard from only one party, the position appears to be prejudged ("If Met intransigence persists...").
"These are all issues that are far too important to be discussed on the basis of assumption, especially where the assumptions appear to have no basis beyond that espoused by a group who have a dog in the race."
|
>> "These are all issues that are far too important to be discussed on the basis
>> of assumption, especially where the assumptions appear to have no basis beyond that espoused by
>> a group who have a dog in the race."
It's a Commentary and Opinion piece, it says so in the heading.
There'll probably be another opinion along shortly.
|
>>Whatever.
Sometimes I wish someone to know I don't care about what they said, and 'whatever' can be tempting. Of course the problem is that by writing to say that one doesn't care, one makes it pretty obvious that one does.
If I truly didn't care then I wouldn't reply at all, I try hard to remember that. It's not unlike car horns. It is pretty much always the car behind which blows its horn.
|
I despair. You cant defend this behaviour.
www.thesun.co.uk/news/14348355/sarah-everard-probe-cop-inappropriate-messages/
Last edited by: Fullchat on Mon 15 Mar 21 at 19:13
|
FFS, they just screw it up for everyone else.
At least they were reported by other officers.
|
|
Was there not a murder of two black sisters last summer where Met officers took selfies beside the bodies?
|
There was certainly a case where photos of the deceased were taken illicitly.
Would need to check which force.
|
>> Claim against the Met by representatives of Reclaim These Streets, organisers of the Vigil, has
>> been upheld on Human Rights Grounds.
To what useful purpose?
|
>> To what useful purpose?
To clarify the law. There were reasonable excuses for breaking the Covid Regs.
I've only looked at the summary but if you read the whole 38 page judgment you'll get the gist of the Claimant's case.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 11 Mar 22 at 12:44
|
>> >> To what useful purpose?
>>
>> To clarify the law. There were reasonable excuses for breaking the Covid Regs.
I was expressing the opinion that "The Vigil" was a pointless and useless exercise.
|
>> I was expressing the opinion that "The Vigil" was a pointless and useless exercise.
Very few protests are seen, in isolation, to change things although the Met's over reaction gave the Sarah Everard vigil a shed load more impact.
Protest gives an issue a higher public profile. The Everard case and public view of it drove the reaction to the Henry/Smallman photo case and the various disgusting Whatsapp groups.
The whole Violence Against Women and Girls thing climbs the chart in terms of political action:
www.gov.uk/government/news/home-secretary-says-enough-to-violence-against-women-and-girls?
|
Second link. Second picture down Right hand side - placard ' F the Pigs'.
Sort of sets the tone really.
|
>>Sort of sets the tone really.
No, no no, "Fk the pigs" is what honest, decent, peaceful people hold up on an emotional vigil mourning the death of a person.
Isn't it?
|
"No, no no, "Fk the pigs" is what honest, decent, peaceful people hold up on an emotional vigil mourning the death of a person."
I know I'm far too defensive :)
Last edited by: Fullchat on Tue 16 Mar 21 at 10:26
|
|
Or an uncouth boar owner :-)
|
>>Three articles worth a moment of your time
Three articles that don't offer a solution although together they describe the problem. 1) Attacks on women should be stopped, 2) Women shouldn't have to stay at home or be permanently accompanied when out, to prevent them 3) It's the men who perpetrate the attacks who are to blame. 4) By implication, it's men who should suffer any inconvenience needed to cure the problem.
What then is the answer, other than a minority of men spontaneously ceasing to abuse women? If that is the only solution, and it is definitely a better one than all women having to stay in or have a friendly companion with them at all times, how can it be brought about? Why are 99 men out of 100, or whatever proportion the non-offenders are, be held any more responsible* for the problem than the female victims (who of course shouldn't be blamed)?
Frankly if I thought my daughter or wife was at risk I would advise them to take responsibility for their own safety, including not going out alone. Even if I had command of the nation's police I could do no more in the short term, other than providing them with a police escort which is impractical.
Long term, more severe punishments, focused police attention to prevention and detection, education, cultural shift, can all have an effect. But in the end the only person who can really look out for an individual if is that individual him or her self. That IMO applies to every grown up person in most situations - self-preservation means either don't do dangerous things, or do them in as safe a way as possible.
Male or female, I would simply be an idiot to wander about alone at a time and place where there is a material chance of me being attacked. If asserting my right to do that results in my being hurt or killed, whose fault is that? The attacker's, obviously. But who could, practically, have prevented it? Only me, whether by being accompanied, armed to the teeth, or simply staying away from there.
Clearly that isn't fair, but what's the answer? Blaming the police because they aren't everywhere at once? Perhaps more CCTV, and would that help? How practical is 100% coverage?
I feel as if I must have missed something obvious. I usually do. But I'm at a loss as to exactly what the protesters want other than to blame the police, and more so because one of these monsters happened to be a policeman.
*What proportion of men commit these crimes? Apart from being unreasonable and impractical, a curfew for men would probably make things worse, because all the law-abiding men would be at home leaving the field clear for the muggers, rapists and murderers who by definition are not concerned with keeping the law.
Last edited by: Manatee on Tue 16 Mar 21 at 11:11
|
>>Three articles that don't offer a solution although together they describe the problem
I posted them as differing perspectives from different places. Out of interest rather than as any part of a solution.
As for a solution, to which problem?
Women being attacked
Public regard/respect for the Police
Public readiness to protest vociferously
Police handling of illegal demonstrations
Public willingness to seek confrontation
Media love of simplistic sensationalism
Public need for sound-bite world news
etc. etc.
|
>>I posted them as differing perspectives from different places.
I'm not having a go, or suggesting that you or the writers had the answer. They were all worth reading especially for me as I haven't ploughed through every word on this previously- rather the opposite.
>>.As for a solution, to which problem?
I thought it was clear that I meant the problem/circumstances I enumerated in the first paragraph.
The others you mention are confounding problems in this context. As far as the gatherings are concerned it's trite but probably true that the police are damned whichever approach they adopt.
The arguments about the police handling of the vigil/protest/civil unrest are a massive distraction and I imagine the people who are genuinely concerned about misogyny and the safety of women will think that too. They seem to want the attacks stopped and the need for women to arrange their lives and restrict their own freedom to avoid danger removed - perfectly reasonable, but their anger suggests all that's needed is the will to do it - my question is simply "how, because it isn't obvious to me?"
|
Didn't think you were, I was clarifying my position rather than disputing yours.
I agree that all but one of those issues is a distraction, but, present company excepted, nobody appears to be able to, or indeed want to, work that out.
Rather it is each to their own bandwagon all lumped into one bucket.
As well all know, the first step to a solution is defining the problem one wishes to solve and the sacrifices one is prepared to make to do so.
|
"how, because it isn't obvious to me?"
I have mid 20s daughters currently at home. We are having heated debate about the issues. Naturally we (parents) are defensive of Police criticism. They on the other hand cannot appreciate the divide between 1./ a Police supported peaceful vigil 2./hijacked by militants and 3/.the highlighting of the vulnerability women feel.
They have been swayed by massively by the reporting of the events and are of the opinion that this was caused solely by the Police intruding on peaceful protest.
The main issues I believe from the females is that they wish to be free from unwanted attention, verbal and random low physical abuse from males. Extreme issues such as rape goes without saying.
These are societal issues whereby the male species needs to understand the concept of boundaries and respect. How you make that happen I dont know. For some females it can be a bit of banter and for others the feeling of being threatened.
|
>> They on the other hand cannot
>> appreciate the divide between 1./ a Police supported peaceful vigil 2./hijacked by militants and 3/.the
>> highlighting of the vulnerability women feel.
I think they have a point.
If 1. were correct we'd not be where we are now
2. Is, at best, a point of view. If there were militants they didn't get out of their seats never mind hi-jack anything.
3. Is axiomatic.
|
>>Is, at best, a point of view
I dislike the way you use that as a sneer at things you disagree with yet as a defense of things you do.
|
2./hijacked by militants and
2. Is, at best, a point of view.
Or, at worst - your own point of view is showing there. At best, it's an accurate description of at least part of what went on.
That is exactly the point. The same event *is* a vigil, a civil disturbance, and a demo and which description you favour depends on your viewpoint. And all three were probably valid on that day.
As much as there were many genuine mourners there, the chances of there having been no s*** stirrers present were approximately nil.
|
>> As much as there were many genuine mourners there, the chances of there having been
>> no s*** stirrers present were approximately nil.
I'd agree with that but the irony is that the probability of **** stirrers being present would have been much less if the MPS had allowed a stewarded vigil as originally proposed.
|
They did. They could not condone a mass gathering as at present it would breach Covid regulations. However they did facilitate and oversee the vigil which went belly up.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Wed 17 Mar 21 at 10:55
|
>
>> at once? Perhaps more CCTV, and would that help? How practical is 100% coverage?
On the route she was abducted on, not only is it feasible, it is actually the norm, which is how her abductor was found. It is not actually 100% monitored real time, that is impractical given the number and diversity of feeds
So the question is, does the knowledge of being caught deter the offenders? In this case I suspect rational thought by the offender is not a limiting factor.
Of course what makes this spectacularly shocking is the offender being a serving policeman.
|
I dont think there is any dispute that the MP handled this badly, right from the outset prior to the vigil. Poor PR, Poor communication Poor intelligence and poor planning & tactics on the night.
Sure you can blame the agitators, but there are ways to get them out the game even before they arrive, its not like they are unknown.
|
>> I dont think there is any dispute that the MP handled this badly, right from
>> the outset prior to the vigil. Poor PR, Poor communication Poor intelligence and poor planning
>> & tactics on the night.
>>
>> Sure you can blame the agitators, but there are ways to get them out the
>> game even before they arrive, its not like they are unknown.
I'd pretty much agree with that.
There was a cohort there, almost certainly attracted by the gathering being 'illegal', who were up for a bundle with the police. It suits the agenda of our excuse for a Home Secretary to say the event was hi-jacked but I'm not convinced the agitators were anything more than a small and noisy subset.
The report from Her Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary may be worth waiting for.
PS: Banners saying Kill the Bill refer to proceedings in Parliament and not a wish for the death of Officers.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 16 Mar 21 at 13:06
|
|
As an aside, and content apart, some of the photographs are excellent quality.
|
>> As an aside, and content apart, some of the photographs are excellent quality.
The Photographer who took the picture of the red head on the floor of the bandstand was on the Radio last night explaining how he'd got it. Cannot remember if it was Radio 4 or Times Radio.
Spoke of composing his shot in darkness and relying on flash to fill in. I guess modern cameras that will do all the aperture/exposure and potentially focus as well mean the skilled snapper can get such pictures.
|
|
I saw some stills of the march with banners that read, boys will be boys. I'm not sure what to make of that.
|
>> I saw some stills of the march with banners that read, boys will be boys.
>> I'm not sure what to make of that.
Do you meant the vigil on Saturday or the more recent protests at Ms Patel's bill?
|
|
Fairly sure it was the vigil.
|
|
Didn't he use to fly Thunderbird 2?
|
>> I saw some stills of the march with banners that read, boys will be boys.
Thinking some more it may be ironic.
Low level harassment or even touching might be seen by women being passed off under 'boys will be boys'.
Wasn't that part of the response to allegations against the teenage Brett Kavanagh?
Or am I thinking of some other historical case.
|
|
No idea at all, probably way over my head.
|
"Of course what makes this spectacularly shocking is the offender being a serving policeman."
Wayne Couzens is a man lightyears from stable. Wasn't Nilsen a copper at one stage?
Odd that we think it's only the sink-estate-trash that do all the vile stuff and that it's almost unimaginable to find the killer is a Met policeman. But there are plenty from the brighter end of the spectrum that have murdered; Doctor Shipman, Beverley Alitt and that young Cheshire nurse arrested last year (again).
Reclaim these wards.
|
We mustn't forget of course that being charged with an offence does not automatically mean the person is guilty. We know very little about the details of the case so far and we have no idea what defence, if any, this man has to offer or indeed what evidence the police have.
While it may on the surface seem like an open and shut case there is a tabloid style lynch mob mentality surrounding this event.
|
>> We mustn't forget of course that being charged with an offence does not automatically mean
>> the person is guilty. We know very little about the details of the case so
>> far and we have no idea what defence, if any, this man has to offer
She slipped your honour, so I buried her in a builders bag 60 miles away
|
The Judiciary website has now uploaded a transcript of Mr Justice Holgate's judgment from last Friday when the original organisers of the vigil sought a declaration as to its legality:
www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Leigh-Ors-v-The-Commissioner-of-the-Police-of-the-Metropolis-12.03.21JUD-1.pdf
The question seems to be whether the effects of Articles 10 (Freedom of Expression) and 11 (Freedom of Assembly) of the Human Rights Act might mean that, in some circumstances, attending a vigil or demonstration was a reasonable excuse for the purposes of the Coronavirus Regulations.
The Judge refused to make the orders sought explaining that there was already legal authority via earlier cases in the Court of Appeal or Divisional Court.
Quite interesting I thought.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 19 Mar 21 at 15:21
|
There's also a report on how our wonderful Home Secretary threw the Met under a bus:
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/19/priti-patel-wanted-police-stop-people-gathering-sarah-everard-vigil
OK, it's The Guardian and one needs to apply a discount but even so......
|
|
And if the police had stopped people gathering there wouldn't have been the problem of dispersing the protestors after the event changed from a vigil to a protest.
|
>> And if the police had stopped people gathering there wouldn't have been the problem of
>> dispersing the protestors after the event changed from a vigil to a protest.
Would doing so, irrespective of how it would have looked to the general public, have been either lawful or practical?
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sat 20 Mar 21 at 09:44
|
|
That, with respect, is a different issue. The article attempts to smear the minister by alluding that her position was in line with the way the protestors were man-handled.
|
The thrust of the story is that Ms Patel's message to the Police was that they were to stop people gathering at vigils. That may have had particular resonance to the MPS for which responsibility is shared by the Home Secretary and the Mayor.
When it went awry on the ground, as is often the case in public order situations, it suddenly becomes an operational decision for the police themselves.
I don't think, if the gist is true, that's a slur.
A comment on her fitness for office perhaps.......
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sat 20 Mar 21 at 10:23
|
The Inspectorate of Police and Fire/Rescue Service has published its report into policing of the the Clapham Common vigil.
www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/wp-content/uploads/inspection-of-mps-policing-vigil-commemoration-sarah-everard-clapham-common.pdf
Headline message is that policing was appropriate.
Day off work today for Mrs B's birthday and we're off to a National Trust Garden later and it's sunny and warm. I've better things to do then try and absorb a 60 page report, will look at it later.
|
Covid plus rent a mob - 2 reasons to arrest people
I do not see anything wrong with that.
However there are many other riots where the police stand and do not arrest the rent a mob types.
|
|
I wonder what happened to the Boris water canons?
|
>> I wonder what happened to the Boris water canons?
>>
Others might remember the details better, but I think they were sold without ever being used. Something to do with them being illegal in the UK?
|
|
I knew someone would remember the detail.
|
Pity
they are an excellent crown dispersal tool without injuring people too much and keeping the scrotes from attacking the police.
|
|
I understand mobile Job Centres, showers and laundries cleared the streets in no time :))
|
>>they are an excellent crown dispersal tool without injuring people too much and keeping the scrotes from attacking the police.
No, they don't.
They will disperse an otherwise peaceful parade that the Police don't want there, but they do nothing against determined and violent protesters.
They're used here all the time to disperse crowds but are ineffective against the dangerous people. Tear gas is much the same.
|
|
Firing live rounds into the legs of sling-armed teenagers on the other side of mesh fences does the trick usually.
|
Considering the abuse they take the Carabineros are far more restrained than I would be in such a situation, though there are bad apples obviously.
However, they have no modern training and rely on a 1970s approach to crowd control and restraint.
Rubber bullets, tear gas, water cannons and batons.
The art of dogs, horses and various techniques are beyond them. Not their fault.
|
Wayne Couzens admits rape and kidnap
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57399170
Sounds like they are doing a mental health assessment on him re the murder element.
If he is found to be sick, how did he pass vetting / get clearance to be a diplomatic fire arms officer?
|
>>
>>
>> If he is found to be sick, how did he pass vetting / get clearance
>> to be a diplomatic fire arms officer?
>>
>>
A mental health condition does not preclude anyone from being clever and cunning enough to pass an assessment, however thorough.
|
If he is found to be sick, how did he pass vetting / get clearance
>> to be a diplomatic fire arms officer?
>>
>>
A couple of reasons, to get DV cleared (or similar) is different to a mental health assessment. The issues may not have been visible until after his acceptance as firearms officer.
|
I realise it is an obvious thing to say, but what a truly terrible thing it is to take someone's life.
I am sure this guy is sick/ill, how could he not be?, but I don't think that should protect him from any repercussions.
He is a murderer. He has done the most terrible thing one can do to a human being and taken their life. Why he has done it is far less important than what he has done.
There is little point in thinking of punishment, deterrence, and certainly no merit in rehabilitation (Why should he get his life back?).
But what do you do? The death penalty is flawed in many ways, not least in what it brings out in people. Life imprisonment is problematic in many ways including our motivation for it. And for sure he shouldn't walk away.
What does one do with people who have no place in society?
|
>> But what do you do? The death penalty is flawed in many ways, not least
>> in what it brings out in people. Life imprisonment is problematic in many ways including
>> our motivation for it. And for sure he shouldn't walk away.
>>
>> What does one do with people who have no place in society?
Life imprisonment seems the least worst option. Probably in reasonably civilised conditions; the punishment is isolation not having to poop in a bucket.
The death penalty has no place in a civilised society. There are the best part of a dozen convicted of terror offences in NI who'd have swung only for convictions to be found unsafe later.
In his case it may be worth waiting for the psychiatric reports and what plea is entered/accepted by the Judge. I'd expect the sentencing remarks to be published.
|
>>Life imprisonment seems the least worst option. Probably in reasonably civilised conditions; the >>punishment is isolation not having to poop in a bucket.
Depends on how you view prison. Does it exist to rehabilitate, to punish, or to remove a danger to the public.
All three have a place, unfortunately we don't have three different prison regimes.
|
>> I realise it is an obvious thing to say, but what a truly terrible thing
>> it is to take someone's life.
It's devastatingly awful and incompressible to me in these circumstances.
But I do think there is a difference to this type of crime and a fight that goes wrong or an argument where someone gets a kitchen knife from a drawer in a fit of anger.
Mrs Z was a "paralegal" for a firm of solicitors who had a small number of murderers as clients. One was just that, a fight that went wrong. The person admitted it right away. Was devastated at what he had done and accepted his time. I understand that he is out on licence and contributing to society through volunteering work.
>>
>> I am sure this guy is sick/ill, how could he not be?, but I don't
>> think that should protect him from any repercussions.
Life in Broadmoor or similar perhaps? Sees it as a better option than prison?
>>The death penalty is flawed in many ways
Could you just imagine the coverage from the Daily Mail and that ilk. I don't think anyone would be safe from them baying for the death-penalty for every murder - and there have been people acquitted on appeal recently - too late once hanged.
Just as an aside, I understand the Home Secretary was very pro the death penalty.
|
>> If he is found to be sick, how did he pass vetting / get clearance
>> to be a diplomatic fire arms officer?
I suspect the police will have an internal investigation as to whether anything in his career sound the alarm bell of hindsight.
It is however possible that he's fey enough to appear normal at an assessment or that something flipped later.
|
Wayne Couzens has plead guilty to murder:
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jul/09/wayne-couzens-pleads-guilty-murdering-sarah-everard
I assume a sentence hearing will follow but may be delayed for reports.
|
Wait 'till all the old lags in the blue brick get hold of him.
He deserves everything they will probably do to him.
|
>> Wait 'till all the old lags in the blue brick get hold of him.
>> He deserves everything they will probably do to him.
One would expect the Prison Service to prevent any such thing.
If the days ever existed where the Officers could turn a blind eye to such conduct they're long gone now.
|
|
I'm only going by what I've seen on TV, but don't prison officers, police and other High risk prisoners get separated from regular prisoners?
|
>> I'm only going by what I've seen on TV, but don't prison officers, police and
>> other High risk prisoners get separated from regular prisoners?
I'd expect that to happen. Hospital wing or whatever.
Maybe some think they're hard enough to survive whatever risk.
Ian Huntley has been seriously injured on more than one occasion. He sought damages from the Prison Service though it's unclear whether he succeeded.
|
|
I'm a bit surprised that head of the Met hasn't gone before now, I think it's the most political police in the uk, i think there's been a few controversies for the met recently. I thought they might have had a change at the top by now. I think she's been there for quite a while.
|
She's only been in since 2017, that isn't a long time really.
I don't know what relevance that has here anyway - I got a bit fed up with the police as an institution seemingly being blamed for this copper's actions (though in this instance they could do with looking at - in fact they probably already are - why he hadn't been disciplined over the MacDonalds incident).
I don't often go along with the calls for the top dogs to resign, too many people call for it as a reaction when really what is required is a bit of stability and continuity. And I also think the paymasters often have a better idea of when it's time to go then we do - they see the bigger picture, and can assess what alternatives they have and whether it is more disruptive to push someone or carry on.
|
I don't know how long they normally stay in post for that role, I would have thought 5 years sounds about right.
I'm not saying she should have gone, just mild surprise that she hasn't.
|
This is sounding like it was all planned by Couzens, the hire of a Vauxhall Astra and she was found 100meters away from (wood)land owned by Couzens.
He was claiming he was forced to do it by a criminal gang but after she disappeared he purchased self adhesive film and builders bags.
If only he was nicked for his flashing it may never have happened.
|
|
You only need to listen to R4's 'It's a fair cop' by Alfie Moore an (ex?) BIB to see what others think of the met.
|
>>
>>
>> One would expect the Prison Service to prevent any such thing.
>>
>> If the days ever existed where the Officers could turn a blind eye to such
>> conduct they're long gone now.
>>
Prisons should be places where people are sent to lose their liberty, not hell holes rife with the constant risk of violence. It is not just rapists and paedophiles who are targets, but anyone who is seen as weak and suseptable to bullying.
When we get on our high horse and start saying, "If you can't do the time," etc, remember we are all just one lapse of concentration behind the wheel away from ending up there ourselves.
It happens.
|
|
Yip, if anyone hasnt seen the IPlayer program called “Time” I thoroughly recommend it to open your eyes to the reality of prison life.
|
|
I watched that as well, good show.
|
Sentencing is due later today.
Some of the revelations today are horrific and suggest that the investigators still don't have the full truth from him.
I truly hope he gets no benefit for the early guilty please and he gets life with no chance of release. There are some crimes so horrific that there can be no hope of rehabilitation.
|
|
I wonder why he chose her, had he been following her or was it random? I wonder why he did it, seems to be no mention of motivation.
|
>> I wonder why
Not sure you can rationalise any thought process like that. We cant anyway.
|
|
I'm sure his fellow prisoners will make sure he treated appropriately.
|
I truly hope he gets no benefit for the early guilty please and he gets life with no chance of release. There are some crimes so horrific that there can be no hope of rehabilitation.
Totally agree. But the reverse of this, why are folk convicted of pre meditated murders but do get release? Is it different as he is a police officer in which case is it trial by occupation?
|
>> Totally agree. But the reverse of this, why are folk convicted of pre meditated murders
>> but do get release? Is it different as he is a police officer in which
>> case is it trial by occupation?
>>
To my mind there is a difference between killing someone outright, even if pre-meditated and kidnapping them, raping them, killing them and then burning the body.
It is known of the poor woman was even dead before she was set alight?
|
>> It is known of the poor woman was even dead before she was set alight?
The judge's remarks have been published:
www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Wayne-Couzens-Sentencing-Remarks-1.pdf
Apparently he has given an overview and avoided repetition of detail but the facts and in particular the level of planning Couzens undertook is very clear.
As is the cock and bull story he invented when first a suspect.
|
Thanks Bromp.
That's a very well put together "summary".
It was all so planned it makes me wonder if he's had prior experience?
|
>> Totally agree. But the reverse of this, why are folk convicted of pre meditated murders
>> but do get release? Is it different as he is a police officer in which
>> case is it trial by occupation?
>
its because its the massive breach of trust and abuse of position. Anyway should police be held to and judged on higher moral standards than the rest of us? I guess they should.
|
A whole life sentence has been given.
I hope her family and friends can find some peace.
|
>> Anyway should police be held to and judged on higher moral standards than the rest of us?
Judges who lie, doctors and teachers who nonce, nurses who kill - usually get a wee bonus on their sentence.
|
|
He may choose to follw the example set by Fred West & Harold Shipman.
|
>> He may choose to follw the example set by Fred West & Harold Shipman.
>>
Facing a whole life sentence, I would.
What is disturbing about this is how premeditated it all was, he had planned the whole thing in meticulous detail well in advance. One seriously flawed individual.
What must his wife and children be going through?
|
Police and Crime Commissioner for North Yorks says Ms Everard should not have submitted to arrest:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-58762029
Like he was an actual male copper with a warrant card and all the kit. What was she supposed to do?
|
This idiot proves the futility of Police and Crime Commissioners, they are no more than a sop by politicians to appease the public. God knows what good they do.
On another note, I feel desperately sorry for Couzens wife and children. There lives must be hell on earth at the moment and one hopes they will be moved to a far away location and given new identities for their own safety.
|
>> On another note, I feel desperately sorry for Couzens wife and children. There lives must
>> be hell on earth at the moment and one hopes they will be moved to
>> a far away location and given new identities for their own safety.
I think his wife was Polish and she moved back there quite some time ago.
|
|
And another MET officer up in court today charged with rape.
|
>> And another MET officer up in court today charged with rape.
>>
Same division/ department as well.
|
>> Apparently some of his fellow officers spoke up in his defence:
>> inews.co.uk/news/sarah-everard-met-police-officers-support-wayne-couzens-judge-reveals-1226708
>>
Yes, it is in the judges summary above...
"He has no prior previous convictions and some of his colleagues have spoken supportively of him."
|
>> Yes, it is in the judges summary above...
>>
>> "He has no prior previous convictions and some of his colleagues have spoken supportively of
>> him."
Pendant Corner
Department of Tautology
I may be wrong, but I don't think it is possible to have prior convictions which are not previous.
Nor, for that matter to have previous convictions which are not prior.
|
>> I may be wrong, but I don't think it is possible to have prior convictions
>> which are not previous.
That must be right. Serial offenders may have done subsequent crimes while on bail awaiting trial.
Those would not be 'previous' at the time of the charged offence.
No doubt Iffy, once of this parish, could have regaled us with tales based on the view from the press bench.
|
Any road.
Isn't it time we had a new volume? It's a pain reading it on a PC, let alone some smaller device.
Tsk.
What do those moderators do for their money? Eh? That's what I want to know?
|
>> Isn't it time we had a new volume? It's a pain reading it on a
>> PC, let alone some smaller device.
Must be your age
|
"What do those moderators do for their money? Eh? That's what I want to know?"
Give special love and attention to only those subscribers who contribute to their poverty fund. I'll send you the JustGiving link if you want :-) #adoptamod
Anyway - for no good reason I tend to leave thread splits to the smarter mods, but I wouldn't have split this one at this time as it is unlikely to generate much more traffic.
I'm sure we will split if if that turns out not to be the case.
|
Sarah Everard Missing / Murder? - Zero
