| Non-motoring > Plebgate | Miscellaneous |
| Thread Author: Armel Coussine | Replies: 38 |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 15:13
Plebgate - Armel Coussine
|
|
Following a trivial incident caused by a young officer's cheeky officiousness and a cabinet minister's crass and bullying rudeness, the government and the police are now watching their (utterly filthy) linen being laundered in public. The police appear to be in some disarray, with senior officers looking martyred during TV interviews. This has all happened through two police practices that we have come to regard as normal if not entirely justifiable: the practice of trimming the truth in accounts of incidents to save time and ensure convictions, and the practice of calling in other forces or 'services' to back them up when they encounter difficulties. They usually get away with both - perhaps it's a good thing - but this time they have chosen the wrong victim. I could have told them that. It's amusing, but it isn't really a good thing. There's more than enough vulgar cynicism about already. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 15:28
Plebgate - -
|
|
I should state straight away that i'm a supporter of most real coppers, the ones who try to do the right thing by using their common sense and take no notice when their box ticking greasy pole climbing seniors tell them they haven't made enough nicks so go out and do some, they nick when its needed a rollock when thats appropriate. I think theres far more to this affair than meets the eye, and i would trust mainstream media not one inch in their reporting of this affair anyway, pot kettle black vested interests all round. What hope does the ordinary Joe have. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 15:44
Plebgate - Cliff Pope
|
|
As with that other "gate" affair, it's not the actual deed that matters much, its the demeaning and suspicious way those in high positions try to slide out of responsibility by lies and evasions. Perhaps someone can explain why 3 regional police chiefs now seem to be involved. I understand that when the police are short of staff they may borrow people from another area, but aren't seconded personnel under the command of a single chief? |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 15:56
Plebgate - madf
|
|
The three Police Federation coppers accused of telling porkies about their interview with Mr Mitchell belong to three separate police areas. So disciplinary action is dealt with by three senior managers.. who of course conferred with each other before arriving at the same judgement for each individual - not guilty.. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 16:09
Plebgate - helicopter
|
|
The three police federation coppers did not realise when they told those porkies that Andrew Mitchell had taped the meeting....... .....the man has very powerful friends and is bent on revenge...... watch this space..... |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 16:27
Plebgate - No FM2R
|
|
>>.....the man has very powerful friends and is bent on revenge.. He has and he is. And good luck to him. But I wish the tabloids could be punished for being so willing first to dance on his grave and now to turn on the police. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 16:21
Plebgate - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> The three Police Federation coppers accused of telling porkies about their interview with Mr Mitchell >> belong to three separate police areas. So disciplinary action is dealt with by three senior >> managers.. who of course conferred with each other before arriving at the same judgement for >> each individual - not guilty.. I think the verdict was guilty but only on a lesser charge and dealt with by 'management advice'. They're now reconsidering...... |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 17:22
Plebgate - Robin O'Reliant
|
|
>> >> I think the verdict was guilty but only on a lesser charge and dealt with >> by 'management advice'. >> >> "Make sure you don't get caught next time". |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 17:24
Plebgate - Roger.
|
|
.........followed by funny handshakes all round. Boaz. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 18:07
Plebgate - Mapmaker
|
|
>> .........followed by funny handshakes all round. >> Boaz. >> I think protecting the 'good' name of the police is more likely to be of benefit than any 'funny handshake'. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 18:14
Plebgate - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> I think protecting the 'good' name of the police is more likely to be of benefit than any 'funny handshake'. Yes. One thing the country really doesn't need is a wounded, discredited, paranoid police force not in the best of moods. Quite a few people really need to shape up on this one. Doesn't look good at all. The present Defence Secretary, whose name eludes me at the moment, seems to me to be very bright and just the thing really. The reshuffle didn't happen but when it does, he ought to get the Home Office. Whatsername's all right, but he would be better at a difficult time. Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Thu 24 Oct 13 at 18:18
|
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 18:28
Plebgate - madf
|
|
Hammond. He would certainly sort out the Border Agency - dysfunctional and probably grossly overextended. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 18:30
Plebgate - Westpig
|
|
This is my understanding of the issue. After the initial confrontation in the street (Downing Street) which happened between Andrew Mitchell and members of the Metropolitan Police attached to the Diplomatic Protection Group.. ..on a completely separate occasion afterwards Andrew Mitchell met with three representatives of the national Police Federation to clear the air. Those three were from individual county forces and had nothing to do with the Met. Andrew Mitchell taped it. They, being the somewhat soft equivalent of a union, were unimpressed with Andrew Mitchell and came out afterwards and said so, via the media. Those officers have been investigated for their actions as police officers and speaking with the media...whereas they no doubt saw their actions as being those more aligned with union type work. A complaints dept investigation by one force saw they'd done little wrong. Three Chief Constables agreed. Now one Chief Constable of the three has backtracked a bit after the IPCC, Home Secretary and Parliament all say more was needed. Two Chief Constables continue to state they did little wrong. Quite what the Home Sectretary was doing putting her oar in at this stage I don't know, she's supposed to be overseeing the whole kaboosh, yet has dived in early. How could she preside over any future appeal? If the three officers had blatantly lied or falsified things, then they deserve all they get. If an initial complaints investigation has found they did little wrong...then they haven't. I find it interesting that a Fed Rep can be criticised and investigated (with some suggesting it will be misconduct in public office) by his county force for going to the media in circs that he is acting as a Fed Rep only i.e. there is no suggestion he has been unprofessional in his media contacts when indulging in general policing... just when being a Fed rep, but also happening to be a police officer. Meanwhile people are dying in the world. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 18:52
Plebgate - sooty123
|
|
>> Andrew Mitchell taped it. >> >> They, being the somewhat soft equivalent of a union, were unimpressed with Andrew Mitchell and >> came out afterwards and said so, via the media. >> I think that's the crux of the matter isn't ? They claimed one thing in the meeting, he claimed another however he had taped it to prove it? |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 19:00
Plebgate - Roger.
|
|
Given the unseemly haste with which David Cameron et al rushed to condemn Andrew Mitchell, I wonder how his lust for revenge might widen its envelope to include certain senior members of the Tory hierarchy? The current Home Secretary is positioning herself for a crack at the leadership after Cameron is ditched and anything she says, or does, should be viewed with this in mind. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 19:20
Plebgate - R.P.
|
| I despised Andrew Mitchell for saying what was claimed. I remember reading through his biography at the time - he came across as quite a decent bloke in reality. Vast experience in the real world. Maybe he should be brought back into the fold....minus the lady-bike. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 19:23
Plebgate - Dutchie
|
|
The funny handshakes.Could be closer to the truth than what you think.Look at West Yorkshire police and the lies and cover up what went on regarding the Liverpool supporters at Hillsborough. If a miljonair top Government minister struggles with the police what change do we have. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 19:25
Plebgate - NortonES2
|
|
From the outside, "A complaints dept investigation by one force saw they'd done little wrong. Three Chief Constables agreed." Surely that is inaccurate? The officer in charge of the investigation was apparently quite explicit in pointing to a charge of gross misconduct. That was cleaned out of the report by the 3 Chief Constables. IPCC highlighted the difference, not the 3 Chiefs, who did not explain the reasoning behind their reversal of the conclusions of the investigating officer. Perhaps they hoped the IPCC was lap-dog material for all time? The Police Federation members had a spokesman, who took an observers role. It appears the spokesman had a prepared speech, and did not reflect on what was said. Hence their backtracking to say they should have debriefed before talking to the press! What did the 3 think they were doing? I can't see their standing in this matter, which they knew was still under consideration by the CPS. How did they presume to take on a investigative role? Did the Federation mandate them? Did their forces mandate them? Was it a move orchestrated by the Met? It seems to have succeeded on one level: it took away the headlines from the "conspiracy" to oust Mitchell. Last edited by: NIL on Thu 24 Oct 13 at 19:25
|
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 19:29
Plebgate - R.P.
|
| They Policed an area that included Mitchell's constituency that's why they involved themselves. Should have kept clear let the Met sort it. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 19:35
Plebgate - NortonES2
|
| What is going on? A free for-all? Unions represent their members, not the employer, is my understanding. Or should the usurpers be on a charge of insubordination? I thought the police were a disciplined service....Aah now I see: the PF runs the forces, is that it? |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 19:30
Plebgate - Lygonos
|
|
The 3 Fed chappies gave a press interview after speaking to Mitchell. What they said had nothing in common with the transcript of the meeting they had just been in. They made a political recommendation while being representatives of the Police. They will, I am sure, in time be given the boot, or at least a moderately severe kicking. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 20:07
Plebgate - Westpig
|
|
>> They made a political recommendation while being representatives of the Police. Yes..and that's my problem. In the outside world, their opinion and slant would have been from a Union perspective, not the employer, despite the fact they are employed by that employer. In this case, 3 Fed Reps have done what a union would do...yet are being held to account as misrepresenting their employer. The Police are not allowed to have a Union, only a Federation..yet their Fed representatives are not allowed to act on what they perceive is right for their members..if their employer thinks otherwise? I'm not at all Union minded..but..still think they are a necessary and healthy fallback for employees. You've got the IPCC, Home Secretary and parliamentary committees calling for blood..because three union type people gave their slant..and because they are police officers (they'd have to be to represent fellow police officers), they are to be investigated/disciplined/prosecuted for not acting wholly as general police officers would when involved in general policing.. as opposed to acting on behalf of their members in a union type capacity? |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 20:25
Plebgate - NortonES2
|
| The inevitable Judicial Review might sort out what has been going on. If the 4 forces and the PF haven't destroyed the evidence. Sorry: lost the notes/tapes/mobile messages/planning meeting reports somewhere.... |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 21:05
Plebgate - Kevin
|
|
>..because three union type people gave their slant... They didn't give their 'slant'. They lied. They lied in an attempt to destroy the career of an elected MP and member of Govt. It was a stitch-up and they should be packing their toothbrushes. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 21:49
Plebgate - Westpig
|
|
>> They didn't give their 'slant'. They lied. >> >> They lied in an attempt to destroy the career of an elected MP and member >> of Govt. >> >> It was a stitch-up and they should be packing their toothbrushes. >> I don't think they did. If a police complaints dept thought they'd lied, they'd have said so. If a chief officer thought they'd lied, he wouldn't have agreed with his complaints dept that they hadn't done much. Two chief officers wouldn't go in front of a parliamentary committee and stick by their officers if they thought they'd lied. Why would any of the above try to do their colleague a favour and cover something up..when it's already known to be a high profile investigation involving a govt minister, combined with a baying press pack? |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 21:56
Plebgate - sooty123
|
| Wasn't the 'lie' in the meeting supposed to be if he'd apologised or not ? They said no, he said yes and had taped himself doing so? |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 22:15
Plebgate - Lygonos
|
|
>> If a police complaints dept thought they'd lied, they'd have said so. Tell that to Kyle McArdle. metro.co.uk/2013/10/22/kyle-mcardle-merseyside-police-officers-sacked-for-tasering-innocent-man-five-times-4156084/ Last edited by: Lygonos on Thu 24 Oct 13 at 22:16
|
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 22:32
Plebgate - NortonES2
|
|
The Chief Inspector who was the leader of the police complaints department investigation DID recommend that the trio be disciplined. His junior was at odds. The CI was overruled by the COs of the forces employing the PF guys. From the Guardian report on the Committee evidence: "The Officers have therefore given an account of the meeting to the media that was inaccurate and misleading and contrary to the elements of the Standard of Professional Behaviour listed above. What I do not see from the information gained through the investigation is a malicious attempt to deliberately misrepresent what took place at the meeting." The link is:www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/23/mps-question-police-over-plebgate-politics-live-blog |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 22:36
Plebgate - Kevin
|
|
>If a police complaints dept thought they'd lied, they'd have said so. CI Reakes-Williams conducted an internal inquiry and stated "I did find a case to answer for misconduct and that's still my view." He was "later overruled by senior officers and it was decided the three had no case to answer for misconduct or gross misconduct." tinyurl.com/qz3nkfr Here's the transcript of the tape. tinyurl.com/l5xyegb Try and reconcile that with the statements made to the press after the meeting and the answers (sic) to the Select Committee who found their evidence "unsatisfactory". Watch the video. Why did they appoint a "media advisor" before the meeting? Who leaked the time and location of the meeting to the media so that they could conveniently get their 'slant' on the 6 o'clock news? This isn't doing plod any favours and it's going to get a whole lot worse. |
|
New Fri 25 Oct 13 09:22
Plebgate - Westpig
|
|
>> Why did they appoint a "media advisor" before the meeting? Who leaked the time and >> location of the meeting to the media so that they could conveniently get their 'slant' >> on the 6 o'clock news? Deep Sigh.............because they were acting as Federation Reps. They were acting on behalf of the general police workforce and didn't approve of a high handed politician calling their charges 'plebs'. They were not primarily acting as police officers, although they obviously still held the 'Office of Constable'. |
|
New Fri 25 Oct 13 10:37
Plebgate - NortonES2
|
|
They were interfering in matters being dealt with elsewhere, apparently unsynchronised and obviously out of their depth. Chris Sims, Chief Constable of Warwickshire had this to say: "One of the key issues arising from this case is the role of the Police Federation. It has been remarked that police leaders are in some way ‘afraid’ of the Federation. Let me say from a West Midlands perspective, where I have imposed Regulation A19, introduced wide ranging changes to working practices and taken more than £100m from our budget, I would not be regarded as a “Federation Poodle”. Nor are we soft on discipline as 21 officers have been dismissed without notice in the past 18 months. The Police Federation’s status, however, is ambiguous and unsatisfactory. The 1969 legislation is virtually silent on the right of the organisation and its members to campaign. While condemning wholeheartedly the events of 12 October, I do recognise that, in the absence of formal union rights, officers need to be able to highlight issues that impact upon pay, status and conditions. The Review by Sir David Normington may shed light on this issue. In the meantime, I have focused the ‘management action’ in the West Midlands at the conclusion of this investigation on changing the ‘Facilities Agreement’ the force has with the Federation to make the repeat of such an incident impossible." |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 21:53
Plebgate - Meldrew
|
| More likely retire early on full pensions and on the grounds of "Ill Health" |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 22:32
Plebgate - No FM2R
|
|
Its all a bit silly really. A couple of policemen have a row with a politician. The politician should never have been fired for it, whether or not he said "pleb", it was never worthy of the National media, the police should never have made it so formal, the politician should have got over himself and the general public should have consider that there might be more important things in the world. And now it should be left for the police to deal with it and not gain splashed all over the place. Presumably all these "outraged" people are wholly fine and upstanding people who would never get annoyed, never have a row, and never try to make themselves look innocent. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 22:43
Plebgate - Kevin
|
|
>And now it should be left for the police to deal with it and not gain splashed all over the place. Which police do you suggest? |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 23:16
Plebgate - No FM2R
|
|
I am quite confident that if they were left to deal with it internally an appropriate level of justice would be achieved. The police did not get the politician sacked; the media supported by the wonderful, lemming-ish, general public and the scaredy-cat politicians did that. I mean really, they hardly committed a crime sufficient to lose their livelihood any more than the politician did. And he should have known better. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 23:28
Plebgate - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> The police did not get the politician sacked; the media supported by the wonderful, lemming-ish, >> general public and the scaredy-cat politicians did that. The killer was that he lost or never had the confidence of his charges. I suspect there was a significant cohort of Tory MPs who though Mitchell was an egregious appointment to the Whip's office - too military/command and conrol. The gate affair was an opportunity, part real and part engineered, for them to 'get' him. |
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 23:38
Plebgate - No FM2R
|
|
Whatever, I don't really 'do' conspiracy theories, but it still was not the police.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 24 Oct 13 at 23:38
|
|
New Thu 24 Oct 13 23:57
Plebgate - Kevin
|
|
>I am quite confident that if they were left to deal with it internally an appropriate level of justice >would be achieved. I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous reply: "CI Reakes-Williams conducted an internal inquiry and stated "I did find a case to answer for misconduct and that's still my view." He was "later overruled by senior officers and it was decided the three had no case to answer for misconduct or gross misconduct." So, I ask again. Which police do you suggest? The ones who tried to stitch up an elected member of HM Govt. or the ones who, despite evidence to the contrary, decided to overrule the conclusions of their own internal inquiry? >The police did not get the politician sacked; the media supported by the wonderful, lemming-ish, general public >and the scaredy-cat politicians did that. Who fed this story to the media in the first place? It wasn't Mitchell. >I mean really, they hardly committed a crime sufficient to lose their livelihood any more than the politician did. Police officers colluding and lying to bring down a member of the Govt. isn't a crime? This isn't South America. |
|
New Fri 25 Oct 13 00:11
Plebgate - No FM2R
|
|
>This isn't South America. Thank you for clearing that up although I did actually realise that. For the rest, I gave you my opinion, there's no reason why you should agree with it and no reason for, nor value in, me repeating it. |
Forum Version 3.0 - By Khoosys
Car4play Forum
