Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Filth by name. . .

20111224082822!Metropolitan_Police_Logo.png

Chief Superintendent Paul Martin and Chief Inspector Davinder Kandohla of the Metropolitan Police have both been dismissed without notice for gross misconduct, both having been found to have breached standards of professional behaviour.

Chief Superintendent Paul Martin and Chief Inspector Davinder Kandohla were both found to have failed to declare conflicts of interest in a promotion, been involved in improper spending of police funds and mistreated more junior colleagues.

The disciplinary panel found that Chief Superintendent Paul Martin did not disclose a conflict of interest in the promotion process for Chief Inspector Davinder Kandohla. Chief Superintendent Paul Martin was also found to have misused a corporate credit card and behaved badly towards a pregnant colleague.

Chief Inspector Davinder Kandohla failed to declare a conflict of interest in his own promotion process, misled an investigation into an expenses claim he had made and also behaved badly towards junior colleagues, the disciplinary panel found.

The same disciplinary panel also considered allegations against two other officers.

Sergeant James Di-Luzio was found to have misused a corporate credit card and behaved badly towards his junior colleagues and was issued with management advice.
Allegations made against PC Karina Kandohla were not proven.

50002967-10160083-image-m-62_1635941410414.jpg


Chief Inspector Davinder Kandohla (left) and Chief Superintendent Paul Martin (right) at work ... before they were dismissed without notice.

45453047-9789251-image-m-46_1626294532658.jpg


(Source: as stated in image)

"Have you got one of these?"
when was devinder kandohla demoted?
 
From the article equationgirl linked to above:

[Officer "Michelle"] kept silent. She never brought the subject up with any of her colleagues "and I certainly wasn't going to report it".
She feared she would not be believed and would forever be known as the female colleague who "alleges rape".

"The culture of the Met then and for some time afterwards was quite male-dominated. It was a bit Life on Mars," she says, referencing the BBC TV series about 1970s policing. She remembers being closed in the boot of a patrol car "for half a shift as a joke" and driven to blue-light calls.
"That's what they did to a lot of the females as they joined."

They also used a "Property of the Met", rubber stamp on female officers to mark "various parts of the anatomy".
"It was done in a laughing, joking way and most officers just went along with it," she remembers.

21st century policing there.

 
He's got a minimum of 30 years. What exactly do you need to do in this country to be banged up for life?!

I watched that sentencing. I know the judge had to go through the motions. But she knocked 20% off because he pleaded guilty.
 
He's got a minimum of 30 years. What exactly do you need to do in this country to be banged up for life?!

I watched that sentencing. I know the judge had to go through the motions. But she knocked 20% off because he pleaded guilty.
have a read of the sentencing guidelines Rape – Sentencing

e2a: it is of course possible that the sentence may be reviewed as too lenient
 

Sentence comes 17 years and 12 victims too late, says campaigner​

Reacting to Carrick's sentencing Farah Nazeer, chief executive of Women's Aid, tells BBC News that while the disgraced officer's prison time is an "acceptable sentence in a very, very unacceptable situation", she says it comes "17 years, 12 victims and at least and 85 offences too late".
Ms Nazeer praises Carrick's victims saying the jailing of the 48-year-old was only possible due to the "courage, commitment and determination of those women who went up against an agent of the law".
She continues: "It is very hard to do that, even when you're not up against a police officer. The courage and bravery should be commended and that will send a message to other women in that situation that justice can be achieved."



Almost certainly this piece of excrement will never see the light of day again. Let him rot away and fade into obscurity, like the nonentity he is.

And though no amount of sentencing will ease the victims' pain or what they went through, hopefully they'll find some way of moving forwards, now that this monster is finally behind bars.
 

Sentence comes 17 years and 12 victims too late, says campaigner​

Reacting to Carrick's sentencing Farah Nazeer, chief executive of Women's Aid, tells BBC News that while the disgraced officer's prison time is an "acceptable sentence in a very, very unacceptable situation", she says it comes "17 years, 12 victims and at least and 85 offences too late".
Ms Nazeer praises Carrick's victims saying the jailing of the 48-year-old was only possible due to the "courage, commitment and determination of those women who went up against an agent of the law".
She continues: "It is very hard to do that, even when you're not up against a police officer. The courage and bravery should be commended and that will send a message to other women in that situation that justice can be achieved."



Almost certainly this piece of excrement will never see the light of day again. Let him rot away and fade into obscurity, like the nonentity he is.

And though no amount of sentencing will ease the victims' pain or what they went through, hopefully they'll find some way of moving forwards, now that this monster is finally behind bars.
Yes, this is far more important than the precise number of years this rapist will serve. Far too many of these people seem to be able to offend over years, with multiple victims, in ways that, when they are finally brought to justice, appear to have been going on in plain sight for far too long.

For a 48 year old, the difference between 30 years and life seems comparatively trivial; for his victims, the 17 years it took to catch him is far more significant, as is the fact that so many of these police officers seem to have been serial offenders for whom red flags were there far too often.
 
36 life sentences though, fucking hell. Never seen a sentencing like it.

If he's got 36 life sentences, then forgive my ignorance, why could he be potentially be out at the age of 78 - men live a bit longer these days?

And why do they bother calling it 'life'?
 
If he's got 36 life sentences, then forgive my ignorance, why could he be potentially be out at the age of 78 - men live a bit longer these days?

And why do they bother calling it 'life'?
There's a tariff, a minimum term they have to serve before having the chance to go before the parole board. it's common knowledge to all bar - apparently - you
 
I'm aware of that you patronising twat. It just seems fucking absurd to call it 'life'.
He's not automatically going to be released once the 30 year minimum time served is up. He'll be eligible for parole, sure, but I would be exceptionally surprised if he was ever, ever released. It's not absurd to call it life, it's just the way the sentencing guidelines work.

Before the changes to the whole life tariff, I suspect he'd have gotten that instead

Basically, it doesn't matter what it's called, he will die in jail.
 
He's not automatically going to be released once the 30 year minimum time served is up. He'll be eligible for parole, sure, but I would be exceptionally surprised if he was ever, ever released. It's not absurd to call it life, it's just the way the sentencing guidelines work.

Before the changes to the whole life tariff, I suspect he'd have gotten that instead

Basically, it doesn't matter what it's called, he will die in jail.
Also worth noting that anyone who gets a life sentence is, even after release, always liable to be recalled to prison.
 
Also worth noting that anyone who gets a life sentence is, even after release, always liable to be recalled to prison.
Yeah, for any reason if I remember correctly.

Carrick is going nowhere anytime soon. He's not going to any 'open prison' and if I were a female prison guard I wouldn't be going anywhere near him with several of my biggest colleagues or large weapons. The only way he won't rape is to ensure he never has access to any woman in any situation ever again.
 
Serving Metropolitan Police officer, PC Jorden Brown, who is attached to their Central East Command Unit, was charged by postal requisition on Friday 6 January 2023, with rape and three counts of causing actual bodily harm. These offences are alleged to have occurred while he was off-duty, and relate to one victim, who was known to PC Jorden Brown.

PC Jorden Brown, who has been suspended from duty, is due to attend Barkingside Magistrates' Court tomorrow.


45453047-9789251-image-m-46_1626294532658.jpg


(Source: as stated in image)

20111224082822!Metropolitan_Police_Logo.png

The offences are alleged to have happened between November 2018 and February 2019.
 
On the BBC site this afternoon:
Greater Manchester Police officer arrested on suspicion of rape - BBC News

A police officer has been arrested on suspicion of rape. He was detained on Tuesday in "an immediate response to a report received that day", said Greater Manchester Police (GMP). The constable, acting up in the role of temporary sergeant, had been posted to GMP's City of Manchester district, said a force spokeswoman. She added that the officer remained in custody for questioning.

Meanwhile it has emerged that another GMP officer had been suspended after being arrested in October on suspicion of rape. GMP's professional standards branch (PSB) said the force had received a report of a rape in 2017 and a constable posted to the Rochdale district had been arrested. "The officer was suspended and is no longer a serving GMP officer," said a PSB spokesman.

The latter case was referred to yesterday in the Manchester Evening News
Greater Manchester Police officer arrested on suspicion of rape - Manchester Evening News

That story also refers to other recent cases:
Among the cops accused of sexual impropriety is one senior officer. We reported in October he was suspended after being accused of sexual harassment, although since then fresh allegations have been made about him. The number of cops being sacked for sex offences or other misconduct is on the increase. The latest figures show that in 2020 one officer was dismissed. But in 2021 five were sacked and last year 12 were dismissed. GMP periodically publishes the outcomes of disciplinary hearings and in the latest bulletin it revealed a PC was dismissed in November for 'entering into a sexual relationship with a victim of crime'.

Another PC was found to have 'pursued relationships with vulnerable females met during the course of duties'. They left the force ahead of their disciplinary hearing, which ruled they would have been sacked. A third PC also left the force after being accused of 'sexual harassment and inappropriate touching of female colleagues'. A disciplinary hearing found the case proved and ruled the former officer would have been sacked had they not already left the force.

And it links back to another story two weeks ago
Almost 100 GMP officers currently under investigation over sexual misconduct allegations - Manchester Evening News
 
One after the other right now isn't it? Scum abusing their power and positions of trust all over the place You can virtually hear the conversations between sex pests "Join the police mate you can get away with as much rape as you like. Your colleagues will make sure you get away with it
 
And another one, former PC Jamie Gibb :

Gross misconduct proven against former Northamptonshire constable - Independent Office for Police Conduct
Gross misconduct proven against former police officer - Northamptonshire Police

A former police officer who resigned while under investigation for gross misconduct has today been informed, he would have been dismissed without notice if he was still a serving officer. (...)

On August 30, 2020, he was the officer in charge for an incident where Female A flagged down a police car and requested assistance following a verbal disagreement with her ex-partner which left her in a state of distress. This information ought to have made it clear to him that Female A was a person who was vulnerable to an abuse of authority. He had a professional duty of care towards Female A. Between the date of the incident and September 5, 2020, he sent messages relating to this incident Female A from his work mobile. He subsequently sent messages from his personal mobile telephone to Female A and telephoned her, inviting her to contact him via SnapChat. He did so without having any policing purpose. The content of these messages included sexual comments, referenced to sexual activity with her, and requests for sexual images from her.

On and around September 21, 2020, he attended an incident following a report that Female B was harassing her estranged partner. After making enquiries he reported that Female B had been described as ‘distraught and inconsolable’ at the breakdown of her marriage. (...)

He sent messages to Female B and communicated with her via his personal mobile phone following the initial incident for which he had no policing purpose in doing so. During those communications he disclosed personal information and communicated in a manner that was described as ‘flirty’. He requested that she download SnapChat for further communication.

In his determination Chief Constable Adderley said: "I would describe the actions of former PC Gibb as calculated, manipulative and cruel. He set a course of action to exploit two vulnerable females who he knew, not ought to have known, but knew to be vulnerable. He used his privileged position, as a police officer, to obtain evidence and information, including intimate information, about Miss A and Miss B, then used that evidence to satisfy his own, either sexual gratification, or perverse desires, making both Miss A and B, further victims".
 
Metropolitan Police officer was ‘nicknamed the rapist by colleagues’

So, Carrick's behaviour was an open secret.

Officers in a Metropolitan Police sex offences unit nicknamed a colleague “the rapist” and celebrated when women decided to drop complaints against them, a whistleblower has claimed.

on the day the official report came out officers were told by a superintendent to delete damaging material from Facebook and WhatsApp: “I started looking around the room; I thought she was joking because I thought surely no one has those messages because they shouldn’t, you know, exist. She said, ‘just get rid of them’.”
 
Back
Top Bottom