Ian Tomlinson CPS verdict: "no realistic prospect of conviction"

[xes]

"cunt collective" = the public.

it's how the police have seen us for a good few years. Seem to treat enough people like cunts anyhow.

 

[DexterTCN]

The Collective "shit" will only stop if and when the Collective ceases it's operation ... so sounds like you need to get used to it really!

It's its, it's not it's.

I'm quite happy to throw abuse back at you, discussion's pretty pointless. You're an arsehole. Do you really think you can bully people into having the same opinion as you? Do you think if you swear at them enough they'll acquiesce?

 

[SpookyFrank]

No-one suggested that the senior officers of the met were "remarkably like u75".

.

No, you're right. What you actually said was 'very simillar' not 'remarkably like'. Two phrases as divorced in content and tone as 'would you like a cup of tea?' and 'die motherfucker die!'. My humblest apologies.

 

[ymu]

Do you really think you can bully people into having the same opinion as you? Do you think if you swear at them enough they'll acquiesce?

He does, yes. And if it doesn't work, he flounces. He flounced from the police force and he's flounced from here ... <counts on fingers> <runs out of fingers> <runs out of toes> ... loads of times. One day there will be a happier world where db's word is law and he can finally get on with his life. Until then, yer all cunts.

 

[detective-boy]

There's a bit of a chicken and egg thing going on here. With your experience, perhaps you'd consider an approach aimed at de-escalation?

Those with a position of responsibility, power and influence are obliged to de-escalate. Which is why I consistently argue that in relation to the delivery of policing, individual officers and the police service as a whole have a significantly greater responsibility for addressing the issues that arise between themselves and citizens than do the citizens themselves.

Therefore in this case, the Collective (seeing as they hunt as a pack and egg each other on) have a responsibility to avoid flaming me every time I appear and to avoid propogating falsehoods (not that they'd have much to post if they did that ...) as they are in a position of relative power as compared to me as an individual poster. And the Mods, who have actual power here have a responsibility to prevent trolling by members of the Collective and their unjustified gang-attacks on me which disrupt thread after thread. Sadly, for the most part, they signally avoid doing that.

 

[detective-boy]

"cunt collective" = the public.

No. The Collective = you and your tosser mates on here. The vast majority of the public (and the vast (but silent) majority of posters on here) are far more intelligent and open-minded than you and display far less prejudice.

Perhaps you'd care to refelect on the situation that the Collective have created, namely that many posters feel restrained from posting their views, if they conflict with the monothought clique that is the Collective, in case they attract the same sort of flaming that I do ...

 

[detective-boy]

Do you think if you swear at them enough they'll acquiesce?

No. But I reserve the right to throw fucks into a tosser. Why should you be allowed to post shite without getting called on it?

 

[Pickman's model]

No. The Collective = you and your tosser mates on here. The vast majority of the public (and the vast (but silent) majority of posters on here) are far more intelligent and open-minded than you and display far less prejudice.

Perhaps you'd care to refelect on the situation that the Collective have created, namely that many posters feel restrained from posting their views, if they conflict with the monothought clique that is the Collective, in case they attract the same sort of flaming that I do ...

quit digging

 

[detective-boy]

No, you're right. What you actually said was 'very simillar' not 'remarkably like'. Two phrases as divorced in content and tone as 'would you like a cup of tea?' and 'die motherfucker die!'. My humblest apologies.

The comparison I drew was in relation to ONE aspect. You generalised it way beyond what I fucking posted, you twat. You really are fucking stupid.

 

[detective-boy]

... <counts on fingers> <runs out of fingers> <runs out of toes> ... loads of times.

Some fucking statistician you must be ...

(Though 99.98% of your posts are total shite. Fact.)

 

[Pickman's model]

The comparison I drew was in relation to ONE aspect. You generalised it way beyond what I fucking posted, you twat. You really are fucking stupid.

 

[detective-boy]

quit digging

Quit posting. Or breathing ...

 

[ymu]

Self-awareness still not your strong point then, db?

 

[free spirit]

No. But I reserve the right to throw fucks into a tosser. Why should you be allowed to post shite without getting called on it?

nobody should.

That's nobody including you though, which is a concept you appear to not understand.

 

[free spirit]

Senior officers (no-one, no matter how fucking elevated their rank or position, is "superior" to anyone else - I am surprised that you subscribe to the contrary view ...) certainly rolled their eyes at my insistence on doing the job properly and not cutting corners / bending rules / misleading the public for performance management and other bullshit reasons, yes. To the point where one pointed out, in an air of exasperation, "You're very good at doing the right thing, you're not very good at doing what you're told".

I had no desire to be the Commissioner, I don't "do" internal politics, I'd done everything I wanted to do as a police officer and so I left. The organisation (especially the Met, which I know best) has become ever more dysfunctional since I left and I do not regret leaving at all.

(ETA: And to the extent that senior officers didn't like being told the truth about situations, especially when it did not fit in with their world view, it was very similar to here, where the Collective are pathologically incapable of accepting any view which does not fit with theirs ...)

to return to an earlier point then, would it be fair to say that you'd be exactly the type of officer that the Met would keep as far away as possible from situations where you might be likely to come across hundreds of TSG & support in full riot gear with not a single number to be seen on any of their collars?

and that you're therefore maybe not best placed to determine whether or not this is in fact a long standing policy (defacto or otherwise), whereas people who've been stood face to face with them in kettles and the like just might be capable of noticing whether or not any of the coppers surrounding them had their numbers displayed or not?

 

[cesare]

Those with a position of responsibility, power and influence are obliged to de-escalate. Which is why I consistently argue that in relation to the delivery of policing, individual officers and the police service as a whole have a significantly greater responsibility for addressing the issues that arise between themselves and citizens than do the citizens themselves.

Therefore in this case, the Collective (seeing as they hunt as a pack and egg each other on) have a responsibility to avoid flaming me every time I appear and to avoid propogating falsehoods (not that they'd have much to post if they did that ...) as they are in a position of relative power as compared to me as an individual poster. And the Mods, who have actual power here have a responsibility to prevent trolling by members of the Collective and their unjustified gang-attacks on me which disrupt thread after thread. Sadly, for the most part, they signally avoid doing that.

I'll take that as a "no" then.

 

[Pickman's model]

to return to an earlier point then, would it be fair to say that you'd be exactly the type of officer that the Met would keep as far away as possible from situations where you might be likely to come across hundreds of TSG & support in full riot gear with not a single number to be seen on any of their collars?

and that you're therefore maybe not best placed to determine whether or not this is in fact a long standing policy (defacto or otherwise), whereas people who've been stood face to face with them in kettles and the like just might be capable of noticing whether or not any of the coppers surrounding them had their numbers displayed or not?

by no means! according to d-b he's been a senior officer at many public order dos

 

[audiotech]

And your point is? For fuck's sake this is painful ...

sub judice

 

[Pickman's model]

And your point is? For fuck's sake this is painful ...

stop banging the keyboard so hard then

 

[free spirit]

by no means! according to d-b he's been a senior officer at many public order dos

I'm sure he has, but being silver commander, sitting a in some mobile command unit looking at maps, drinking coffee and issuing radio commands at one protest doesn't help much when it comes to knowing whether or not the TSG and others are instructed to hide their numbers at other protests by other commanders who're a bit more old skool about things... or whether this is at least defacto met policy for certain protests.

if he wanted to actually offer some proof to back up his statements, he could presumably point to the numerous examples there must have been of at least some of these hundreds of officers being reprimanded (and no I don't mean someone talking the talk for the press, I mean actually reprimanded in a way that is recorded on their records and affects their career).

 

[xes]

nobody should.

That's nobody including you though, which is a concept you appear to not understand.

typical stance for people from a certain working background.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Has the officer who struck Tomlinson been publically identified by any chance? I'm sure Londoners would be keen to know exactly which officer they oughtn't to walk past with their hands in their pockets for fear of a beating is all. Particularly if there is likely to be no evidence that such an attack took place even when half the country has seen the evidence.

 

[ymu]

Has the officer who struck Tomlinson been publically identified by any chance? I'm sure Londoners would be keen to know exactly which officer they oughtn't to walk past with their hands in their pockets for fear of a beating is all. Particularly if there is likely to be no evidence that such an attack took place even when half the country has seen the evidence.

Yes. His lawyers released a photo last week in an attempt to stop the press door-stepping him. Click pic for details.

 

[Citizen66]

Three policemen violently assaulted a soldier who had served in Iraq and Afghanistan in 'a scene worthy of the TV programme Life on Mars' as they tried to restrain him, a court heard today.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...teran-like-scene-Life-Mars.html#ixzz0vGTPXHNo

And here's the evidence:

 

[Urbanblues]

I don't defend the excesses of the police at all, except in the fevered imaginations of the Collective ...

Of course. In for me, in for me; they've all got it in for me!

 

[ymu]

And here's the evidence:

Cue db explaining that this is all standard practice in accordance with their training and necessary for the protection of the public and that non-professionals really just can't understand these things because they've not had specialist training in how to be a violent arsehole copper.

 

[Corax]

And here's the evidence:

And? That's just straight from page 32 of the standard operational manual. Rubbing someone's face along the tarmac is sometimes the only way to stop them from biting you. And that wasn't disproportionate, unnecessary punching, he was clearly using the "hammer strike" move, designed to stun a criminal in order to protect the safety of the public and officers.

Nothing to see here. Move along.

 

[winjer]

Turns out it was another 'bad apple':

"The conduct of SPC Lightfoot that day fell well below the standard we expect at Greater Manchester Police. His actions in no way reflect the committed and professional attitude shown by the vast majority of our Special Constables, who are highly trained in the best ways to safely detain prisoners. We are even more disappointed that he knowingly lied before a criminal court."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ght-beating-duty-soldier-CCTV-faces-jail.html

 

[Pickman's model]

the old "i'm not angry, i'm disappointed" line, i see

 

[Citizen66]

Will 'special' constables be given a royal whitewash, I wonder, I'd wager he'll be the scapegoat for the three of them.