Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

ymu said:
There is no reason why police officers should receive more leniency when a serious offence is committed. If it was taken seriously, I'm sure episodes of "forgetfulness" will reduce miraculously.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by "taken seriously"?

What, for instance, do you suggest Professional Standards should do if they were sent the photo with the PC without numbers on his hi-vis jacket and the Chief Supt standing next to him?

And if the PC turned out to have just been ordered to have put his high-vis on and had numbers on the uniform underneath and had forgotten to change the numbers / epaulettes over, had not been specifically told to do so and ignored the direction; had no previous history of not displaying numbers or any other aggravating factors, what do you suggest would be an appropriate disciplinary sanction?

Stop just fucking repeating the same mantra and add some fucking detail about what you actually fucking mean.
 
Proper Tidy said:
Half of all coppers asked. That's how surveys work.
Click to expand...
And questioning the reliability of the "findings" (and especially of how those findings are portrayed) is what grown-ups do with the results ... especially when the survey was a self-selecting sample answering a simple yes / no question ...

I'm surprised a statistician like ymu hasn't expressed concerns about the weight being put on the outcome ... maybe it's because it actually supports their proposition. I am sure she'd be jumping up and down like a good 'un if I happened to post that I'd got a sample of a few hundred cops who said they'd never deliberately failed to wear or obscured their numbers ...
 
DexterTCN said:
Do you have any instances of where police officers have spoken out against colleagues where the death of a member of the public is involved? Have any officers gone public in the UK against other officers? I don't recall that happening. Ever.
Click to expand...
"In 1970 a young police recruit reported to a senior officer that he'd heard gossip from colleagues about the severe way Kitching and Ellerker had treated Oluwale. This report might have been prompted by fraud charges that were on-going against Ellerker. An enquiry was launched, carried out by Scotland Yard, and sufficient evidence was gathered to prompt manslaughter, perjury and grievous bodily harm (GBH) charges being brought against Kitching and Ellerker in 1971."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Oluwale

"The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has today praised the courage of four Metropolitan Police Service Officers who came forward to report the behaviour of a colleague following an incident in August 2005. The officers reported PC Mark Tuffey, 45, after they heard him using racially aggravated insulting words and behaviour whilst on duty"

http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/pr050506_tootingbec.htm
(see also: http://www.4wardever.org/#/brian-douglas/4528092357 )

free spirit said:
I don't see how any photo taken at one particular point could possibly disprove my point. [...] At the mayday guerilla gardening protest in 2000 I personally witnessed the frontline (well, front 2-3 rows) of the police kettling operation on all 4 sides of the square was carried out by several hundred coppers, none of whom had their shoulder numbers other than the sergeants at the back.
Click to expand...
Because it's a photo of the kettle at Trafalgar Square. :facepalm:

Paulie Tandoori said:
A senior officer at G20 not wearing a number....
3404637727_fbe97e7e27.jpg

standing next to another officer not wearing a number....
Click to expand...
I wonder if that's his other epaulette with a number we can see on his left shoulder?

Oh yes, yes it is. How do I know for sure? Because it's in your next photo, FFS. I think he might have made a reasonable claim to have been wearing both earlier in the day - notice also that the officer next to him is missing the opposite epaulette.

The senior officer is Chief Superintendent Mick Johnson, head of the TSG, who at the time wouldn't have had a shoulder number to wear, but as already pointed out is wearing a name badge.

Pickman's model said:
incidently, by his helmet the cop without any numbers should be from haringey & is level 2 not tsg
Click to expand...
He is, but the helmet is not reliable as we know from other incidents at the G20 - e.g. the medics who tried to revive Ian Tomlinson are from Hackney (GD), but were wearing TSG helmets (U34). Probably as a result of many helmets being spread around the Bank area before the protest started.

gavman said:
standing next to another blood spattered officer not wearing a number....
Click to expand...
It was red paint.
 
winjer said:
Oh yes, yes it is. How do I know for sure? Because it's in your next photo, FFS.

...

He is, but the helmet is not reliable as we know from other incidents at the G20 - e.g. the medics who tried to revive Ian Tomlinson are from Hackney (GD), but were wearing TSG helmets (U34). Probably as a result of many helmets being spread around the Bank area before the protest started.

....

It was red paint.
Click to expand...
You're far to reasonable to be a legal observer (and far to prone to actually, er, observe). You'll never last! :D

(ETA: I'd want to know exactly what numbers were on the single epaulettes on the adjacent constables though ... :hmm:)
 
detective-boy said:
What do you mean by "taken seriously"?

What, for instance, do you suggest Professional Standards should do if they were sent the photo with the PC without numbers on his hi-vis jacket and the Chief Supt standing next to him?

And if the PC turned out to have just been ordered to have put his high-vis on and had numbers on the uniform underneath and had forgotten to change the numbers / epaulettes over, had not been specifically told to do so and ignored the direction; had no previous history of not displaying numbers or any other aggravating factors, what do you suggest would be an appropriate disciplinary sanction?

Stop just fucking repeating the same mantra and add some fucking detail about what you actually fucking mean.
Click to expand...

I already said what I'd do. Automatic disciplinary and suspension without pay. If a driver "forgets" to put a valid number plate on his car/trailer, they get done for it regardless of the intent behind the action. Therefore, they do not do it very often.

Hold the police to the same standards as we hold everyone else.
 
winjer said:
He is, but the helmet is not reliable as we know from other incidents at the G20 - e.g. the medics who tried to revive Ian Tomlinson are from Hackney (GD), but were wearing TSG helmets (U34). Probably as a result of many helmets being spread around the Bank area before the protest started.
Click to expand...
according to the caption on the picture you link to, it was taken 'late on the day' of the g20: hence, after the protest started. do you have something showing helmets being shuffled about prior to the protest?
 
detective-boy said:
(ETA: I'd want to know exactly what numbers were on the single epaulettes on the adjacent constables though ... :hmm:)
Click to expand...
They're not exactly hard to find, the red paint hit them before they had their helmets on, when they were part of the cordon by Shouty McHeadwound. There's bound to be a few photos where you can read them.

Pickman's model said:
according to the caption on the picture you link to, it was taken 'late on the day' of the g20: hence, after the protest started. do you have something showing helmets being shuffled about prior to the protest?
Click to expand...
The helmets were there when the march I was with arrived from London Bridge, this is in my contemporaneous notes (which you can inspect at LDMG's secret HQ by appointment). Here are the same helmets at 2:34pm - the camera's clock was set an hour slow. That's at the point when the police were kicking off on Threadneedle Street, but not elsewhere, pre-RBS.

Now, jog on pedant. ;)
 
detective-boy said:
What do you mean by "taken seriously"?

What, for instance, do you suggest Professional Standards should do if they were sent the photo with the PC without numbers on his hi-vis jacket and the Chief Supt standing next to him?

And if the PC turned out to have just been ordered to have put his high-vis on and had numbers on the uniform underneath and had forgotten to change the numbers / epaulettes over, had not been specifically told to do so and ignored the direction; had no previous history of not displaying numbers or any other aggravating factors, what do you suggest would be an appropriate disciplinary sanction?

Stop just fucking repeating the same mantra and add some fucking detail about what you actually fucking mean.
Click to expand...

it would be perfectly clear to anyone who isn't being as willfully obtuse as you. wearing of police numbers needs to made equivalent to displaying number plates on a car, ie an offence not to do it.
 
ymu said:
I already said what I'd do. Automatic disciplinary and suspension without pay. If a driver "forgets" to put a valid number plate on his car/trailer, they get done for it regardless of the intent behind the action. Therefore, they do not do it very often.

Hold the police to the same standards as we hold everyone else.
Click to expand...

got there first
 
detective-boy said:
And if the PC turned out to have just been ordered to have put his high-vis on and had numbers on the uniform underneath and had forgotten to change the numbers / epaulettes over, had not been specifically told to do so and ignored the direction; had no previous history of not displaying numbers or any other aggravating factors, what do you suggest would be an appropriate disciplinary sanction
Click to expand...
Gee I don't know...what if that officer stopped me driving and I had no insurance...I'd only just been told I needed insurance, I amen't paid until tomorrow, didn't think I'd be getting a car this week, I'd never been in trouble before, I'm a good family man......

What would he do, dibble?

Oh...and quoting a 1970 case where ....a fucking recruit, you say???.... reports gossip (as opposed to reporting illegal actions which lead to death). Not doing it for me.
 
winjer said:
"In 1970 a young police recruit reported to a senior officer that he'd heard gossip from colleagues about the severe way Kitching and Ellerker had treated Oluwale. This report might have been prompted by fraud charges that were on-going against Ellerker. An enquiry was launched, carried out by Scotland Yard, and sufficient evidence was gathered to prompt manslaughter, perjury and grievous bodily harm (GBH) charges being brought against Kitching and Ellerker in 1971."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Oluwale

"The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has today praised the courage of four Metropolitan Police Service Officers who came forward to report the behaviour of a colleague following an incident in August 2005. The officers reported PC Mark Tuffey, 45, after they heard him using racially aggravated insulting words and behaviour whilst on duty"

http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/pr050506_tootingbec.htm
(see also: http://www.4wardever.org/#/brian-douglas/4528092357 )


Because it's a photo of the kettle at Trafalgar Square. :facepalm:


I wonder if that's his other epaulette with a number we can see on his left shoulder?

Oh yes, yes it is. How do I know for sure? Because it's in your next photo, FFS. I think he might have made a reasonable claim to have been wearing both earlier in the day - notice also that the officer next to him is missing the opposite epaulette.

The senior officer is Chief Superintendent Mick Johnson, head of the TSG, who at the time wouldn't have had a shoulder number to wear, but as already pointed out is wearing a name badge.


He is, but the helmet is not reliable as we know from other incidents at the G20 - e.g. the medics who tried to revive Ian Tomlinson are from Hackney (GD), but were wearing TSG helmets (U34). Probably as a result of many helmets being spread around the Bank area before the protest started.


It was red paint.
Click to expand...
thank you for your fastidious attention to detail.

we now know that photographic (and contemporary) evidence can show many things (apparently).

what we still really don't know is why the cops can get away with killing completely innocent people. ian tomlinson was walking home. and a cop killed him. don't forget that.

i apologise completely for any mistakes in my earlier claims, it was heat of the moment stuff.

thankfully, ........
 
hmm, looking back on what I wrote originally about the numbers it seems I did get a bit carried away, probably in the heat of the moment in response to DB's expletive laden rant I was responding to. These revised statements are a bit closer to what I actually meant to say, and I'd not actually realised I'd been quite so definitive about it - 'ie not a single met officer'.

free spirit said:
I can tell you that the not a single met officer below the rank of sergeant in large sections of the police who were involved in kettling trafalgar square at one point at the mayday protest in 2000 was wearing a visible number
Click to expand...

free spirit said:
but this doesn't alter the fact that the vast majority (in many cases all) of some of the frontline units that are deployed when things start to kick off / they expect them to kick off at certain types of protests do not have their numbers displayed other than their sergeants.
Click to expand...

If as Winjer says, this isn't as common as I thought from my experience then fair enough, maybe I'm just an aggravating factor or something. It remains the case though that this is far from the first time that this has happened, and I've never heard of any action being taken against any of the officers involved on previous occasions, which does tend to lead one to suspect that it's not an issue that's taken seriously by the met.

I'm still convinced based on my conversations with several coppers at that mayday, and up in Scotland that when it has happened in a largescale way it must have been at least tacitly authorised by someone reasonably high up the chain. I don't think it's a coincidence that the 4 times I've seen it happen have been when the met have lost control of a situation and are trying to get their authority back in protests involving basically the same grouping / ethos (RTS, Dissent, g20 mob) plus on all 4 occasions the protests have been preceded by Met (well actually I guess more NETCU or it's predecessors) instigated press campaigns demonising the protestors and ramping up the threat of violence.

This was what I meant by a policy btw, not that it necessarily happens on every protest (as I'm sure it doesn't), but that there's a pattern to when it does happen that's a bit too blatant IMO to just be random chance. Coupled with the fact that NETCU and their predecessors were heavily targeting these campaigns by fair means or foul in the build up to, during and after the actions, I don't think it's that outlandish to say there was some sort of strategy / policy at play that the removal of numbers in these situation was part of.
 
winjer said:
Because it's a photo of the kettle at Trafalgar Square. :facepalm:
Click to expand...
yeah sorry, I'm sure I'd originally written that comment about trafalgar square a bit differently then clicked the wrong button and had to rewrite it, so I'd forgotten I'd written it in that way.

thing is though, at one point shortly after they'd kettled the square I did go round challenging (aka being an annoying twat probably) the officers on at least 2 and I thought 3 sides of the square as to why they weren't wearing their numbers, and I'd have thought that at least one of them might have pointed out that he was wearing his number if I was just being blind about it. Thinking about it, I think I was fairly loudly actually attempting to report the groups of officers who weren't displaying their numbers to others nearby who were, so I guess it can't have been quite as widespread as I'd initially remembered it as being... mists of time and all that.

*I think they were the ones who'd formed a wedge to split the crowd in 2 up the road between traf square and parliament square by the MD's that was getting trashed, then forced everyone back up into traf square, so the bottom end of traf square towards parliament square.
 
Urbanblues said:
I don't know. Some of your colleagues forget that members of the public are human beings. If they can forget something like that; why not a squad car.
Click to expand...
Actually, thinking about it, I did almost forget to bring one back once - it was during a phase when (a) we couldn't afford petrol and (b) we were being told to walk not drive if we could and so we were allowed to drive to the far reaches of the area, but then to park up and walk for a while ... and it was such a nice day I had wlaked almost all the way back to the nick before remembering I'd taken a car out with me ...
 
gavman said:
ie an offence not to do it.
Click to expand...
IT IS. My question is what are you suggesting the sanction should be? And if you have an allegation of an officer not wearing numbers at some time in the past, how seriously should that be taken in terms of the resources put into a restrospective investigation? Are you suggesting that an enquiry equivalent to a homicide investigation should be undertaken? With no stone left unturned? At a cost of thousands, nay, hundreds of thousands of pounds? (Cos ymu seems to be ..)
 
DexterTCN said:
What would he do, dibble?
Click to expand...
Probably report you (seeing as having no insurance is considered by the law a pretty serious motoring offence and one which regularly acts to the detriment of others (i.e. people involved in collisions)). And then leave it to the Court to decide on penalty ... fully expecting it to usually be a fine of a few tens of quids and a few points onyour licence.

And if someone wandered in and said someone had been driving without insurance a few days ago, there would be NO retrospective investigation at all and it would just be noted for future attention in case they were encountered committing a new offence in the future.

Which is the level of seriousness I am suggesting it is appropriate to apply to officers not wearing numbers: if they're seen doing it, bollock them and tell them not to. If they ignore that / fail to wear numbers on a future occasion or there are other aggravating factors, report them for discipline and expect them to get a warning unless they have previous findings against them in the relevant period.

Simply not wearing numbers, with no aggravating factors, is NOT a sacking offence. Nor is it at all sensible to argue that it should be.
 
free spirit said:
hmm, looking back on what I wrote originally about the numbers it seems I did get a bit carried away, probably in the heat of the moment in response to DB's expletive laden rant I was responding to.
Click to expand...
The words you're looking for "I'm sorry d-b. I realise that I was grossly exaggerating and when I persisted with my ridiculous generalisations it was no surprise you got the arse with me."

But, of course, you'll never use them ... :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kid_Eternity
No thanks app - boycotting Israel with a tap of a button
Replies
4
Views
367
existentialist
existentialist
Magnus McGinty
Apparently I no longer have an NHS dentist
Replies
24
Views
847
newme
newme
hitmouse
A general election thread for posting literally every single tweet that you see, no matter how inane
Replies
7
Views
569
Yata
Yata
PR1Berske
Bills of note (2023-4 session)
Replies
1
Views
276
stavros
S
Mation
No-context news
Replies
0
Views
254
Mation
Mation
Back
Top Bottom