Police brutality on the streets of England:
I have read today in horror about a poor plumber thrown in jail for dropping an apple core.
It is an absolute disgrace that PCSOs are out there trying to prevent littering and antisocial behaviour when clearly they should be catching burglars. It is even more disgraceful that when the offender refused to pay the £50 ticket, the Police Community Support Officer took the draconian step of having him arrested. If people refuse to pay fines given to them by the police, they should just be forgiven.
But the tale of police brutality does not stop there. Once in custody, the offender spent 18 hours there, DESPITE HAVING A HEART CONDITION. He was seen twice by the doctor. Vulnerable people like this should not be arrested at all, and if they are in custody they should be dealt with immediately regardless of whether or not they have seen a doctor. If the police do cruelly insist on having prisoners checked out medically before interviewing them, there should be a doctor allocated to every patient, installed in custody for 24hrs and standing by with a stethoscope at the door to each cell.
As you can tell, I have strong feelings about this story. But all my angers melted away when I heard the BBC Breakfast's guest commenter say:
"I mean, this guy who stopped him was a PCSO - you know, just someone like in the Territorial Army doing police work on his days off. He probably works full-time round the corner from the plumber."
I am so glad that the government has explained the role and purpose of a PCSO in a manner explicable to intelligent broadcast journalists.
It is an absolute disgrace that PCSOs are out there trying to prevent littering and antisocial behaviour when clearly they should be catching burglars. It is even more disgraceful that when the offender refused to pay the £50 ticket, the Police Community Support Officer took the draconian step of having him arrested. If people refuse to pay fines given to them by the police, they should just be forgiven.
But the tale of police brutality does not stop there. Once in custody, the offender spent 18 hours there, DESPITE HAVING A HEART CONDITION. He was seen twice by the doctor. Vulnerable people like this should not be arrested at all, and if they are in custody they should be dealt with immediately regardless of whether or not they have seen a doctor. If the police do cruelly insist on having prisoners checked out medically before interviewing them, there should be a doctor allocated to every patient, installed in custody for 24hrs and standing by with a stethoscope at the door to each cell.
As you can tell, I have strong feelings about this story. But all my angers melted away when I heard the BBC Breakfast's guest commenter say:
"I mean, this guy who stopped him was a PCSO - you know, just someone like in the Territorial Army doing police work on his days off. He probably works full-time round the corner from the plumber."
I am so glad that the government has explained the role and purpose of a PCSO in a manner explicable to intelligent broadcast journalists.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Diary of an On-Call Girl' is available in all good bookstores and online.
posted by PC Bloggs at 19:04
61 Comments:
I work hundreds of miles away from where this occured, however:
The PCSO saw the fella drop the apple core.
He/She told him so and told him the fp was £50 and what was his name please.
The man treats the PCSO like a bit of shit and tells him/her that he is going to a shop and he will speak to the PCSO after doing so.
The PCSO correcty does the right thing and calls the Constable. Five of them arrive, possibly from the one transit van mobile in the town.
He refuses to tell the police who he is and ends up arrested. 18 hours later (how long did it take this fella to tell the police who he was?) he is released.
In custody the various heart problems arise and amazingly CPR is not administered.
He is going to court to tell the Magistrate that the PCSO imagined the whole thing or that it was all a tragic misunderstanding due to his medical condition.
Bet he puts the next apple core in the bin.
10 May, 2008 19:31
Common Sense flew out of the window here. Not blaming the PCSO for doing what he believed was correct.
Am looking at why the duty SGT did not remind the guy that if he had dropped the apple core, then a Fixed Penalty 'could' be used, and if the old guy still refused to admit he dropped it then it requires more evidence.
Then weigh up the cost of getting that evidence compared to the value of resolving the 'crime', think of the wasted opportunity cost.
5 officers? What were they doing, Holding Hands?????
The PCSO could be reminded of the fact not everyone lives by the same draconian code as the PCSO and to use his brain in situations that require tact, diplomacy, civility, understanding, you know, those social skills that seeming don't come with a badge and a blue shirt.
The duty inspector will hopefully be communicating with the said Duty Sgt about responsibilty to the public, First Impressions, communication skills, Duty awareness, Career progression and that kind of thing.
The last thing that should have happened, is a news event-worth story for the daily rag to get hold of. All told, a bit of a balls up and any time served officer could have handled this without it even raising a pulse.
The PCSO's from GMP seem to have a knack for getting into the papers...
10 May, 2008 19:48
Last anon, that's a bit unfair to the PCSO. The guy might have been rude, aggressive and threatening. When the PCSO asked for back-up, every car in the area probably headed his way - as when someone is asking for assistance you don't stop to ask how many assistances they would like, you just go. Hence 5 officers turning up. the fact of there being 5 probably put paid to any thoughts he might have had of resistance, so he decided to whinge about being surrounded by 5 of them instead. The fact that he's now gone whining to the papers and some fool of an editor has jumped on it as a front page story does not mean he is right.
10 May, 2008 22:07
The next time someone is walking along the street eating an apple and is tempted to just drop the core onto the pavement they might remember this case and put it in a bin--- O.K.? thats just one of the reasons for this is`nt it?
10 May, 2008 22:13
Anon at 19:48
Do you think the PCSO is a liar?
Para. 2 you seem to have the evidence that the SGT should have done something different. please publish this.
`Five officers`. Many towns would relish the thought. Hope they are where you live.
Para.five: How do you know the PCSO is a draconian maniac? What is this persons name? Do you know him/her. I think the only one missing skills here is you.
I work for a living "twat" summs you up.
10 May, 2008 22:28
Police chose not to investigate reports of teenage girls causing trouble outside a house in Harrow before a fatal explosion”----------HEADLINE
“ Police had decided against sending a patrol to investigate complaints about teenage girls causing trouble outside a house that was destroyed by a fatal explosion hours later” --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- “ While the girl was still on the phone line, she told the police call-taker that the troublemakers were moving away, and she no longer needed police assistance. Accordingly, police did not send a patrol.”
Hows that for a provocative headline from the The Times
10 May, 2008 22:58
Perhaps it's just me, but it does seem like overkill.
Did it really need 18 hours in a cell to get the accused to deliver his name and addy?
Can't fault the PCSO though. If they are not backed up over minor things, what authority do they have?
10 May, 2008 23:21
would be interesting to know at what stage he eventually gave his name and address.
10 May, 2008 23:38
So if someone refuses to pay the penalty, they get forgiven?
That would set a nice precedence, making the entire point of the penalty redundant.
I still think that if someone refuses the fine but picks up the litter that's ok. I'm going to assume that's what you meant...
11 May, 2008 01:01
Woopsie. Think the BBC guest commentator got it a bit wrong... It's interesting though, how few people actually know what the role of a PCSO is. When I first started out, working with the PCSOs, my Grandma thought their main role was to carry a map and give people directions. Sweet, but probably not quite what the Government was thinking.
11 May, 2008 02:55
So why the hell should somebody pay a £50 on the spot fine on the unsupported say so of one man, PCSO or not?
Funny how five manage to turn up for this but if a neighbour smashes down your fence or a tenant wrecks a flat they are not interested.
11 May, 2008 09:02
While I hate litter and I do appreciate there have to be some sanctions for those who refuse to comply with laws, does strict enforcement of litter law in a shopping mall actually make much sense given that the cleaning will have to be done nightly anyway by reason of people walking through it and given that just having a cleaner wandering around is probably cheaper than a PCSO. There is a lack of common sense in enforcement of our laws.
It makes sense to have simply stated laws, "you must not do x" etc. because we cannot spend thousands on every single case proving that, in all the circumstances, somebody did something, on balance of probabilities, that was against the public interest.
Simple laws do not mean there should always be simplistic enforcement. Before any action is taken, enforcers should ask themselves whether enforcement in the case in question actually serves the basic purpose behind the law or is beurocracy for the sake of it.
11 May, 2008 10:51
Great blog. Really mirrors my feelings about it. I know a lot of us are sceptical about PCSOs, but they are here to stay, and some of them, believe it or not, do a good job.
I no longer buy newspapers as I got so fed up of the spin that was put on certain stories.
11 May, 2008 11:13
I think the point that some of the commenters is missing is that no, he did not need to accept the FPN (and no, there is no such thing as an on the spot fine). If he disputed the PCSO's allegation then he still had to give his identification details so that he could argue his case in front of the Mags. To refuse, well, tough on him. I have no sympathy. If he was so worried about his own health and that of his wife he could have been on his way in a couple of minutes.
Dave the Dog
11 May, 2008 12:02
" I mean, this guy who stopped him was a PCSO - you know, just someone like in the Territorial Army doing police work on his days off. He probably works full-time round the corner from the plumber. "
Fantastic work by the BBC, again, how much is that TV tax i pay again?!?
It was so impressive to see that the BBC have managed not to notice the 15,000 PCSO positions that have been created in recent years which effectively introduces a 2 teir Policing system for the first time in the UK.
Its also impressive to see the BBC at least trying to understand what a Special Constable Volunteer Officer is, i mean they have only been around for 40 years. Perhaps after another 40 they will be able to tell the difference between one and a PCSO.
I think this is why the media probably hate us. I mean, we know that they know, that we know that they are total muppets and they don't like knowing that we know this.
They say ignorance is bliss or maybe even a qualification for the BBC Breakfast Show as well.
(I probably just provoked a expose report by the Beeb now, they can be a little peevish at times if someone dares criticise them.)
11 May, 2008 12:16
The article states that he was taken before the court in handcuffs. This implies that he did not give his name and address to Police at all and as a consequence was put before the next available magistrates court hence the 18 hour wait in custody - All this man had to do was give his details and an arrest could have been avoided - I think this is a reasonable request - he did not have to pay the fine he could have opted for a court appearence.
11 May, 2008 12:22
Xoggoth says that he hates litter but as far as I can make out he would be quite happy for it to mount up during the day so long as it was gone by the next morning. The exercise is not to save the cleaners work but to stop the place looking a bloody tip by late afternoon.-- Anyway this bloke seems to be a complete arse and deserves all he got.
11 May, 2008 13:20
It seems that some people are saying that if you d on't give your name and address after committing a reportable offence that you should be let go. I suppose thats one way of keeping crime figures down...it would make the law even more of an ass than it already is.
Failing to provide your name and address to a Constable who suspects that an offence has taken place is one of the reasons for arrest. If he is stupid enough to withhold his details for 18hrs then that is his lookout. If he wants to prove his point then he can argue out in front of a magistrate and save himself a lot of heartache.
People are saying its overkill, but where do you draw the line? At one point does an offence become too minor to enforce?
11 May, 2008 15:38
I wonder why the PCSO didn't arrange to do what a sensible constable should have done,
...report for summons.
(A competent officer knows that there are so many ways of easily getting a correct name and address.)
And why didn't the Custody Officer do something similarly sensible.
Or were they all out to punish someone who hadn't even been found guilty.
What on earth has this country come to...
...nuLabour have won!
Fred
11 May, 2008 16:26
Fred, I'd be interested to know how one can report for summons without knowing the name and address of the person being reported.
11 May, 2008 16:49
Fred said:
(A competent officer knows that there are so many ways of easily getting a correct name and address.)
Really?
I wonder then why it was recognised many years ago that if someone refused to properly identify themselves there was sufficient grounds to arrest them to enable identification to be made.
We must have all been wrong, please Fred train us in this mystical knowledge.
Dave the Dog
11 May, 2008 17:22
Ellie - you're really paying the price of fmae nowadays, I feel. There's so many "anonynous" mugs on your blog nowadays that I find myself getting frustrated.
Anyone else or is it just me?
That said, you seem to strike the zeitgeist with nearly every post. I could almost hear 99.9% of Bobbies all round the country shouting "Well - if you hadn't dropped it and then waited 18 hours to tell the custody skipper your name none of this would have happened!"
11 May, 2008 18:10
If he had put the core in a bin that would have been the end of it. A non story hope the fine is near the maximum, he has it coming to him.
11 May, 2008 18:18
You’ve hit the nail on the head there bloggsy. My sentiments exactly.
11 May, 2008 20:21
The Mail rightly withheld approval for a fool and his antics. Missed is the subtle point of the article making news with foolishness aped by Authority.
King Pyrrhus was noted for winning a battle with Romans albeit at great personal cost in troops and reputation. Of both he is alleged to have declared "Another such victory and we are lost"
11 May, 2008 20:23
xtp said:
There's so many "anonynous" mugs on your blog nowadays that I find myself getting frustrated.
Ouch, okay I've now signed up with my user name. I'm no longer anonymous 'Dave the Dog'
;o)
11 May, 2008 20:40
xoggoth: "So why the hell should somebody pay a £50 on the spot fine on the unsupported say so of one man, PCSO or not?"
Clearly the PCSO has numerous motives to make up his evidence, such as a grudge against plumbers and a deviant mislike of apple cores. Perhaps more likely, he actually DID see the guy drop the apple core. In any event if the bloke didn't accept what the PCSO saw, he could have just gone to court by giving his name and address.
In other news... just to make you aware if you click "Name/URL", you can make up a name to comment under so people can distinguish you from other anonymouses. Alternatively, you can post as anonymous and answer your own questions in a sly and clever manner.
11 May, 2008 23:30
xoggoth and various anonymouses,
If instead of dropping our trash in the mall, you may wish to give us your addresses so we can all come round and deposit it on your property. I assume that would be OK, as no doubt you do your gardening and clean up your lots each weekend?
12 May, 2008 00:51
"Territorial Army doing police work at weekends". Hmmmmm. An idea is starting to form in my mind.
Can I please have the Rifle Battalion from Toxteth on patrol in Ruraltown?
12 May, 2008 07:18
notellin said...
" Its also impressive to see the BBC at least trying to understand what a Special Constable Volunteer Officer is, i mean they have only been around for 40 years
(...)
They say ignorance is bliss or maybe even a qualification for the BBC Breakfast Show as well"
Actually it's more like a 175 years.
Yeah, ignorance is bliss...
12 May, 2008 08:19
"People are saying its overkill, but where do you draw the line?"
I draw it at bio-degradable waste like an apple core!
If he'd been fly-tipping, or dumping household waste from a dustbin, fair enough...
12 May, 2008 08:45
Even biodegradable waist makes a mess. More so in some circumstances I imagine. Banana skins, Apple cores and numerous other rotting fruit and veg dashed across our pathways is worse IMO than an empty packet of crisps. The crisps wouldn’t stick to my shoe and require a wash under a tap. It may be degradable but that’s not the point.
It’s all low level stuff, but it is annoying and for some ‘lucky’ people, litter’s one of their only problematic local issues. Though I doubt it would have gotten this fare is the bloke had just passed the attitude test.
12 May, 2008 13:03
As a Scot
I must ask:
was there any corroboration?
Here without corroboration (preferably in the form of a second witness) you have no case before the Court.
Never mind, with the five assisting constables on the scene under Scots' Law you have a technically unbreakable case of failing to provide... (name and address. I suppose).
Is that punishable with imprisonment in England?
(I personally think that imprisoning people in England is better than putting them in prison, and cheaper for us Scots!)
But what about the 550 robberies and 160 burglaries that occurred when those five officers were away from the canteen, shouldn't they be held somehow responsible?
Or will the poor apple dropper be additionally charged with wasteful employment?
Whatever, someone in your Force should perhaps have shown just a tiny little modicum of common sense. (Or is that done away with now, south of the border?)
Best wishes
John G
12 May, 2008 14:52
I think this just highlights the inadequacies of training for C3PO's. They have to call for back-up whenever they get out of depth with confrontation and can't handle angry MOP's. Right decision in the end though. Always makes me laugh inside when middle class tossers like this one think they can't get nicked for so called trivial matters.
12 May, 2008 17:06
Hang about upsidedownhead, 'middle class tosser'?
This man is an unemployed plumber from Manchester who cares for his disabled wife. And anyway, what's his class got to do with it?
Fact is, none of us were there, so none of us know for sure what happened.
BUT - IF he dropped the apple and IF he refused to give his name and address, he's a daft bugger for not co-operating sooner and arguing the toss later.
However, I'm afraid the police are losing the law abiding people of Britain. Readers of this blog might not like it, and might say they don't care, but it's true and it's a tragedy for our democracy, our liberty and our country.
Like I say, I wasn't there, but if I put myself in this bloke's shoes, I'd be shirty if someone started asking for my name and address over an apple core in Manchester - though I wouldn't drop it in the first place and would give the details if asked.
Why? Because we know that the police are next to useless at catching real criminals and we're fed up with it.
It might be government inspired, it might be down to targets etc, but some of you have got to start having the backbone to stand up and say No, enough's enough. This and other blogs do that in their way - do you do it on the streets, though?
The final comments, from Supt Ian Palmer, of Greater Manchester Police, sum it up.
He said: "Littering is an offence and GMP work tirelessly to ensure the streets are not only safe but also clean."
That's just a lie. The streets of Manchester are NOT safe and I think the police would do well to concentrate on assaults, robberies and muggings before they worry about discarded fruit.
12 May, 2008 17:23
rob: "This and other blogs do that in their way - do you do it on the streets, though?"
I'd like to think I do, actually.
12 May, 2008 17:50
rob - you cheeky #######. I would say that the HUGH majority of guys who read this blog, and are engaged in coppering (inc PCSO-ing), do it on the street. I know that I do.
And - an "unemployed plumber"? Give over. Is there such a thing?
12 May, 2008 20:17
There are two people that really know what happened, the PCSO and the plumber.I saw one report that said the apple(core) was thrown, but no doubt the truth of the dropping/throwing/depositing side of things will come out in Court.
Where I worked there was a problem of people urinating in the street. It was a report for summons bye law offence and I could guarantee to find at least one person behaving in this way over a weekend of lates.
A few would refuse their name and address under the 'I'm not giving my name because I haven't done anything' reason. However most changed their minds once the potential arrest outcome was explained.
This all hinges on the 'authority' of a patrolling PC or PCSO. No one goes out of the nick with the express intention of reporting or ticketing someone for litter, urinating in the street or no lights on a bike, but often these things happen under the Officers nose. And what then? The matter if blatent should not be ignored. The Officer should at least have words but if the 'customer' refuses to give his details or is otherwise unreceptive to advice etc, it will end like this every time.
In effect the plumber was not arrested for dropping the apple core, but for refusing to give his details once that was suspected.
13 May, 2008 00:42
If this had been a teenage yob dropping an apple core, a packet of chips ( also biodegradable )etc etc and who failed to give his name and address no-one would have been bothered about him being arrested - they would have been positively happy.
As it was an unemployed plumber who looks after his sick wife all and sundry condemn the Police.
Rather like someone taking pot shots at the public with a shotgun - had it been a teenage tearaway no-one would have been bothered the Police shot him 5 times, but as it is a barrister the Police have done wrong!
The complainers in both cases are GUILTY of class snobbery. That's all it is - the belief that the middle classes shouldn't be arrested if they do wrong.
Ricky G
13 May, 2008 07:53
"However, I'm afraid the police are losing the law abiding people of Britain."
Agreed...
This blogpost gives a good example of a 'non-crime' too:
http://fulhamreactionary.blogspot.com/2008/05/thought-policeman-of-day-pc-paul-hughes.html
Note, no 'class issue' in there that I could see, either.
"The complainers in both cases are GUILTY of class snobbery. That's all it is - the belief that the middle classes shouldn't be arrested if they do wrong."
Not at all. I raised no objections to the police shooting of the barrister, for instance. I don't give a damn what the class of the person pulling the trigger, upper, lower, in-between, it's their action that's lethal!
13 May, 2008 09:23
XTP - thanks (not sure what a ####### is though :-) )
If you're all so full of common sense, who are these cops who are arresting people for suggesting a horse is gay, or interviewing Tony Blair over alleged anti-Welshness, or turning up in squad cars to deal with old ladies who won't return a football that's been hoofed over their fence for the tenth time that day? Who are the cops who go to schools and turn playground fights into arrests and detections?
Obviously not you, or anyone else who reads this blog (you obviously know them all) but these things are happening, they didn't used to happen and it is driving a wedge between us and you. (By 'us' I mean law-abiding people.)
13 May, 2008 09:53
Rob, you are reading too many newspapers that tend to give a one sided view of policing. I'm not saying these incidents are made up, but there is usually a bit more to it than is published.
I know it's hard for you to accept, but the large majority of us turn up for work for the right reasons and do our best under the circumstances. We do make mistakes, because we're human and not robots, but if you think you can do better then please feel free to join up.
13 May, 2008 11:05
Rob, your comment seem to stem from the view that we do sweet FA all year then turn up and the one job that we deal with hits the papers? of the 120k Police officers in the UK around 20-30k are actually front line officers, on average dealing with 20 calls a shift EACH (an average of my last 6 months) with more so on a night duty.
Even if there was a story like the ones you put every single hour of every single day in a year that would be insignificant compared to the number of calls we do actually attend, which is again considerably less than the number of requests to attend that we actually get from the public.
Be under no illusion that there are not editors just waiting to wet their pants over an overblown story of police brutality or heavy handed job, but they hardly happen, its just when they do every w4nker and his mate is waiting to beat us with it.
13 May, 2008 11:34
"...you are reading too many newspapers that tend to give a one sided view of policing.."
Let's not blame it all on the newspapers. People often like to say that they make the news, but actually, they write the news that their readers want to read.
About 20 years ago, you wouldn't have seen the volume of these type of stories because they would have immediately drawn a backlash from the readers, along the lines of 'Yes, but the police do a good job!'. People were (mostly) protective and appreciative of their police.
The fact that now, a story like that one brings in a flood of 'Oh, but I can top that..!' letters, which the editors duly print, should tell you something.
Something about newspapers, yes. But something about the change in public attitudes, too...?
13 May, 2008 11:44
Thanks pzgirl, but no thanks. I have no desire to join the police. Others do that job.
Equally, I didn't choose to become a doctor, a nurse, a teacher, a binman or any other public servant.
That, by the way, the 'public servant' bit, is what gives us the right to criticise the police when they do wrong (and metcountymounty, I know it's rare, but it's increasing and rather than attacking anyone who criticises the police you'd be better employed in sympathising).
Most of the members of the public who read these blogs, I'd say, support he police. But we like the p;olice how they used to be - with common sense and fair play. I know this isn't the fault of the PCs walking the beat, but we lament the loss of that. (Again, I know it's not completely lost, or even mostly lost, but it's being lost.)
13 May, 2008 15:51
Daft thing is, the chap thought he was standing up for his rights while being honest. His generation still think they have rights.
He could have given anyone's name and address. It's not like he had to show his ID card or anything...
And actually, we don't know WHAT the pcso saw. Bet he will when writing it up.
13 May, 2008 19:06
rob
"But we like the police how they used to be - with common sense and fair play"
Would that be the Guildford Four type of common sense? or the Bridgewater Three type? or the Birmingham Six type? or would it be the West Mids Serious Crime Squad type of fair play, or the Steven Lawrence type?
13 May, 2008 21:49
This one did make me laugh - couldn't help thinking "just make up a name then you daft twat!" Most PCSO's i've met wouldn't bother to check it - just make a note, issue forms as appropriate then wander onwards...
And Rob, i don't think anyone's objecting to being criticised. Constructive, Neutral, Appropriate and above all WELL-INFORMED criticism is welcomed by most mature adults (which encompasses the vast majority of Bobbies).
I strongly suspect the hard-response from many readers to your comment was due to the fact that it wasn't well informed.
Despite that though you do make a good point about alienating the MoP's that support the police gradually due to the lack of discretion they can apply in most situations...
14 May, 2008 13:17
Over an apple core allegedly..., I mean its a good job he wasn't the chief con of a nearby south Wales Force, he could have paid his fine on a corporate credit card, along with hotel room and dinner for his current girlfriend, instead of going to London to attend important meetings about rape and Internet Children Abuse things. And then elected to 'retire' before he could be prosecuted or penalized...
So its ok to rob the gravy train with your corporate creddy while your delving into the dicky di doh, but not coughing up for a apple core is 18 hours in the cells, handcuffed and marched in front of a judge, seems the twats are at the top on this one and some blue shirts and scammy bashers all support it.
Allah have pity...
14 May, 2008 19:13
Plaid Cymru Llanelli AM Helen Mary Jones said, “I am very concerned about this situation. As I understand it, the normal procedure is for police officers not to be allowed to retire while they are under investigation. It is a matter of serious concern that the chief constable has been allowed to retire in these circumstances.
“I shall be writing to the Dyfed-Powys Police Authority asking for an explanation".
Whoops, I bet all concerned are trembling in their boots, she is going to write to them! Now if he had dropped an apple corp, he would be in deep stuff... Why not just get a local CPSO to deal???
14 May, 2008 20:12
This bloke sounds like the kind of numpty we deal with every day; the kind who thinks he can do what he likes with no consequences. It's always fun pointing out the error of this approach, and little in the job gives me more satisfaction.
I really hope the PCSO asked him to pick up the apple and put it in the bin before rushing for his ticket book.
Anyway, got to go now. I'm off to dish out a load of fixed penalties to drivers who have committed very minor infractions of the law and give them a fine and points on their licence. Maybe this will push them over the top and they will loose their licence and their job!!! hahahahahahaha!!!
14 May, 2008 21:00
You must be Met, or GMP, or a turnip head, lol... Round em up... PC, your a cracker...
14 May, 2008 22:50
Sounds like Keith Hurst was defending what he thought remained of his ancient liberties in refusing to be bossed around by a " not a proper copper " PCSO.
Many will have some sympathy with his stance though he should have seen more sense when Police Officers did arrive.
PC Bloggs "if he didn't accept what the PCSO saw, he could have just gone to court by giving his name and address.
"
Quite so, that was the way in which he should have stood up for himself and/or his rights.
I am aware that the unsupported evidence of local council Civic Enforcement Officers will be enough to fine errant citizens, is that also the case with PCSOs ?
Sadly though"this kind of incident does not help in improving relations between the community and police."
Why do you suppose the newspapers and readers feed off each other with this kind of story ? Perhaps because many MOPs have had similar experiences with various tentacles of the 'Enforcement Society Regime' that has emerged but, unlike Keith Hurst, most simply pay up; later sharing their festering contempt for it with their mates down the pub.
If I were a PC or PCSO I would leave apple cores to local councils and get on with catching criminals.
15 May, 2008 05:03
If I were a PC or PCSO I would leave apple cores to local councils and get on with catching criminals
Oh - If I only had a £ for every time I have heard that!
A phrase used by every scr*te who has been pulled up for any offence at all
15 May, 2008 07:47
Inspector Gadget said:
rob
"But we like the police how they used to be - with common sense and fair play"
Would that be the Guildford Four type of common sense? or the Bridgewater Three type? or the Birmingham Six type? or would it be the West Mids Serious Crime Squad type of fair play, or the Steven Lawrence type?
Oh... why didn't you say?
I didn't realise it was a straightforward choice between criminality and ineptitude.
I mean, for the hard of thinking, police who basically understand that they police with the consent and approval of the (basically) law abiding majority.
For all the rest of you reading this, I wasn't having a go at the police particularly, or the PCSO - I said the guy was an idiot not to co-operate.
I was simply pointing out that you are losing support and I asked the question - it was not a comment binarysurfer, it was a question - how many cops who talk so much common sense on here actually act it out in real life. I'm reassured that it seems to be the majority, buit there are one or two morons in your ranks I fear.
15 May, 2008 09:37
I do feel that Insp Gadget was out of order when her referred to the 'Guildford 4 type of commonsense'. If my memory serves me correct, the offenders (for that is what they were) were let out because their sentence MAY have been unsafe. The Surrey Police officers were subjected to a full trial over their actions and were COMPLETELY EXONERATED. Every single one of those officers walked out of court with quiet dignity, unlike the show business like actions of the other lot, and tried to get on with their lives. Unfortunately, with the resultant publicity the majority of them failed to do so to their own standards. I have no knowledge of the others referred to but it may be that they were also tainted by the political desire to 'accept casualties for the greater good.'
15 May, 2008 21:12
I'm 100% with Inspector Gadget on this one. I'm sick to death of being told how great the police were way back when. I've been in nearly 20 years. PACE was brought in at about the time I joined. It was written in 1984. So the police officers then had already proven they couldn't be trusted.When I joined there were officers coming up for retirement who joined at the start of the 60's and the fondest stories they told were about the abuses of trust they could get away with. Police officers today are more honest and hard working than ever before but they pay for the sins of their fathers every day with greater scrutiny etc. In my role I get the 'good old days' thrown at me at public meetings regularly by people in their 40's and 50's who shut up when I do the maths and point out that the coppers they are talking about were regarded as so bent the government brought in PACE!
16 May, 2008 01:47
rob
I'm taking that as an "I don't know" then.
Actually, that was my way of pointing at PACE but never mind.... I'll draw pictures next time.
17 May, 2008 08:22
John Said
"But what about the 550 robberies and 160 burglaries that occurred when those five officers were away from the canteen, shouldn't they be held somehow responsible?"
I don't know where you live but where I do robberies are down 17%, Burglaries 29%, crime overall has fallen for the 4th year running, on 'my' patch crime is at its lowest level for ten years.
It would appear that north of the border is a lot less safe than south...
17 May, 2008 19:43
成人電影,情色,本土自拍, 一夜情, 辣妹視訊, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊, 視訊美女, 美女視訊, 視訊交友, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, 情人視訊網影音視訊聊天室, 視訊交友90739, 成人影片, 成人交友, 本土自拍, 免費A片下載, 性愛,
成人交友, 嘟嘟成人網, 成人電影, 成人, 成人貼圖, 成人小說, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人遊戲, 微風成人, 愛情公寓, 情色, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 做愛, 色情聊天室, 美女交友,
嘟嘟成人網, 成人貼圖, 成人電影, A片, 豆豆聊天室, 聊天室, UT聊天室, 尋夢園聊天室, 男同志聊天室, UT男同志聊天室, 聊天室尋夢園, 080聊天室, 080苗栗人聊天室, 6K聊天室, 女同志聊天室, 小高聊天室, 情色論壇, 色情網站, 成人網站, 成人論壇, 免費A片, 上班族聊天室, 成人聊天室, 成人小說, 微風成人區, 色美媚部落格, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人論壇, 情色聊天室, 寄情築園小遊戲, AV女優,成人電影,情色,本土自拍, A片下載, 日本A片, 麗的色遊戲, 色色網, ,嘟嘟情人色網, 色情網站, 成人網站, 正妹牆, 正妹百人斬, aio,伊莉, 伊莉討論區, 成人遊戲, 成人影城,
ut聊天室, 免費A片, AV女優, 美女視訊, 情色交友, 免費AV, 色情網站, 辣妹視訊, 美女交友, 色情影片 成人影片, 成人網站, A片,H漫, 18成人, 成人圖片, 成人漫畫, 情色網, 日本A片,
愛情公寓, 情色, 舊情人, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 情色交友, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 色情遊戲, 情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 色情a片, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 寄情築園小遊戲, 色情遊戲情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 言情小說, 愛情小說, 色情A片, 情色論壇, 色情影片, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊美女, 視訊交友, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, a片下載, aV, av片, A漫, av dvd, av成人網, 聊天室, 成人論壇, 本土自拍, 自拍, A片,成人電影,情色,本土自拍,
03 April, 2009 21:18
免費A片, 本土自拍, AV女優, 美女視訊, 情色交友, 免費AV, 色情網站, 辣妹視訊, 美女交友, 色情影片, 成人影片, 成人網站, A片,H漫, 18成人, 成人圖片, 成人漫畫, 情色網, 日本A片, 免費A片下載, 性愛, 成人交友, 嘟嘟成人網, 成人電影, 成人, 成人貼圖, 成人小說, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人遊戲, 微風成人, 愛情公寓, 情色, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 做愛, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 寄情築園小遊戲, 色情遊戲, 情色視訊,
情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 言情小說, 愛情小說, 色情A片, 情色論壇, 色情影片, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊美女, 視訊交友, ut聊天室, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, a片下載, av片, A漫, av dvd, av成人網, 聊天室, 成人論壇, 本土自拍, 自拍, A片, 愛情公寓, 情色, 舊情人, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 情色交友, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 色情遊戲, 情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 色情a片, 一夜情, 辣妹視訊, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊, 視訊美女, 美女視訊, 視訊交友, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, 情人視訊網, 影音視訊聊天室, 視訊交友90739, 成人影片, 成人交友,
15 April, 2009 02:37
Post a Comment
<< Home