The behaviour of UK police officers.

[catsmate]

Further revelations about Alan Greer and selective answers from Police Scotland.

Serial rapist police officer passed vetting despite warnings

Alan Greer was investigated by police in 2002 and 2005 for making inappropriate phone calls to women, with one case resulting in a formal police caution.

www.bbc.com

 

[Nessie]

Further revelations about Alan Greer and selective answers from Police Scotland.

Serial rapist police officer passed vetting despite warnings

Alan Greer was investigated by police in 2002 and 2005 for making inappropriate phone calls to women, with one case resulting in a formal police caution.

www.bbc.com

I say it was a deliberate deception by Police Scotland, to claim, when answering questions about a supposed lack of missed opportunities, they thought the question only applied to after he joined the police, not before.

The police officer or officers in recruitment, who approved the appointment of Greer, despite his past offending against women by inappropriate phone calls, should be investigated for misconduct. They may have left the job by now, but there should still be an investigation.

 

[Nessie]

No need to watch it, the title "Greater Manchester Police abused power to demean and criminalise victims and suspects" says it all, do you really need to see a video to tell you that water is wet? Over 40 years ago they were doing that, it would seem they have not quite got rid of all the singular and only one bad apples in the last 40 years. Or is the barrell bad?

The barrel is bad. It can turn good people bad, as they see the bad as being normal and lose perspective.




However.

The police still manage to do a lot of good. At the moment they are battling to stop parts of Middlesbrough descend into anarchy. They keep Glasgow a safe city to visit, despite BBC suggestions to the contrary.

They, more than any other profession in the UK at the moment, are cleaning their act up and getting rid of the bad apples.

 

[catsmate]

I say it was a deliberate deception by Police Scotland, to claim, when answering questions about a supposed lack of missed opportunities, they thought the question only applied to after he joined the police, not before.

Absolutely

The police officer or officers in recruitment, who approved the appointment of Greer, despite his past offending against women by inappropriate phone calls, should be investigated for misconduct. They may have left the job by now, but there should still be an investigation.

I can't see that happening.

 

[Darat]

Further revelations about Alan Greer and selective answers from Police Scotland.

Serial rapist police officer passed vetting despite warnings

Alan Greer was investigated by police in 2002 and 2005 for making inappropriate phone calls to women, with one case resulting in a formal police caution.

www.bbc.com

The original police answer was "technically" true but was completely dishonest. I am sure it was one singular bad apple that responded to the journalist's question and lessons have now been learned, and that wouldn't happen these days so that's all fine.

It really does show how rotten our police forces are, how dishonesty is deeply entrenched in the institutions.

 

[bluesjnr]

The barrel is bad. It can turn good people bad, as they see the bad as being normal and lose perspective.

However.

The police still manage to do a lot of good. At the moment they are battling to stop parts of Middlesbrough descend into anarchy. They keep Glasgow a safe city to visit, despite BBC suggestions to the contrary.

AKA, doing what they are paid to do.

They, more than any other profession in the UK at the moment, are cleaning their act up and getting rid of the bad apples.

A better force should be along any day now, after all....

*Efforts to reform and oversee British policing have existed almost as long as modern professional police forces—roughly nearly 200 years. When Sir Robert Peel founded the Metropolitan Police in 1829, complaints and fears about police overreach, brutality, and misconduct began almost immediately in the 1830's

*AI response

 

[Darat]

The barrel is bad. It can turn good people bad, as they see the bad as being normal and lose perspective.




However.

The police still manage to do a lot of good. At the moment they are battling to stop parts of Middlesbrough descend into anarchy. They keep Glasgow a safe city to visit, despite BBC suggestions to the contrary.

They, more than any other profession in the UK at the moment, are cleaning their act up and getting rid of the bad apples.

Forgive my cynicism but the GMP have been cleaning up their single bad apple for as long as I personally have been aware of their bad behaviour, which is over 40 years, how much longer should they be given?

As for being a police force, yes they do operate as a police force and carry out the duties they are meant to, and as I've said before there have been improvements in police behaviour. And yes they like all public bodies were badly damaged by the Toriy and Liberal governments' fiscal policies but we are talking about basic personal behaviour of the officers, that isn't caused by lack of resources.

 

[The Common Potato]

The police still manage to do a lot of good.

They're meant to. There's a Chris Rock sketch there somewhere. In my opinion, it's not their job to try and make society better.

 

[Nessie]

Forgive my cynicism but the GMP have been cleaning up their single bad apple for as long as I personally have been aware of their bad behaviour, which is over 40 years, how much longer should they be given?

As for being a police force, yes they do operate as a police force and carry out the duties they are meant to, and as I've said before there have been improvements in police behaviour. And yes they like all public bodies were badly damaged by the Toriy and Liberal governments' fiscal policies but we are talking about basic personal behaviour of the officers, that isn't caused by lack of resources.

Conduct within the police improved during my time, from the late 1980s to mid 2010s. That was in respect of both the behaviour of police officers and how well they investigated crime.

There was a pretence in the 1970s and 1980s, that we had a great police force, and that it was largely honest. That pretence had melted way by the 1990s, and promises to clean up were not kept. But, now, after numerous scandals, such as the murder of Sarah Everard, I genuinely believe the promised clear up is now happening. I base that belief on the sheer volume of police officers who are now the subject of misconduct investigations and action, including, crucially, a number of Chief Constables.

 

[Nessie]

They're meant to. There's a Chris Rock sketch there somewhere. In my opinion, it's not their job to try and make society better.

I agree in cases such as the pandemic, when the police often overreached and acted as if they were guardians of the public in the fight against Covid. I disagree in that the prevention and detection of crime does make society better and they are core functions of the police. Then there is the grey area, over issues such as mental health and "hurty words" where police involvement is not ideal. The NHS should be dealing with mental health calls and the public need to get a grip over the complaints they make about "hurty words".

 

[The Common Potato]

Nessie, the police, by arresting wronguns, will benefit society; but that is surely a result of their actions, not the aim. FWIW, some almost 40 years ago, I applied to join the Surrey constabulary. After a three day stay in Mount Browne, they said no, but please come back next year and try again. I was about 19. Many decades on, I think I would have made an awful police officer!

I can't speak for anyone else, but it's the perhaps the seeming institutional disingenuousness that gets me. As others have said in this place, doubling down is a thing that police officers - senior ones - seems to be of a habit.

I have read all of Peter James's 'Grace' novels; police officers go mad when they attain the rank of chief superintendent! Probably because they have to deal with politicians.

Personally, I want the police to be better. They way they are going, they are going to have to be brought under direct political control; and that is not a good thing.

 

[The Common Potato]

and "hurty words"

Is essentially prosecuting motive.

 

[Nessie]

Nessie, the police, by arresting wronguns, will benefit society; but that is surely a result of their actions, not the aim. FWIW, some almost 40 years ago, I applied to join the Surrey constabulary. After a three day stay in Mount Browne, they said no, but please come back next year and try again. I was about 19. Many decades on, I think I would have made an awful police officer!

I can't speak for anyone else, but it's the perhaps the seeming institutional disingenuousness that gets me. As others have said in this place, doubling down is a thing that police officers - senior ones - seems to be of a habit.

I have read all of Peter James's 'Grace' novels; police officers go mad when they attain the rank of chief superintendent! Probably because they have to deal with politicians.

Personally, I want the police to be better. They way they are going, they are going to have to be brought under direct political control; and that is not a good thing.

The police acts state that police duties are to prevent and detect crime, ensure public safety and follow court orders.

Doubling down is a habit and once someone gets to Chief Superintendent, they are largely immune from criticism and being held to account.

 

[The Common Potato]

The police acts state that police duties are to prevent and detect crime, ensure public safety and follow court orders.

You’re back to quoting regulations.

 

[theprestige]

If UK police simply cannot help but accost any likely-looking twat they see walking down the street, I'd much rather they focus their Copper Gaze on people like this ◊◊◊◊-face:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ImTheMainCharacter/comments/1w0rurc/mc_harasses_pianist

There's no reason, in a civilized society, that a licensed busker should have to set up his own video documentation, and face off himself, against offensive passerby. Where's the busybody cop when society actually needs him?

A cop doesn't like the look of a baseball bat, but I'm here to tell you the look of that haircut and smirk and swagger is a much better indicator of imminent sociopathy. Sometimes the egregiousness of the behavior of UK cops is best illustrated by its absence.

 

[Nessie]

....

There's no reason, in a civilized society, that a licensed busker should have to set up his own video documentation, and face off himself, against offensive passerby. Where's the busybody cop when society actually needs him?

A cop doesn't like the look of a baseball bat, but I'm here to tell you the look of that haircut and smirk and swagger is a much better indicator of imminent sociopathy. Sometimes the egregiousness of the behavior of UK cops is best illustrated by its absence.

I thought that the public wanted the police to not get involved when people are offensive and use hurty words?

Would you support a police officer who explained that he arrested a male, because of his haircut, smirk and swagger?

 

[Mojo]

I thought that the public wanted the police to not get involved when people are offensive and use hurty words?

Only when the police get involved. If the police don't get involved they are clearly neglecting their duty.

 

[theprestige]

I thought that the public wanted the police to not get involved when people are offensive and use hurty words?

Who said anything about "the public"? I'm telling you my opinion.

In my opinion, physically interfering with someone's livelihood, and threatening them with imminent physical violence, is a proper matter for the police. If the police are going to be out on the streets, looking for policing opportunities, I'd much rather they be on the lookout for this kind of thing, than for people walking around with sporting equipment.

They certainly shouldn't be harassing people for saying mean things on the internet. In my opinion.

Would you support a police officer who explained that he arrested a male, because of his haircut, smirk and swagger?

No I would not. I don't believe in arresting people because of their profile.

I would, however support a police officer who noticed the profile, and therefore kept an eye on the person, and was therefore in a position to do some good police work when the person did something arrestable. Or even was just in a position to deter arrestable behavior by being present and attentive.

 

[bluesjnr]

I would, however support a police officer who noticed the profile, and therefore kept an eye on the person, and was therefore in a position to do some good police work when the person did something arrestable. Or even was just in a position to deter arrestable behavior by being present and attentive.

This is bindingly obvious to anyone except existing and retired police officers. There is only one profile they will go after with enthusiasm. So much so, that despite the massive disparity in the number of times that that profile is stopped the, % of, "positive outcomes", is very close to the % of such outcomes within another profile. Can you guess what the former profile is and what profile the latter is? You've got two to choose from. You can? Good.

I say good because there is something else afoot within the police... let me explain. We're talking about hate crimes here.

66% of all people charged with such a crime belong to a distinct profile. The problem is that it's not the profile that gets such close attention as that profile described in my previous paragraph.

Y'see, despite one profile being considered as, largely, of criminal intent, leading to them being stopped more often than that another profile. That profile are considered really quite law abiding when it comes to hate crime.

According to the police, when out and about profiling innocent people, one profile will be at large committing the really bad crimes but, hardly ever, would they commit a hate crime.

No. I don't why the police arrive at such a skewed perspective neither? It's almost like they are a bunch of racists themselves, yet they see far right supremacists everywhere they look or listen.

What a shower.

 

[Mojo]

I thought that the public wanted the police to not get involved when people are offensive and use hurty words?

Would you support a police officer who explained that he arrested a male, because of his haircut, smirk and swagger?

We probably need that "Family Guy" card.