• You may find search is unavailable for a little while. Trying to fix a problem.

The behaviour of UK police officers.

^ It will be interesting to see what is in the report as more details come out over the next few days - sounds like it is a big and very detailed beast - like the role of the Murdoch empire...
 
The Met Police has changed its statement over a BBC journalist being chased at an anti-lockdown protest

lts initial statement said officers were not in the immediate vicinity but video shows them there and failing to intervene or help
Met says first statement "was drafted based on the video of the incident which was shared very widely on social media this morning. That video began on Richmond Terrace and out of sight of officers on nearby Whitehall. We were subsequently made aware of a longer piece of footage lasting 3 minutes and 28 seconds which shows the incident in full. It is clear that the incident began on Whitehall where officers were present"

Met says it "acknowledges concerns raised about the police response"
"We take those concerns seriously and will be reviewing our actions with a view to improving the policing of events for all Londoners"

Incredible for this is happening on the day the Daniel Morgan report found that "concealing or denying failings for the sake of an organisation’s public image is dishonesty for reputational benefit, and constitutes a form of institutional corruption"
 
Last edited:
What is the line which you have to cross to become one of the people who get to keep their job no matter how catastrophic they are at it?

Dido Harding, Cressida Dick etc.

Once you start rewarding failure, failure is inevitable.
 
Channel 4 News


In 2015 the Met Police chose not to open a full criminal investigation into an incident involving Epstein, Maxwell and Prince Andrew in 2001.
Serious questions raised about why Met Police chose not to investigate alleged offences. Police said today they will ‘review the information’ reported by this programme.

https://www.channel4.com/news/revea...ted-in-multiple-uk-abuse-claims-over-a-decade
 
Last edited:
Carrot Flower King said:
Monk found guilty of the manslaughter of Dalian Atkinson: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...manslaughter-of-ex-footballer-dalian-atkinson

Jury still considering verdict on Bettley-Smith.
Click to expand...

The first policeman to be convicted in thirty-five years for murdering a member of public. One wonders whether had Dalian Atkinson not been such a high profile person (I often saw him play when I frequented Villa Park in the mid-90's) this would even have gone this far. I can well imagine how frightening someone in a psychotic rage and exhibiting super strength might be but to keep on tasering and kicking in the head until the person is definitely dead is something a trained police officer should never do. In the case of the London Bridge 'narwhal' incident when a police officer had to fire - what was it? 20 shots? - into the terrorist's body, that was quite different. The man had already killed two people and attacked others, had two knives and a possible suicide vest, was still moving as though to reach for a cord or weapon, so that did fall under 'reasonable force'.
 
Last edited:
The manslaughter conviction was more likely, because the police officer is allowed to use a degree of force and there was no evidence of an intention to kill. I think that there is relief that he was convicted at all. It has been a long time coming and plenty of other police officers have killed and been excused, such as those who arrested and killed Sheku Bayoh.
 
Vixen said:
The first policeman to be convicted in thirty-five years for murdering a member of public. One wonders whether had Dalian Atkinson not been such a high profile person (I often saw him play when I frequented Villa Park in the mid-90's) this would even have gone this far. I can well imagine how frightening someone in a psychotic rage and exhibiting super strength might be but to keep on tasering and kicking in the head until the person is definitely dead is something a trained police officer should never do. In the case of the London Bridge 'narwhal' incident when a police officer had to fire - what was it? 20 shots? - into the terrorist's body, that was quite different. The man had already killed two people and attacked others, had two knives and a possible suicide vest, was still moving as though to reach for a cord or weapon, so that did fall under 'reasonable force'.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure what to make of this.
The first policeman to be convicted in thirty-five years for murdering a member of public.
Click to expand...
manslaughter

One wonders whether had Dalian Atkinson not been such a high profile person (I often saw him play when I frequented Villa Park in the mid-90's) this would even have gone this far.
Click to expand...
fair enough

I can well imagine how frightening someone in a psychotic rage and exhibiting super strength might be but to keep on tasering and kicking in the head until the person is definitely dead is something a trained police officer should never do.
Click to expand...
The first part, we only have the word of a convicted killer.

In the case of the London Bridge 'narwhal' incident when a police officer had to fire - what was it? 20 shots? - into the terrorist's body, that was quite different. The man had already killed two people and attacked others, had two knives and a possible suicide vest, was still moving as though to reach for a cord or weapon, so that did fall under 'reasonable force'
Click to expand...
True but irrelevant - nobody's claiming that it's not reasonable to kill terrorists in the course of their attacks
 
jimbob said:
I'm not sure what to make of this.
manslaughter

fair enough

The first part, we only have the word of a convicted killer.

True but irrelevant - nobody's claiming that it's not reasonable to kill terrorists in the course of their attacks
Click to expand...

I meant to say 'killing' not 'murdering', whoops. I was aware it was manslaughter and not murder.

The London Bridge terrorist case is relevant because any killing of 'a member of public' has to be independently investigated. And that one was and the police officer cleared, as having used 'reasonable force', not that 'it is not reasonable to kill terrorists in the course of their attacks'.
 
Can anyone point me to any report, witness account or anything which confirms the police account of "big, mad, scary black man"? And I don't mean Atkinson's father's apparent account to the police, as he, obviously, did not confirm that report in court.

I mean, if witnesses were able to tell the court that they saw Monk kick Atkinson in the head more than once, surely someone confirmed Monk's narrative of "big, mad, scary black man"?

None of the press accounts I've seen mention this.
 
Carrot Flower King said:
Can anyone point me to any report, witness account or anything which confirms the police account of "big, mad, scary black man"? And I don't mean Atkinson's father's apparent account to the police, as he, obviously, did not confirm that report in court.

I mean, if witnesses were able to tell the court that they saw Monk kick Atkinson in the head more than once, surely someone confirmed Monk's narrative of "big, mad, scary black man"?

None of the press accounts I've seen mention this.
Click to expand...

Were there witnesses? I though the kick on the head was admitted and confirmed with blood on Monks boot and injuries.
 
^A couple of folk described seeing Monk kicking Atkinson repeatedly and seeing him (Atkinson) on the ground.

Monk claimed he'd kicked Atkinson in the shoulder, while the forensic evidence clearly showed he'd kicked him hard in the head.

ETA He did tell colleagues that he's kicked Atkinson in the head, but then later claimed he couldn't remember either doing it nor saying he had - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-57417506

Checking for reports containg other witness testimomny.
 
Last edited:
Monk is a liar and he was trying to rely on the scary black man defence, which worked for the cops who murdered Sheku Bayoh and many others with excessive force and restraint, but hopefully will no longer work.

This is the UK's George Floyd case, and is hopefully a tipping point here, such that fewer BAME people (and others) will be killed by the police, or if they are killed, the police will be properly held to account.
 
Nessie said:
Monk is a liar and he was trying to rely on the scary black man defence, which worked for the cops who murdered Sheku Bayoh and many others with excessive force and restraint, but hopefully will no longer work.

This is the UK's George Floyd case, and is hopefully a tipping point here, such that fewer BAME people (and others) will be killed by the police, or if they are killed, the police will be properly held to account.
Click to expand...

Not sure the George Floyd comparison is a flattering one to pick. Chauvin got convicted of proper murder, not manslaughter. The scary black man defense still seems to be somewhat effective for reducing the culpability of killer cops.

Kicking someone in the head is widely understood by everyone to be lethal force. Manslaughter is a miscarriage of justice.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Not sure the George Floyd comparison is a flattering one to pick. Chauvin got convicted of proper murder, not manslaughter. The scary black man defense still seems to be somewhat effective for reducing the culpability of killer cops.

Kicking someone in the head is widely understood by everyone to be lethal force. Manslaughter is a miscarriage of justice.
Click to expand...


Agreed.
 
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...nson-jury-discharged-failing-reach-verdict-pc

"A jury has been discharged following its failure to reach a verdict on allegations that a police officer assaulted the former footballer Dalian Atkinson with a baton after he was felled by a stun gun on the night he died.
The case against Mary Ellen Bettley-Smith, a West Mercia probationary constable, ended with a hung jury a day after PC Benjamin Monk was convicted of manslaughter and told he would face an inevitable prison term."

Hopefully there will be a re-trial.
 
Given the current controversy over the rate of rape convictions in the UK the BBC has put up a piece of fairly infamous footage. Back in the early 80s when 'fly on the wall' reality shows were relatively new the BBC got permission to film a series about the police. You can tell it was the early days because the police would never allow such unfettered access now and they certainly wouldn't have let the BBC get near what became the episode 'A complaint of Rape':

The police rape interview that shocked 1980s Britain

Shocked is probably an understatement and unfortunately I suspect the attitudes on display haven't changed as much as we might like to think.
 
I remember watching that documentary at the time. IME, rape investigations have changed significantly since then. The victim is treated far more sympathetically.
 
jimbob said:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-officer-was-kept-on-despite-gross-misconduct

Monk had previously been disciplined for gross misconduct.
Click to expand...

Oh FFS!

I've been on nursing interview panels where we had to turn someone down for non-disclosure of well spent convictions for something even more trivial (bit of shop lifting as a teenager) than what Monk was cautioned for, 'cos it's the non-disclosure which is the problem at least as much, if not more so, than the actual offence.

But then I've long had the view that sharp end NHS workers are on far tighter rules than the dibble or politicians of any sort...
 
zooterkin said:
Isn't the point of spent convictions that you don't need to disclose them?
Click to expand...

Not the case for certain positions of trust according to my understanding.

I'd *guess* that it should also come up in security vetting for sensitive positions.
 
zooterkin said:
Isn't the point of spent convictions that you don't need to disclose them?
Click to expand...

Under the post-Soham, Ian Huntley rules for disclosure certain posts, i.e. those working with children and vulnerable adults among others, allowed for disclosure of many things...I worked in one of those areas - we had to disclose in-grown toe nails.

Seriously, the levels of checking for those of us in certain areas were very stringent: I nearly had the offer of my last job withdrawn, 'cos Durham police were dicking around over my place of birth and trying to make out I had fabricated it (it's a small town in North Wales, which was in Denbighshire, which no longer exists, then was in Clwyd, then the Wrexham County Borough), as they didn't know where to look for it, even though I told them that Wrexham was the actual town of my registration of birth; and another police force raised a query about another address, which they mis-read and associated with some intelligence they had on some suspected drug dealers; and then the officialdom in charge of collating the information from the police managed to lose everything pertaining to me and we had to start again...
 
How about a police force so bad even its own officers don't trust it?

Greater Manchester Police officers allege force failing crime victims

"I wouldn't feel confident reporting a crime to my own police force."

These are the words of a serving Greater Manchester Police (GMP) officer who has chosen to speak to BBC Newsnight to allege serious failings within England's second largest force.

A number of officers, past and present, have also come forward to voice similar concerns.
Click to expand...

Greater Manchester Police is under what is called 'special measures' basically they are so bad that if they were a business they would have gone bust by now.
 
jimbob said:
Not the case for certain positions of trust according to my understanding.

I'd *guess* that it should also come up in security vetting for sensitive positions.
Click to expand...

When I started case work on Proceeds of Crime cases (dodgy directors, bankrupts, etc) I had to be thoroughly background checked. Whilst having a record doesn't bar you from certain professions, you would have to declare it and make a special case as to why you can still be in that profession. Who would want that embarrassment. And you would probably be turned down anyway.
 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-57603091

"A police officer who unlawfully killed Dalian Atkinson by tasering him to the ground and kicking him in the head has been jailed for eight years."

I hope the family sue the police for allowing him to continue in the job, despite failing to disclose the theft and drunkenness cautions. Prospective police officers are required to give details of everything and anything in their past, even as a juvenile, even if it is not normally disclosable.
 
A former Greater Manchester Police officer is being investigated by a watchdog over his evidence at a public inquiry into the Manchester Arena bomb.

Ch Insp Dale Sexton was the force duty officer in the control room on the night of the 2017 terror attack.

The inquiry heard he thought he had "got away" with concealing information to an earlier review into the bombing.

The investigation follows a referral by GMP to the police watchdog and then a complaint by victims' families.

In May, the inquiry heard Mr Sexton declared Operation Plato, a pre-arranged terrorist plan, within minutes but did not alert the fire and ambulance services.

When Ch Insp Sexton, who has since retired, was then asked during his testimony about why he had not told a previous review about concealing the information, he replied: "I felt as if I'd got away with it."

He said it was not a decision he was proud of but believed "it was the right thing to do" and accepted he should have previously told the full truth but denied lying.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-57720019
 
It is that duty of candour again. Police officers think it is acceptable to lie or lie by omission to public enquiries.
 
WTAF is going on with police selection processes and internal disciplinary processes?

We had Monk getting in despite cautions and then getting a wrist slap when that and his having concealed it came to light; we now have Couzens having been investigated on 3 separate occasions for indecent exposure and yet allowed to continue as a serving officer.

These are things which in other sensitive parts of the public sector would have folk down the drive with a P45. But not in the police...
 
Last edited:
And Couzens' eventual guilty plea, after all the steps he clearly took to hide what he'd done, prepare for the act and then lie repeatedly afterwards, looks like a very cynical and manipulative attempt to get a discount on his sentence.

Not that a serving police officer would be expected to know anything about those things...
 
Last edited:
Bear in mind that is now four UK police officers (one retired) who have now been convicted of killing a woman in the past few years.

Darren McKie 2018
Keith Farquharson 2019
Timothy Brehmer 2020
Wayne Couzens 2020

Plus this from last month;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57432300

"UK police forces have received more than 800 allegations of domestic abuse against officers and staff over the last five years, BBC research has revealed."
 
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-pressure-to-overhaul-internal-investigations

Provides more detail about the appalling lack of proper vetting of Couzens and, towards the end, more detail supporting the point Nessie made in #198 about numbers of offences committed by serving police staff (as an aside I have personal knowledge of several instances of domestic/spousal abuse by serving officers and admin staff which were very badly investigated. Treating the children for PTSD, depression, anxiety and the like...).

The claim, quoted in that Guardian piece, that senior police sources regard Couzens as a one off, while maybe accurate if one takes a very limited view regarding specific sexual offending, comes over disingenuous in the extreme just after the failings of vetting over Benjamin Monk were revealed.This smacks of the "one bad apple" line used back in the '70s about corrupt officers and we know how true that one was...

There is clearly a significant problem around vetting and selection and then other problems around internal disciplinary procedures.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom