In the world of Policing, a victim has many acronyms, such as I/P, aggrieved, loser, to name but a few.
These people are always the victim of some particular crime. However, in recent times, the numbers of people, who are becoming victims through their own stupidity, are increasing, if my experiences are anything to go by.
Back in my regular pub/club drinking days, I soon spotted potential trouble and did my best to avoid it. Nowadays, it seems common for some people to aggravate others, then seem surprised when they get a beating. Hello! What did you think would happen?
I had a bloke complaining of assault to me, after he had told the drunk and upset boyfriend of a girl he fancied, that the boyfriend didn't deserve the girl. When he tried it on with her, the bloke punched him in the face.
Now, I realise that's an assault, but I think I'd rather not get a shooing, than have one with 'right' on my side!
The same goes for victims who don't secure their property or victims of internet scams. I know these are all crimes and in the ideal world, there would be no criminals out there preying on their victims. Unfortunately, we live in the real world. These things have, do and will happen again.
I think we should have two sets of crime statistics. Those where the person became a victim, through no fault of their own and the other, for the rest of the numpties!
Friday 29 February 2008
Thursday 28 February 2008
Wednesday 27 February 2008
Oh bugger...
This story is a sign of the times.
In years gone by, I have been guilty of playing a similar game. I didn't get caught (I didn't venture too far). There was a story floating around years ago, that a few Met Officers were stranded at Calais, when the weather turned bad (before the Channel Tunnel).
Back then, undoubtedly, they would have been disciplined. But it wouldn't need the IPCC to do it. I don't know the circumstances of this, but I guess that the force in question self referred the matter to the IPCC, rather than dealing with it themselves. Why? Is the result any different? I doubt it. Just another copout by the top brass.
Next time you do it boys and girls, use a plain car and make sure you have breakdown cover!
In years gone by, I have been guilty of playing a similar game. I didn't get caught (I didn't venture too far). There was a story floating around years ago, that a few Met Officers were stranded at Calais, when the weather turned bad (before the Channel Tunnel).
Back then, undoubtedly, they would have been disciplined. But it wouldn't need the IPCC to do it. I don't know the circumstances of this, but I guess that the force in question self referred the matter to the IPCC, rather than dealing with it themselves. Why? Is the result any different? I doubt it. Just another copout by the top brass.
Next time you do it boys and girls, use a plain car and make sure you have breakdown cover!
Tuesday 26 February 2008
I know I shouldn't, but.....
I remember when I joined this job, someone saying, “be prepared for the unexpected”.
It was just gone 1am on a cool Autum night, when we had a call to attend a domestic burglary. “Bastards”, I thought. It’s bad enough being burgled during the day, but at night time, it can be traumatic, to even the strongest person.
We arrived at the scene within minutes. It was a semi-detached bungalow. We had a quick check around the garden but nothing untoward. I knocked on the door. It was answered by an elderly man.
“Hello. It’s the Police Ethel” he said, whilst looking over his shoulder towards the living room.
“Well, let them in then” said a female voice.
“Hello” I said, “We’ve come about the burglary”.
“Eh”.
“Did you phone us about a burglary?” I asked.
“Yes, that’s right”.
We were shown into the living room, where an elderly lady was sat, knitting away, with a cat curled up by her feet. It had the ‘normal’ smells of an old person’s house! Nothing appeared disturbed.
“What’s been taken?” I asked.
“Clothes” replied the old man.
That’s unusual, I thought. “Where from?”
The man shuffled into the hallway and pointed to the loft hatch.
“How did they get in there?” I asked.
“I’ll show you” he replied and shuffled outside into the rear garden.
It was pitch dark outside. The old man pointed to the roof and said “There”. I shone my torch but the roof was as it should be.
“Where” I said.
“There. Between the gaps in the tiles” he said. I stifled a giggle.
We went back inside. I pretended to write something in my pocket book, desperately avoiding eye contact with my colleague.
“I know who did it” said the old man. “It was Danny Jarvis”. This was a name of a local thief.
“Oh yes” I said, “What makes you think it was him?”
“I’m psychic” he replied.
That was it. I could control myself no longer. I began to giggle. I made my excuses and went outside. I started to laugh uncontrollably, with tears streaming down my face. Not very professional, I know but I couldn’t help myself.
Fair play, to my colleague. He managed to get sufficient details from the couple, for us to make a report to Social Services.
It was just gone 1am on a cool Autum night, when we had a call to attend a domestic burglary. “Bastards”, I thought. It’s bad enough being burgled during the day, but at night time, it can be traumatic, to even the strongest person.
We arrived at the scene within minutes. It was a semi-detached bungalow. We had a quick check around the garden but nothing untoward. I knocked on the door. It was answered by an elderly man.
“Hello. It’s the Police Ethel” he said, whilst looking over his shoulder towards the living room.
“Well, let them in then” said a female voice.
“Hello” I said, “We’ve come about the burglary”.
“Eh”.
“Did you phone us about a burglary?” I asked.
“Yes, that’s right”.
We were shown into the living room, where an elderly lady was sat, knitting away, with a cat curled up by her feet. It had the ‘normal’ smells of an old person’s house! Nothing appeared disturbed.
“What’s been taken?” I asked.
“Clothes” replied the old man.
That’s unusual, I thought. “Where from?”
The man shuffled into the hallway and pointed to the loft hatch.
“How did they get in there?” I asked.
“I’ll show you” he replied and shuffled outside into the rear garden.
It was pitch dark outside. The old man pointed to the roof and said “There”. I shone my torch but the roof was as it should be.
“Where” I said.
“There. Between the gaps in the tiles” he said. I stifled a giggle.
We went back inside. I pretended to write something in my pocket book, desperately avoiding eye contact with my colleague.
“I know who did it” said the old man. “It was Danny Jarvis”. This was a name of a local thief.
“Oh yes” I said, “What makes you think it was him?”
“I’m psychic” he replied.
That was it. I could control myself no longer. I began to giggle. I made my excuses and went outside. I started to laugh uncontrollably, with tears streaming down my face. Not very professional, I know but I couldn’t help myself.
Fair play, to my colleague. He managed to get sufficient details from the couple, for us to make a report to Social Services.
Monday 25 February 2008
Court Bail
Apparently, things have got so bad in the ministry of justice, that there is little chance of being remanded in custody, even on a murder charge!
I have lost count recently, how many of our Prolific Priority Offenders have been granted bail by the courts. If these people can get bail, then there is no hope.
Some might argue, that these people should be granted freedom, but have restrictions placed upon their lives. Uhm, let me think about that for a minute. No.
The problem is, they are given bail conditions, usually not to go to certain places and to live at a certain address and remain indoors at night. The first problem, we usually encounter, is that the nasty policemen have a habit of knocking on their door's after midnight to check they are in. Despite requests to the contrary, the magistrates often fail to put a duty to answer the door, upon the suspect. Hence, there is no way of knowing if the little darling is in or out, if he doesn't want to answer his door!
Eventually, they are usually caught breaching one or all of their bail conditions and are arrested and taken back to court. Now, any sensible person would think, if they were given a chance to stay free, but chose to break the rules, then they should no longer have the chance. Yes? Er, no. The little darlings are told off for breaking the rules of the game, but given a third chance and released again with the same conditions. When they are caught the very same day breaking those conditions, that gives the court a real problem. We can't keep releasing this person, only to have him back in front of us within hours. He obviously can't abide by his conditions, so we only have one alternative. Yes, that's right, send him to prison. Well, er, not quite. You see there's no space. No, we think it best if we remove his bail conditions, because he'll only break them again, and you'll end up arresting him and bringing him back here. The best solution in the long run. Save the court time, save the Police time and help unclog the prisons!
If only it was a joke!
I have lost count recently, how many of our Prolific Priority Offenders have been granted bail by the courts. If these people can get bail, then there is no hope.
Some might argue, that these people should be granted freedom, but have restrictions placed upon their lives. Uhm, let me think about that for a minute. No.
The problem is, they are given bail conditions, usually not to go to certain places and to live at a certain address and remain indoors at night. The first problem, we usually encounter, is that the nasty policemen have a habit of knocking on their door's after midnight to check they are in. Despite requests to the contrary, the magistrates often fail to put a duty to answer the door, upon the suspect. Hence, there is no way of knowing if the little darling is in or out, if he doesn't want to answer his door!
Eventually, they are usually caught breaching one or all of their bail conditions and are arrested and taken back to court. Now, any sensible person would think, if they were given a chance to stay free, but chose to break the rules, then they should no longer have the chance. Yes? Er, no. The little darlings are told off for breaking the rules of the game, but given a third chance and released again with the same conditions. When they are caught the very same day breaking those conditions, that gives the court a real problem. We can't keep releasing this person, only to have him back in front of us within hours. He obviously can't abide by his conditions, so we only have one alternative. Yes, that's right, send him to prison. Well, er, not quite. You see there's no space. No, we think it best if we remove his bail conditions, because he'll only break them again, and you'll end up arresting him and bringing him back here. The best solution in the long run. Save the court time, save the Police time and help unclog the prisons!
If only it was a joke!
Sunday 24 February 2008
Interviews
I'll be honest, I'm not the greatest interviewer in the world. That's mainly because I only ever get to interview muppets who have committed petty crimes, that are not going to result in Crown Court Trials. I can't be bothered to use the 'peace' model. Why waste time going around the houses. A simple "did you do it?", will normally get the desired cough!
The only advantage of interviewing some of these pondlife, is that you can usually guarantee they will say something hilarious.
A couple of examples:
1)
" I need to ask you some questions about an allegation of theft".
"I aint saying nuffing til I spoke to my lawyer."
"O.K. Who is your solicitor?"
"No Comment."
" I understand you do not want to say anything, but can you tell me your solicitors name, so I can call him for you?"
"No Comment"
"No you don't understand, this is not an interview. Just tell me which solicitor you want to speak to."
"No Comment."
"Are you refusing to tell me?"
"No Comment."
It carried on like this for a while, before I got bored. I had to get the Inspector to penetrate his thick skull. He didn't have a brief and went for the duty!
2)
I was interviewing another member of MENSA one day. He was answering every question with"No Comment". I continued to ask him questions covering all the salient points, when he got bored and came out with a classic line.
"Can I just say, I will be pleading guilty, even though I'm going no comment!"
"Why are you going No Comment, then?"
"It saves time!"
If the court ever listened to the tape, they could hear me struggle to maintain my composure!
The only advantage of interviewing some of these pondlife, is that you can usually guarantee they will say something hilarious.
A couple of examples:
1)
" I need to ask you some questions about an allegation of theft".
"I aint saying nuffing til I spoke to my lawyer."
"O.K. Who is your solicitor?"
"No Comment."
" I understand you do not want to say anything, but can you tell me your solicitors name, so I can call him for you?"
"No Comment"
"No you don't understand, this is not an interview. Just tell me which solicitor you want to speak to."
"No Comment."
"Are you refusing to tell me?"
"No Comment."
It carried on like this for a while, before I got bored. I had to get the Inspector to penetrate his thick skull. He didn't have a brief and went for the duty!
2)
I was interviewing another member of MENSA one day. He was answering every question with"No Comment". I continued to ask him questions covering all the salient points, when he got bored and came out with a classic line.
"Can I just say, I will be pleading guilty, even though I'm going no comment!"
"Why are you going No Comment, then?"
"It saves time!"
If the court ever listened to the tape, they could hear me struggle to maintain my composure!
Saturday 23 February 2008
Thursday 21 February 2008
Discretion
My mind drifted back to my days in Police Training School, the other day. I remember struggling to learn all my powers. I mentioned it to the instructor. He gave me a sound piece of advice. He said, "Just remember, that the greatest power you have, is the power of discretion." He also said, that arrest should be a last resort, because you are taking someone's liberty away from them.
Oh, how times have changed. Discretion is banned word nowadays. I am not allowed to use my discretion anymore. I'll give you an example.
Your at home with your wife/husband one evening, when you have a loud argument. Nothing serious or violent, just the way your two personalities deal with disagreements. Unfortunately, a plate gets accidentally broken during the shouting. However, a neighbour can hear the shouting and smashing and phones the Police, to complain about the noise. The call taker asks the neighbour what the problem is and he tells the call taker that you two are shouting and making too much noise and he heard the sound of smashing. The call taker asks who is in the house and the neighbour says that it is a man and a woman. The call taker then creates a log, with the immortal description of 'Domestic Disturbance'. Police will be directed to attend.
Now, in the good old days, I would have attended and spoken to you and your partner. If I was satisfied that it was nothing more than an argument, I would have given words of advice and left it at that.
Nowadays, as soon as the 'D' word has been used, then all discretion goes out of the window. You see, every Police Force in the land, has a positive action policy when it comes to dealing with domestics. What that means, is, the attending officer has got to justify why they have not arrested anyone. Yes, that's right, justification for not arresting! So, I would turn up at your house, with the intention of arresting someone. You and your partner will tell me that nothing has gone on. I will see the smashed crockery on the floor. I then decide that a breach of the peace has occurred and I arrest one of you (normally the man). I will also have to ask you some very personal questions, in order to complete a risk assessment. I will then visit the neighbour to find out more from them.
You or partner will then be taken to the Police Station and put in the cells. I will research your history to see if there is sufficient evidence to put you before a court for a bind over to keep the peace. If there is (which in this case there isn't) you will be kept in custody to attend the next available court. Alternatively, you will be released from custody once we are satisfied a breach of the peace is no longer likely to occurr.
You will return home, very resentful and having no respect for the Police. I will have completed a mountain of paperwork, for fu*k all and the domestic violence statistics will have risen again.
Will I have prevented a potential domestic murder? I doubt it. Will I have made you or your partner think twice before answering the door to the Police again. Most likely.
Oh, how times have changed. Discretion is banned word nowadays. I am not allowed to use my discretion anymore. I'll give you an example.
Your at home with your wife/husband one evening, when you have a loud argument. Nothing serious or violent, just the way your two personalities deal with disagreements. Unfortunately, a plate gets accidentally broken during the shouting. However, a neighbour can hear the shouting and smashing and phones the Police, to complain about the noise. The call taker asks the neighbour what the problem is and he tells the call taker that you two are shouting and making too much noise and he heard the sound of smashing. The call taker asks who is in the house and the neighbour says that it is a man and a woman. The call taker then creates a log, with the immortal description of 'Domestic Disturbance'. Police will be directed to attend.
Now, in the good old days, I would have attended and spoken to you and your partner. If I was satisfied that it was nothing more than an argument, I would have given words of advice and left it at that.
Nowadays, as soon as the 'D' word has been used, then all discretion goes out of the window. You see, every Police Force in the land, has a positive action policy when it comes to dealing with domestics. What that means, is, the attending officer has got to justify why they have not arrested anyone. Yes, that's right, justification for not arresting! So, I would turn up at your house, with the intention of arresting someone. You and your partner will tell me that nothing has gone on. I will see the smashed crockery on the floor. I then decide that a breach of the peace has occurred and I arrest one of you (normally the man). I will also have to ask you some very personal questions, in order to complete a risk assessment. I will then visit the neighbour to find out more from them.
You or partner will then be taken to the Police Station and put in the cells. I will research your history to see if there is sufficient evidence to put you before a court for a bind over to keep the peace. If there is (which in this case there isn't) you will be kept in custody to attend the next available court. Alternatively, you will be released from custody once we are satisfied a breach of the peace is no longer likely to occurr.
You will return home, very resentful and having no respect for the Police. I will have completed a mountain of paperwork, for fu*k all and the domestic violence statistics will have risen again.
Will I have prevented a potential domestic murder? I doubt it. Will I have made you or your partner think twice before answering the door to the Police again. Most likely.
Wednesday 20 February 2008
I want to play with it!
Have you ever noticed how some officers get very excited about the Police vehicles they drive?
I have known some, to arrive for work half an hour early, just so they can get the keys to their favourite car. Some will even hide the keys or take them home, so no one else can drive their motor!
How pathetic. Are they that pedantic about their 'own' computer or printer? I doubt it. Come on people, its a piece of kit. Certainly not worth fighting over!
Monday 18 February 2008
I do a lot of work for Charidee
So the family of a sword wielding psycopath, want Police Officers prosecuted.
Well, excuse me, what the f**k did they expect? A man smashes up his house, drives the wrong way up a dual carriageway, crashes, then advances towards Police carrying three swords. The Police tried baton rounds to stop him but they didn't work. He would have been told numerous times in no uncertain terms, to put the swords down. He didn't but continued threatening the officers. They were forced to shoot him with live ammo. Now the family want the officers to face charges.
I am sorry for their loss, but what did they want the Police to do? Massage him into submission, with their tickling sticks!
Those officers deserve a commendation, not the threat of prosecution. If the bloke kept coming at them after two baton rounds, then they had to stop him with as many live rounds as was necessary, which in this case turned out to be six.
God forbid they had failed to stop him and he went on to attack an innocent member of the public.
Well, excuse me, what the f**k did they expect? A man smashes up his house, drives the wrong way up a dual carriageway, crashes, then advances towards Police carrying three swords. The Police tried baton rounds to stop him but they didn't work. He would have been told numerous times in no uncertain terms, to put the swords down. He didn't but continued threatening the officers. They were forced to shoot him with live ammo. Now the family want the officers to face charges.
I am sorry for their loss, but what did they want the Police to do? Massage him into submission, with their tickling sticks!
Those officers deserve a commendation, not the threat of prosecution. If the bloke kept coming at them after two baton rounds, then they had to stop him with as many live rounds as was necessary, which in this case turned out to be six.
God forbid they had failed to stop him and he went on to attack an innocent member of the public.
Sunday 17 February 2008
This week, I'll be mostly.....
There seems to be a new policy or crackdown announced at least once a week, nowadays.
Today, the con artist from the home office, has announced that she wants the Police to crack down on violent crime. No doubt, this will inolve lots of media interviews by Police Chiefs, followed by a couple of weekends, where overtime is used, to crew a PSU van, before it has been deemed a huge success and quietly forgotten about.
Last week, it was cracking down on underage drinkers, which consisted of getting a few neighbourhood beat officers to work evenings for a change. Filled the cupboards up with booze for the summer BBQ, though!
Next week it will be a crackdown on smoking without a licence.
Leave us alone you devious old cow. All you do, by having these silly campaigns, is grab a few headlines, then move on to the next one. It changes nothing in the long term.
I for one, shall not alter the way I do my job, one iota, no matter what Jacq the Rip Off, says!
Today, the con artist from the home office, has announced that she wants the Police to crack down on violent crime. No doubt, this will inolve lots of media interviews by Police Chiefs, followed by a couple of weekends, where overtime is used, to crew a PSU van, before it has been deemed a huge success and quietly forgotten about.
Last week, it was cracking down on underage drinkers, which consisted of getting a few neighbourhood beat officers to work evenings for a change. Filled the cupboards up with booze for the summer BBQ, though!
Next week it will be a crackdown on smoking without a licence.
Leave us alone you devious old cow. All you do, by having these silly campaigns, is grab a few headlines, then move on to the next one. It changes nothing in the long term.
I for one, shall not alter the way I do my job, one iota, no matter what Jacq the Rip Off, says!
Friday 15 February 2008
Blame
Does anyone ever take responsibility for their own actions anymore? It seems that this bloke doesn't.
Now, I can feel some sympathy with any addict, that it must be very difficult to break their addiction. However, anyone who succesfully remains addiction free, will have done so by taking responsibility for their own welfare. Yes they will need help, but they will get nowhere without addressing their own failings.
So, the only person who could have stopped this man gambling, was himself.
I wonder if he would be suing the bookmaker for allowing him to gamble, if he had won? I doubt it very much.
Whilst, I do not really like anything about the gambling industry, I do hope that this man fails. That is the only way he will ever take responsibility for his own actions, and then beat his addiction.
I bet he doesn't though!!
P.S. Can I have the £1.50 back, that I wasted on last week's Euro Lottery?
Now, I can feel some sympathy with any addict, that it must be very difficult to break their addiction. However, anyone who succesfully remains addiction free, will have done so by taking responsibility for their own welfare. Yes they will need help, but they will get nowhere without addressing their own failings.
So, the only person who could have stopped this man gambling, was himself.
I wonder if he would be suing the bookmaker for allowing him to gamble, if he had won? I doubt it very much.
Whilst, I do not really like anything about the gambling industry, I do hope that this man fails. That is the only way he will ever take responsibility for his own actions, and then beat his addiction.
I bet he doesn't though!!
P.S. Can I have the £1.50 back, that I wasted on last week's Euro Lottery?
Thursday 14 February 2008
Time to go
I bet there will be some serious arse licking in Strathclyde soon, as the supernintendos jockey for position.
No doubt Super in charge of paperclips will argue that he is more important than Super in charge of colouring pens. I think Super in charge of re-naming departments can relax, as there is no chance of his job being scrapped.
As for more officers out on the streets, is that in 'real' or 'actual' terms. I doubt anyone will notice the difference!
No doubt Super in charge of paperclips will argue that he is more important than Super in charge of colouring pens. I think Super in charge of re-naming departments can relax, as there is no chance of his job being scrapped.
As for more officers out on the streets, is that in 'real' or 'actual' terms. I doubt anyone will notice the difference!
Saturday 9 February 2008
Friday 8 February 2008
Laws to suit...
It seems that British law is not suitable for everyone in the community. This is despite the fact that our Laws have evolved over many centuries and can be found as the basis of most legal systems around the world. Dr Williams thinks that those who's beliefs differ from the norm, can elect to be dealt with under their own law.
I have therefore drawn up a list of other groups, who may wish to revert to their own laws.
1) Pikey Law: Though shalt nick anything thou wants, but thou shalt not take thy mothers name in vain.
2) Polish Law: Thou shalt drink til thou canst stand, needing thy chariot to drive home. Thou shall claim that it be alright to do so, in thy motherland.
3) Bosnian Law: Thou shall fight to the death using swords and cleavers, anyone from thine own country of birth, thou dost not like.
4) Nigerian Law: Thou shalt write to others, promising great riches, but needing investment to bring to fruition.
5)Yardy Law: Thou shalt do whatever thy likes, in recompense for no respect.
Obviously, I'm only joking, so please don't start accusing me of racism.
I have to say, that I think Dr Williams has a theoretical point. However, the reality is quite unworkable. How can you have members of a society, chosing to ignore that society's laws and expect to be treated differently. It would result in a free for all! There are many laws in the land that I don't necessarily like. However, I can understand the need for them, for the greater good of society, so I therefore abide by them.
I have therefore drawn up a list of other groups, who may wish to revert to their own laws.
1) Pikey Law: Though shalt nick anything thou wants, but thou shalt not take thy mothers name in vain.
2) Polish Law: Thou shalt drink til thou canst stand, needing thy chariot to drive home. Thou shall claim that it be alright to do so, in thy motherland.
3) Bosnian Law: Thou shall fight to the death using swords and cleavers, anyone from thine own country of birth, thou dost not like.
4) Nigerian Law: Thou shalt write to others, promising great riches, but needing investment to bring to fruition.
5)Yardy Law: Thou shalt do whatever thy likes, in recompense for no respect.
Obviously, I'm only joking, so please don't start accusing me of racism.
I have to say, that I think Dr Williams has a theoretical point. However, the reality is quite unworkable. How can you have members of a society, chosing to ignore that society's laws and expect to be treated differently. It would result in a free for all! There are many laws in the land that I don't necessarily like. However, I can understand the need for them, for the greater good of society, so I therefore abide by them.
Thursday 7 February 2008
Utter Drivel part one...
I am getting increasingly frustrated with the utter nonsense, that gets reported to us nowadays. I think we have developed a generation of immature, pathetic individuals, who want someone else, to sort out all of life's little problems, for them. Now, I expect the underclass to call about rubbish, but not intelligent upper middle class people!
I had a complaint to investigate about abusive messages. When I phoned the informant I was staggered. Apparently, the callers 14 year old daughter goes to a private school. She has recently fallen out with her best friend. Both girls have 'My Space' pages on the internet and the other girl had apparently called the informants daughter an "evil bitch" and "Slag", on her site.
Is that it? Am I hearing right? What a fu*king load of old bollox. I'm sorry. But isn't that what teenage girls do? They fall out with each other over silly things, then in no time at all, are best friends again.
The trouble was, our wonderful civilian crime desk, had recorded it as malicious communications and I would have to conduct an investigation into it!
Fortunately, using my experienced old head, I managed to cuff the job, without putting pen to paper. I did however, have to type up the investigation on the computer to show that it was investigated thoroughly. What a complete waste of time.
When will today's generation learn to sort their own lives out, insteading of expecting someone else to do it for them?
I had a complaint to investigate about abusive messages. When I phoned the informant I was staggered. Apparently, the callers 14 year old daughter goes to a private school. She has recently fallen out with her best friend. Both girls have 'My Space' pages on the internet and the other girl had apparently called the informants daughter an "evil bitch" and "Slag", on her site.
Is that it? Am I hearing right? What a fu*king load of old bollox. I'm sorry. But isn't that what teenage girls do? They fall out with each other over silly things, then in no time at all, are best friends again.
The trouble was, our wonderful civilian crime desk, had recorded it as malicious communications and I would have to conduct an investigation into it!
Fortunately, using my experienced old head, I managed to cuff the job, without putting pen to paper. I did however, have to type up the investigation on the computer to show that it was investigated thoroughly. What a complete waste of time.
When will today's generation learn to sort their own lives out, insteading of expecting someone else to do it for them?
Wednesday 6 February 2008
Stating the Bleeding Obvious...
I wish I was a retired Chief Constable. I could earn a few quid touring the country, chatting to my mates, then produce a report, which any copper in the land could have written.
Everyone knows there's too much bureaucracy in the Police Service. The big question needs to be, "What are we going to do about it?"
Over the years, many departments, that feed off bureaucracy, have sprung up. (Best Value, Performance Monitoring, Corporate Development, to name but a few!) Are we going to disband these departments? I very much doubt it! There are too many empire builders within the Police Service, for change to happen overnight. Just look at the Police Almanac for any force and see how many officers of Inspector and above, there are at each HQ. What do all these people do? Obviously there is the Chief Super in charge of counting paperclips and Chief Inspector for colouring in pie charts. But what about the rest of them? No doubt, each and everyone of them, will seek to justify their role, but come on, who are they trying to kid?
If this governemet seriously want to reduce bureaucracy for the bobby on the beat, then they need to start at the top. Until, these bean counters are made redundant, nothing is going to change very much. The Tories are no better, because they want to bring in performance related pay. What do they think that will achieve? More bureaucracy and people who know how to play the system.
The only thing that will change as a result of this report, is the colour or name, of the forms!
Everyone knows there's too much bureaucracy in the Police Service. The big question needs to be, "What are we going to do about it?"
Over the years, many departments, that feed off bureaucracy, have sprung up. (Best Value, Performance Monitoring, Corporate Development, to name but a few!) Are we going to disband these departments? I very much doubt it! There are too many empire builders within the Police Service, for change to happen overnight. Just look at the Police Almanac for any force and see how many officers of Inspector and above, there are at each HQ. What do all these people do? Obviously there is the Chief Super in charge of counting paperclips and Chief Inspector for colouring in pie charts. But what about the rest of them? No doubt, each and everyone of them, will seek to justify their role, but come on, who are they trying to kid?
If this governemet seriously want to reduce bureaucracy for the bobby on the beat, then they need to start at the top. Until, these bean counters are made redundant, nothing is going to change very much. The Tories are no better, because they want to bring in performance related pay. What do they think that will achieve? More bureaucracy and people who know how to play the system.
The only thing that will change as a result of this report, is the colour or name, of the forms!
Tuesday 5 February 2008
Emperors New Clothes
I was watching a TV programme last night, about the war in Afghanistan. Part of it showed a Major briefing his troops. This bloke, finished his briefing with, "If we get into a contact with the enemy, we're going to put them in a headlock and kick their arse!" Immediately, this raised a chuckle from his troops, and you could see instantly, the respect they had for their boss.
Compare that with a briefing in the modern day Police Service. " Good morning, non gender specific people. Today, we are implementing Operation Safer Neighbourhood. You will be required to engage with our stakeholder partners, to deliver a programme of crime awareness workshops, to the community. It is requisite that you adopt the strategic ambition in your approach. Do not be diverted from delivering the citizen focus message,. Engage those members of the community that are vulnerable or from a special population group. If you do encounter recidivists, then you are empowered to be tactically aware and offer a zero tolerance approach to their activities."
What the fu*k is all that about? Just a load of nonesense and management speak. The attitude seems to be, if we use big words, we'll look more intelligent. Actually, no you wont. The intelligent thing to do, is gauge your audience. If you use big words and management bollox to your workers, the vast majority will switch off and think your a to55er.
Isn't it about time that some of our 'leaders' were brave enough to use their own personality, rather then follow the crowd. The chances are, you will gain far more respect from the staff who produce your results and where might that lead...?
Go on be brave, tell the emperor he has no clothes on!
Compare that with a briefing in the modern day Police Service. " Good morning, non gender specific people. Today, we are implementing Operation Safer Neighbourhood. You will be required to engage with our stakeholder partners, to deliver a programme of crime awareness workshops, to the community. It is requisite that you adopt the strategic ambition in your approach. Do not be diverted from delivering the citizen focus message,. Engage those members of the community that are vulnerable or from a special population group. If you do encounter recidivists, then you are empowered to be tactically aware and offer a zero tolerance approach to their activities."
What the fu*k is all that about? Just a load of nonesense and management speak. The attitude seems to be, if we use big words, we'll look more intelligent. Actually, no you wont. The intelligent thing to do, is gauge your audience. If you use big words and management bollox to your workers, the vast majority will switch off and think your a to55er.
Isn't it about time that some of our 'leaders' were brave enough to use their own personality, rather then follow the crowd. The chances are, you will gain far more respect from the staff who produce your results and where might that lead...?
Go on be brave, tell the emperor he has no clothes on!
Monday 4 February 2008
Underclass Quiz
1) Tyler, your 9 year old son, has just returned home from school, with a cut lip. He tells you that Jordan, his 10 year old friend, elbowed him in the face, whilst they were mucking about in class. Do you,
(a) Put an ice pack on it and tell him to be more careful next time, or
(b) Charge round to Jordan’s house, have a fight with his mum, then phone the Police to say that your son has been beaten up at School, complain that they aint doing nuffing about it, so you want Jordan done.
2) Your car has been vandalised overnight and you report the matter to the Police. Eventually, an officer arrives to take a statement from you. Do you:-
(a) Send the kids out of the room, make the officer a nice cup of tea and apologise for causing him more paperwork; or
(b) Get your 3 year old to answer the door in his nappy, then say, “Sorry about the mess, we’re decorating”, whilst chucking last night’s dirty dinner plates behind the sofa. Then, whilst the officer is trying to write, continue to watch Trisha and take no notice of the kid, who is now wiping his sticky fingers all over the officer’s uniform.
3) You are watching a film on your surround sound, when a neighbour knocks on the door, asking you to turn it down a bit, because he’s on an early shift the next day. Do you:-
(a) Apologise profusely, and turn the surround sound down, remembering to make sure the neighbour is out, the next time you crank it up; or
(b) Do you tell him to “F**K OFF”, then slam the door in his face and turn the volume up a bit. Then, when he knocks again, rush outside, punch him in the face and run back indoors, before he can retaliate.
4) Your fridge finally packs up and is not economical to repair. Do you,
(a) Take it the local recycling centre and pay the environmental disposal charge, or,
(b) Leave it in the garden until its leaking and gone rusty. Then, load it onto your mate’s flatbed, then after dark, dump it at the nearest beauty spot,.
5) You buy a cheap runaround advertised in the local paper. Do you:-
(a) Make sure it is roadworthy and fully taxed and insured, before you take it anywhere near a road; or
(b) Assume that because you occasionally wash cars for your sister’s, best friend’s, aunties, cousin, that you must be covered on his trader’s policy. As far as the tax is concerned, you have “sent off for it”!
6) You over did it at Christmas and piled a few pounds on. Do you:-
(a) Try to lose some weight, but in the meantime disguise your excess weight with sensible clothing; or
(b) Drink Slim Fast for a day, then continue to parade around town in your ski pants and cut off top, thereby flaunting your fat arse and stretch marks, to all and sundry.
7) It’s your partner’s birthday and you decide to treat her/him. Do you:-
(a) Book a table at a nice restaurant and have a romantic evening stroll under the moonlit sky; or
(b) Take them to Chicago Rock for a burger, but make sure you get there in time for happy hour. After you’ve got bladdered, you see someone look at your partner and decide to ‘teach them a lesson’ by re-arranging their face with your fists and boots. Then, have a fight with the pigs and bouncers, and spend the night in the cells, leaving your partner to find their own way home.
8) Your local council has entered your town into the ‘Best Kept Town’ competition. Do you:-
(a) Do your bit by planting a few more flowers in your front garden and generally keep the place looking tidy; or
(b) Keep letting your pitbull crap in the kiddies play park. Then next time you’re out on the piss in town with your mates, pull all the flowers out of their beds, kick the bins over and snap all the hanging baskets from their mountings, before smashing all your empty WKD bottles on the pavement.
9) You are currently out of work. Do you:-
(a) Write to all the local employers asking for a job and in the meantime do a little voluntary work, to keep you active; or
(b) Stay in bed until midday, then slope down the DHSS for your benefits, before blowing half of it in the bookies and the other half on fags and booze. Then, when you’ve run out of money, claim that your Giro has been stolen, in a pathetic attempt to get more.
10) Your sat at home when there is a knock at the door. A scruffy looking bloke says that he has got a HD 42” Plasma TV in his van, that’s yours for £50. Do you:-
(a) Say ‘no thanks’ and shut the door, before phoning the police to inform them of the dodgy bloke; or
(b) Go outside, buy the telly off him for cash. Then, after he has legged it, discover that it doesn’t have anything in it except cement, and have the audacity to phone the Police to complain about being conned.
(a) Put an ice pack on it and tell him to be more careful next time, or
(b) Charge round to Jordan’s house, have a fight with his mum, then phone the Police to say that your son has been beaten up at School, complain that they aint doing nuffing about it, so you want Jordan done.
2) Your car has been vandalised overnight and you report the matter to the Police. Eventually, an officer arrives to take a statement from you. Do you:-
(a) Send the kids out of the room, make the officer a nice cup of tea and apologise for causing him more paperwork; or
(b) Get your 3 year old to answer the door in his nappy, then say, “Sorry about the mess, we’re decorating”, whilst chucking last night’s dirty dinner plates behind the sofa. Then, whilst the officer is trying to write, continue to watch Trisha and take no notice of the kid, who is now wiping his sticky fingers all over the officer’s uniform.
3) You are watching a film on your surround sound, when a neighbour knocks on the door, asking you to turn it down a bit, because he’s on an early shift the next day. Do you:-
(a) Apologise profusely, and turn the surround sound down, remembering to make sure the neighbour is out, the next time you crank it up; or
(b) Do you tell him to “F**K OFF”, then slam the door in his face and turn the volume up a bit. Then, when he knocks again, rush outside, punch him in the face and run back indoors, before he can retaliate.
4) Your fridge finally packs up and is not economical to repair. Do you,
(a) Take it the local recycling centre and pay the environmental disposal charge, or,
(b) Leave it in the garden until its leaking and gone rusty. Then, load it onto your mate’s flatbed, then after dark, dump it at the nearest beauty spot,.
5) You buy a cheap runaround advertised in the local paper. Do you:-
(a) Make sure it is roadworthy and fully taxed and insured, before you take it anywhere near a road; or
(b) Assume that because you occasionally wash cars for your sister’s, best friend’s, aunties, cousin, that you must be covered on his trader’s policy. As far as the tax is concerned, you have “sent off for it”!
6) You over did it at Christmas and piled a few pounds on. Do you:-
(a) Try to lose some weight, but in the meantime disguise your excess weight with sensible clothing; or
(b) Drink Slim Fast for a day, then continue to parade around town in your ski pants and cut off top, thereby flaunting your fat arse and stretch marks, to all and sundry.
7) It’s your partner’s birthday and you decide to treat her/him. Do you:-
(a) Book a table at a nice restaurant and have a romantic evening stroll under the moonlit sky; or
(b) Take them to Chicago Rock for a burger, but make sure you get there in time for happy hour. After you’ve got bladdered, you see someone look at your partner and decide to ‘teach them a lesson’ by re-arranging their face with your fists and boots. Then, have a fight with the pigs and bouncers, and spend the night in the cells, leaving your partner to find their own way home.
8) Your local council has entered your town into the ‘Best Kept Town’ competition. Do you:-
(a) Do your bit by planting a few more flowers in your front garden and generally keep the place looking tidy; or
(b) Keep letting your pitbull crap in the kiddies play park. Then next time you’re out on the piss in town with your mates, pull all the flowers out of their beds, kick the bins over and snap all the hanging baskets from their mountings, before smashing all your empty WKD bottles on the pavement.
9) You are currently out of work. Do you:-
(a) Write to all the local employers asking for a job and in the meantime do a little voluntary work, to keep you active; or
(b) Stay in bed until midday, then slope down the DHSS for your benefits, before blowing half of it in the bookies and the other half on fags and booze. Then, when you’ve run out of money, claim that your Giro has been stolen, in a pathetic attempt to get more.
10) Your sat at home when there is a knock at the door. A scruffy looking bloke says that he has got a HD 42” Plasma TV in his van, that’s yours for £50. Do you:-
(a) Say ‘no thanks’ and shut the door, before phoning the police to inform them of the dodgy bloke; or
(b) Go outside, buy the telly off him for cash. Then, after he has legged it, discover that it doesn’t have anything in it except cement, and have the audacity to phone the Police to complain about being conned.
Sunday 3 February 2008
Fraud
All the recent hoohah about MP's employing family members, has made me think.
I have a lot of paperwork, whenever I arrest someone. Perhaps I could explain to the bosses that I would be far more proactive, if I could get my wife to do all my paperwork? I could pay her about £25k, which obviuosly I would claim back.
As I explained in my previous post, the chances of any of my arrestees, ending up in court is very slim. Therefore, my wife wouldn't have to do much paperwork, just staple a few MG forms together and submit it for a detection. If there was the odd case that slipped through the net and ended up in court, I could do the paperwork myself! That way, we're both in the money and the job thinks it's getting more detections.
Oh, but that is deception I hear you say. Well, yes it is actually. I wonder exactly what work Derek Conway's sons did for him? I bet it wasn't anything too taxing. Research, into earning money for doing nothing, I would suggest! You'd think Mr Conway would know better.
It makes you wonder, who are the mugs here?
I have a lot of paperwork, whenever I arrest someone. Perhaps I could explain to the bosses that I would be far more proactive, if I could get my wife to do all my paperwork? I could pay her about £25k, which obviuosly I would claim back.
As I explained in my previous post, the chances of any of my arrestees, ending up in court is very slim. Therefore, my wife wouldn't have to do much paperwork, just staple a few MG forms together and submit it for a detection. If there was the odd case that slipped through the net and ended up in court, I could do the paperwork myself! That way, we're both in the money and the job thinks it's getting more detections.
Oh, but that is deception I hear you say. Well, yes it is actually. I wonder exactly what work Derek Conway's sons did for him? I bet it wasn't anything too taxing. Research, into earning money for doing nothing, I would suggest! You'd think Mr Conway would know better.
It makes you wonder, who are the mugs here?
Saturday 2 February 2008
Court Warnings
Nowadays, it's quite rare to get a witness summons to appear at court. Current CPS and ultimately government thinking, seems to be that court trials are too much hassle. The onus is definately on guilty pleas and offenders are rewarded for doing so. However, every now and then, there comes an incident that is so serious, that the offender must be brought to justice (I mean proper justice, not some fixed penalty ticket that he wont pay!)
Before we get to that stage, the Police must have prepared a water tight case. The evidence must have past the 'threshold' test, whatever that is! It must then be presented to a 'grown up', known as the gatekeeper. If the gatekeeper thinks the evidence is good enough, he allows the officer to speak to the 'very grown up' CPS Lawyer. The CPS person, will do their utmost to avoid taking the job to court, by sending the file back with a lot of silly questions, that if they had read the thing properly in the first place, they would have found the answer to themselves! Once you have made it simple and bleeding obvious and return the file to them, then some tough decisions will have to be made. Is it in the public interest to go to court? Well, usually yes it is. So the long process of arranging a trial begins.
Now, despite the fact that the Police have to hand the completed file to CPS asap, you can't expect them to read the thing thoroughly. Hence, every single person who is mentioned on the file, will be warned to attend court for the trial. In some cases this can be dozens of people. I can guarantee that the court date will be arranged, when I am on a rest day (with plenty of advanced warning, so that I can't claim overtime!)
As a Police officer, quite often, there is not a lot of evidence I can give. It is usually a case of, "Got sent to a shoplifter. Went to the store, security told me a bloke knicked a packet of biscuits. I then arrested him and took him back to the station. I interviewed him and he went no comment". Now, nothing very contentious there. However, I will still attend court and hang around for a bit, until the defence and CPS get their heads together and decided that they will accept my evidence as it is written and no need for cross examination.
Why couldn't that decision have been made weeks/months ago. I've no doubt there is a bit of brinkmanship going on, but this is ridiculous. I am a person. I have a private life. You don't see too many court cases in the evening and at weekends, do you? Fine, if I have to actually give evidence, then I don't mind. However, I can't remember the last time I did!
Before we get to that stage, the Police must have prepared a water tight case. The evidence must have past the 'threshold' test, whatever that is! It must then be presented to a 'grown up', known as the gatekeeper. If the gatekeeper thinks the evidence is good enough, he allows the officer to speak to the 'very grown up' CPS Lawyer. The CPS person, will do their utmost to avoid taking the job to court, by sending the file back with a lot of silly questions, that if they had read the thing properly in the first place, they would have found the answer to themselves! Once you have made it simple and bleeding obvious and return the file to them, then some tough decisions will have to be made. Is it in the public interest to go to court? Well, usually yes it is. So the long process of arranging a trial begins.
Now, despite the fact that the Police have to hand the completed file to CPS asap, you can't expect them to read the thing thoroughly. Hence, every single person who is mentioned on the file, will be warned to attend court for the trial. In some cases this can be dozens of people. I can guarantee that the court date will be arranged, when I am on a rest day (with plenty of advanced warning, so that I can't claim overtime!)
As a Police officer, quite often, there is not a lot of evidence I can give. It is usually a case of, "Got sent to a shoplifter. Went to the store, security told me a bloke knicked a packet of biscuits. I then arrested him and took him back to the station. I interviewed him and he went no comment". Now, nothing very contentious there. However, I will still attend court and hang around for a bit, until the defence and CPS get their heads together and decided that they will accept my evidence as it is written and no need for cross examination.
Why couldn't that decision have been made weeks/months ago. I've no doubt there is a bit of brinkmanship going on, but this is ridiculous. I am a person. I have a private life. You don't see too many court cases in the evening and at weekends, do you? Fine, if I have to actually give evidence, then I don't mind. However, I can't remember the last time I did!
Friday 1 February 2008
Are we worth the money?
All the recent shenanigans about Police Pay and this government’s back track on arbitration, have made me start to wonder. Is there something more sinister going on?
I remember going to a Police Training School for 14 solid weeks of law exams and physical beastings. By the time I left, I could quote most of the major Acts and Statutes that a Police Officer will use on a day to day basis. One of the hardest things to get your head around, was arrestable offences and offences with a power of arrest! We not only needed to know if something was an offence, but also if we were able to arrest a person for that offence or deal with it by way of report. Since the Serious and Organised Crime Act came into being, all we need to know now is, is something an offence.
But then, do we need to even know that? In years gone by, I would get sent to an incident and would have to use my knowledge of the law, to decide if an offence had been committed and if so, what offence. I would then have to submit the necessary crime report. Nowadays, some civvy, using a drop down menu on his/her computer screen, will have already decided what crime has occurred before I attend.
Then when I do attend, there will be a policy dictating, what I have to do. I don’t have to decide if I need to arrest anyone, because policy will tell me!
So, is this government, looking at de-skilling me, so that they don’t have to pay me so much. I do wonder sometimes!
I remember going to a Police Training School for 14 solid weeks of law exams and physical beastings. By the time I left, I could quote most of the major Acts and Statutes that a Police Officer will use on a day to day basis. One of the hardest things to get your head around, was arrestable offences and offences with a power of arrest! We not only needed to know if something was an offence, but also if we were able to arrest a person for that offence or deal with it by way of report. Since the Serious and Organised Crime Act came into being, all we need to know now is, is something an offence.
But then, do we need to even know that? In years gone by, I would get sent to an incident and would have to use my knowledge of the law, to decide if an offence had been committed and if so, what offence. I would then have to submit the necessary crime report. Nowadays, some civvy, using a drop down menu on his/her computer screen, will have already decided what crime has occurred before I attend.
Then when I do attend, there will be a policy dictating, what I have to do. I don’t have to decide if I need to arrest anyone, because policy will tell me!
So, is this government, looking at de-skilling me, so that they don’t have to pay me so much. I do wonder sometimes!
The most annoying TV programme ever...
Have you noticed how television programmes are becoming more and more dumbed down recently? Is it just me, or are TV producers aiming their programmes at goldfish? Take ‘Homes Under the Hammer’ for instance.
It’s a bit sad, but being a shift worker, I sometimes watch daytime TV. The basic idea of this programme, is that film crews visit house auctions, get buyers to appear on TV, then film their houses. The buyer tells them what he/she intends to do, to improve the property, then the film crew return at a later date, to see how they have got on.
If only that was it. As someone who likes a bit of property developing (watching more than doing!), this show on the face of it sounds quite appealing.
So, what’s wrong with it? Well, for starters, the film crew return to the premises about 6 weeks after the place was originally filmed, and needless to say nothing has been finished. What’s the point of that? I’m watching your programme, because I wanted to see what they had done to improve the place, not so I can see a pile of rubble and a few sketch drawings! So, here’s a tip. How about arranging for the owners to phone you, when it is finished?
As if that wasn’t bad enough, the presenters then get some local Estate Agents to view the property and give it a valuation. What is the point of that, if it is only half finished? It’s a bit like me showing a pile of nuts, bolts and sheet metal to a race engineer and him saying to me “Well, if you build it like you should, it will be the fastest car ever known”. Sheer pointless fortune telling!
But worst of all and the most annoying part of this programme, is the new infatuation of programme makers to forecast and review. “Coming up on today’s show...”. Get on with it! “In a moment we’ll be going back to see how Fred Bloggs got on. He bought a 3 bed semi-detached house in Blackpool.” I know he did, I’ve just watched him doing it 5 minutes ago! “Coming up, we visit Stoke to see how Vera Smalltush got on with her 2 bed terraced house.” I know you will, because you told me that 5 minutes ago! What do you think I am, a f**king goldfish? I haven’t got alzheimers, you know!
Coming up. Listen mate, the only thing that will be coming up in a minute, will be last night’s dinner. Just get on with it. Your half hour programme, is only about 20 minutes long in reality, if you take away all the repetition!
It’s a bit sad, but being a shift worker, I sometimes watch daytime TV. The basic idea of this programme, is that film crews visit house auctions, get buyers to appear on TV, then film their houses. The buyer tells them what he/she intends to do, to improve the property, then the film crew return at a later date, to see how they have got on.
If only that was it. As someone who likes a bit of property developing (watching more than doing!), this show on the face of it sounds quite appealing.
So, what’s wrong with it? Well, for starters, the film crew return to the premises about 6 weeks after the place was originally filmed, and needless to say nothing has been finished. What’s the point of that? I’m watching your programme, because I wanted to see what they had done to improve the place, not so I can see a pile of rubble and a few sketch drawings! So, here’s a tip. How about arranging for the owners to phone you, when it is finished?
As if that wasn’t bad enough, the presenters then get some local Estate Agents to view the property and give it a valuation. What is the point of that, if it is only half finished? It’s a bit like me showing a pile of nuts, bolts and sheet metal to a race engineer and him saying to me “Well, if you build it like you should, it will be the fastest car ever known”. Sheer pointless fortune telling!
But worst of all and the most annoying part of this programme, is the new infatuation of programme makers to forecast and review. “Coming up on today’s show...”. Get on with it! “In a moment we’ll be going back to see how Fred Bloggs got on. He bought a 3 bed semi-detached house in Blackpool.” I know he did, I’ve just watched him doing it 5 minutes ago! “Coming up, we visit Stoke to see how Vera Smalltush got on with her 2 bed terraced house.” I know you will, because you told me that 5 minutes ago! What do you think I am, a f**king goldfish? I haven’t got alzheimers, you know!
Coming up. Listen mate, the only thing that will be coming up in a minute, will be last night’s dinner. Just get on with it. Your half hour programme, is only about 20 minutes long in reality, if you take away all the repetition!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
&h=260&w=200&sz=11&hl=en&start=2&sig2=ywAQSBEcwosJarKe3U8LhQ&tbnid=8IEFyLkDVjwbdM:&tbnh=112&tbnw=86&ei=JNmlR-iqFJugxAHHp-3pAg&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dderek%2Bconway%2Bthe%2Bbill%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff){kind=link}