Theresa May.

tim_wand

Whilst I agree no union should be publicly funded or assisted....

Is it just me or does anyone else find it ironic that Theresa May claims that the Police Federation has broken the public's trust.

Think she needs to look a little bit closer to home on that one!!! ( if she can work out which one her and her colleagues are claiming for this week!)

Mikey23

Bit eye watering... You've all been very naughty

brianonyx

TV news reported that privately ministers from all parties have wanted to but not been brave enough to.

Suspect that the relationship between the Tories and the Police was changed by the Damian Green affair.

Matthewfalle

Or the fact that the Pigs are the most inwardly corrupt, racist, homophobic self serving organisation since, maybe, the Khmer Rouge?

Not that every investigation into the actions of the Pigs has resulted in numerous disciplinary charges and sackings (including a few custodial sentences). Plebgate, anybody?

Nah ...............................................................................

Colinthecop

Matthewfalle wrote:

Or the fact that the Pigs are the most inwardly corrupt, racist, homophobic self serving organisation since, maybe, the Khmer Rouge?

I like sweeping statements, it tells you a lot about someone.... 8)

ballysmate

Matthewfalle wrote:

Or the fact that the Pigs are the most inwardly corrupt, racist, homophobic self serving organisation since, maybe, the Khmer Rouge?

Not that every investigation into the actions of the Pigs has resulted in numerous disciplinary charges and sackings (including a few custodial sentences). Plebgate, anybody?

Nah ...............................................................................

Will have to be more subtle than that.

Matthewfalle

Colinthecop wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

Or the fact that the Pigs are the most inwardly corrupt, racist, homophobic self serving organisation since, maybe, the Khmer Rouge?

I like sweeping statements, it tells you a lot about someone.... 8)

I agree completely - now what was the one I was looking for: oh yes: "I can topple the Tory government".

Colinthecop

So you use the statment of one sent in a private text to a friend as evidence to generalise the opinions of 140,000 others...?

Are you not very bright or do you just read the Daily Mail...?

:roll:

tim_wand

Matthewfalle wrote:

Colinthecop wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

Or the fact that the Pigs are the most inwardly corrupt, racist, homophobic self serving organisation since, maybe, the ?TORY GOVERNMENT

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Corrected that for you!

Matthewfalle

Colinthecop wrote:

So you use the statment of one sent in a private text to a friend as evidence to generalise the opinions of 140,000 others...?

Are you not very bright or do you just read the Daily Mail...?

:roll:

1. Yes. It seemed to work in a court of Law, so why not here. Anyway. lets say 139,997 as at least three of them have gone down in this case alone for perverting the course of justice - which isn't upholding the course of justice meant to be their sole raison d'etre? Shurely shome mishtake here.

2. No. Telegraph I am afraid. And there is no need to be rude. This is meant to be a healthy debate.

Hendon, we have a problem. We're meant to ne here to serve the people but the people seem to have lost all respect for us ......

ballysmate

Theresa May?
I knew her mate, Sally who did. Much more fun.

tim_wand

Ending Comment of May's speech was " time to show the public that you get it".

Okay so when is that time for all the corrupt Politicians out there? More than 3 at last count I m sure!

My Local MP Patrick Mercer has just resigned after being found taking payments to lobby.
Maria Miller paid her parents mortgage interest with tax payers money!

That's 2 in the last 2 months without recalling all the ones exposed by the telegraph.

Lets face it Governments don't like Unions and will do anything they can to destroy them.

nathancom

Colinthecop wrote:

So you use the statment of one sent in a private text to a friend as evidence to generalise the opinions of 140,000 others...?

Are you not very bright or do you just read the Daily Mail...?

:roll:

Ever heard of Daniel Morgan. You probably have since you worked in the Met.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Morgan_(private_investigator)

Colinthecop

Matthewfalle wrote:

1. Yes. It seemed to work in a court of Law, so why not here. Anyway. lets say 139,997 as at least three of them have gone down in this case alone for perverting the course of justice

And here's what the last one was sacked for -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27503271


Incase you missed it - she was sacked for 'someone close to her contacting the press' and 'receiving an E mail'.

Now last time I checked, it's hard to control the actions of 'others' and even harder to control what E mails come in to your inbox.

But it would seem that in an attempt by certain section within the Police to court favour with the Government, then people must be punished and be seen to be found guilty of whatever and punished.

Fair...? It would seem you think so, but personally I have my doubts. It's easy for the press to report that X number of officers have been sacked as a result of plebgate. Some blindly quote that figure in their arguments. The smarter one would look at the facts behind that number....

But anyways, back to Mays speech. Yes the Police Federation have many failing, I says lets get rid of them, afterall they are there due to an act of parliment. The alternative...? Let us join a trade union. Admitedly there are obvious flaws with that alternative.

Colinthecop

nathancom wrote:

Ever heard of Daniel Morgan. You probably have since you worked in the Met.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Morgan_(private_investigator)

Yes, the unsolved 1987 murder. The Met has a lot of unsolved murders. Some more interesting than others.

How many Cops who were working in 1987 are still working now..? infact I work with Cops who weren't even born then.

I joined the Police in 87, things were very different then. Using examples that old to try and beat current officers with is poor, very poor.

nathancom

Colinthecop wrote:

nathancom wrote:

Ever heard of Daniel Morgan. You probably have since you worked in the Met.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Morgan_(private_investigator)

Yes, the unsolved 1987 murder. The Met has a lot of unsolved murders. Some more interesting than others.

How many Cops who were working in 1987 are still working now..? infact I work with Cops who weren't even born then.

I joined the Police in 87, things were very different then. Using examples that old to try and beat current officers with is poor, very poor.

Unsolved murder of a man investigating Police corruption, with the lead detective becoming the main suspect's partner in a private agency shortly after and letting him go home to wash and change on the night of the murder. Not just any old murder...

Funny how the Police are never at fault in your eyes.

Colinthecop

nathancom wrote:

Funny how the Police are never at fault in your eyes.

I say again, things were very different back then... Policing today is a world apart from what it used to be.

And again, using an example of something that is almost 30 years old is somewhat poor.

nathancom

Colinthecop wrote:

nathancom wrote:

Funny how the Police are never at fault in your eyes.

I say again, things were very different back then... Policing today is a world apart from what it used to be.

And again, using an example of something that is almost 30 years old is somewhat poor.

Not when the main suspect Jonathan Rees was also involved in corrupt payments to police as part of the phone hacking scandal as well.

slowmart

Its amazing some of the bollocks spouted on here.

slowmart

Matthewfalle wrote:

Colinthecop wrote:

2. No. Telegraph I am afraid. And there is no need to be rude. This is meant to be a healthy debate.

Do you lips move when you read?

tim_wand

I was hoping for Prince Charles' Opinion on this but I think the Mods have banned him!!

Matthewfalle

Slowmart wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

Colinthecop wrote:

2. No. Telegraph I am afraid. And there is no need to be rude. This is meant to be a healthy debate.

Do you lips move when you read?

Excellent.

Again, no need to be rude - this is meant to be a healthy debate.

Colinthecop

Matthewfalle wrote:

Again, no need to be rude - this is meant to be a healthy debate.

Did you forget about your first post in this thread...?

Unless you are 12 years old you'd realise 'healthy debate' is not normally a product of name calling. :roll:

Actually, now I think about it, the last person I heard using the word 'pigs' was about 12. When they shouted it from the end of the street before running off, I guess thinking it would make them look cool and impress their fellow 12 year olds.

Do you recognise yourself in that description Matthew...?

Matthewfalle

Rudeness and objectivity Colin, rudeness and objectivity. Objectivity is the thing that the Feds seem to have lost in their sense of self purpose.

Why did the 12 year olds shout that? Perhaps you can tell us.

If you look at the way policing has changed, its not really much for the better and you can't really say that the policing of the '70s and '80s was that great (lets not mention the Birmingham 6, the Cardiff 5 and the West Midlands Crime Squad to name but three shall we).

It's unfortunately a force that is meant to be set up to serve the population but seem to have more interest in serving themselves.

I've been involved in writing bits concerning the uniformed services for several years and have found the following:

Armed Forces: yeah, people like and respect them.
Ambulance: lots of respect, people will do anything for them, generally not too embroiled in massive scandals.
Fire Brigade: lots of respect, people will do anything for them, generally not too embroiled in massive scandals
Feds: Err.....................

Says something doesn't it?

I think your motley crew need to take a long hard look at themselves and see how./why they have lost respect and hope they can try and regain it: constant scandals are not assisting you and neither is being defensive all the time.

Unfortunately the scandals are everywhere - lets not mention the matters surrounding the Lawrence murder investigation - perhaps you can tell us why your colleagues keep on doing this?

After all, its widespread across all forces - not just one bad apple.

Discuss please.

bompington

Matthewfalle wrote:

Rudeness and objectivity Colin, rudeness and objectivity. Objectivity is the thing that the Feds seem to have lost in their sense of self purpose.

Why did the 12 year olds shout that? Perhaps you can tell us. I'm absolutely sure it's because they've researched policing scandals and concluded that shouting rude words at policemen is the best way to effect meaningful change to the corrupt system

If you look at the way policing has changed, its not really much for the better and you can't really say that the policing of the '70s and '80s was that great (lets not mention the Birmingham 6, the Cardiff 5 and the West Midlands Crime Squad to name but three shall we). So your evidence that policing hasn't changed for the better is...? Perhaps if things have got worse since the 80s then you might have chosen to quote more recent examples of egregious Police misbehaviour?

It's unfortunately a force that is meant to be set up to serve the population but seem to have more interest in serving themselves. Of course no other group in society does this.

I've been involved in writing bits concerning the uniformed services for several years I take it this means you are a completely unbiased observer then and have found the following:

Armed Forces: yeah, people like and respect them.
Ambulance: lots of respect, people will do anything for them, generally not too embroiled in massive scandals.
Fire Brigade: lots of respect, people will do anything for them, generally not too embroiled in massive scandals
Feds: Err..................... Just possibly because the other uniformed services aren't ever called on to do anything that antagonises people?

Says something doesn't it? Yes, but not so completely what you think it says

I think your motley crew need to take a long hard look at themselves and see how./why they have lost respect and hope they can try and regain it: constant scandals are not assisting you and neither is being defensive all the time. There is some truth in this though
Unfortunately the scandals are everywhere - lets not mention the matters surrounding the Lawrence murder investigation - perhaps you can tell us why your colleagues keep on doing this?

After all, its widespread across all forces Maybe it is. How widespread? Stats? Evidence? - not just one bad apple.

Discuss please.

OK, discussed.

napoleond

Unfortunately these days I have to spend as much time covering my own back as other people's. Mainly due to the actions of a TINY minority of officers. This may well come across as self serving behaviour. I have a mortgage and bills to pay and a family to support.

Matthewfalle

bompington wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

Rudeness and objectivity Colin, rudeness and objectivity. Objectivity is the thing that the Feds seem to have lost in their sense of self purpose.

Why did the 12 year olds shout that? Perhaps you can tell us. I'm absolutely sure it's because they've researched policing scandals and concluded that shouting rude words at policemen is the best way to effect meaningful change to the corrupt system If that's so then fair play to them for doing their research. Or perhaps its because they don't respect those who don't respect their given positions of responsibility?

If you look at the way policing has changed, its not really much for the better and you can't really say that the policing of the '70s and '80s was that great (lets not mention the Birmingham 6, the Cardiff 5 and the West Midlands Crime Squad to name but three shall we). So your evidence that policing hasn't changed for the better is...? Perhaps if things have got worse since the 80s then you might have chosen to quote more recent examples of egregious Police misbehaviour? Ian Tomlinson, telephone hacking, ongoing Lawrence, kittling during student protests, plebgate, Hillsborough disclosures and the 10,000 (yes, ten thousand) uses of Tasers in 2013 alone.

It's unfortunately a force that is meant to be set up to serve the population but seem to have more interest in serving themselves. Of course no other group in society does this. Yes, they do, but given that the whole point of the Feds is to utterly selfless in their service to the population then surely they should be 100% clean and crack down completely on any who aren't? Failings inherent in the system that the members of the system have no desire in sorting out?

I've been involved in writing bits concerning the uniformed services for several years I take it this means you are a completely unbiased observer then yes it does - I have no particular (when it come to work, which these writings have fallen into) political alliance and have found the following:

Armed Forces: yeah, people like and respect them.
Ambulance: lots of respect, people will do anything for them, generally not too embroiled in massive scandals.
Fire Brigade: lots of respect, people will do anything for them, generally not too embroiled in massive scandals
Feds: Err..................... Just possibly because the other uniformed services aren't ever called on to do anything that antagonises people? Antagonism has nothing to do with this discussion - after all, falsifying/destroying evidence isn't really antagonism. I suppose the recent phone hacking issues were also "antagonism"?
Says something doesn't it? Yes, but not so completely what you think it says

I think your motley crew need to take a long hard look at themselves and see how./why they have lost respect and hope they can try and regain it: constant scandals are not assisting you and neither is being defensive all the time. There is some truth in this though Thank you
Unfortunately the scandals are everywhere - lets not mention the matters surrounding the Lawrence murder investigation - perhaps you can tell us why your colleagues keep on doing this?

After all, its widespread across all forces Maybe it is. How widespread? Stats? Evidence? - not just one bad apple. Well, between 2008 and 2010 you had 489 officers from 47 forces allowed to resign before misconduct cases were finalised, and 1,915 further guilty findings against officers for misconduct. So I'd hazard a guess that it was pretty widespread. I could go on if you like.





Discuss please.

OK, discussed.

Discussed again

bompington

Matthewfalle wrote:

bompington wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

Rudeness and objectivity Colin, rudeness and objectivity. Objectivity is the thing that the Feds seem to have lost in their sense of self purpose.

Why did the 12 year olds shout that? Perhaps you can tell us. I'm absolutely sure it's because they've researched policing scandals and concluded that shouting rude words at policemen is the best way to effect meaningful change to the corrupt system If that's so then fair play to them for doing their research. Or perhaps its because they don't respect those who don't respect their given positions of responsibility? You, I and everybody else know that they do this because a) kids like to be rude and b) this is what they have learned from those around them. Yes, there is certainly a case that we should be looking at why whole groups in society think this is the way to behave towards the police.

If you look at the way policing has changed, its not really much for the better and you can't really say that the policing of the '70s and '80s was that great (lets not mention the Birmingham 6, the Cardiff 5 and the West Midlands Crime Squad to name but three shall we). So your evidence that policing hasn't changed for the better is...? Perhaps if things have got worse since the 80s then you might have chosen to quote more recent examples of egregious Police misbehaviour? Ian Tomlinson, telephone hacking, ongoing Lawrence, kittling during student protests, plebgate, Hillsborough disclosures and the 10,000 (yes, ten thousand) uses of Tasers in 2013 alone. I'm not denying there are problems. The debate is as to how widespread those problems are, and in particular how ingrained and "institutional". Cases like Hillsborough, where there definitely does seem to have been widespread and blatant wrongdoing, are distinctly different from Tomlinson, which looks much more like an error of judgement (and yes, of character too) in a high tension situation.

It's unfortunately a force that is meant to be set up to serve the population but seem to have more interest in serving themselves. Of course no other group in society does this. Yes, they do, but given that the whole point of the Feds is to utterly selfless in their service to the population then surely they should be 100% clean and crack down completely on any who aren't? Failings inherent in the system that the members of the system have no desire in sorting out? You are right to identify the system as the key - because the police are not plaster saints, just like everyone else: so there needs to be a system set up to make it easier to behave the right way, and harder to behave the wrong way. But this is at odds with the childish desire to shout cheap insults that some poster or other fell prey to a few posts ago.

I've been involved in writing bits concerning the uniformed services for several years I take it this means you are a completely unbiased observer then yes it does - I have no particular (when it come to work, which these writings have fallen into) political alliance TBH I find it quite hard to believe that someone who can write things like "the Pigs are the most inwardly corrupt, racist, homophobic self serving organisation since..." can consider themselves unbiased. and have found the following:

Armed Forces: yeah, people like and respect them.
Ambulance: lots of respect, people will do anything for them, generally not too embroiled in massive scandals.
Fire Brigade: lots of respect, people will do anything for them, generally not too embroiled in massive scandals
Feds: Err..................... Just possibly because the other uniformed services aren't ever called on to do anything that antagonises people? Antagonism has nothing to do with this discussion - after all, falsifying/destroying evidence isn't really antagonism. I suppose the recent phone hacking issues were also "antagonism"?
Says something doesn't it? Yes, but not so completely what you think it says

I think your motley crew need to take a long hard look at themselves and see how./why they have lost respect and hope they can try and regain it: constant scandals are not assisting you and neither is being defensive all the time. There is some truth in this though Thank you
Unfortunately the scandals are everywhere - lets not mention the matters surrounding the Lawrence murder investigation - perhaps you can tell us why your colleagues keep on doing this?

After all, its widespread across all forces Maybe it is. How widespread? Stats? Evidence? - not just one bad apple. Well, between 2008 and 2010 you had 489 officers from 47 forces allowed to resign before misconduct cases were finalised, and 1,915 further guilty findings against officers for misconduct. So I'd hazard a guess that it was pretty widespread. I could go on if you like. So that's about 1% of the force over three years. I would say that's pretty bad really and should definitely be better, but a couple of observations: firstly, that doesn't differentiate between different levels of misconduct, and secondly, it can certainly be interpreted as someone actually trying to do something about it.

Discuss please.

OK, discussed.

Discussed again

...and again and again and again.

I suppose I should comment on why I am generally pro-police.

1. In my own dealings with the police, I have invariably found them to be professional, helpful, and courteous. Of course, maybe I'm just lucky to be white and middle class (like Andrew Mitchell say) or maybe I'm just lucky to be polite and courteous to them, and not to commit crimes. I was arrested once - a bunch of us for illegal rock-climbing, since you ask - and could not fault the way we were treated.

2. Because respect for the law - by which I mean respect for the people, because, despite all the immature rantings about "the man", that's who the law serves - transcends the behaviour of the police. Mutual respect between people and the police can be - and constantly is - damaged from both sides, and I do not intend to contribute to this. I also entirely agree with the obvious reply that mutual respect is in fact increased by calling out the police when what they do is wrong - so long as this is done with the aim of improving the police, not the aim (quite obvious in a lot of cases) of setting up the police as the bad guys in an "us and them" tribalism.

3. Because for 15 years I worked in a residential school for (to put it bluntly) bad boys and girls. In that time I had a lot, a really big lot, of contact with the police. And on every occasion - absolutely without exception - that I saw them dealing with violent, out of control youths, invariably calling them a whole lot worse than "pigs" as well as kicking, punching, and always spitting, I was impressed at their restraint, compassion and care.

I am well aware that others have not had the same experience of the police that I have. But not all of that is the police's fault.

Anonymous

So in other words the system is as fault with a few rotten apples but generally the officers themselves are good?

Sounds like just about every industry except politics where it seems to be the opposite

Pross

I really don't get this trend on here (and no doubt anywhere else where anonymous people can have their say) to tar everyone on the actions of a few whether it's the police or any other profession. It's absolutely ridiculous. When people complain about cyclists behaving badly based on the actions of a minority those of us who try to be considerate on the bike get rightly wound up and yet a proportion of us are doing exactly the same thing (actually not exactly the same thing as the proportion of badly behaved police is likely to be significantly lower so there's even less justification for tarring people with the same brush). I assume those who claim the police are a bunch of corrupt racists would not bother asking for their help if they end up the victims of crime?

lucan2

Strange profession where you can be condemned for doing your job and condemned for not doing your job.

Win/win? Sounds more like, "Damned if you do, damned if you don't".