Police In A State?

Burning Chopper….

BlogAdmin — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 09:36:46 +0000

This is a subject close to my heart in more ways than the obvious police angle. It seems that West Midlands Police Air Support Unit’s relatively new (2007) helicopter has been set fire too (see here). Now, this isn’t the first time there has been smoke around it – they suffered a technical fault late last year resulting in a cabin full of smoke and had to return to Birmingham International Airport, their home base.

Security at BHX "Meets The Required Standards"

However, this time it appears that it has been set on fire on purpose in a suspected arson attack. While the criminal fraternity might be pleased to hear this, I am not. The EC135 P2+ is one of the most advanced police helicopters available, and at an estimated US$ 4.2 million before police fit they are not a cheap piece of kit. So, naturally they are looked after.

WMP base there at a fairly large regional international airport, which is inside their own force boundary. You might then wonder how an arsonist can break into such a place and set fire to a major police asset (probably the most expensive single asset WMP have?) in front of their very eyes? Nobody in the media seems to be asking this??

If this was a break-in at Heathrow, or Gatwick it’d be all over the news. WMP seem to have done very well in playing the security aspect of this down and “playing the victim.” I’m pretty sure BHX pay good money to WMP to police the airport. Mind you, its not the first time security at BHX has been publically ridiculed – see here.

Hungry….

BlogAdmin — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 08:16:46 +0000

Couldn’t help myself but to take this photo yesterday evening, at a McDonalds drive through. Now, I know that Police need to eat too, but there is something just slightly galling about this picture. That being the fact that I would not be allowed to use a company car, with company fuel, to go and fetch my dinner – let alone use a tax payer funded vehicle and fuel, and possibly even on tax payer time to fetch it. I would add that this was also taken during what I would regard as rush hour too.

Police at McDonalds Drive Through.

Of course, if I could summons the enthusiasm to write to Warwickshire Police and ask if they thought this was an appropriate use of police resources, or if the officers concerned (there were 2 in the car) would be repaying the cost of fuel etc I am sure they would wheel out the usual arguments about how it is good to have the police out and about and taking their breaks in public etc.

Which, of course, I agree with. It is good to see the police out and about, it makes people feel safe. Seeing them walking in town and taking lunch with the public is a great thing. However, driving in to McDonalds, not getting out of the car, then driving off (presumably back to police station) doesn’t really serve any public interest that I can see…. can you?

Lies, Damn Lies… and the Police.

BlogAdmin — Sat, 30 May 2009 11:00:32 +0000

When will they learn? It seems two custody sergeants from Greater Manchester Police, and a “Custody Detention Officer” (which I assume is jingo for a civilian contractor) are in a spot of bother with the IPCC after the death of a man, effectively in custody. Of course, they tried to cover up their failures by making false entries into a log detailing safety checks they should have made on Callum McLean.

Mr McLean was arrested for failing to attend court after being found drunk and injured in Gorton. So the GMP officers decided the appropriate thing to do was to check on him for precisely 1 second in a near three hour period. He was left alone, while unconscious, for 22 minutes while they waited for an ambulance. What a caring bunch! Mind you, they were probably using those 22 minutes to add the “misleading information” to the custody record.

Why do the IPCC call it misleading information? This is the exact conclusion from their own website:

A custody detention officer entered misleading and inaccurate information on the custody record in relation to a cell visit. This information suggested a visit had been made when in fact it had not.

So, surely, that isn’t misleading – its a straight lie. A total falsification. Why not just say so?

I should add, in the interests of fairness to GMP, that they have apologised to the family of Mr. McLean, and claim to have learnt lessons from this incident. Perhaps one of the lessons, a basic pre-requiste to being a police office I would have thought, could be “DO NOT LIE, DO NOT FALSIFY DOCUMENTS.” ?

Some links: BBC. IPCC.

Top Cop In Contempt…

BlogAdmin — Wed, 27 May 2009 14:30:59 +0000

Interestingly, it seems that the Cheif Constable of Avon & Somerset has been summonsed to appear before the high court to explain why his force has failed to comply with an order of a court relating to the return of some siezed property. Interestingly, Avon & Somerset Police were forced to apply for a warrant against their own Chief Constable so they could retain the property.

All sounds a bit like the madness we have become accustomed to from our police forces in the UK. The Police & Home Office seem to think that they know better than the Courts on way too many occasions.

What is more telling to me though, in this case isn’t the absurd spectacle of a police force seeking a warrant against its own Chief Constable; its how the force and the Chief Constable have frittered with media, in an attempt to garner public support for their corner. However, when the Courts have turned against them, Mr. Port (Chief Constable) said to the media:

I am taking independent legal advice as to my position and in the circumstances I will address my response to these allegations to the court, and will not be responding to media comment whilst the proceedings are continuing.

Funny how they were prepared to make statements to the media while the proceedings against the individual concerned were continuing? No.

Source article here… which links to some other articles.

Unwise? Maybe…

BlogAdmin — Fri, 22 May 2009 12:08:13 +0000

Something tells me that starting this blog may be ultimately unwise – but provided I don’t say anything slanderous etc, I can’t see why our police service should be exempt from public criticism. Perhaps, a big leap of faith I know, they might even take it as constructive and embrace some of the comments I am bound to make – for I know they echo the opinions of most of the people I know.

What I should like to point out, before I start is that I do genuinely believe that the vast majority of the individuals who serve in our police forces are decent, hard working people… unfortunately the institution which they join, in my opinion, is so far removed from what people expect of the police they go awry on their way. A great shame, as I am sure most (if not all) new recruits go into policing with noble aims.

So, while at times it may be possible to highlight less than desirable actions of individual officers, generally it shall be about highlighting the shortcomings of the police and the system they work within, provided courtesy of an ever more Orwellian UK government.