To think Oliver Banfield is a danger to women and girls?

[WomenArentSafe]

I’ve just read this on BBC NEWS:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-56459217

Women appear to be fair game for anyone to attack without punishment...

This probationary POLICE OFFICER grabbed the victim by the neck and forced her to the ground, all whilst calling her a fucking slag.

Plus it’s dark, he’s pretty tall. It’s on CCTV.

How will women ever feel safe when men - and specifically those tasked with keeping us safe - get away with inflicting abuse, fear and pain on us?

There are some days when I just despair.

Last week we saw spreadsheets of mainly male police officers and their crimes against women. I was totally shocked.

Who are these judges that believe that this kind of misogyny is remotely acceptable? Why aren’t they being screened for misogynistic views before they achieve Judge status?? Something is very very wrong.

He's suspended awaiting the outcome of the criminal case. There will now be a misconduct hearing - I do think he will be dismissed. He's being investigated for gross misconduct and that often leads to dismissal.

Things I’ve only learnt this week regards police officers and Judges

• Oliver Banfield case - copper and the Judge’s pathetic non-punishment

-Sarah Everard Case - Cooper arrested for her kidnap and murder... -Nottinghamshire police - senior police officer said she wouldn’t report an offence against her

• the spreadsheet of Police crimes and the inappropriate punishments

This isn’t hearsay...

I’m allowed to be worried. I can’t go out with my friends and discuss it, so I’m worrying about it here instead. Hope that’s okay for you @PapaSierra.

@WomenArentSafe as well as the disregard shown to the woman reporting a flasher at the Sarah Everard Vigil to police officers on site only to be told they had ‘enough of the rioters’ and wouldn’t investigate.

That video is utterly repugnant to watch. A Completely unprovoked, violent attack. She is absolutely right, it's clear that in his head, he's playing a role in Line of Duty or something. The way he is hanging on to her back though, I would say the assault has a sexual content to it, too. It is clear he is enjoying and prolonging the contact.

I hope Emma manages to sue them. I think the police and judiciary have pretty much proven that theft and tax crimes are more heavily penalised than rape and violent assault.

If the police have to keep forking out every time they are successfully sued or prosecuted they might start to listen and change their warped, misogynist ideas. Surely he cannot be allowed to pass his probationary period. It is terrifying that people like him and Couzens are serving Police officers. Have the police no shame? It is caught on tv.

@PapaSierra.

Absolutely pathetic whataboutism. Just admit you don’t give a shit about discussing ways to change the system in which those in positions of power are vetted and monitored in order to protect women and do one.

Sorry - guilty of not having read pages 2 and 3.

Finger's crossed AnneElliott is right.

That statistic regarding domestic violence is grim indeed.

[quote PapaSierra]@LaVitaPuoEsserePiuBella I'm well aware what the OP is referring to and was drawing parallels to other people in positions of power abusing that power, some including multiple murder. But let's just start another police bashing thread, thats easier.[/quote]
Police bashing???
That's a really very unfortunate choice of words, I have to say, so I will simply add another word to your phrase and say that this thread is about "police(men) bashing women".
Don't you understand that women are SICKENED by this case? That policeMAN deserves all of society's scorn and fury.
Amongst other things, he deserves never to work again.
I, for one, have totally lost faith in the police after the last couple of weeks.

What is the answer though? How do police recruitment teams know who the bad apples are? They have to pass vetting. What other tests should there be?

That is a genuine question, although I am a bit at all the people who seem to know the answers to this.
Unfortunately in this case - the police are the people.

[quote PapaSierra]@LaVitaPuoEsserePiuBella I'm well aware what the OP is referring to and was drawing parallels to other people in positions of power abusing that power, some including multiple murder. But let's just start another police bashing thread, thats easier.[/quote]
The point is that *police officers" work in investigating crimes, and their evidence gathering has a strong influence on the decision to prosecute.

Pilots, nurses, doctors, etc do not work in the investigation of crimes.

It would be better to draw a parallel with lawyers, who receive harsher sentences and bigger fines when convicted of crimes of dishonesty than members of the public.

Why are you trying to derail the thread?

Police officers do lose their jobs for committing crimes like these, it just takes time. The full details then get shared with their colleagues and it is absolutely drummed into them what is and isn’t acceptable behaviour. So he really has no excuse. I often comment on these threads just to say that DH is a police officer and is genuinely the kind of person you would want in the police, but agree with a PP that it’s scary when you can’t tell the ‘good’ ones from the ‘bad’ ones. There has been some fairly significant misreporting of the police in recent weeks that hasn’t painted them in a good light but that doesn’t take away from the fact that when a police officer does get it wrong it’s absolutely chilling.

Our justice system is not fit for purposes, it frequently lets all victims down and that is something that needs to be addressed quickly.
Police officers, male and female, should be held to higher standards because of the job they do. Bad officers are more likely to cause more fear and hatred amongst communities than many jobs. They should recieve harsher sentences due to this, not easier.

Justanotherworkingmom, reading the guidelines, it’s clear that the CPS undercharged him for the offence committed.
The CPS was forced to charge after first finding lack of evidence despite the CCTV- would this reluctance have occurred if not for Banfields profession?
The magistrates then didn’t take into account the aggravating factors that should have been used to show serious harm had been committed to her psychologically and that the wording used by Banfield throughout the offence clearly showed that this happened due to the sex of the victim.
If the magistrate wanted to he could have imposed a 26 week custodial sentence based upon these aggravating factors, or referred to crown court. Instead his job was used as mitigation to reduce his sentence.

This case clearly illustrates the issue with the CJS when a police officer is a defendant and I’m sure you agree that the victim was let down at every stage of the process.

I happen to think that this isn’t just a problem with police officers, but all those whose profession brings them into contact with the courts on a regular basis receiving much lighter sentences than the general public when it should be an aggravating factor that attracts much higher sentences as they should know better.
Take this recent case as an example. Once again, the loss of his job was taken as a mitigation against a standard sentence.
www.leamingtoncourier.co.uk/news/crime/childrens-services-team-manager-from-near-kenilworth-caught-taking-part-in-sexual-chat-with-what-he-believed-to-be-a-13-year-old-girl-3161871

What is the answer though? How do police recruitment teams know who the bad apples are? They have to pass vetting. What other tests should there be?

I wondered the same. Anyone can be on their "best behaviour" during a few weeks of screening / vetting. Unless candidates underwent extensive psychological evaluation of their character and personality at vetting, which would be very resource intensive, I'm not sure what else could be done to stop these types slipping through the net.

@LucieStar

What is the answer though? How do police recruitment teams know who the bad apples are? They have to pass vetting. What other tests should there be?

I wondered the same. Anyone can be on their "best behaviour" during a few weeks of screening / vetting. Unless candidates underwent extensive psychological evaluation of their character and personality at vetting, which would be very resource intensive, I'm not sure what else could be done to stop these types slipping through the net.

Making a standard check through previous social media history is oribabky quite a good idea.

I agree that oliver banfield was under charged. Its all rather odd. Its also odd how the serving police officer charged with the murder of Sarah Everard hadn't come to light before. His flashing offence a few days before wasn't investigated either, but offenders like this don't usually move from one flashing offence in a public place(!) to murder within a few days. There's invariably a history of lesser offences, which builds up a belief in their minds that they are invincible from being caught.

But let's just start another police bashing thread

Well maybe if the police stopped “bashing” women, we wouldn’t need any of these threads? But yeah, aim your anger at women who are discussing their valid concerns. 🙄

Officers like him in plain clothes will be ‘protecting’ people in pubs, bars and clubs fairly soon.

@SimonJT
Plain clothes officers have been doing this for a long time. Also, have you heard women can be police officers now?? And can....VOTE??

Oliver Banfield was drunk on the power of his job as a police officer that night.

Now there’s another type of man for women to cross the street to avoid - the police man.

[quote PapaSierra]@SimonJT
Plain clothes officers have been doing this for a long time. Also, have you heard women can be police officers now?? And can....VOTE??[/quote]
They have, but on a much smaller scale and often only due to tip offs etc, very few areas have this as a standard policy.

Not sure why you’re commenting about women being officers or being able to vote.

@mbosnz

I'm afraid that if women are to feel they can trust any and all police officers, then the police need to clean house.

The 'bad apples' are a minority, I believe, but a significant minority. And you can't tell a goody from a baddy. For the sake of the good police and the general population they are given the powers they have to protect, there need to be serious efforts made to rid the police of those that abuse those powers, and instead of being the shepherd, they use their powers to prey on women as the wolf.

There are some very unpleasant articles in the Observer today about the police (male) abusing it engaging in criminal conduct with vulnerable women.

Very few prosecuted. Women being raped in cells. A lot of allegations relating to the Met. This is a culture, not bad apples.

I think also women need to understand the kind of grading that is done on people. There is not much doubt to me that how the police treat and handle people is strongly related to class, wealth, relative nuisance value and their sex.

The allegations about police officers having sex with women who had reported domestic abuse, or posting pictures of women they would like to violate is revolting.

I would favour a full psychological evaluation for any officer joining. It would stand to exclude predatory thugs who are motivated by power.

Not enough psycholgical screening of police goes on or these cases of people trained in physical skills wouldn't keep abusing women like this.

A friend was in a different force. Yes it's normalised. More likely to find a criminal in uniform than from a random selection of the public.

@LexMitior

I think also women need to understand the kind of grading that is done on people. There is not much doubt to me that how the police treat and handle people is strongly related to class, wealth, relative nuisance value and their sex.

The allegations about police officers having sex with women who had reported domestic abuse, or posting pictures of women they would like to violate is revolting.

I would favour a full psychological evaluation for any officer joining. It would stand to exclude predatory thugs who are motivated by power.

I wonder why the (admittedly not perfect) screening process used by the forces can’t be applied to officers as part of their training process .

Whats your evidence for that then? B33Fr33

and to the person upthread - yes Social Media is checked as part of recruitment.

psychlogical screening is an option I guess, are there some out there that are suitably recommended / tested? And is the tax payer prepared to pay? The public always want more police officers. Are they willing to have fewer to pay for this?

Again, it is all easy to say from an armchair, but how to do you pick off this insideous issue when it is national / global?? The police are the people.