That the police don't vet their officers

[OneTC]

And if not, why not?

www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-64289461

Hmm, that sounds familiar. Where have I heard this before?

Oh that’s right, from (amongst others) ex-Scotland Yard domestic violence campaigner Laura Richards who has been calling for this for YEARS! Honest to god when will they learn to sit up and listen to what experts have been telling them needs to be done?!

www.dashriskchecklist.co.uk/laura-richards-dash-coercive-control-stalking-newsletter-january-2020/

I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice but then what about healthcare professionals, teachers, social workers, clergy, prison officers. Why single out the Police?
I just think it would be impractical to implement (that's an awful lot of psychologist hours) and the small risk doesn't warrant it.

Psychological testing is a good idea but... I think you would find a lot of potential candidates failed.

Btw I don't think this is bad. Other jobs use it to see if you have a suitable mindset. Because there are strictly no correct answers on a properly designed test, it is hard to fool because a "pass" is not obvious.

@JudgeRudy - healthcare professionals, teachers, social workers, clergy do not have the same powers as the police do.

Prison officers I think should also have psychological assessments.

I've no doubt btw that the Police Federation would go literally mad if psychological testing was a criteria. But it can be legislated for. And designed and administered by sources independent from the police.

You could have an argument in an empty room couldn’t you? To be quite frank, I couldn’t care less if you give any credence to my opinions on the Police, as I feel quite the same about yours. That’s the thing with opinions…we ALL have one. You seem to base a lot of your points on things that I haven’t actually said, referencing “husbands” and “surveys”. Now you are banging on about whether or not I know Police Officers “intimately”, which has nothing whatsoever to do with my position on this debate. That’s pretty reductive as well, suggesting that I cannot form my own thoughts or views without intimate knowledge of Police Officers. Why is it so hard for you to consider that I might just see things differently to you?

That’s just whataboutery at its finest. The police are in a uniquely powerful position over people. I single out the police because of that position.

Every profession is in a “uniquely powerful” position over people.
Really, the above is a lesson in how to say nothing to sound like something.

Let’s just ignore the fact that psychological testing is so wildly unreliable it’s only used in films.

Ah yes all those teachers legally imprisoning people and strip searching them. 🙄

Oh, I see I will have to explain the definition of “unique”
In the context in which it is used here unique means differences in powers that one profession has compared to other professions. Each & every profession has different powers over people.

Your example is not very good 🙄

Btw, police don’t have the power to legally imprison anyone…only judges or justices of the peace have the power to order the arrest, detainment or imprisonment of anyone. Police are merely acting on the orders of another profession in a “uniquely powerful position” over people.

Now police can strip search people, but so can other professions such as the border force, prison guards, secure psychiatric facility staff, and so on.

There’s a real problem with vetting happening right now, with Boris’ push for 20000 ‘new’ police officers (some of the police officers lost since Tories got in power) - there isn’t the capability in terms of police staff to process the clearance processes. Boris’ plan states that if even if the recruitment (and successful completion of probation) is one person short, ALL the funding is forfeited.

And vetting will only show up those who have previously been on police radar.

I guess psychological testing is so useless for courts, the probation service, parole purposes, criminal law cases, the civil service, working in the security services.

Yes, it does seem pretty discredited

I reckon we've got a Police Federation wonk on here!

For those who don't know, that's the equivalent of the trade Union for the police who cannot strike. Interesting people if you ever meet them professionally

Yes, that’s true, but what I meant was The specific nature of the police forces power is what makes it even more important to thoroughly vet them.
healthcare professionals, teachers, social workers and clergy aren’t usually dealing with people who are in hand cuffs, that they are legally allowed to use force to apprehend.
healthcare professionals, teachers, clergy, prison officers aren’t entering the homes of people accused of, or victims of crimes in the immediate aftermath of a crime to ask them about it.
clergy are not a public funded body.
healthcare professionals, teachers and social workers are not a male dominated field where a certain level of aggression is actively encouraged in certain situations. ‘Cop culture’ exists. There are studies and reviews which show this time and again and to pretend it doesn’t is naive at best, and thoroughly disingenuous at worse.

You’re being completely disingenuous here. The police have the power to arrest you, put you in cuffs and into their vehicle/police station and hold you there against your will. That may not be ‘imprisoning’ a person in the strict sense, but you know what the poster meant. None of the other professions you mentioned can do that legally.

I KNOW that not all police are bad people, I know some very nice police officers, I’ve dealt with some lovely officers over the years who are great at their jobs, but I’ve also dealt with enough angry, aggressive, worrying ones to make me hugely wary of the police as a whole and I’ve seen first hand the way they close ranks around ‘one of their own’. I was physically threatened by friends of my sibling. I was emotionally manipulated by people who were meant to be taking my statement on crimes he’d committed against me- “are you sure you want to do this, you could be ruining a good officers career” and such when I’m reporting him for breaking both my eye sockets and my nose by head butting me in a rage. I was 13. A GOOD OFFICER.

Yes of course it’s not voluntary, my DH had to name all of his close relatives and they’re looked into too. When something came up about something his adult brother did 20 years ago this was heavily investigated, looking at what relationship DH had with his brother etc.

I assume that there will be no extra resources put into the police to carry out all the extra vetting.

I do wonder why people aren’t so up in arms about the NHS and the killer doctors and nurses, the one’s performing unnecessary operations, the cover ups. If a nurse kills. I don’t see people on here demanding psych evaluations of every member of staff in the NHS.

Lol at the NHS performing unnecessary surgeries. It’s a struggle to even get necessary ones.

Again you are purposefully and deliberately missing the point. The police should be held to a higher standard as they are the ones enforcing the standards. I am not sure how many other ways it can be said.

and Again you’re purposefully ignoring the point I’m making, I really don’t know what to say to you anymore.

its well known many doctors perform unnecessary surgery, usually private but are NHS doctors eg www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-63430990

What about Harold Shipman? Look at the current trial of Lucy letby. Speak to the 10s of thousands of women left with permanent injuries by neglectful and uncaring staff, those left with ptsd. Read all the inquiries into maternity services. Falsified notes, cover ups.

yes the police have issues. You worry about the authority the police have, medical staff literally have your life in their hands.

Yes the police need better systems to weed out the bad apples. But do you go round saying don’t trust medical staff, I would never visit the doctor?

I think you need to gain perspective in that some terrible things have happened, systems weren’t in place to stop these bad apples. But the police are not alone. Where are the demands to sort out the medical profession because that’s just as fucked up if not more so.

What have you got against the NHS huh? Huh? Do you know how mad you sound with your paranoia about doctors and nurses. It’s just a few bad apples. They have a really tough job you know. They work long hours and have to put up with lots of abuse from patients. My husband is a doctor (he’s not) and he is great, therefore there are no issues.

See where I am going with this? No one denies the NHS has issues and is guilty of cover ups. But that doesn’t detract from what is happening in the police force and why many woman and POC are terrified of the police who hold extraordinary powers over people.

Stop trying to shut down legitimate concerns because you see them as a personal attack on your husband, I am sure he can stand up for himself. Concerns backed up by numerous reports and investigations by the way, as much as you try and paint it as paranoia.

Some level of whataboutery on this thread.

Youre incorrect as only judges and justices of the peace can legally imprison a person. Those were the only professions I mentioned in regards to imprisonment.

Police cannot legally imprison people…it’s not my fault that the poster used the wrong word for what they meant, I can only take what they write at face value. That’s not being “disingenuous” that’s reading what they wrote. The disingenuous part is writing something that is not true, and then pretending a poster really meant to write something else.

Yes it is, because all the psychological tests you are referring to are not ones for initial screening/vetting of candidates.

The specific nature of the police forces power is what makes it even more important to thoroughly vet them.

Yes it is important, but not more important than say doctors or nurses who have power of life and death over people. Or judges/justices who have the power to imprison a person for life. Or MPs who have powers to write & pass laws that affect people in every aspect of their lives. Or the armed forces who have power of life and death over people in conflict zones. So the “even more” is what I object to.

I think vetting could be improved, but I don’t think it is that bad currently. We’d see far more offenders in the police if the vetting were not as good as it is.

Maybe not 'imprisoning', but bullying in other physical, sexual and emotional ways equally asabusive and damaging as an enforced strip search!
Whether or not the Police are able to abuse in a 'unique' way isn't pertinent to your argument. The abuse happens because someone 'bad' has been recruited. If you want to tighten the vetting process in the hope of risk reduction I cannot think of any reason why other profesions wouldn't be held to the same standard. All professions are in 'unique' positions and all have the same opportunity to abuse and f#@k with someone's life.