That the police don't vet their officers

[OneTC]

And if not, why not?

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

Sigh, another day, another Met Police officer charged with a crime, this time child sex offences. Well 2 former Met Police officers who were in league with a current Chief Inspector who appears to have killed himself. I wonder if we will find out they had unsavoury nicknames too. I mean how does one find out their colleague is also as depraved as them to join together like that?

I know I know to the police champions on here - NAPALT. There you don’t need to say it.

Oh, I reference ONS you reference ITV but wrongly call it “citing” and I’m the one talking out my arse? Seems someone doesn’t know the definitions of a reputable source or citing.

Well I expect if a crime happens to you, you will be too terrified to call the police on 999. Given that you think most of them are shit.

Does seem a little odd how all these cases are only suddenly coming to light since a certain commissioner was forced from her job. Almost makes you wonder if someone was suppressing bad news...

Lol you said ONS for two of your statistics and when I asked for the most important one (statistics on officers committing crime) you vaguely say it was a report you found somewhere. I like that you ignored The Bureau of Investigative Journalism from my post. An independent organisation that collaborates with lots of reputable organisations.

I am not sure why you keep picking up on me using words in a way you don’t like - does it make you feel superior?

to cite - refer to (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, especially in a scholarly work.

Sure, lash out because I think there is a problem with the culture in policing.

Lol. That’s the least of what you have alleged.

He may have been clean prior to being an office and became an officer to allow him to prey on women and get away with it knowing he wouldn't be questioned.

If an allegation or complaint is made about an officer - what should happen?
Should they be suspended straight away?

Of course. If an allegation of abuse or assault is made against a teacher, they are suspended. Why on earth shouldn't that be the case for a police officer?

Your argument that criminals would just make false allegations to get rid of police... well yes, maybe they would. Kids do about teachers too. Does that mean we should just shrug and let a teacher who's alleged to have assaulted a pupil carry on teaching?

Yes, you did not cite, despite saying you had. You referenced just like I did. I pick up on words that you used incorrectly to imply you did something superior to what I did, when you haven’t. Therefore, if I am “talking out my arse” or “plucking numbers from thin air” as you have alleged by merely referencing, then so are you. 🤷‍♀️

Should this be the case for every complaint? Every allegation?

Of course not @gold22 . But when there are several as in the case of David Carrick and when those complaints from unconnected individuals show marked similarities (locked in a cupboard, pissing in the mouth) also as in the case of David Carrick that person should be suspended on full pay while a swift yet thorough investigation is conducted.

This is fair to complainants and the complained-of and also to rest of us. Because while like all of us individual police officers have their own individual things going on in their private lives their duty and that of their employers is to the public.

As a member of the public and one in the Met area where David Carrick did his thing enabled by his status as a police officer I think that would be fair.

Don't you agree?

Well I expect if a crime happens to you, you will be too terrified to call the police on 999. Given that you think most of them are shit.

@Onnabugeisha I expect most of us would call 999 if in fear of our lives but the standard of service we receive shouldn't depend on who turns up. Don't you think we should aspire to more from our emergency services? It's not Trip Advisor.

Thinking about it @Onnabugeisha when women are raped there are circumstances where they would not go to the police.

It's not just the piss poor rates of convictions.

Chief among them for me would be if the rapist was a police officer with whom I was in a relationship. Particularly if he told me that he was a copper so I wouldn't be believed. The multiple rapist David Carrick did that. With mounting evidence I'd be a fool to think he is a one off or one bad apple.

Added to my thinking would be that my first port of call would be my local police station which is Charing Cross. www.standard.co.uk/news/london/met-police-charing-cross-iopc-operation-hotton-b993054.html

That's the police station involved in a scandal of misogyny and racism and the area covering Buckingham Palace and the Houses of Parliament where Carrick worked as an armed member of the elite royal and diplomatic squad. The police officer Wayne Couzens worked in the same unit when he abducted, raped and murdered Sarah Everard after coming off duty in a uniform and armed from the US Embassy.

Like Carrick (nickname Bastard Dave) Couzens had a nomme de guerre - The Rapist - among mates. And they call these people the Met's Finest...

Carrick's convictions concerned women near his home in nearby Hertfordshire but I bet people at Charing Cross are having a nervous look through their files.

I'm no Miss Marple but I'm beginning to suspect this cop shop is not an outlier and the barrel is bigger than the Met.

limitedperiodonly

Of course not @gold22 . But when there are several as in the case of David Carrick..........

I agree - There should be a thorough investigation which is done expeditiously. And yes multiple similar complaints should result in suspension whilst it is being done.

@limitedperiodonly of course and there isn't one part of me that would ever advocate for him (or the rest of extreme nature)

The only point I was going to make is, where do you draw the line because there are complaints made against officers all the time, some of them malicious, some of them because a member of the public hasn't got the outcome they wanted, some of them genuine complaints where an officer has abused their position.

Until an investigation has taken place which can take a long time, you don't know which is which, and with there already not being enough officers to do the job, does there need to be a decision on what kind of allegations are an instant suspension- maybe there already is, I don't know, I would imagine it's looked at on an individual basis because I've heard of officers suspended whilst undergoing investigation.

Just going by my experience, any offences disclosed regarding an officer are flagged straight away and looked in to, to the same length and probably more than if it was reported about joe bloggs, so when the bastards pretend their victims won't be believed because of their position, the reality is it's not true, well not in my experience but of course I'm just one officer in one force- I can't speak for everywhere.

Ditto where I am too

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jan/20/police-officer-alleged-rape-victim-david-carrick

@gold22 I'm no expert but I'd start an investigation on someone with multiple allegations of a similar nature against him. I would keep an open mind but wouldn't take his word for it because he did the same job as me. I would do a proper investigation while expediting matters for the good of all concerned including me.

I might suspend that person on full pay and with no prejudice. I would be minded to do this especially if the allegations were of a sensitive nature and the person had a gun.

I would definitely not say it was all a bit too difficult and people make things up and takes a long time. It is and sometimes they do and it does.

But that's the job, isn't it?

As a police officer would you do anything differently?

@limitedperiodonly not a thing

@limitedperiodonly actually, the only change I would make is investigated at the very first allegation- in the way that you say, suspension depending on allegation but definitely for multiple allegations

@gold22 I also think things should be investigated at the first allegation. I'm glad that you as a police officer thinks that. I have a job where colleagues are criticised and though I sometimes say it's not exactly like that, I'm not going to defend anyone who has done wrong.

If you have a job in a public-facing role then the public are going to make complaints about you whether you are a police officer, GP receptionist or a ticket inspector.

An investigation doesn't mean you're guilty. A lot of people are bonkers or just get the wrong end of the stick.

But the assertions on this thread from people I believe are not police officers or who are wives or troublemakers or deluded that police officers can do no wrong are not helpful to those decent people who are doing a very difficult job.

I believe most coppers are okay and I believe some are outstanding. I've met them both in work and in personal contexts. But pretending that everything is okay, nothing to see here, doesn't help the police or the public and I despair of people who think it does and wonder why they cling to that belief.

If you are an officer you sound like one of the good ones. I am very grateful for them.

www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-64511189.amp

Police actively recruiting known "bad apples"

Are they? did they do that intentionally? Or does the article say they invited recently retired officers to reapply and in error didn't check misconduct records.

100% still not acceptable but you're clearly taking that out of context and turning it round to make it look like something it isn't which isn't helpful for anyone.