To think there are more than "a few bad apples" in the police force?

[nellynaemates]

I'm not anti-police, you won't hear me spouting on about the "pigs" or any such unpleasantness. I don't come to this as someone who has an irrational and in-built hatred of the police.

However, having read about the recent incidents at the G20 protests it sounds to me as though there was an organised effort to brutalise the protesters. In the Guardian yesterday a young woman described how she was laughing and joking with officers earlier in the day and how they told her that there was a surprise coming up.

Half an hour later it all kicked off and I urge anyone who hasn't to read the testimonies of these protesters. It is frightening and reads like descriptions of violence in totalitarian states.

"Peaceful" protests don't seem to be allowed to exist any more. People are cordoned off like dangerous animals and attacked for the slightest thing (or nothing at all).

I'm sure I'm not the only one who would think twice before going to a protest now because I wouldn't feel safe. In a supposedly democratic country this should not be the case.

I'm not saying all police are bad, but I do believe that a combination of the culture surrounding the "war on terror" and the fact that the police force is bound to attract some unpleasant and power-hungry thugs into its ranks means that we have real problems with trusting police to always be on the side of the law-abiding member of the public.

of course there is something here to be desired and addressed HerBeatitude, I agree completely but I believe that it is required across society as a whole and not just within the police force - it just so happens many believe that they have a right to judge police officers based on the actions of the minority

No that's what I'm saying Dizzie - it's not individual police officers I'm criticising, it's the whole culture.

I may be wrong of course and it may be that the police have made a few mistakes co-incidentally. But I think there's something going on which needs to be looked at.

I appreciate you're not trying to get at individual officers but speaking from the inside I think they get too weighed down in looking like they're doing the right thing instead of getting on with it

some things are so far gone on the political correctness that they're ridiclious and yet other things go unnoticed, meanwhile they waste a stupid amount of money on nonsense, for example thinking up new titles for jobs that are already in existence

we should get some more women in to run it, would make more sense and get done properly

Well said, Bella, re. the institutional hostility to democratic protest.

The 'a few bad apples' line doesn't explain why officers are, time after time, allowed/encouraged/instructed to take off their numbers.

Looks like HM Inspector of Constabulary is beginning to ask questions about the attitude to protests, which could be a good thing. At least it's not just the crappy IPCC.

Tattifer, interesting what you say about not being able to predict people's behaviour from their appearance. I'm of the same opinion. But I had assumed police officers would be as likely as the rest of us to be prejudiced.

I agree edam. Taking off numbers is a deliberate and premeditated attempt to hide your identity. surely senior members of staff have noticed this practice and are in the position to encourage it, stop it or turn a blind eye to it before now.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

I realise imjoining this debate, very late, in fact, when it has all but finished. BUT i just had to post. There are so many points that i was itching to respond to, but i had say this.

Yes, unfortunately ther are more than a 'few bad apples'. No the police dont get bonuses or the other things listed, but they dont work in private industry and were fully aware of that when they signed up, no? So why should that have any relevance to this debate?

Its not about condemning the entire profession, but the reality is that the effect of officers who are allowed to abuse memebers of the general public in various ways cannot be overlooked and glossed over just because most in the profession are 'good honest souls'. Police are rightly judged by the lowest common denominators. To whoever suggested that much police criticism is about misplaced media hype, i would say that for too many of us, the 'hype' is a reality And when the public write off such incidents serves to colude with the perpetrators - in this case the offending police officers.

I have been stopped in my car, by the police, twice. Both times it was after midnight, in South London (relevant or not? you decide). The first time officers parked in a car no less than 40 metres away said that my 'eyes looked glazed over when I turned the corner. And by the way, why was I 30 miles away from where the car was registered? WHAT? Following an address check, they decided to (in their words) "let me off".
The second time I was couldnt find parking on a shortish one-way road and drove full circle to try and find a space. This was apparently enough to arose sufficient suspicion for officers to stop me on the basis of 'many cars in the area being stolen. When I challenged their decision, they told me to shut my mouth and drive off before they arrest me. Arrest me for what? I asked. For challenging their flawed reasoning it would seem. In light of their assertion, no vehicle check was done, no name check even. Yet THEY drove off, calling out of the window that that they are fed up of 'my sort' and that i should consider myself lucky that time. Right.

These examples are tame and without going into too much detail, it is only when you are involved FIRST HAND with the sad and harsh reality that the police are able to freely operate in a way that allows them to:

1. Use junior officers as scapegoats;
2. Use 'discretion' to set aside the procedural investigative guidelines;
3. Misapproriate factual information and decide which parts of evidence are recorded onto the CRIS computer;
4. Lie under oath without repercussion;
5. Conduct internal enquiries that mean they are effectively investigating themselves;
6. Issue veiled threats to families who fail to co-operate in the way the police desire;
7. Issue "no comment" statements when being questioned by allegedly 'independent' authorities;
8. Pre-determine which resources will be applied to an investigation, based on 'supposition' rather than factual or intelligent information;
9. Escape formal discipline because the investigation authority considers that although the officers' actions 'appear' to have prejudiced an investigation, there was an absence of 'intent' behind the officers decision;
10. Take early retirement while under disceplinery investigation.

So, yes they should rightly be publicly damned when they get things so disastrously wrong, particularly when they have the emotional detachment to walk away leaving distraught, broken and permanently scarred families to deal with the consequences of their (in)action - all that before or while these families are trying to greive.

Lastly, sorry for the loooong post, I am not anti-police ina any way. I have encountered some genuinely great officers, but the trusth should not be allowed to be masked.

Lone Stranger,
You sound like you have an entire chip shop on your shoulder! In one of the incidents you describe, it sounds like the police were concerned about potentially suspicious behaviour, and rightly checked it out. From your post it would appear you got arsey with them for no reason. Would you prefer the police didn't stop suspicious looking vehicles in areas where vehicle crime occurs on the off-chance that someone is looking for a parking space?

I don't know the context of the list of statements you make, and nor do you provide any supporting information, but surely, to take one of your statements, if officers are being investigated for a potentially criminal matter, they have the same right to remain silent as every other individual in the country? Or should police officers have lesser rights?

In terms of retirement whilst under investigation, the Taylor report has an interesting discussion on this. It is arguable as to whether there is any legal power to prevent an officer from retiring. However, if an officer retires whilst under investigation, any criminal proceedings against them will still continue. There are provisions for pension forfeiture in certain circumstances, and most police forces have a policy where if an officer resigns or retires whilst they are under investigation, any subsequent service certificate or reference will make reference to the fact that there was an unresolved discipline matter at the point when they left the force. It is not the case that police forces are being complicit in sending corrupt officers off with a golden handshake.