Should we condemn this policeman

Studio488commercial said:
Let’s get this into perspective this is just It is just about the hatred of the police be a select few that causes the problem, if this had been a nurse in A&E threatening not to treat someone in the same way, it would have been related to stress, long hours, the story would have been let’s pay him more, and so on.

if the video turned out to show the guys had just abducted a child who was found in the back of the van, would it be a sack him situation?
Click to expand...
A&E nurses do refuse to treat abusive people, they call security and have them escorted out.
 
j crossley said:
You are missing the point: Studio488commercial seems to be suggesting that it is alright for a police officer to break the rules if a serious crime has been committed. It is NOT.
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced he has broken any rules. Had he arrested him on a fabricated charge then yes, but as far as I can tell, he didn't. It's poor professional conduct at worse.
 
jakeblu said:
I'm not convinced he has broken any rules. Had he arrested him on a fabricated charge then yes, but as far as I can tell, he didn't. It's poor professional conduct at worse.
Click to expand...

Intent? Like "going equipped"?
 
j crossley said:
Detective Superintendent Steve Fulcher was disciplined for breaching PACE guidelines when he arrested Christopher Halliwell.
Click to expand...

And that is a perfect example of how sad and pathetic the managements attitude (backed by a small minority of the public, who as we know in this day and age have a louder voice than the majority) has become. when people should be getting medals they are getting slated by management, public and the media, its all a sad, sad, sad state of affairs, and getting worse.

Has anyone ever wondered how we ended with 93% of ALL crime resulting in no one being prosecuted,, only about 43% result in a suspect let that figure soak in 93% and it has nothing to do with officer numbers, it is down to the amount of evidence now needed, the police being suffocated by the CPS, People can live in their Ivory towers and that is fine, however they have to accept that at some point they will be robbed
 
nilagin said:
A&E nurses do refuse to treat abusive people, they call security and have them escorted out.
Click to expand...

But that is clearly not what I said, "if this had been a nurse in A&E threatening not to treat someone in the same way " so if you are going to manipulate the comments for your own end there is no point in continuing with it.
 
Studio488commercial said:
But that is clearly not what I said, "if this had been a nurse in A&E threatening not to treat someone in the same way " so if you are going to manipulate the comments for your own end there is no point in continuing with it.
Click to expand...
I wasn't manipulating comments for my own end, I was confirming it does happen. A&E departments don't tolerate abusive and violent people,
A threat is a threat. If a doctor or nurse has an aggressive or abusive patient they tell them they won't be treated and made to leave, if they don't play ball security escort them out. It's not as if nhs staff can fabricate a reason not to treat someone anyway.
 
j crossley said:
Detective Superintendent Steve Fulcher was disciplined for breaching PACE guidelines when he arrested Christopher Halliwell.
Click to expand...
He was found guilty of gross misconduct for breaching PACE and also (and probably worse from the police perspective) found guilty of gross misconduct because he talked to the press, which they very much don't like.

Some years ago I received a phone call from a person employed by a police force, telling me something that, in the interests of justice, needed to be known. I always maintained that I was unable to identify the person who contacted me and the police force involved never did manage to identify him or her - but boy, did they try, because s/he had exposed a cover up by senior officers. I think, in Fulcher's case, he told someone in the press that his force was ignoring the evidence and refusing to check into possible (probable) other murders by Halliwell.

In my view Fulcher did the wrong thing for the right reasons, and that may apply to this case too. I can't justify it but I do understand it. But people who work for large organisations need to accept that there are always going to be people above them who are incompetent and / or lazy, and that the system itself is always flawed. They need to accept that they will be in serious trouble if they rock the boat and they also need to accept that if they allow their personal standards to get in the way of working within the system then they will be the ones who are punished for it.
 
Garry Edwards said:
if they allow their personal standards to get in the way of working within the system then they will be the ones who are punished for it.
Click to expand...
I have personal knowledge of the pressures created during such serious investigations through having been involved in a murder case. Myself and another were identified as alibi witnesses by the defence. The murder had been committed many years previously. Both of us recalled the circumstances of the alleged alibi but neither of us could remember the date to closer than two or three months. Neither could we find documentary evidence of the alibi (which we both thought should have existed).

The police interviewed both of us several times, clearly concerned that we would suddenly remember something that would disrupt the prosecution. In the event, neither of us were called to court and the individual, who had been arrested during the commission of another very serious offence, was found guilty on other incontrovertible evidence.

My point is that the police (rightly) went to a lot of trouble to ensure that they were prosecuting the right man. In Steve Fulcher's case, it seems, his real crime was to do his job to the best of his ability instead of obeying rules which appear to have been created specifically to protect the guilty.
 
Last edited:
It is interesting that the Steve Fulcher case is being talked about; at the time he did breach PACE but since then PACE has been changed in light of the fact of what Steve Fulcher did and it would now be allowed.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
I have personal knowledge of the pressures created during such serious investigations through having been involved in a murder case. Myself and another were identified as alibi witnesses by the defence. The murder had been committed many years previously. Both of us recalled the circumstances of the alleged alibi but neither of us could remember the date to closer than two or three months. Neither could we find documentary evidence of the alibi (which we both thought should have existed).

The police interviewed both of us several times, clearly concerned that we would suddenly remember something that would disrupt the prosecution. In the event, neither of us were called to court and the individual, who had been arrested during the commission of another very serious offence, was found guilty on other incontrovertible evidence.

My point is that the police (rightly) went to a lot of trouble to ensure that they were prosecuting the right man. In Steve Fulcher's case, it seems, his real crime was to do his job to the best of his ability instead of obeying rules which appear to have been created specifically to protect the guilty.
Click to expand...
I take your point, but the rules (PACE) were introduced to protect everyone, not just the guilty. Those of us who are old enough to know what used to go on before PACE was introduced also know why the rules are needed.
 
Garry Edwards said:
Those of us who are old enough to know what used to go on before PACE was introduced.
Click to expand...
I am and I know that there have always been naughty policemen. I also know that if you complained about bad behaviour by officers it resulted in action, at least where I lived. In my opinion PACE gave excessive power to the worst kind of defendents and society benefited from it being scaling back by the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005.
 
Last edited:
KIPAX said:
The OP posted about an incident in Accrington... Well... Its not looking good for Accrington police... a few weeks ago everyone was aghast at this footage that shows a man holding his hands in the air and then lying down on the floor.. then a load of police attack him https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co....ctv-clip-accrington-car-thief-arrest-emerges/
Click to expand...


Pc Saul Hignett, 26, has now been charged with Section 39 assault

www.lancs.live

Lancashire Police officer charged with assaulting car thief

Footage of the arrest, which was shared on social media, showed 34-year-old Adeel Ashraf being restrained by a number of officers
www.lancs.live www.lancs.live
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top