Jump to content

Recommended Posts

How much worse can it get for her and the Met? Jesus, from Charles da Silva e de Menezes, knife crime in London, Operation Midland and the criminal investigation into Leon Brittan to a Met cop charged with kidnap and murder, when is she going to resign? Total disgrace, useless at her job and obviously a token LGBT appointment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should she resign because one of the Met's officers might have proved to be a bad egg ? Surely the fact that he has been arrested shows that her force is working ? Typical Gammon outcry due her being lesbian ?

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

She looked very upset when a Met officer was charged with the murder of a young English woman in London, quite rightly. She looked devastated.

Not quite as upset when a Met officer killed a young Brazilian male though. She's a total disgrace... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

Not quite as upset when a Met officer killed a young Brazilian male though. She's a total disgrace... 

An Old Bailey jury found at a trial that she bore "no personal culpability" for his death.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/03/2021 at 20:25, Guided Missile said:

How much worse can it get for her and the Met? Jesus, from Charles da Silva e de Menezes, knife crime in London, Operation Midland and the criminal investigation into Leon Brittan to a Met cop charged with kidnap and murder, when is she going to resign? Total disgrace, useless at her job and obviously a token LGBT appointment.

Can you explain how that is in any way her fault?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Can you explain how that is in any way her fault?

Don't hold your breath waiting for an answer to your (very sensible) question. GM only spouts bombast and bollocks and is incapable of cogent debate.What more would you expect from someone so thick that he only scraped into Pompey Poly?

Edited by Tamesaint
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Can you explain how that is in any way her fault?

As the head of the Met Police isn't she responsible for the way the force runs and operates?  In which case, isn't she responsible for not investigating previous (alleged) crimes committed by the same police officer?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56368531

Quote

Scotland Yard is to be investigated over its handling of an allegation of indecent exposure against the officer suspected of murdering Sarah Everard.

The police watchdog will consider if Metropolitan Police officers "responded appropriately" to the alleged incident.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

As the head of the Met Police isn't she responsible for the way the force runs and operates?  In which case, isn't she responsible for not investigating previous (alleged) crimes committed by the same police officer?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56368531

 

Whilst she is at the pinnacle of the command chain, the procedures for deciding whether to investigate allegations of misconduct by Met officers stop at least 2 or 3 tiers below her desk. The responsibility / culpability for any failings in that instance probably falls at Chief Superintendant level. She cannot be held directly at fault for every instance, of which there are probably hundreds every year, and applying hindsight in this instance is ridiculous - regardless of the indecent exposure claims, an extrapolation to surmise that it would have prevented the poor woman's murder is a flight of fancy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Whilst she is at the pinnacle of the command chain, the procedures for deciding whether to investigate allegations of misconduct by Met officers stop at least 2 or 3 tiers below her desk. The responsibility / culpability for any failings in that instance probably falls at Chief Superintendant level. She cannot be held directly at fault for every instance, of which there are probably hundreds every year, and applying hindsight in this instance is ridiculous - regardless of the indecent exposure claims, an extrapolation to surmise that it would have prevented the poor woman's murder is a flight of fancy.

You know you're wasting your time trying to explain things to him right? The Met has 42,000 staff dealing with nearly 1 million crimes pa and he cant understand why Cressida Dick didn't personally investigate an indecent exposure case.  

Edited by buctootim
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

Whilst she is at the pinnacle of the command chain, the procedures for deciding whether to investigate allegations of misconduct by Met officers stop at least 2 or 3 tiers below her desk. The responsibility / culpability for any failings in that instance probably falls at Chief Superintendant level. She cannot be held directly at fault for every instance, of which there are probably hundreds every year, and applying hindsight in this instance is ridiculous - regardless of the indecent exposure claims, an extrapolation to surmise that it would have prevented the poor woman's murder is a flight of fancy.

Apologies, I should have used the word 'accountable' rather than 'responsible'.

If a private company screws up and ends up in court, would it be the managers explaining their actions to the beak or the CEO?

As GM has previously pointed out, this isn't the first 'failing' that has happened on her watch and that she is accountable for.  At what point do you draw the line and start to question the head of the organisation?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Apologies, I should have used the word 'accountable' rather than 'responsible'.

If a private company screws up and ends up in court, would it be the managers explaining their actions to the beak or the CEO?

As GM has previously pointed out, this isn't the first 'failing' that has happened on her watch and that she is accountable for.  At what point do you draw the line and start to question the head of the organisation?

Why not go one further and challenge Priti Patel's position, as she is her boss.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Referring back to the OP; Operation Midland concluded the year before Cressida Dick was appointed as Commissioner of the Met. Are we going to see a thread lambasting Bernard Hogan-Howe ?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Why not go one further and challenge Priti Patel's position, as she is her boss.

There is an opportunity to do that every five years. 

So, you're happy that she is doing a cracking job and nothing has gone wrong on her watch, that's fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

There is an opportunity to do that every five years. 

So, you're happy that she is doing a cracking job and nothing has gone wrong on her watch, that's fine.

Assuming you are referring to CD, I hold no particular opinion over whether she is currently doing a "cracking job", having had very little experience of policing in London during her tenure. I do feel that the OP was rooted firmly in prejudice, and conflated events that she cannot actually be held in any way accountable for.

If you are asking an opinion of PP's competence, she is out of her depth.

Edited by badgerx16
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

As the head of the Met Police isn't she responsible for the way the force runs and operates?  In which case, isn't she responsible for not investigating previous (alleged) crimes committed by the same police officer?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56368531

 

I hadn't read any of that before, so the crucial thing in the article is what will come out of the IOPC investigation into how they dealt with the indecent exposure incident on 28th Feb, presuming it relates to the same officer.

I imagine that if it was the same guy then he would have been suspended pending internal investigation from PSD. 

Maybe that's what happened? He'd still have been a serving police officer at the time of the murder, but removed from duty while the investigation took place. 

I'm not sure how Cressida Dick is in any way responsible though. Any decisions would have been taken way below her level. If their structure is anything like Hampshire's then it's the DCC who carries PSD in their portfolio with a Chief Superintendent heading up the department.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, whelk said:

Few questions to be answered in how they handle tonight’s vigil

 

Why aren’t they taking the knee in front of them? Very different to how they handled the summer BLM riots 

Edited by Turkish
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfathomable how those in charge thought this was a good idea to physically break up. Appalling leadership.

The poor family - getting hijacked and politicised is probably last thing they need.

some cunt on Twitter even said well she was breaking lockdown by being at a friends house. What is up with people?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

MET police playing a blinder. Says no one ever.

Shame this is not a largely peaceful protest. 

 

I know you didn’t post on here then but we Agreed in the summer if less than 50% of the people protesting get arrested then it is largely peaceful, interesting you’ve used those exact words.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Turkish said:

I know you didn’t post on here then but we Agreed in the summer if less than 50% of the people protesting get arrested then it is largely peaceful, interesting you’ve used those exact words.....

Most witnesses said peaceful but mood changed when police moved in. If it was a party in Manchester where they thought there might be some fight back they hide away in a cordon. Probably fancied their chances against women with posters and candles.

Edited by whelk
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Turkish said:

Why aren’t they taking the knee in front of them? Very different to how they handled the summer BLM riots 

Exactly my thoughts when I saw it break over twitter. 
 

breaking up the protest (that’s what it is, don’t be fooled), is probably the right thing to do given the current climate. However, the fact they let the BLM mob just do what they want leaves a bitter taste. 
 

ironically, I bet if you took a sample of both of the protests, they’d largely be the same people. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, whelk said:

Most witnesses said peaceful but mood changed when police moved in. If it was a party in Manchester where they thought there might be some fight back they hide away in a cordon. Probably fancied their chances against women with posters and candles.

To be fair they were just enforcing the law. You can’t just pick and chose when the law is applicable or not. However, the bigger issues is that that they’re doing exactly that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SKD said:

Exactly my thoughts when I saw it break over twitter. 
 

breaking up the protest (that’s what it is, don’t be fooled), is probably the right thing to do given the current climate. However, the fact they let the BLM mob just do what they want leaves a bitter taste. 
 

ironically, I bet if you took a sample of both of the protests, they’d largely be the same people. 

Usual crowd jumping on the latest fashionable bandwagon no doubt. I saw a few signs saying that they weren’t safe in their homes. I thought a few months ago they wanted to defund the police? It’s hard keeping up with it all.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SKD said:

To be fair they were just enforcing the law. You can’t just pick and chose when the law is applicable or not. However, the bigger issues is that that they’re doing exactly that. 

That’s exactly what they do. Do they arrest everyone who drives over 30 mph?

We’re all those Rangers fans arrested?

I love the way saintsweb like to frame everything through BLM.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Turkish said:

Usual crowd jumping on the latest fashionable bandwagon no doubt. I saw a few signs saying that they weren’t safe in their homes. I thought a few months ago they wanted to defund the police? It’s hard keeping up with it all.   

Depends on how sharp your mind is maybe? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, whelk said:

Depends on how sharp your mind is maybe? 

Maybe. We love Muslims, we love gays, not sure how we can love them both as one hates the other but hopefully everyone will forget about that. We want to defund the police, we need the police to protect us from MEN, we are free to chose our own gender but all men are rapists. It’s fucking hard work being woke, no wonder we’re so angry all the time

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, whelk said:

That’s exactly what they do. Do they arrest everyone who drives over 30 mph?

We’re all those Rangers fans arrested?

I love the way saintsweb like to frame everything through BLM.

The BLM riots were the template for the modern protest. Wide scale disorder ignored or dismissed as a few people getting carried away with getting their point over. All other protests will be measured by the police reaction to those. Nice try on the rangers stuff, not many people running around defacing statues or attacking the police. As the cranberries once said, everyone else is doing it why can’t we?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Turkish said:

Maybe. We love Muslims, we love gays, not sure how we can love them both as one hates the other but hopefully everyone will forget about that. We want to defund the police, we need the police to protect us from MEN, we are free to chose our own gender but all men are rapists. It’s fucking hard work being woke, no wonder we’re so angry all the time

Must be hard work being as thick as you.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, whelk said:

Most witnesses said peaceful but mood changed when police moved in. If it was a party in Manchester where they thought there might be some fight back they hide away in a cordon. Probably fancied their chances against women with posters and candles.

To be fair, on this occassion they were in a no win situation.

The 'right' to peaceful protest (during a pandemic lockdown) was argued in the High Court, which clearly ruled that public safety had to come ahead of that right and denied the organiser's request for it to go ahead.

The Police were duty bound to enforce High Court judgement and the organiser's abandoned their plans to stage a vigil in public and asked people to protest remotely by standing outside their front door.

Anyone attending Clapham Common on Saturday night would have known that the High Court had ruled that their attendance was unlawful.  The Police had already confirmed how they would police the event so it shouldn't have come as a surprise to anyone!

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Turkish said:

Maybe. We love Muslims, we love gays, not sure how we can love them both as one hates the other but hopefully everyone will forget about that. We want to defund the police, we need the police to protect us from MEN, we are free to chose our own gender but all men are rapists. It’s fucking hard work being woke, no wonder we’re so angry all the time

Do you think all the women on Clapham Common want to defund the police?

Maybe Duchess of Cambridge does too?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Turkish said:

The BLM riots were the template for the modern protest. Wide scale disorder ignored or dismissed as a few people getting carried away with getting their point over. All other protests will be measured by the police reaction to those. Nice try on the rangers stuff, not many people running around defacing statues or attacking the police. As the cranberries once said, everyone else is doing it why can’t we?

Rangers is a parallel. Advised not to go there by authorities. They went there anyway. Police left them alone. Were many statues defaced last night? Must have missed that

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

To be fair, on this occassion they were in a no win situation.

The 'right' to peaceful protest (during a pandemic lockdown) was argued in the High Court, which clearly ruled that public safety had to come ahead of that right and denied the organiser's request for it to go ahead.

The Police were duty bound to enforce High Court judgement and the organiser's abandoned their plans to stage a vigil in public and asked people to protest remotely by standing outside their front door.

Anyone attending Clapham Common on Saturday night would have known that the High Court had ruled that their attendance was unlawful.  The Police had already confirmed how they would police the event so it shouldn't have come as a surprise to anyone!

Policing is about sensitivity not being pedantic. And intuition 😀

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks to me like the plod would have been better off just leaving them alone last night. Their actions probably caused more risk of spreading than if they just let them hold their candles or whatever and go home when they got bored.

Edited by aintforever
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, whelk said:

Policing is about sensitivity not being pedantic. And intuition 😀

Apologies, I always thought it was about maintaining law and order by enforcing rules.

Maybe they should swap out their pepper spray for a delightful pot pourri air freshener.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Apologies, I always thought it was about maintaining law and order by enforcing rules.

Maybe they should swap out their pepper spray for a delightful pot pourri air freshener.

We have talked before about how you would get on in the police force. You’d blow a sting operation for a traffic violation. Sorry guv but we are here to enforce the rules. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, whelk said:

We have talked before about how you would get on in the police force. You’d blow a sting operation for a traffic violation. Sorry guv but we are here to enforce the rules. 

Like I said, no win situation for them yesterday.

If they had worn tie dye shirts and flowers in their hair, stood back and watched (as aintclever is suggesting they should have done :mcinnes: ), then they would have been neglecting their duties to enforce a high court ruling and somebody would be receiving a massive bollocking this morning - Priti Patel would be looking at another contempt of court charge.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, whelk said:

That’s exactly what they do. Do they arrest everyone who drives over 30 mph?

We’re all those Rangers fans arrested?

I love the way saintsweb like to frame everything through BLM.

No, but they Should they have been dispersed. But we’re talking about the exact same police force (The Met) handling 2 similar situations completely different. In fact, BLM was significantly worse, given the large scale disorder and vandalism they caused, yet they’re on their knees begging for forgiveness whilst last night start steaming into a crowd of women stood around. 
 

A better police force would have dispersed the crowds before they get too large.

Edited by SKD
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, whelk said:

We have talked before about how you would get on in the police force. You’d blow a sting operation for a traffic violation. Sorry guv but we are here to enforce the rules. 

Are you seriously suggesting that the police wouldn’t arrest someone if they were driving dangerously and recklessly? Of course they would. But anyway if you’re caught by a speed camera breaking the speed limit, you are literally punished by the law, so I don’t see the point you’re trying to make here. 

Regardless, We’re not talking a bloke driving a couple of miles and hour. We’re talking thousands of people crammed into park, shouting, during a global pandemic which were nearly out of. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SKD said:

No, but they Should they have been dispersed. But we’re talking about the exact same police force (The Met) handling 2 similar situations completely different. In fact, BLM was significantly worse, given the large scale disorder and vandalism they caused, yet they’re on their knees begging for forgiveness whilst last night start steaming into a crowd of women stood around. 
 

A better police force would have dispersed the crowds before they get too large.

Ok just one witness’s account but this is why Met has so many problems. I am sure most have witnessed similar at football as well

 

8360DDC7-9F24-4F70-B9BB-9DA362DFF208.jpeg

Edited by whelk
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SKD said:

Are you seriously suggesting that the police wouldn’t arrest someone if they were driving dangerously and recklessly? Of course they would. But anyway if you’re caught by a speed camera breaking the speed limit, you are literally punished by the law, so I don’t see the point you’re trying to make here. 

Regardless, We’re not talking a bloke driving a couple of miles and hour. We’re talking thousands of people crammed into park, shouting, during a global pandemic which were nearly out of. 

My point is that police accept many laws being broken constantly. Staggering that people don’t seem to understand that. Do any of you know any coppers? If you think they aren’t empowered to make decisions to deescalate inflammatory situations it is hard to have a sensible discussion.


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, whelk said:

My point is that police accept many laws being broken constantly. Staggering that people don’t seem to understand that. Do any of you know any coppers? If you think they aren’t empowered to make decisions to deescalate inflammatory situations it is hard to have a sensible discussion.


 

Using speed as an example is a stupid one though, as unless you have the tools, it’s impossible to prove. And when they can prove it (I.e speed camera, you are punished). 
 

But yes you’re right, they are empowered to make decisions. The decision is usually made on risk of the offence. Driving at 35 in a 30, pretty low risk. Huge gatherings during a lockdown due to a global pandemic, which were about 2 weeks from being out of, pretty high risk. 
 

I think we can both agree that the handling was perhaps wrong, but removing the crowd wasn’t, Imo. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ll end by saying that it truly sad that another tragic event has been hijacked by the far left to push their ludicrous agenda. Whatever that may be. 
 

The real outrage here should be that she was ‘allegedly’ murdered by a police officer. That point seems to be missing in this hate of white men. I bet her family are disgusted. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})