Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Playing Devil’s advocate but guess the Met would have broken up a Muslim celebration breaking lock down rules as they did the Polish church?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
23 hours ago, The Cat said:

Interesting article from the FSA on the possible implications of the policing bill on football fans.

 

 

 

So you can basically get arrested for being mildly annoying. Not that this will bother the mildly annoying on here, who for now would prefer to obsess over how the moon landings were faked. But you can bet that once this gets passed, the police will use this at will to interfere with the lives of football fans who might be guilty of nothing more offensive than singing OWTS in public. It will be low hanging fruit for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Ted Bates Statue said:

So you can basically get arrested for being mildly annoying. Not that this will bother the mildly annoying on here, who for now would prefer to obsess over how the moon landings were faked. But you can bet that once this gets passed, the police will use this at will to interfere with the lives of football fans who might be guilty of nothing more offensive than singing OWTS in public. It will be low hanging fruit for them.

You have to be seriously annoying, but we all know that the police will use the act to provoke groups who are not seriously annoying to kick off. A neat self-fulfilling prophecy tool for the police.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/04/2021 at 19:40, The Cat said:

Interesting article from the FSA on the possible implications of the policing bill on football fans.

 

Cant see there is any case for changing the currents laws. What (non) problem is it addressing?  If anything protests have gradually less frequent and more orderly over time   

Edited by buctootim
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, buctootim said:

Cant see there is any case for changing the currents laws. What (non) problem is it addressing?  If anything protests have gradually less frequent and more orderly over time   

Protecting Winston

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, buctootim said:

Cant see there is any case for changing the currents laws. What (non) problem is it addressing?  If anything protests have gradually less frequent and more orderly over time   

Extinction Rebellion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Cheerio, cheerio, cheerio....

Quote

The Met Police was institutionally corrupt in the way it concealed or denied failings over the unsolved murder of Daniel Morgan, a report says. The force's first objective was to "protect itself" for not acknowledging its failures since the 1987 killing of the private investigator, chair of an independent panel Baroness O'Loan said. Mr Morgan's family and the public are owed an apology, the report concluded. He was attacked with an axe in the car park of a pub in south-east London.

The panel criticised the Met for then-Assistant Commissioner Dame Cressida Dick's initial refusal to grant it access to a police internal data system and the most sensitive information. Mr Morgan's brother Alistair said Dame Cressida, now the Met Police Commissioner, should "absolutely" be considering her position in light of the report.

 

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

They've been reporting on this case for years in Private Eye. Really glad the enquiry came to the conclusion it did as there was quite obviously a lot of dodgy behaviour going on at the Met back then.

You mean back when CD had only been in the Police for 4 years ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, The Cat said:

I didn't say anything about her. I was referring to the enquiry stating there was institutionalised corruption.

I know, but yet again unconnected events are being woven together by a certain individual out of sheer spite and bile.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

I know, but yet again unconnected events are being woven together by a certain individual out of sheer spite and bile.

Isn’t it more about blocking evidence from the enquiries not the event itself?

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

Isn’t it more about blocking evidence from the enquiries not the event itself?

Yes, its about her role in obstructing previous investigations access to the police computer systems. Organisations always look to protect themselves first. It's a thing they all do, then they obstruct long enough to buy enough time between the event and the reckoning to limit the repercussions.

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})