Saving Police Time

The Camera Cannot Lie, (or so they say).

2007-11-01T01:41:00.000Z

So, the well known nut-case and New Labour spin- monkey Meredydd Hughes, who in this insane world also doubles as the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and ACPO spokesman on Traffic, ( a title which he inherited from CC Dick Brainstorm incidentally), has been caught driving his car at 90 mph at 8.00 a.m on a Dual Carriageway. Well, continuing the Welsh theme, I am reminded of the words of the Sgt. Major played by Windsor Davies in that old sitcom,
“Oh Dear-what a Pity-Never Mind!”
I suppose I should mention that he has yet to be convicted and is thus entitled at this point to the Presumption of Innocence. There you go then, I’ve mentioned it.
Of course, if he did commit this heinous crime, then I have no sympathy with him whatsoever, and I will expect to see him disqualified for a short period, as is possible under sentencing guidelines for that speed.
– NOT because it actually IS a serious matter of course, because it’s really a pretty harmless and entirely trivial infringement of an unimportant Regulation of the sort that every normal person might commit every day of the week.
No, it’s because this pillock has for too long been riding the wave of trendy speed hysteria and government‘s predilection to use the Law and the Police as just another way to filch money from the public. What’s more he has cynically used these obviously damaging fads to rank-hop far beyond the level which he would ever have managed on his own merits.
This is a man who, in saner times, would have been struggling to make Sergeant by the time retirement was looming, yet he has risen to the very top by enforcing trivial traffic regulations upon the General Public with a ruthless disregard for the consequences to individuals concerned, a total indifference to the failure to detect real crime because of his disproportional deployment of scant resources to traffic matters, and no concern whatever about the damage which this has inflicted upon the reputation of the Police.

He who lives by the sword must die also by the sword, and so, if Mr. Hughes is proven to have committed this offence, perhaps it is time for him to fall on his? Since he considers speeding to be such a serious matter, how could he possibly feel able to continue in Office if convicted?
Of course, he has one possible hope. The alleged offence happened in the Force Area of his old friend and fellow traffic maniac Richard Brainstorm. Together they have crusaded against transgressors of the Con & Use Regulations for many a gallant year, and are thus Brothers in Arms in their total war against the generally law abiding British motorist. These are two men cast from the same heroic mould, and neither has had any closer ally in their common cause over two decades, so it remains to be seen how Mr Hughes’ old friend will react in this time of peril.

Now, I can’t think why this comes into my mind, but I remember as a boy sitting up in the rafters of an old barn at dusk waiting for the rats to come scuttling out of their holes, (rats never look up you know). In due course, two rats emerged from under a pile of bales. I had plenty of time to take aim, and shot one of them somewhere at the base of his head, causing an unusual amount of blood. The other one darted back under the bales, but by the time I had re loaded he was back and as I took aim, I was revolted to see that it first lapped at the blood of the dead one, and then started tucking into it! Still, that’s rats for you I suppose. Don’t know why I mentioned it really!

Coming back to the subject in hand, what do you think Mr. Brainstorm will do to help his old chum?

Author’s Note: Since writing the above, it has been pointed out that I may have inadvertently given the impression that I am prejudiced against rats. Nothing could be further from the truth! I did not mean to stereotype rats, or to imply that the behaviour described in the piece is in any way typical of the genus Rattus Norvegicus as a whole.
In the past , we may have made negative assumptions about these beautiful creatures based only upon ignorance and the fact that every rat we ever dealt with was a filthy vicious little bastard which stole eggs, killed young hens and crapped in the barley. However, modern social research has shown that each rat is an individual with the potential to become a wonderful and loyal pet if we could only cast aside all the outdated negative assumptions about them and encourage them into our homes.
I fully acknowledge that I was quite wrong to have made these disparaging remarks about rats, and I intend to enroll with a trained Counselor as soon as possible with a view to developing a more balanced and open minded attitude to all types of vermin.

PCSO’s or CSO’s………What is the Point?

2007-10-28T20:43:00.000Z

They were originally the brainchild of the most senior bods at C.O, and when he realised that there might be some kudos and cost-cutting involved, David Blunkett ,( perhaps the best ever example of a Cabinet Minister who did not deserve the dignity of that High Office of State), jumped enthusiastically onto the bandwagon.

The plan was to increase police visibility on the streets without actually sending Police Officers out to interact with the public, but to quote Edmund Blackadder, there was one small flaw in this theory ; it was bollocks!

The reason that high police visibility is , and has traditionally been , considered vital is because it reassures the public that the police are out there protecting them and that they are getting value for their “tax dollar”. Moreover, it goes directly to Mayne’s Primary Object of an Efficient Police – the Prevention of Crime, because it has an immeasurable deterrent effect. Who can guess how many crimes have been thwarted by the presence of a uniformed P.C, who probably remained totally unaware of the intended mugging, burglary or vandalism about to happen when he passed by on his Beat?

The ‘P’CSO illusion, however, does not reassure the public of anything,(quite the opposite in fact), OR indeed intimidate any criminals from going about their nefarious business. At my school, the Prefects had greater powers and standing than they have.

To their credit, some of the CSO’s I have encountered do everything a Police Officer should in terms of dealing with the public. They’re polite, often smartly turned out, and don’t act as if they think they’re more important than the public. In truth, most CSO’s I encounter seem to have more of the qualities that a Police Officer should have than many recently recruited Officers actually do have.

As pointed out by a poster in an earlier conversation, you could get rid of ALL CSO’s and replace them with nearly 70% of the same number of properly trained and warranted Officers.
So why don’t they?
A CSO in Bromley can quite easily be making more money than a probationary PC in Brixton, Toxteth or Birmingham, which ,if you ask me is, as crazy as an inflatable dartboard.

Anyway, returning to the original subject of this post, the serving Officers amongst you will know that the Federation now refuse to refer to “PCSO’s” because, to quote Inspector Glen Smyth, Chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation,
“Police Officers they are not”.
Instead they officially refer to them as “CSO’s” as I have been doing, incidentally, since they were introduced.

Not for the first time, I almost swallowed my dentures when I heard a week or two back that UNISON were proposing giving them the same uniform as serving Officers and this is, as far as I am concerned, the straw that has broken the camels back.
CSO’s are NOT Police Officers and it riles me when I hear politicians and very senior Officers ,(who clearly are politicians in all but name), trying to make CSO’s Police Officers in all but name.

Here is my proposal: Dismiss with six months notice all CSO’s in the land BUT give them priority interviews within the force they have been serving, to join as a Police Officer.
If they can do the job, (which some undoubtedly could in my opinion), then we should welcome them with open arms. If they cannot do the job, well that’s tough I’m afraid.

Using CSO’s IS POLICING ON THE CHEAP and it ain’t even all that cheap!

McGoogan says Thank You

2007-10-28T20:22:00.000Z

May I briefly express my gratitude that members of the Fourth Estate, (that's the Press, for the benefit of DC Readers), and others who have been instrumental in taking the views expressed by your humble correspondent into the public arena. Also, I would thank all those who have contacted me with messages of support against the vitriolic comments and suppression of my voice elwhere in the 'bloggesphere'. Please forgive me if I cannot answer each one individually, but accept my sincere thanks - it is comforting that so many decent people still remain! Let me also assure you that McGoogan has been dealing with bullies and those who would smother the truth for their own ends for a LONG time, and he's not going to give into them now!!
Nor should we spend time on them, but press on to the next issue..........

Appeal for Public Assistance

2007-10-25T19:36:00.000+01:00

As you will know, in direct contrast to the author of the ‘Policeman’s Blog’ I know a great deal more about police work than I do about blogging.
Following on from Cotlake’s posting under ‘Criminal or Ally’, it it would be quite wrong to deduce that I am a “gentleman of leisure”, but I fully take on board his call for regular postings and hereby call for your assistance in the shaping of this site. I would also take the opportunity to assure you that it will remain YOUR site, and will never be ‘sold out’ for commercial gain.
In this spirit, may I call upon you to assist me by posting what you would like to see more of.
I am gradually learning about the ‘blogging’ world so your comments will help a lot.
I will be making a more topical entry later on this evening, but in the meantime, in addition to your feedback on the above, I would be interested in your thoughts on fixing the job if that’s possible. The question I am most frequently asked is what I would to improve things for the police and the public. Here are two points off the top of my head.

Less politicisation of policing:
The police should be above politics and actively refuse to comment on political matters (are you listening ‘Commissioner’?)
Sensible recruiting.
This kind of links in to the point above -but recruiting can should only ever be done on merit. If you can do the job, fine, but we shouldn’t have to beg anyone to do it because if we do, then they probably won’t want to do the job for the right reasons.
Police Officers don’t NEED to be Bamber Gascoign ,but they should never actually be stupid, so some kind of IQ test might be called for. As old fashioned as it may be, I don’t really think that anyone who could be cast as one of the 7 dwarfs in the Divisional Pantomime, (No, not Graded Response –the actual Divisional Pantomime), should ever be in a position where they have to deal with drunks and violent criminals.

Over to you for 2 things you’d change about the job if you could!

Posts Coming soon in no particular order:

This policeman’s blog is not a happy one… happy one!
PCSO’s or CSO’s?
CSO’s or more PC’s
How to deal with the public and how to deal with criminals.

Captain Gatso and his Band

2007-10-23T12:03:00.000+01:00

One thing which I am beginning to learn is that you have to keep these posts as simple as possible because the average attention span doesn't seem to be what it was.
Two points which I have consistently laboured are the following,
(i) That police officers appear to be falling into the trap of believing that they are in some way superior to the public whom they are supposed to serve and protect, their loyalty seeming to be shifting from the interests of justice for the public to the commands of politicians.
(ii) That this system of non consentual policing has never, and can never ultimately suceed. It has been tried time and again throughout the world and failed. I can point to domestically related forces such as the old British Colonial Police and the Irish Auxillary Police, (more commonly known as the 'Black 'n Tans'. At the point when a police force starts to contempt the public,("everyday tales of the British Underclass, how I detest them...!), then that police force is already condemned to ultimate failure.

In an entirely unrelated Posting, the following comment appeared,

"Off topic question for ALL actually but Mcgoogan too.What do you think about roads policing and speed cameras?Do you sympathise with the organisation Motorists' Against Detection and the self-styled 'Captain Gatso'?"

So important is the question, that it deserves a whole new Post.
Firstly, for all those who didn't read through quite a long posting from me on this and other issues, I shall be rude enough to quote MYSELF!

".........in common with many other Public Institutions, the whole purpose of the Police Force began to change. It’s function now would be to support Party Dogma, both by putting into practise some of the insane social engineering employment policies of the left, and by physically enforcing their political theories. As a secondary undertaking, it would raise revenue for the Government by shifting its efforts from the traditional priorities set out by Mayne of preventing and detecting Crime, (i.e, as the term is understood by the General Public – Burglary, Car Theft, Violence, Public Disorder etc), and push to the top of the enforcement list those comparatively trivial misdemeanours, (either already existent ones previously used only as useful paper wedges to level a wonky table in the canteen, or brand new ones invented and enacted to order), which provided a ready source of cash input for a minimum input of effort, time and expertise..."

Of course I cannot condone criminal damage to speed cameras. In fact I don't think that "Captain Gatso" himself publicly condones such actions. However, as I have repeatedly tried to warn, there always will come a point when people who feel that they are being oppressed rather than served by their police will begin to bite back, and this is why the actions of Captain Gatso should sound alarm bells in police circles.
Of course it is politicians rather than policemen who decided to start using the Laws of England as a means of enforcing their dogma and collecting money instead of fighting crime, and police officers are merely the tool of their self-serving policies. However, historical world events will show that this will count for little in the public mind if they eventually reject those politicians, in whatever manner.
I have never met 'Captain Gatso', and know nothing about him except for press coverage,but I do not get the impression that he is some sort of professional trouble maker or madman, but rather an ordinary, generally law abiding man, whose sense of justice has been bruised, and who finds that he has no legitimate remedy.
Once again, I must emphasise that I do not condone any criminal acts, but I believe that we would be wise to consider what has led to this situation.
To loosely quote a well known politician and General, "Those who warn of grave events which they can forsee by the use of common sense, always run the risk of being accused of WISHING for them to happen".
In a triumph of Hope over Experience then, I would LIKE to think that I won't get posts which suggest that I'm doing that.
I would, however, appreciate your thoughts on the matter. Is there anyone who can appreciate the dangers of continuing down the path of disregarding public opinion?

Criminal or Ally

2007-10-21T00:13:00.000+01:00

I nearly choked on my All Bran this morning, when I read about the case of an ex-Naval man in his 50’s, David Bamber who was arrested by uniform carrying Hampshire Officers for doing what many would regard to be a public service.

Having witnessed a young yob ripping up a pile of leaflets and tossing them on the floor, Bamber walked over to the boy and told him he had to pick the litter up and put it in the rubbish bin just six feet in front of him. The young 12 year-old, being a product of his undisciplined age told Mr Bamber to go forth and multiply , then launched into a tirade of abuse against the gentleman.

Mr Bamber then took hold of the young hooligan by his coat and instructed him to clear up the mess he had made. Unsurprisingly the boy saw the error of his ways and did as he was told by his elder and better.

I would have thought that a responsible parent might have patted Mr Bamber on the back for his actions. Sadly, the boys’ mother ,Mrs Chav ,from Southsea turned up and started hurling more abuse at this gentleman then threatened to call the Police to have him charged with assault. Confident that he had done the right thing, Mr Bamber called the police himself to prevent a further Breach of the Peace, but was shocked to find that they turned up quicker than Michael Barrymore to a pool party and arrested HIM!

Unsurprisingly, the case was dropped by the CPS because there was absolutely no prospect of a conviction. None of this happened however before Mr Bamber was taken to the police station, detained for eight hours, interviewed, fingerprinted, DNA swabbed and released on bail to sweat it out for six weeks before eventually being told that he would not be prosecuted.

Someone will point out that you cannot simply ignore an allegation of assault upon a juvenile, but nor is there any compulsion to accept the say-so of some little yob who clearly has the ulterior motive of shifting the blame onto someone else. An officer MAY arrest upon reasonable suspicion, but he is equally entitled to conclude that he is not sufficiently convinced by what the boy has said, balanced against the other version, to take such drastic action on the spot, and may deal with the allegation in a number of other ways. Similarly, the Custody Officer should be insisting on some CREDIBLE evidence before authorising detention. Mr Bamber could have been released altogether at this point, (after being informed that he could theoretically be re-arrested in the unlikely event that the CPS considered it to be either in the public interest or likely to meet with anything but public and judicial derision to proceed against an adult for doing his bit to reduce anti-social behaviour on the streets, based solely upon the unsubstantiated evidence of a juvenile suspect without visible injury)
Now before anyone starts saying that the public should not take the law in to their own hands, let me remind you that the police are meant to uphold the law on behalf of the public, not to act like self-appointed supermen (and I’d better say girls) , who OWN the Law. Police Officers are not above members of the general public because they are members of the general public.
Nor do the government of the day own the Law, by the way. In slavishly enforcing a perverse version of the law as interpreted by some politically appointed, (and motivated), bureaucrat, a police officer would in principle be no different to the SS Guard herding people into ovens and saying, “But I was only obeying Orders!”
Obviously, I do not mean to suggest that a police officer making whacky arrests in the U.K is in any way, shape or form comparable to a Nazi, or that anyone has committed actually evil acts. However, I do point out the rationale certainly is the same, and my intention is not to vilify anyone, but rather to provide a wake-up call.

There is no doubt that mad directives from the top are the root cause of the plummeting levels of both public confidence in the police, and the morale of police officers. This is clearly understood by all, but I believe that the public has an expectation that individual officers will stand up and be counted if they are asked to ignore their Oath and the Law, and that they will become more and more unsympathetic if this public expectation is rebuffed.

But can I, as an individual, hope to change things for the better when they have gone this far? Well, one thing I have observed over the years, and which is usually true, is that whether you think you can… or you think you can’t… you’re right!

Just as a footnote to this item, since Mr Bamber was not convicted or cautioned for any offence, he is currently fighting to have his fingerprints and DNA destroyed. As readers of this blog will know, the retention of DNA and fingerprints where cases are not proceeded with lies in the hands of the Chief Officer. I would be interested in your comments on whether YOU think they should be retained.

An Inconvenient Posting

2007-10-18T19:42:00.000+01:00

As you may know, I recently upset the proprietors of the ‘Policeman’s Blog’ by disputing some of the opinions of the blogger in what I though was an Open Forum. Being quite unable to support his doctrine of despair with logical argument, he threatened to remove my posts, using the transparent excuse that they were too long, and claiming that he doesn’t allow posts over 200 words because ‘people won’t read them’.
However, in a stunning oversight, went on to quote another post of 622 words which happened to agree with his point of view!
Since he had addressed his latest Sermon directly to me, I duly replied, but later received a telephone call telling me that he had in fact deleted all but the first 200 words –even though he had left other posts of more than that which agreed with him alone.
Apparently, he has also activated the posting control so no one will be able to agree with me.
Of course I shall not post there again.( Indeed, I would NOT have done on this occasion had I not been directly attacked by the young Commissar of Propaganda ).
However, I have NEVER given into bullies, so in the interests of Free Speech, I shall reproduce the full censored reply here.
I must warn you that it isn’t specially exciting, and that I am only posting it to protect your right to CHOOSE what to read. In that spirit, you are welcome to visit this site and disagree with me as much as you like, and may choose your own words,(and the number of words), when doing so.
“Firstly, I cannot resist noting that Martin’s (excellent), post is rather more than 200 words.(It is 622 actually). However, instead of deleting it, you have quoted it in your main Posting. The difference is, of course, that it is, (on the face of it at least), more in keeping with your own views. Editorial discretion is quite properly your own in this arena, but at least you have been kind enough to demonstrate that the length of a posting is not the real yardstick.
I keep trying to extricate myself politely from the conflict which has unexpectedly arisen. I did say, didn’t I, that no positive consequences can result from such childish ‘tit for tat’ BEFORE the last time that you decided to try pulling my chain again? I am indeed very mindful of the dangers of constantly repeating constructive criticism after the point has been made, and I would hope that it is clear that my intention is not to publicly discredit young officers who are doing their best, but have been betrayed by cowardly rank-hopping individuals who are more politicians than Police Officers.
I have quite deliberately refrained from mentioning my own blog here, but since you have done so repeatedly, I will point out that anyone who reads it will see that my attacks are against those who have abused their positions of Senior Rank to bring about the atrocious state of affairs set out in Martin’s posting. Yes, I have also teased some younger people, but only in the cause of encouraging them to take themselves less seriously, (probably the first lesson we must all learn if we are to avoid the temptation to ‘go postal’ the next time some member of the public makes an unfortunate remark or some little joke which we’ve heard 300 times before), and to engender a more positive attitude to the seemingly insurmountable difficulties which they face today.
OF COURSE I know how hard it seems for a young officer to buck the system at this point, and I can fully understand what a futile gesture it might seem. On the other hand, all efforts to come to their, (and the public’s) rescue will be wasted if they have already surrendered by the time the relief force arrives.
Martin, the recruitment standards of Devon and Cornwall were always high, and I can see from your use of language that they haven’t slipped as much as some. Yes, you are quite right that it is some time now since I was a ‘Response Officer’, but please accept my word for it that in certain parts of the country it wasn’t quite as sedentary as some imagine- even then. Also please accept my word that I may well have undertaken other duties which many of the posters here have not, and PLEASE consider the possibility that this might give me a slightly wider perspective on the matter.
Reading your post certainly makes me want to grab some of the supervising officers who have betrayed you by the scruff of the neck and bang their heads against the wall, (though consultations with the CPS have more or less established that this would be illegal), and your Custody Officer should certainly be sacked. Unfortunately, things are not as simple as that, and we must crack on at it more methodically.
I am well aware that my earlier post was long, but it needed to be because I seem to recall that I was asked to “show my working out”, and I am also aware that it seems a thousand miles from reality. On the other hand, if you read it again, you will see that it contains no impossible parts, but DOES require a re-think on the part of officers of all ranks AND the support of the general public, (which is why I always think it’s a bad strategy to piss them off). It is true that the uniformed P.C cannot do this on his own, but he must do his part by at least speaking up for himself in the RIGHT place, and at the RIGHT time.
That is all he can do, and it might not seem much I know. However, you have 2 alternatives; either to just yield to the night, or pressurise as much as you can from one end of the problem and hope that others will be able to mobilise the Relief Force which I have mentioned at the other end of the problem, and come to your aid.
Finally, I must apologise to the Senior Management of this blog for exceeding my word budget in this case. I fully appreciate that my efforts have not on this occasion fallen within the performance targets set for replies Sir, but I would respectfully submit that circumstances do sometimes arise which call on young bloggers like myself to act upon their own initiative. I realise that you disapprove of such brash behaviour, but in mitigation, I promise to familiarise myself with all of your latest Policy Directives, and study some of your own posts in the hope that I will eventually learn how to express myself properly.

Submitted, Sir, for your consideration.

Probationary Blogger McGoogan”

Local Beat Officer may be a Burglar!

2007-10-17T18:37:00.000+01:00

Following a number of emails and two press enquiries earlier today, I would like to further address the serious subject of serving Police Officers with police records… (and no I’m not talking about ‘walking on the moon’).
No these are NOT all minor offences like not having a TV licence. In the case of the 30 Hampshire Officers, we know about, who have criminal convictions, one Officer has a conviction for possession of drugs, one for carrying an offensive weapon in a public place and at least one Officer with a conviction for benefit fraud!!!!
Perhaps it should be impossible under very exceptional circumstances to retain Officers with criminal convictions. For example, the PC you may remember some years ago who was convicted of common assault after slapping a yob who had threatened to throw his baby out the window of a moving train. (An early example of cops nicking cops without pausing to exercise any common sense). What I do know is that the Office of Constable is one that puts the Holder in a position of trust ,and that taxpaying members of the public are entitled to assume that the Officer who turns up to report a burglary (eventually ) isn’t themselves a convicted burglar or thief. One might reasonably assume that an Officer conducting a search for an offensive weapon hasn’t themselves been convicted for carrying one!
In years gone by, any recordable criminal conviction of a serving Officer would have led to them being thrown out faster than a George Formby CD at a swingers party, but these days it seems that anything goes.
I know the trendy Senior Management like their Officers to represent the community they serve and I’m aware of the paradigm that it takes a crook to catch a crook but don’t you think they’re taking things too far?
Whatever next ? Rapists to understand the offenders feelings? Shoplifters who can understand how other shoplifters operate? This is yet another nail in the coffin of decent policing in Great Britain .

Almost finally – if I haven’t scared you enough… there could be many hundreds more serving Officers with criminal convictions. The 158 criminals who wear police uniforms in Scotland, the 74 in the Met, the 30 in Hampshire and so fourth are only known to us following a freedom of information request which alarmingly only reveals the number of Officers who have been convicted since 2000.

So I ask for your help. I will be writing to the Home Secretary and to every Chief Officer in the land and I intend to attach a copy of your comments and posts in reply to this post. Whether you are yourself a serving Officer or just a taxpaying member of the public; which we all are at the end of the day, whether or not we carry a warrant card, I urge you to HELP reclaim the Police Force (Service for those who do newspeak) by posting your comment now.

"An Inconvenient Truth"

2007-10-17T18:24:00.000+01:00

I have received many e-mails and messages of support about what has been seen as the censorship of my views on a certain blog. One e-mailer used the above phrase "an incovenient truth", which I rather liked and, with apologies to Al Gore and a certain clueless near-probationer who doesn't like being shown up for wasting his own time, I have used it! However, this is a trifling matter and I must leave it aside for the moment to deal with more substancial and constructive matters, but I promise you, I will return to it when time permits.

Brunstrom's Latest Brainstorm.

2007-10-17T04:16:00.000+01:00

Readers may be interested in the latest antics of Britain’s most bizarre and unpopular Chief Officer, (and that’s a title which he holds in the face of some pretty stiff competition I’d say). I speak, of course, of Richard Brunstrom, the Chief Constable of North Wales. So, you may ask, what is the latest offering from the man who brought us zero-tolerance speed cameras, investigated Anne Robinson’s jokes about Welsh people on Room 101, and used photographs of a decapitated RTA victim as a prop in a Public Speaking engagement?
Well, I’ll tell you- I expect that you remember when he instructed his officers to start hiding behind traffic signs to catch people speeding….. Well, he’s had yet another thought about how to crack down on crime, and he’s pretty confident that this one is a REAL winner!
He has noticed that drugs are a pretty big problem to the police, (can’t get ANYTHING past this man, can you?), and for so he’s been thinking how best to solve this tricky dilemma for ages now. Then, all of a sudden it came to him!
What we do is……………:LEGALISE DRUGS!!! Brilliant, innit? Why didn’t we think of that before? If drugs were legal, then they wouldn’t cause a problem any more would they?
Well done Mr Brunstrom! All we have to do now is legalise theft, assault, rape and guns then the place should be pretty much crime free, and we can all go home!
Not much more to say then is there? I wonder what he’ll think of next. Possibly re-introducing the Death Penalty for Ethnically Aggravated Speeding.(That’s where you get caught doing 31mph in a 30, and say “Well, I got confused by all those bloody road signs in Welsh”).
I also see that another controversial Senior Officer has left and started a “new career as a politician”. Brian Paddick , the UK's most senior gay policeman until his retirement as Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police in May this , is standing for the Lib Dems as their candidate for Mayor of London. The man who pioneered the idea of letting people openly smoke cannabis on the streets of South London, (with disastrous results), long before Mr Brunstrom ever thought of it has been quoted in the Evening Standard as follows,

"But from my experience if you are good at your job and they trust you, sexuality becomes a non-issue….If you are useless and cannot be trusted it becomes an issue.”

-I don’t understand………Is he saying that it IS an issue, or that it ISN’T?

Moving on, a Poster here made a very valid point about people being kept in the job despite conduct which would have resulted in the sack a few years ago, and the effect which this is bound to have on efficiency, morale and public confidence. I agreed with his position on the matter when I read it, but a bit of digging reveals just how bad the situation actually is.
According to public information records there are 30 Officers with criminal convictions serving in the Hampshire Force, 74 in the Met, 158 in Scotland,40 in Yorkshire, and 14 in Sussex.
Reading some of the posts from people in these blogs who are apparently serving officers, you can’t help but wonder where they’re getting them from. I’d begun to think that there must now be a recruitment quota for people with learning difficulties, but it seems to be even worse than that, doesn’t it?
The lunatics have taken over the asylum, and all that remains is for the Chief Constable of North Wales to suggest reducing prison overcrowding by recruiting all the inmates into a new Super Traffic Division based on the principles of the French Foreign Legion.

Will there come a point when we cut the Police Service loose from political control, expel the trendy nutters from senior command and return to traditional unbiased and honest policing, or will we let it carry on like this until there is total anarchy and the situation is beyond redemption?
……..actually, thinking about that, I’m not enjoying the answer which seems to be offering itself, so I will bid you goodnight my friends, and look forward to your thoughts on the matter.

Another Assault by Panorama

2007-10-15T05:29:00.000+01:00

I have long been mystified by the Job’s refusal to bite back when certain sections of the media attack it consistently and unfairly.
This over-developed sense of gentlemanly conduct goes back a very long way in fact. I personally recall the events leading up to the shooting of Waldorf in Kensington by Peter Finch and a chap called Jardine if my memory serves me correctly, and I can assure you that 99% of the exculpatory evidence was withheld from the media. Perhaps I shall go into that further on another occasion, but for now suffice it to say that the Job refused to make public a great deal of photographs and other surveillance evidence which made a nonsense of the various T.V Documentaries on the subject which sought to colour the facts adversely for the Police. Fortunately, Peter –a TRUE gentleman and a very good detective was, together with the other chap, acquitted by a jury of the charges which, in my opinion, were unfairly brought under intense media pressure.
However, this was one of many experiences which have left me with a mistrust of T.V Documentary makers, who are only too happy to condemn policemen and the police service on the say so of someone with little integrity, even less credibility, and usually some motive of financial gain.
The examples of this are too numerous to list, but I particularly object to some of these ‘undercover policeman’ type shows where some dodgy character joins the Job fraudulently, then proceeds to covertly record pissed-up probationers and recruits saying silly things in what they believe to be private conversations. The reaction is to start sacking people all over the place and apologizing for Institutional Racism, when the reality is that if it took them 6 months of secret recording to obtain 3 or 4 stupid statements , I would regard it as a testimony to the general good conduct of officers.
Of course this is ANOTHER way of using the naïve words of someone who is too wet behind the ears to know better as a club to beat over the head of his colleagues.
I really would like to record the conversations in a BBC News Room for 6 months and see how many unfortunate remarks were made!
Now, is it possible that the Job has, at long last, decided to stand up for itself against the poisonous Panorama Programme, with its long history of Police knocking?
The Stephen Lawrence case is one which I intend to explore further here at another time, because I believe it to be a milestone on the road to ruin for the reputation of the Metropolitan Police, and one which has been both ENTIRELY misrepresented and used as a political football.
It enters this post, however, because it was the subject of a Panorama Programme in July last year in which it did no less than accuse Assistant Commissioner John Yates of corruption!! Believe me – he isn’t. What’s more, they did their usual thing of rolling out some individual whom they tried to portray as reliable and knowledgeable to prove their anti-police ravings had some basis.
Was it yet another naïve probationer running off at the mouth for the cameras without beginning to understand the harm he was doing ?
No, this time they went one better and propped up another former policeman –former detective actually - Neil Putnam, a man whom I shall make no bones about saying was a corrupt officer!
The allegations never passed the laugh test in the first place, but now that the IPCC has finally confirmed that they were completely groundless, the Telegraph reports that CO are considering complaints to OfCom. I hope they do, and I hope that the producers of this programme will resultantly be revealed to be carrying a dangerous anti-police bias, as has been very obvious for some years to anyone capable of looking past their affable and apparently even-handed façade.

Another Assault by Panorama

2007-10-15T05:05:00.000+01:00

I don't intend to do this every time, but I have received complaints from another blog that my Posts are too long and complicated-so, on this one occasion, I will duplicate this post in a simplified version for the hard of thinking-
SOMETIMES REPORTERS ARE NASTY MEN WHO JUST PRETEND TO BE NICE SO THEY CAN GET YOU TO SAY BAD STUFF ABOUT THE POLICE. THEY SAID NASTY BAD THINGS ABOUT A POLICEMAN BEING NAUGHTY, BUT HE HADN'T REALLY BEEN NAUGHTY AT ALL! BUT IN THE END THE BIG GROWN UP POLICEMEN WHO KNOW BUGGER-ALL ABOUT STUFF 'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT IN A RESPONSE TEAM ,FOUND OUT WHAT HAD HAPPENED, AND SO THE POLICEMAN WHO HADN'T REALLY BEEN NAUGHTY DIDN'T GET IN TROUBLE AFTER ALL!
- AND THEY ALL LIVED HAPPILY EVER AFTER !!!

Blogging a Dead Horse?

2007-10-12T13:16:00.000+01:00

For reasons which I will set out, I am a bit depressed today. I’m not going to lie to you, or wrap this up, my friends. My overnight reading of police related ‘blogs’ has made me realise that things are much worse than I thought.
As I mentioned at the outset, my idea in starting this blog was to counter David Copperfield’s contribution to the debate. On discovering its existence through media publicity, I was horrified that such an inexperienced officer was putting over a bleak and hopeless image to the general public, which reflected a level of gutless incompetence that I felt sure was not representative.
Of course I did not hesitate to fight fire with fire, thinking that I could perhaps -in some small way - offset the damage to police morale and public confidence being inflicted incrementally with each fatalistic posting on the Copperfield Blog. Thus, I banged out a long initial post which was intended to appeal on a number of levels, and therefore over a wide audience of interested parties, with the intention of rallying a more positive view of the subject.
However, I did not pause to look at some of the other related material on the Web before writing it, and that was a grave error! I have now done so, and found that there are dozens of ‘Sons of Copperfield’ out there, moaning and groaning about the bloody awful state of policing instead of doing anything about it. Pretty much all of them are –or claim to be- police officers, yet the irony of the fact that they are therefore complaining about themselves seems to have passed them by!
Each and every one of them seems to regard himself as the last remaining ‘good guy’ in the whole British Police Service- a man of action who joined to rid the streets of crime only to find himself tied up in red tape. How easily though, these latter-day super heroes have surrendered to the ‘grey faceless ones’ who I can assure you have always populated offices in every Force H.Q and done their damnest to prevent achievement by perpetually inventing new rules, forms and restrictions with no purpose except to make them seem clever and make it impossible to get anything done.
Lord Wellington, during his Napoleonic Campaigns between 1802 and 1815 said something like, “I shall not defer control of my armies to mere quill-drivers”.
Faceless bureaucrats are, by their nature, bullies and trouble makers. They always have been and they always will. Such men will always back down when challenged!
However, let me put this very clearly for the benefit of my fellow bloggers; if you haven’t got the guts to stand up to some silly bloody uniformed governor who wants you to spend your time filling in endless forms, don’t write blogs about it - put your papers in and make way for men with more intestinal fortitude.
Frankly, if you haven’t got the bottle and astuteness to frustrate the mad impractical schemes of some 18 year old Bramshill tosser and get on with what you should be doing, then I doubt that you’ll be the right man to stand up to some drugged-up knife wielding nutter in a pub fight either.
Yes, you can creep around like a scared little mouse while you’re on duty and do exactly what you’re told, no matter how stupid, without ever rocking the boat , then go home and sob like a girl for a bit and pour your heart out on the internet. Or, you can start applying some standards in what you do and be prepared to take the flak.
Up to you really !
I know one thing though- when I saw the crap which people were writing on these blogs I could have easily gone along with the general flow of gutless carping, or even given up the whole idea, but I’m buggered if I’m going to shut my mouth on this issue no matter how much it upsets a bunch of pontificating probationers and sandal-wearing rural Inspectors, (which it will) – any more than I have ever danced to the tune of the said Bramshill timewaster.
As I said, it’s entirely up to you, but the question is – are you up to IT ?

-Evenin' All

Did you see the episode of Panorama entitled, 'Wasting Police Time'?

2007-10-11T02:49:00.000+01:00

Evenin’ All !
Well, it’s a week or so now since I turned on the Jon Gaunt Radio Show, and heard that P.C David Copperfield had not only given up on us, but run off to join the Mounties, so perhaps enough time has now elapsed that I can make some ,(very deferential), observations.
I thought I’d better leave a decent period during which the Nation could share it’s collective grief ,and reflect upon how best to fill the gap which he has left in our unrelenting fight against crime.
To be quite honest, I had somehow missed his contribution, but I am assured that during his brief participation in the day to day workings of some far-flung local sub-station he was able to assess all the maladies facing us today with stunning confidence!
I turned the radio up and listened intently because I’ve got to be honest here, I can’t see any easy solutions myself, and I was quite excited that this chap seemed to have all the answers. In fact, I must admit that got a pad and a fountain pen out to start taking some notes.
Now, that was a when a very funny thing happened. I just don’t know whether it was just interference on my old transistor radio, the cumulative effects of far too many bottles of Bushmill’s whisky down the years, or possibly just my age, but I kept hearing this voice in the background, repeating over and over again,
“A little knowledge is a dangerous thing”.
I digress!
It seems that young Copperfield had been confounded at every turn in his diligent efforts to keep the mean streets of Trumpton safe from (…….. I don’t know………poachers or something I expect), by having to do lots of writing.
Apparently, it takes him six hours to do the paperwork for a drunk, and he went on to set out in detail one particular case which he found exceptionally testing. Of course, my own powers of language cannot put it across in quite the same colourful way as young Copperfield did, and I may well miss some of the subtler points, but I would nonetheless like, in my own clumsy way, to try to share it with you.
Now it seems that young Copperfield had received a call on his radio to an allegation of theft at a local address. He rushed to the scene, (arriving a few days later no doubt), and was confronted by a morass so intricate and challenging that not even his 25 minutes or so experience of policing at the sharp end had prepared him for it!

What had happened was that a young couple, (who had formerly been cohabiting), had suffered a falling out, and could not decide who was to keep the family dog. Now, the female half of this situation was most upset that her boyfriend had taken the said hound, (let’s call him ‘Rover’ for the purposes of this case-study, though obviously that is not his real name), when he had deserted the former love nest. Well, hell hath no fury like a woman scorned as they say, and she had dialled the local police station to get her own back by alleging that her boyfriend had stolen poor Rover.
(At this point, it must be said, my mind is boggling a bit as to why whichever retard took the call actually assigned a unit to it in the first place).
By the time he eventually got there, the woman had in fact changed her mind, and didn’t even want to make the stupid allegation any more. However, the bold Copperfield knew that a line had been crossed and he had to act!
Now, a lesser man might have simply accepted her current wishes and left, or calmed her down and politely explained that this was a matter best sorted out privately between the two parties or through the Civil Courts, resulted the radio call as ‘no offences disclosed, no cause for police action’, (or whatever number that corresponds to on the CAD system), and moved on to deal with another call. He might even have reported it briefly in his pocket book had he been satisfied with mere common sense.
But No! The man, who is so outraged by unnecessary paperwork, reported it as a theft!
Indeed, not satisfied with this, he stayed to take witness statements and, (probably), examined the scene for forensic evidence. Having taken this mystifying action, he returned to the police station to tell Sargey about his latest strike against the underworld. (Well, I don’t know whether he did that immediately, or whether he stopped off on the way at a local Internet Café to post it on the Web), but certainly he did at some point present Sargey with the pig’s breakfast which he had made of this very routine call.

Well, it turns out that the wicked Sergeant made him go back and get a withdrawal statement, and the whole thing –surprisingly- ended up creating a lot of time consuming red-tape!

A few decades back, I would have been blaming the Section Sergeant for lack of supervision had I heard this story, but as we know; it is no longer that simple. Had I, as a probationer, presented the old Station Sergeant, (a sadly defunct rank), with a pile of steaming bloody nonsense like this, his face would have reddened, his eyes would have narrowed, and his handlebar moustache would have started spinning with rage!
I would have been shouted at, ridiculed, threatened with the sack, and quite possibly clouted over the head with the heavy wooden board which he carried round for the ostensible purpose of clipping charge sheets to, but in fact used just as readily as a close-quarter weapon, or for throwing furiously around the Charge-Room as a sign of his disapproval. I would have been posted on the back door of some inconsequential diplomatic premises for six weeks, and tormented in the Canteen about it for at least two years!
But, guess what? I wouldn’t have done it again!
Of course, that was in the bad old days when the Commander was a retired Colonel instead of a 24 year old lesbian with a degree in Drama from Southampton Polytechnic, and when we simply didn’t understand how wicked it was to interfere with the self-esteem of recruits. In these more open-minded days, no Sergeant would dare to pass judgment on his probationers, because he’d be accused of racism, sexism, homophobia or -as a last resort- ‘bullying in the workplace’.
Once again, I digress! The point is that the now undeservedly prominent author of ‘The Probationer’s Blog’, is also the author of the problems which he complains about, but no one has ever dared correct him.
Most of these problems result from the fact that he is part of a generation which is above correction or rebuke, yet ready to pontificate, at the drop of a hat, on matters which they simply do not understand .
We can only recruit policemen from the general public, of course, and so if they tend to bring their groundless self-belief and lack of knowledge with them when they join, that really should not come as a shock to anyone, should it?

Is it really as simple as that? No, of course it’s not. What I am describing is, of course, merely a symptom of the disease, not the disease itself.
Like all self-respecting and life-threatening diseases, the one afflicting society in general and specifically log-jamming the police and criminal justice systems, has many unfortunate symptoms. I really cannot address them all here, although, in saying that I intend to direct my comments primarily to the terminal decay of the police service, I am to some extent myself guilty of treating the symptoms rather than the disease, and I am well aware of the irony of this.
Nonetheless, a journey of a thousand miles must start with one small step, so this is as good a place to start as anywhere else. It’s certainly one aspect of social decay which is highly visible to the general public, and one which effects them very directly on a daily basis – which is why we witness it’s increasing presence as the subject matter of talk radio shows like the one which I started out by mentioning, similar T.V shows and general discussion in the pubs and canteens of the Nation.

Now, I am well aware that these weighty matters will be starting to cause severe headaches amongst certain readers, particularly those pseudo-intellectual young people in positions of senior command- and I can sense attention levels expiring, so please allow me to promise that I shall lighten the mood very shortly. However, I must do one more boring bit before that, just to sort of ‘round off’ the subject. Please bear with me for a few moments longer, then I will blow cigarette smoke out of my ears or something to regain my audience.
Returning then, as briefly as possible, to the reasons why I decided to have a bash at this ‘blog’, (what a bloody awful name), and in the interests of countering the ‘Can’t Do’ attitude of young Copperfield’s ‘Wasting Police Time’ with a few pointers as to how he and others might stop doing this, I shall go to the other end of the Chain of Command, which is where the root of the problem lies.

What we must look to is the politicisation of the police. When Mayne set out his instructions as to what the Police should be trying to do in 1829, (and, incidentally, did so in the wake of a great deal of controversy and debate as to whether such a body could ever operate successfully without being seen by the public as Government bully-boys), he said a great deal more than the paragraph which we all used to learn parrot-fashion, and which is quoted at the top of this article.
As we know, he went on to make it very clear that police action must never be influenced by colour, creed, social class or other individual factors. This was quite correct then and now, and demonstrates that the concept of even handed policing was not born in the heart of some well-meaning vegetarian student at a Labour Party Conference in 1968. Moreover, having rather more education, common sense and life experience than those who dictate policy today, he specifically DID NOT even contemplate the idea of ‘positive discrimination’, since it would be quite obvious to anyone with a scintilla of reason, that such a strategy can only ever replace one set of victims with another. Similarly, the inequalities of mankind and the social conditions of the country were evidently far outside the terms of reference of the Police Force and, then as now, any attempt to expand police activities into areas where it had no control or influence could only lead to failure and ridicule.
What he did make crystal clear, however, was that the Police could only ever hope to carry out their duties with the consent of the general public, and to this end they must always be seen to be absolutely separate from and above Politics.
As I have said, there had been great public and parliamentary debate about the proposed setting up of a Police Force, and this centred on the fear, (despite the clear advantage of having a body to protect the public from rampant crime), that such a force would become the creatures of politicians and in reality used to limit or remove our ancient freedoms rather than to protect them. Thus, it was crucial to Mayne that his new police force be seen as the servants of Law, Justice and The People, and as such he was well aware that they must keep their distance from politics at all times.
This principle was upheld for around 150 years, up till the time when a few bright but ruthless senior officers began to see the potential for rank-hopping by beating particular political drums. All this coincided with the growth of the Racism Industry, Feminism and the creation of the Profession of Single Motherhood.
Everyone was a victim of one sort or another, and personal problems were no longer things to be addressed and solved by individuals, but blamed upon the shortcomings of Society. Now, the politicians who had created the social mechanisms which were so unpopular were looking for someone else to blame, and the small but vociferous groups of malcontents came into day to day contact with the police rather than the government. At the point when the ambitious senior officers whom I have mentioned made the fatal mistake of accepting, (on behalf of their colleagues), responsibility for social ills and offering to improve things if only they were promoted to a rank where they could change policy, there would be no going back. Gradually, the function of the police changed and became a political football- politicians and the public could now hold the police force responsible for their own shortcomings ,and as it’s new function as a social whipping-boy grew, it’s ability to undertake it’s previous tasks of Law Enforcement and general helpfulness to the public diminished and at this point has almost disappeared.

The end didn’t come in one single event. Some serious blows were inflicted by the Scarman Report, The Sheehy Report, The Macpherson Inquiry and the ridiculous Political Circus attached to the Stephen Lawrence murder, (all of which I intend to address individually).However, if one single death-blow can be identified, it was the election of Tony Blair’s Grin ‘n Spin Government, with it’s apparent new found commitment to Law and Order, yet with it’s hidden roots buried deep in a bitter hatred of the police, going back to Grunwicks, Wapping, the Miner’s Strike and CND.
The combination of wanting revenge against the police force which they had grown up blaming for Government policy ,and the ambition to replace it with a new ‘ideologically sound’ Party Militia was a potent and toxic mixture!
From the outset, and in common with many other Public Institutions, the whole purpose of the Police Force began to change. It’s function now would be to support Party Dogma, both by putting into practise some of the insane social engineering employment policies of the left, and by physically enforcing their political theories. As a secondary undertaking, it would raise revenue for the Government by shifting its efforts from the traditional priorities set out by Mayne of preventing and detecting Crime, (i.e, as the term is understood by the General Public – Burglary, Car Theft, Violence, Public Disorder etc), and push to the top of the enforcement list those comparatively trivial misdemeanours, (either already existent ones previously used only as useful paper wedges to level a wonky table in the canteen, or brand new ones invented and enacted to order), which provided a ready source of cash input for a minimum input of effort, time and expertise.
Gradually, the ‘Old Guard’ with their traditionalist ideas about common sense, fairness and duty were displaced by the ‘Blair Youth’ - battalions of newly enlisted ideologues with little interest and even less likelihood of preventing or detecting old fashioned crime, but determined to usher in a Brave New World of multi-cultural and sexually diverse unconventionality. Police Officers were no longer recruited on the basis of their ability to do the job, but rather for their race, gender or sexuality, and Senior Officers were no longer selected on the basis of their experience or suitability for command, but their commitment to political correctness and willingness to be remotely controlled by their New Labour puppet masters. All traditions of Christian ethos and jurisprudence were abandoned in favour of a completely new morality which was being made up as they went along by the party ‘spin doctors’, and was based not upon right and wrong, but ‘appropriate’ and ‘inappropriate’; and the beauty of this from the point of view of politicians was that the same act could be ‘appropriate’ when they did it, but ‘inappropriate’ when someone else did!
When there seemed to be votes or at stake over a particular issue, or if it was fashionable amongst the Champagne Socialists of Islington, it went straight to the top of the Home Office priority list, whether it was practical or not, and the promotion-hungry Humanities Graduates of the middle ranks were waiting to grab any ball-no matter how barmy, and run with it!
As every Force swelled it’s ranks with unsuitable staff to demonstrate ‘diversity’ and allocated more and more resources to Special Units intended to confront homophobia, racism etc etc ad inf, the ability and will to control theft and violence on the streets dwindled away. With it diminished the public’s trust, confidence and respect in the Police Service.
Once again the public is holding the Police responsible for detested government policy, but this time there is rather more justification for it because certain Senior Officers have willingly betrayed both their duty and their position of trust for personal advancement. What is more, the public outrage is no longer confined to relatively small groups of malcontents who have always tended to be anti police, (and despite bending over backwards to please them, they generally still are!!), but now includes the great majority of everyday law abiding folk who have traditionally supported the police, but who have now reluctantly given up on them in total despair.

Ok, having painted a rather depressing picture of the problems which we now face,I could hardly blame you if you accused me of being a prophet of doom, or of the very thing which I started out by slating young Copperfield for; someone who is very good at complaining about what is wrong without suggesting any practical way to fix it!
In fact, you may ask, “Can we fix it at this stage? –How on earth can we do anything about it if things have gone this far?”
Well, I’d be a liar if I said it was easy. Actually, I must say that if today’s Police Force was a car, I would seriously consider scrapping it. On the other hand, can we afford not to
fix it?
I made reference earlier to a ‘Can’t Do Culture’. Didn’t I? Well, I’ve always been a devotee of the opposite perspective. If we really intend to do something, then we can and we will. Clearly it would be no easy task to undo the madness of several suicidal decades on the part of the Police Service, or to climb our way- inch by inch- back up the long slippery slope which took us in thirty years from being renowned as the best Police Force in the world to being generally regarded as a laughing stock. There can be no guarantee that we would succeed, but the only alternative would be not to try, and that, I suggest, would be unthinkable.

Okay – enough already! I’m a simple man, and all this passionate talk is giving me a headache. God only knows what it’s done to anyone who is still reading it. I only hope no one has committed suicide or anything whilst considering my intense and seemingly hopeless analysis.
Let’s all light up a fag and relax a bit shall we?
No, no! We’re NOT going outside to light up – and Copperfield, take that bloody Oxygen Mask off! Be a brave boy and risk the peril of death by secondary smoking, why don’t you? Oh, and while you’re at it, why don’t you chill out a bit and loosen your stab vest while you’re in here? Let’s pretend that we’re all grown up chaps who sometimes just ignore rules which we think are trivial, and don’t wet ourselves in case someone tells the teacher.
NO! Put the ‘man smoking on police premises’ form down boy! Just relax a bit, will you?
Anyway, as I was saying, it was my intention when planning the format of this blog, to include some amusing anecdote in each entry, and thus I feel that I should do so. Actually, I must say that I’m not really in the mood after all that serious talk, but I think it’s important to lighten the atmosphere after you’ve been shouting at your staff, and young Copperfield has taken a lot of stick today, haven’t you son?
What? No you don’t need counselling and yes, allright, it’s a ‘person found smoking on police premises’ form. Well done lad- no, I didn’t mean to be sexist.
Right, as I was saying………….

There are times when you can create problems for yourself by cutting corners on apparently inconsequential paperwork, and there has always been a delicate balance to strike between spending hours filling in forms and getting on with your job.
When I was at your stage of Service, Copperfield my boy, there was no “Interweb” for me to grumble to when the Sergeant made me do stuff which I didn’t like – just an old Olympic typewriter which he would certainly have thrown at me if I’d have complained. So, whenever some crappy little job which was considered beneath the more senior members of the shift cropped up, it was usually me who copped it…….and one such incident was when an old lady telephoned the police station from a call box ……
(No, she didn’t have a mobile phone, Copperfield)……..
…….to inform us that her pet dog was lost. Apparently, the Sergeant considered her too elderly and infirm to ask her to come in and report it personally, and thus sent me to deal with the matter………
(No, Copperfield, he didn’t make it a low priority call for next week, and he didn’t give me a lift. I had to go there straight away, and I had to walk.)
If you interrupt me again Copperfield, I will hit you……..Are you typing all this into your laptop? Well put it down! ………………….Stupid boy!

To continue………Muttering under my breath, I set out to see the old lady, and duly found her in her Council Flat, where she served tea and biscuits and, despite her failing faculties and the fact that she must have been about 120 years old, managed to tell me her entire life story, family history and fond memories of the Irish policeman who had patrolled the area during her childhood, (You know, the who used to beat everyone up but they didn’t mind in those days).
I listened patiently, and gradually turned the conversation back to the subject of her missing dog. She began to sob uncontrollably and started to relate tales of how the dog had performed various acts of peerless bravery and loyalty during his youth, but was now old and helpless, being more or less blind and deaf and only barely able to walk
Again, I listened patiently and made a few notes in my pocket book before eventually managing to extricate myself from the situation by claiming that I intended to alert colleagues and undertake a full and unrelenting search of the area for the missing pet.

My head was throbbing by the time I left the old lady’s flat, and I took the first opportunity to dodge down a lane at the back of the Street Market which was on my route back to the Lost Dogs Book, remove my fags and matches from where they were traditionally concealed in those days whilst in shirt sleeve Order…
……(NO! In my helmet, Copperfield!)……and lit up.

Cyril, a market-trader, was in the lane piling fruit and veg from his lock-up onto his barrow to take them out onto the stall. Of course, Cyril didn’t really count as a member of the public, so there was no need to hide the cigarette from him. He offered to fetch me a pint from the back door of the Market Pub, and asked whether I was lurking down there to catch dippers throwing purses and wallets away once they’d emptied the cash out. Of course, I had no idea that they did that, but smiled knowingly as if Cyril had sussed me out and made a mental note that this was a bloody good idea.
Not wishing to let on that my present mission was somewhat less dynamic than the one which he had suggested, I offered him a cigarette and tried to sound disinterested as I asked him whether he had happened to have noticed a small dog around the place.
Now, I really cannot remember at this stage what sort of dog it was, or the various physical characteristics which marked it out, but suffice it to say that I do recall that it was very distinctive.
Cyril knew everything which went on in that market, and had a policy of telling us about some of them to keep us off his back, (which was about the best deal we were ever going to get incidentally), and so the whereabouts of a small white dog was an easy one for him. He informed me that it had been hanging around the Pie and Mash Van all morning where it was being stroked and fed by customers and traders.
Struggling to conceal my elation at having tracked down the fugitive through my network of underworld informants, I threw my cigarette onto the floor and stood on it, rather in the manner of Philip Marlowe, then strode off purposefully to close the dragnet!
Well, having sighted the fugitive, I approached him and, based upon the old lady’s depiction of a gentle and loveable canine pal, I bent down and stroked him. He wagged his little tail, but when I attempted to pick him up and carry him home to his distraught owner, he revealed a whole different side to his character.
The little bastard snarled, bit me on the hand and retreated under the said Pie and Mash Van to avoid capture. What followed was a brief but problematical conflict between man and beast, during which I wrestled around with him under the van, got bitten several more times, covered with oil and various detritus before removing my belt and using it as a makeshift leash to tame the brute. I emerged victorious but very dirty and minus my helmet, to the great amusement of the crowd which had assembled, and which now applauded rather mockingly. With the dog now infuriated and snapping at me, but unable to make contact as long as I held him at arm’s length with one hand, whilst holding my trousers up with the other hand, I determined that the route back to the police station was a quicker and more practical one than that to the old lady’s flat, and set out towards my destination at a trot, calling back to Cyril to get hold of my missing helmet from under the van and keep it safe for me.
I’m sure that you can imagine how pleased Sargey was when I burst through the door of his Charge Room covered in oil, compacted jellied eels and blood and triumphantly holding a furious snapping mongrel on the end of my twisted police issue belt, so I shall skip over the amusing details of his reaction, and simply state that I was rather deflated by it. In short, I ended up confining the thing in the kennel in the yard, putting an entry in the ‘Dogs Found’ book, and swapping duties with the Gaoler for the rest of the shift because I wasn’t allowed out of the station with my uniform in that state and without a helmet. The Gaoler, for his part, was so pleased to be released from the Station that he happily agreed to call round and give the old lady the good news that her pet was safe.

I was just about calming down when the old lady came beaming into the Front Counter. She at least saw the merit of my prompt action in the case, and showered me with praise.
All very fine till I started filling out the slip at the bottom of the Dog Book where the owner claims a dog back at the Counter, and we got to the bit where I discovered that she had to pay a fee, (which I hadn’t actually known myself till I saw it, and which I soon discovered also involved Sargey in some receipts and O.B entries which he wasn’t too pleased about). Things got even more complicated when the old lady found out about the fee and started getting hysterical because she simply didn’t have any money, and imagined that this would result in the dog being put down.
Somehow, everyone was angry with me again, though I was getting used to it by now of course, and I had to find a solution to all these problems which would make everyone happy again – so I did!
Having sought the advice of an older P.C, I took a particular course of action which resolved everything. I’m not going to say exactly what it was, but Sargey was happy, the old lady was happy and even the flea bitten vicious little bastard of a dog was as near to happy as it ever could have been – and all this somehow made me happy. That night my head rested easily on the pillow, (or at least as easily as anyone’s head could rest upon a Section-House pillow which seemed to be made from sailcloth and stuffed with pebbles).
Now, you may think that this was the end of the story- I certainly did. But it wasn’t. About a month later I was on Early-Turn when I was told that the Chief Superintendent wanted to see me.
Oooh!! Now that was considered a bit scary in those days .A thousand ominous thoughts rushed through my head as I climbed the stairs to the Divisional Office and knocked on the door.
I had been warned not to sit down until I was told to do so, and remembered this. Otherwise my mind was a blank. He gestured me into a seat, smiled and said,
“Well done Lad”.
Breathing a sigh of relief, I smiled back and said,
“Sir?”
“Well, I understand that you’ve been bolstering the reputation of the Force and making such a name for yourself that members of the public have started writing in to commend you!”
He placed on the desk a cardboard folder marked, “Letters of Appreciation”, and also produced what I could see was a hand written letter and waved it theatrically, before getting out a very similar cardboard folder marked ,”Discipline Pending”, which he placed next to the other. He stroked his chin thoughtfully, and said,
“Now…….What to do?”
He began to read the letter aloud. It was from the old lady who had lost her dog.
It started with the usual salutations and her commendation for the ongoing good work of the local police, then went on to describe in great detail the events of that fateful day.
How upset she’d been, how polite and helpful I’d been, how promptly I had found the dog and so forth.
She went on a bit at this point but eventually got to the bit where she had been overjoyed to learn that I had found her dog and how she rushed in to collect it.
Now, this is where the letter began to get a bit less complimentary .She mentioned how her husband had been killed defending our Nation, how many children she had consequently brought up single-handed during the Blitz etc etc ONLY to find that the Police were now trying to charge people to return their lost dogs!!
She considered this to be exactly the sort of thing which we fought against in the war and reminded the reader that this was England, not Nazi Germany in that way that people used regularly to do when you asked them to move their car off a zebra crossing or something.
The final paragraph went something like…” Fortunately, P.C ‘McGoogan’, who had been so kind and helpful in finding Fido for me, came back to the Counter and said that he’d thought of a way to get round the fact that I didn’t have the money to pay for the dog. He wrote “Dog Escaped from Kennel” in big letters across the form, and took me out into the back yard and gave Fido back to me. Then he got some keys and let me out of a gate at the back of the yard so that rude Sergeant wouldn’t see!”

The Guvnor put the letter on the desk and looked at me over the top of his reading glasses. His eyes bored into me and I swallowed hard.
His eyes narrowed as he removed his glasses and threw them onto the desk and exhaled dramatically. I’d never seen the man crack a smile, but as I watched his face in trepidation, I thought I noticed his eyes sparkle a bit. The severe frown became at first a slight grin, then a broad smile and slowly he began to chuckle- then to laugh heartily. He laughed so much that he seemed to be having difficulty in getting his words out, but as he gestured to the door with his hand to let me know it was time to leave, he managed to say,
“Quite Right Son! - Quite F*****G Right!!”

Okay, so there we are. I promised to lighten the mood after all that serious stuff, and I did my best. The story is 100% true by the way, and it probably contains a number of lessons, but I’m too tired to explore them right now.

I want to say one thing in conclusion to this first post, however. In the comments which I have made about the daunting task which faces us in restoring credibility to British Policing, I haven’t pulled many punches have I? Well, this is because it’s a bloody serious business and we have to forget trendy notions for a while and start addressing it realistically.
More importantly, I may have seemed a bit hard on some of the youngsters who have come into the job over the last few years. Now, I make no apology for this because, boys and girls, it’s time to harden up your ideas and start forming square! If you have been the tools of politicians and rank hoppers up till now, and if these same contemptible traitors have failed to provide you with the proper grounding and structure to do the job properly, then it is up to you to confound their machinations by taking the initiative. Why is it up to you? Because you are the ones who are here, and it doesn’t really matter now whether you should or should not be here, because you are.
Like many before you, you find yourselves feeling ill-equipped for the mammoth task which you are charged with, and lacking the backup or leadership which is needed. However, it is historically in just such circumstances that the most unexpected heroes have stepped forward to show their mettle, and now it is your turn !

Okay, start fading in the Dixon of Dock Green Music………

It’s a funny old business policing Dock Green, innit? Who would have thought that the D.I would go bonkers and start spouting all that stuff about Richard Mayne and policing by consent and stuff? Still, they’ve given him something to help him sleep and the nurse says that he’ll be up and about in no time, and he’s promised to be much less maudlin if they let him post stuff on the Interweb again.
I don’t know whether young Copperfield has learned much though. Apparently he’s supposed to be tracking some desperado across the frozen wastes of the North West Frontier, but he decided to get his laptop out and start complaining that he’s got the wrong sort of snow shoes and that he doesn’t like the red jackets they’ve got to wear. Well, all this fuss attracted a polar bear, who ate the laptop and, in all the confusion, Copperfield lost his man- which is something no other Mountie has ever done!
Never mind, though. Things don’t change much here at Dock Green, so I’ll just wander off around my beat and remind you to ‘mind how you go’
‘Evening All’