Policing by Consent? Not in my name

I want tougher policing by responsible, decent people.  I believe most crime could be dealt with by local mediation with minimal intrusion by lawyers and with public scrutiny built in (trials open to Internet recording).  Sure, we’d need safeguards and a different route for serious crime.

I withdraw (with a laugh) my consent from what is going on.  It’s bent, run by sold-out bureaucrats and can’t even do anything about thuggery and incompetence.  The killings at Stockwell and G20 are not the problem in-themselves, it’s the response to them and all failures across our systems from Baby P, Askew and the Ripper Enquiry, through to our illegal wars since WW2.  We are now a sad country without democracy or justice.  We are as bad at stopping old ladies and the disabled being tormented by yobs and criminal scum as we are at stopping the Taliban in Afghanistan.  We don’t even know how many Iraqis died at our hands and still allow the vile, actor-idiot Blair to strut about.  I want a flag back I could salute.  Sitting round a table sharing rice and cigarettes with Taliban wannabes nearly ten years ago, trying to dissuade them,my major tack was that their cause was lying to them.  I did not bear arms for ‘virgin reward’ (highly misunderstood here), but for a country worth living in.  Now, like many others, I know I was lied to about this.  The White Cliffs of Dover no longer welcome and are best seen on the way out.

We know Suez was based on a fantastic ‘policing action’ fiction in which Israel attacked Egypt and we and the French just had 120,000 troops lying about to keep the sides apart.  At least we got to know.  Now we have no real idea why we are fighting wars and can’t do anything about rogue cops.  It’s a case of no progress being frogmarched backwards by spin.  We can’t even get out on the streets and put flowers down gun barrels, though if we could the cops with discipline records longer than their batons would lash us to the ground, bent pathologist lying in wait and prosecution bureaucrats sure any jury of twelve of us would believe bent medical evidence ahead of good, thus rendering no need for justice to be seen to be done.  What kind of public have we become?  The sort that doesn’t notice when the disabled disappear, then the gypsies, Jews and any fool capable of dissent?  Zanu PF Nulabour have been replaced, but it is business as usual in Broken Britain, so just what are we ConDemned to?  We had an election in which the choice was merely between who would slash and burn the public sector, but no one told us this.  What extra civil rights should we be feeling now Mr. Clegg, now it’s affirmed a vandal police officer can club down a poorly old man in full view and face no criminal court?  What waste has been saved by keeping him and those who looked on in pay?  Is it him and the odd disgusting prick over on Gadget laying claim to ‘only following orders’ that you intend to use on us when we tumble your new policies?  I withdraw my consent, noting you have not made it easy for many of us to do the same in a manenr that could have constitutional effect.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100048283/when-police-officers-escape-prosecution-we-cannot-blame-idiots-for-applauding-raoul-moat/

This says a lot fairly quickly in describing the problem, but the answers involve getting this accepted and having a plan for change.  We have to get into a situation of open problem review and a scheme for solving the real ones without paying for an army of bureaucrats who redefine everything in their own interests.  We may well need our decent, brave police, but we also need rid of the ones who club an old man from behind when they should just help him home and those who run away as cowards as I have seen.  We need to take our share of the blame, as incapable of standing up to be counted.

There are answers and they all start in easily feasible forms of problem definition, with the baggage that those in positions of power already fail to allow this and pervert resources into false performance management.  They commission mass sample research that will inevitably only reveal expressions of support from people whose lives their organisations have not touched yet and the general inclination to think good of others rather than bad where we have no real knowledge.  Our education system is still churning out people with no idea what evidence is, especially lawyers.

Our legal system is fundamentally not available to most of us because we can’t afford it, and it’s built round this.  All kinds of stuff like he Human Rights Act and Judicial Review, even down to defence evidence and representation in court is really denied us.  Almost inexplicably, we are still paying for this, the money often going to represent utter scrotes against our interests.  There’s a classic Home Office report on the HRA detailing how much it might help us, if broadly adopted.  Farcically, what we have is a system in which all the actors know they can flout our ‘rights’ and get away with it – indeed this is expected of them within the system.  The fear is always that if we really had rights and access to litigation, the floodgates would open.  This fear also states that our public organisations, including the legal system knows they are not working properly, for otherwise there would be no ‘floodgate fear’.

In dealings with local authorities and police, indeed across the legal system, one cannot even hope that records will be properly kept.  One generally cannot even see what is being recorded.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jul/22/ian-tomlinson-story-justice-denied reviews the Tomlinson affair pretty well.  It might not succeed as a charge in court, but a serious conspiracy to pervert the course of justice is involved.  That  charges cannot be brought against Harwood lies primarily in the reluctance of the IPCC to get involved.  This allowed cops to bring in the ‘bent’ pathologist.  That the IPCC were reluctant should surprise no one.  They are useless and lack the right kind of expertise, are led by a loon and internal rumours abound that he has been told to back off embarrassing investigations establishing police incompetence and worse.

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “Policing by Consent? Not in my name

  1. “I want a flag back I could salute”.

    I would be happy to settle for the less ambitious, such as respect for police and the symbols of Justice.

  2. I too was drawn to your comment about the flag analogy. I first thought this deep sadness on the morning my penultimate superintendent returned from his summer leave and called me to account for some of my actions whilst deputising for him. He was a man with a brain the size of the planet, bursting with several degrees that, tragically, left no room for a sane perspective on real life and the common sense decisions it craved.

    I had cleared a band of marauding travellers from land in the midst of an urban area, using powers granted under the Public Order Act and a `happy few` of my officers, with a bit of committment and guts behind them. Havoc had ensued during the travelling locusts stay, crime spiking off the chart like a big fib registering on a polygraph and the residents dogs, children and others being injured by their antics including furious driving around the common on quad bikes.

    In we went, firmly and resolutely, serving the papers and parading our intentions, including several borrowed, begged and hired tow trucks, despite my acting c/i`s reluctance and counsel not to. Mel Gibson in “Braveheart” it wasn’t, but they were gone in half an hour without us breaking sweat. The Super, on returning from leave, waved the HRAct under my nose in a rant, whilst I waved my detailed interpretation of it back at him, pointing out that by my calculations the local residents were well ahead on points, hence my decision. I suddenly found myself looking at one of the loonies that was now in charge of the asylum. The acting c/i joined them later. These were people I no longer wished to be associated with. I was gone in 18 months.

  3. One of my mates Hog, finding me up ladders fixing gutters in the middle of some dalliance with a lady,burst out laughing, saying ‘Now this must be a sight. You with a brain the size of a planet and she’s got you up ladders welding plastic gutters!’ A few beers and great meal later, courtesy of said lady and he was mixing mortar for the garden wall (all the more remarkable as he is blind). I fixed her car and the dog took us to the pub later. We were all ‘just friends’, though the spiteful never allow such grace.
    Intellect is easily a curse,mine once held to shine with all the sparkle of cubic zirconium, a compliment apparently, as I didn’t pretend to be the real thing!

    Zigmund Bauman, about as intellectual as it comes, would explain ‘some dreck’ he’d written to keep his head above water in the ‘academic Brownie Points game’ and get chided by me as a ‘mere biologist’ that he was conflating human and animal characteristics and talking through his arse. He would read my latest stuff, note that all my papers had one thing in common, apparently all written to get free tickets to and hotelling in exotic destinations and then put on a Dirty Harry movie, lamenting we could not use the same tactics on the university establishment.

    The problem with intellect is that it’s so easy just to turn it to the self-interest of a very dry world. Your Super and his ilk probably laugh amongst themselves at naive idiots like us who give a damn about local residents. Their cunning is low, and the intellect they know just knows slick words can excuse just about anything. They see the ‘real world’ in such a way that any ‘evidence’ is skewed to their madness. Nico Bento is convicted on the basis of a bag no one can see, and the same ‘minds’ don’t see that clubbing a poor,old before his time guy with a few drinks in him is the action of just the kind of shit we are supposed to protect the public from.

    The problems are complex, of course. Your actions against the travellers would be seen by some idiots as just that, not action for local residents as well. Something called ‘cultural relativism’ is usually at work, worked out by wuckfits with no experience of culture other than their own. The classic is that form of feminism that really just hates men and sucks up to sisterhood. You can rest assured, that if both our brains got addled enough to start a full frontal rush on a sawn-off at the same time, my sniper would somehow miss his hands and get at least two in the centre of the brain before we managed to stand up. The excuse would no doubt be given with a sheepish smile. ‘Sorry Boss, the thermals were tricky, I ain’t John Wayne you know’. Walking away we would probably hear the drift of ‘And neither are you daft ****s!’
    I don’t know about you Hog, but I never heard the words ‘Stop, armed police’ away from training ground or when we had no intent to shoot or in cover with a good bead. I don’t fancy the phrase as my last words. In short there is too much television.

  4. “We are as bad at stopping old ladies and the disabled being tormented by yobs and criminal scum as we are at stopping the Taliban in Afghanistan. “

    The Taliban have the support (albeit often unsaid) of a great proportion of the people. Can we say that for the yobs?

    I suspect if we can, it’s only in those small areas where the yons congregate. THe ‘Swamp’ as Gadget likes to term it.

  5. All our ideologies are Romantic. Support for the IRA was partly from crap unfairness in housing and other civil rights, partly on dud heroes like Michael Collins and in part, political and other gangsterism. The sectarianism was pathetic and exploited on all sides. This is true in the Middle East in spades.

    When it comes to the Swamps, I have found little understanding of much other than derision of the Evil Poor (who are crap). The networks are complex, but nearly everyone wants the yobs controlled, and some turn to’Robin Moats’ for this, where the cops have disappeared up their own excusing arses. At every point of analysis one finds complexities of devolved budgets and career goons, lawyers, self-interested politicians, jobsworths and others glueing every chance of progress up.
    One aspect of interest to me is that much of the problem is a ‘youth culture’ – they all have ignorant adolescent ‘values’ and narcissism.

  6. In response to one comment in your post about Tony Blair, the Daily Mail reported yesterday, that he is “A Slave To Greed” – by Johann Hari 24th July. I don’t have a web link for the article. I read it in the actual newspaper.

    The reporter questions and investigates, “What unites the invasion of Iraq, BP and Blair’s plot to hand the worst terrorist in our history back to a tyrant? He answers his own question with…..OIL…..and the great god money.[note “god” with a small “g”] And MI6 were involved in the deal with Libya to hand the terrorist back to a tyrant in exchange for corporate access to Libya’s oil wells and huge profits.

    The article goes on to say that 1.2 Million people were killed as a result of Blair’s support for George Bush’s administration and their plot to get their hands on Iraq’s vast supplies of OIL. Johann Hari goes on to say….”It’s proof that oil and corporate power drive foreign policy. Tony Blair’s administration was dubbed “Blair’s Petroleum” because there was a revolving door between BP and No10 Downing street.

    When you read stuff like this in the press, which I’m sure is accurate, one can perhaps understand the anger of the anti-globalisation campaigners and the G20 protests.

    It would appear that anyone who stands up to be counted and who demonstrates an objection to government corruption becomes the target of smears, abuse and violence. The government use the police as a “tool” and a weapon against motivated people who have genuine concerns, and when a member of the public gets hurt, or killed, the publicity of it is never good for the police.

    Agreed though, that cover ups just make matters worse.
    This sort of thing is nothing new, it’s just exposed more by the media these days, than it was before the invention of TV, camera phones, CCTV and the Internet.

    The Arms Industry also has a vested interest in stiring up trouble to create wars, because that’s also “good for business”, but bad for people and the environment. Often there is deception and skullduggery involved to create conflicts in the world, which appears to be happening right now regarding North and South Korea, and the USA.

    MTG…. I too would settle for respect for the police, the symbols of justice, AND governments honest attention
    to credible Intelligence reports, to influence their commitment to serving the best interests of the people, rather than big business and corporate interests.

  7. Talk about confused thinking! Having created a coalition government, the ConDems are supposed to be united on the issue of civil liberties and the dismantling of the Big Brother State. The scrapping of I.D cards was announced with great fanfare, on V.E day, as “symbolic”.

    So what on earth are they now thinking of by allowing European Police Forces sweeping surveillance Big Brother powers over U.K. subjects? This is a contradictory and very dangerous mistake, when one considers the errors and injustices that have already happened here in the U.K with our own police officers and legal system.

    The Tories were against this directive from Brussels when they were in opposition, and a number still are against it. Nick Clegg and others who are pro EU need to think again on that issue, because they have got it badly wrong.

    This is crazy. The Tories, or most of them, are right to be against handing over more powers to Brussels, and are wrong in their support for Nuclear power. The LibDems are wrong to support the U.K being “ruled” by Brussels and are absolutely right to oppose Nuclear power.

    WHY CAN’T THEY BOTH GET IT RIGHT FOR GOODNESS SAKE?

  8. What, and have a dictatorship? Or go back to the Monarch having ultimate power and control? That may well be the best thing since sliced bread actually…..and Theresa May of course!

    • Share the concerns, but we need not to jump them in too quickly. The idea, in Hobbes, of giving up to a Monarch, was to get more rights and freedom on balance. This is no solution now, but the balance idea needs exloring more than we tend to.

  9. The old conventional wisdom, and often stated remark, that the Monarchy are there by “Divine Will” is correct.

    You may well not agree, but I am not wrong on this issue.

    Surely, after the appalling mess and chaos created by the New Labour Orwellian “vision”, [and plots] most people will realise that to have a Monarch as our ultimate Head of State is a blessing. The fact that New Labour et al have tried to undermine the Monarchy, over a period of many years, is a disgrace, treachery and treason.

    There are a lot of people who just do not want the interference and “rule” from Brussels, which in itself is quite “Orwellian” and intrusive into private lives, given what they plan to impose on the people of this country.

    I have to disagree with you ACO, as the Monarchy ARE the solution now to balance, rights and freedoms of Her Majesty’s subjects, who fought against the rise of an evil dictator in WW2. Would be dictators didn’t go away and are alive and active in the U.K and the E.U, although heavily disguised these days.

    The U.K needs a strong and influential Monarchy to PROTECT the people from dictators, like Brown, et al.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s