Rioting Side Issues

The Metropolitan Police clearly should have been out in higher strength on Monday night – this is not straight from Captain Hindsight but the fact of the Tottenham riot the night before.  One wonders what ‘Gold’ was up to, especially as they have to foot the bill under an ancient Riot Act.

The ‘lying’ over the shooting incident needs scrutiny now and sackings.  I doubt the shooting was unlawful – our attitudes towards cops dealing with guns needs tuning up, perhaps by more ‘citizens’ representatives’ doing virtual courses and being reminded nothing shoots back on them!  The IPCC should have had something considered to say within a couple of hours.  My suspicious mind wonders where the non-police gun came from – but it is as irresponsible to put that in main media as the usual character assassination of the dead or brutalised that always seems to be put out.  In these circumstances it should be possible to be as clear on the forensics of that gun as the ballistics on the police shooting.

What have we been told, under successive nopolitics govenrments, under the guise of ‘falling crime’?  Across the comparable EU ‘highlight crime’ except drug dealing is down since 2002.  These highlight figures are manipulated in all forces I’ve worked with in research in much the same way.  There is little effort in real detection other than on serious crime and the figures rely on nodding and the other gaming techniques.  Essentially, someone like me years ago spots a ‘likely lad’ or set of the bastards and nicks them with a pair of socks in their pocket or swag in someone else’s car – perhaps after a chase against pursuit rules – or someone’s munter dob’s him in to get rid of his violence – and the resulting body is sweated for further crimes.  98% even of recorded crime is undetected directly and is ‘coughed’.  How many of the coughs are true is a matter of casting dice.  This is part of the reason Bill the Burglar believes his chance of being caught is one in a hundred – though Bill is so thick he can’t work out his real odds.

The figures seem not to have told us about a welter of young men who will pop out and loot.  In Manchester, it seems one family took their car out to do the ‘shopping’ at a Lydl as it was trashed.  The truth here is that police do not have the responsibility to get in amongst these people in community liaison – this is what government should be doing through jobs and a form of National Service.

The call to sweep the scum off our streets seems hapless – one assumes cops have been keeping the lid on until now.  One suspects this approach on its own will only fester more and deeper problems.  We can come up with a scheme to create jobs and decent opportunities – the problem is always the clown economics that has diverted wealth abroad and to the rich in massive percentages.  This is always the sticking point.  The people involved are the most disgusting thieves of all and not only go unpunished but are lauded as “successful”.  Life and business is actually simple.  The rich and political class just make up schemes to divert work effort into their cash, even getting governments to fund their losses.  The occupy the same moral ground as slave owners and feudal barons.  The social contract and work ethic of old farts like me is broken.  Even the fantasy of university and knowledge society work has evaporated.

Police are out in my City Centre, but if there is any sustainability amongst these looters they will soon be down the road instead.  My guess is this is all the fault of my complacent generation – we are at the very least the parents of it.  There has been a way out for 40 years but we refused to learn, preferring nopolitics and now to brand the perpetrators as hooligans – which they are – but also elides our responsibility for them.  These riots have been familiar to many outside their homes over many years.  Are these the kids ‘achieving’ ever better educational standards?  Ever increasing ‘standards’ that leave them with no decent job?

Guff I found particularly ‘clown’ is that tonight’s police finally have the political backing they need – cops don’t need anything political to deal with crime.  Numbers and equipment yes, but ‘political leadership’ is exactly what we don’t want in this area.  They should be fixing the economy.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the appeal courts when sentencing comes along – is it possible to give these scumbags higher tariffs than they could expect for 100 burglaries on mine and yours?  Would this survive appeal?  Can the judicial cosh work?  Who will be the first vigilante prosecuted>  Are the racists ‘planning’ anything?

Above all, how is it we need ‘mindless looting’ to get us talking about sorting the country out?  Newsnight has just produced she guy in a hoodie and mask with more sense than the politicians.  This government, which looks incompetent and lazy, is puking the old fascist tale that it’s all “hooligans” smashing up their own.  This appeals to us all, but is a con. This is a time to support police action, but if this is turned in such a way as to write off this lot as merely criminal behaviour and the reasons crushed as they would be in a police state – then we have another ball game – or rather ‘you’.  I’m off.

They will try joint enterprise prosecutions – something we should see more of in other circumstances – and these may well backfire.  As may the ‘full force of the law’ (which may be has hapless as Gadget predicts) in encouraging the spread of the feeling of unfairness .  ‘Ring leaders’ will be targeted – all rather like political suppression.  I’d be staying if we had democracy – but that would mean we discussed the real issues and could direct action rather than have to engage in ‘direct action’.  Instead, we have remained so ‘tranced’ that most of us conflate household economics with the global picture.

The similarities between the riots and scene from Grand Theft Auto (SA) are remarkable.  These lads come from this generation.  Have we heard any sensible material on their plight or what it is to grow up poor with no prospects – let alone any action by us to fix the global economic idiocy that has led to massive increases in the wealth of the rich and the creation of a new kind of poor class  – and no democratic means to contest this because the the rich and their banksters are ‘global’ – a term which translates into protection racket jargon of screwing any country that wants to provide public services and structured routes out of poverty.

The events were “unprecedented” (actually there is historic precedent) – and they were in a reasonable sense before Tottenham – but surely not the night afterwards!

The immediate ‘search’ for some rational reason under the riots flies in the face of what we know about human behaviour – that it is hardly ever rational.  A better metaphor might be how this boil built up and how it burst.  Our most politically uneducated have been out smashing things up, but they presumably know they are small mushrooms in the trickle-down fertilizer society we have created.  We should not compare the greed of some hoodie with a T-shirt and cd-player with Madoff and his mates as yet not caught (or our greed in wanting Ponzi-level returns bound to be too good to be true).

I’ve just seen Horriet Harmoon and Gove the Gory whacking each other over the deficit and other bulldung.  The actual issue is about not having people live in the kind of poverty amongst celebrity affluence we have developed (which has returned Britain to 1900) without either big government Sino-Soviet style (which we have now because we are governed by a bankster politburo) or a collapse in motivation to do anything.  This means getting to grips with the fact that we are massively capable and productive – but also gullible in the extreme as witnessed in Nopolitics and ADMASS.  There are reasons we can’t condone criminality – but just as terrorists become freedom-fighters when someone else gets to write history these lads may be written-up rather differently than in current knee-jerk.  Trying to write them up as merely criminal seems as irresponsible as their own actions.

As for cops claiming they haven’t got enough confidence or powers to deal effectively with any of this – why didn’t they say so long before where it might matter?  And all the others who have claimed crime was falling for some bonus or political purpose?  It seems reasonable to suppose that the current boot boys are the same as those causing the anti-social crime police have been doing more or less nothing about (sometimes not for want of effort) outside our homes.  That was crime and not ‘politically motivated behaviour’ too.

Manchester has had a bad night tonight.  Looking at some of the clowns involved, I can see little difference between them and the ones dismissed as ‘just kids, no crime’ for so long until we got a new chief constable.  This isn’t ‘la revolucion’ – but it could be if we could wake up.  I’ll be stuck doing another year for pension catch-up as the stock market plunges (though most of mine is now elsewhere).  I just take a ‘grubbing by’ position.  My guess is the media will convince us robust policing has sorted the matter out by the time I make my escape.  Water cannons will just be another symbol of the banana republic I leave.  It’s 10 years know since an Iraqi colleague explained he had left London to work in Bahrain to get away from uncontrolled streets and this kind of juvenile thug.  They keep a substantial body of their people poor and there is looting behind their actually political-religious riots.  They fairly randomly lock up as much as 10% of their male Shia population.  We have relied on a different model, but have equally left a substantial proportion of our people in hopelessness and a small number with nearly all the wealth.

In respect of this, I’m always told that the top people in our organisations only take a small part of the budget.  This looks true – but the message in preparing a taken-over company was always ‘find the LOMBARDS’ (loads of money but are right dicks) and get rid of them – broadly so the company or part of it could be put up for sale without their wage and on costs.  This had many names – delayering, right-sizing, business process re-engineering and kwality – and it continues everywhere in offering packages to get rid of your experienced people and replace them with cheaper ones.  All sorts of people supposedly vital sparks turn out not to be needed at all and often turn out to have been utterly unproductive doing non-existent management functions and drawing double and triple the salary of someone doing the actual work.  If our promotion systems are this bad, imagine what the truth behind bankers’ claims to be so much better and so much in need of mega-bonus motivation.  Ask yourself too how the rich got so much richer as wages collapsed from around 1979 to now – one might have thought it would become more difficult to get rich if earnings were suppressed.  They ran the world as a richman’s ckub is how, able to invest abroad to take advantage of serf-labour and in the gambling club running Ponzi schemes we have just paid for (only in part).

That we have a legal system out of date and out of order can be seen in the berating of the street-scum and their horrible behaviour and the lack of demand to do anything about the rich and their hoods.  500 riots like these over the last few nights does not make one Madoff.

Disciplined National Service (whatever the work done – it needn’t be military) is the answer – but we can’t afford it because the rich want their money (how was it ‘earned’) invested in China, Indonesia and so on – or some hedge fund betting on global collapse – the top 20% own about 70% (these are people with £350,000 or a lot more) and the bottom 10% don’t even register for any (HMIRC figures).

Our politicians should be implementing an emergency wealth tax across the developed world to be invested at home.  But these politicians are all up to their necks in the existing fraud – countries even cheat on stuff like a gold standard against very clear rules.  ACPOs who find their integrity challenged should know the main figures of integrity at the Bank of England (etc.) cheat.  There is no other solution that will not destroy hard-earned freedoms – and I suspect this is what is at stake.

Just imagine teaching our ‘new revolutionaries’!  And remember they have been produced as educational standards have risen year on year just as crime has fallen year on year.  Like get real!  From 1979 to 1999 personal wealth in Britain went from £500 billion to£2,752billion (figures that just happen to be at hand). I for one was more content then. Soon, I fear, they will be knocking on the door to render such memories seditious! This said, these crimes are crimes and I hope the knocks come where they are deserved.

It’s long been rumored that Manchester’s city centre was rebuilt with Russian Mafia money and this increased the drug trade (etc.), but I guess the thought the hoodies were trying to make a statement on this is as daft as imagining the IRA was ever really Marxist-Leninist!  Might be worth remembering that the peaceful civil rights marches got not much of a response in NI.  Thank goodness they’ve cancelled the soccer friendly and not thew Test!

The generation of “Grand Theft Auto Revolutionarses” is the spoiled generation of recent social-psychological speculation.  I have no doubt they have been dumped on, but they have not known the poverty of my youth.  They have ‘grown’ without corporal punishment and the kind of authority we had.  The ones I speak to are generally clueless – you just hope they are toilet-trained.  Even their brighter cousins I’ve been forced to teach at 18 are dire – we commonly say we are the first people they encounter who say ‘no’ to them.  The idea they know anything is frankly unbelievable and these are the ones with GCSEs and some kind of A levels.  Most of them demand spoon-feeding and then claim it’s boring.  We now vie for the evening classes once avoided in order to miss these young, idle dorks – only to find them spoiling things for mature students once they realise (it takes time) they don’t have to get up in the morning if they crash the evening option.  We should be failing them in droves – but guess what – it’s career suicide.

Now some gawp is saying parents should dob their own kids in to be ‘true Mancunians’.  Those of us who might consider that before dismissing it already know where our kids were.  If this lot are criminals their parents are already not surprised when new equipment comes into the house.  These looters have just upped their thieving from my garden or front room to the high street.  Who and what they are isn’t the issue (except in due process).  What kind of home isn’t bothered when its pre-teens and teenagers aren’t in by 9 p.m. ?  One that ain’t bothered when one of them lugs in a new hoover for Mum.  And our cops are not cracking down on that kind of “home” and we have housing and social workers doing sod all about them too.  If I have a theory it’s that the police and other agencies who should have done something for Fiona Pilkington (and I suspect any poor sod living near these scum and victim of them) have been sitting on an iceberg of this stuff pretending kit wasn’t there.  More lying in performance management and even worse (I suspect a widespread character assassination of victims, even to the point of conspiracies to blame and prosecute them) – these scum are foisted on decent people in denial by authorities on what they do – imagine living next door.  The riots are just the problems of police and related agency failures to tell the truth and get these scum out of other people’s lives.  The reason is resourcing (the rich again) and a fatal nexus of senior bureaucrats and politicians.  Anyone offering space next door for the scum youth you’ve seen?  Not likely is it, but they live near someone and that’s all right as long as it’s someone else.

We’re all guilty – but there was no outcry about the bastards who nearly drove me and my partner insane, killed the Pilkingtons and another dozen cases I’ve uncovered (I know it’s thousands) involving murder, arson and drugs.  What does anyone imagine these bastards do when they aren’t rioting — deliver meals on wheels?  A family like this could be dumped near you tomorrow.  I’d have them machine-gunned simply to save others from having them nearby.  Yet the real problem is the rich.


London Riots Bring Out The Old Fascist Mentality

There should have been a curfew in London and across England last night.  There is no excuse for the kind of violence we have seen.

I would like to believe the violence is a political reaction to quite hapless, greedy-rich “government” – but it isn’t in any direct manner.  This is nopolitics Britain.

The facts are pretty clear – most of the trouble is being done by those labeled ‘mindless, criminal and violent’.  It’s doubtful this is all these people are, though the behaviour is that of scum.  Cops clearly could not cope with the outbreak of this mindless, criminal, violent group – which rather suggests they are not normally this, leaving open the question of what the tilting point was.  Many of us have suffered because the police don’t take the goings on of these bastards seriously enough and write matters down as antisocial behavior.

Police clearly failed to control anything much and Gadget is claiming officers were talking about the Tomlinson case as an excuse, fearing they would ‘become Harwood’ if they got stuck in.  If this is true our officers have sunk to a new low.  Mr. Tomlinson was subject to an unnecessary attack by a clod (Harwood) in front of other officers who should have stopped him.  If police really see the Tomlinson incident in this light (most police blogs don’t) they need disabusing and re-training or replacement.  I don’t believe it, though just as the scum out on our streets are a minority, there is no doubt a scum minority in the police who have the fascist mentality on brutality.

We don’t yet know who Mr. Duggan was, but it is now emerging he was shot twice and not involved in any exchange of fire with police.  There is lots about in the press about Mr. Duggan – my reading left me with the impression he was a hood.  This kind of information always seems to get out well ahead of facts, and often turns out to be wrong.  This has been subject of considerable academic scrutiny, and it’s accepted that police get the ‘misinformation in first’ – the Rodney King beating is the classic example.

I know how difficult armed duty is (and even worse what unarmed duty feels like when you expect the opposition to be armed – the trauma lingers) and I also know the public has little clue.  Instead of the cosy dinners with media bosses and misinformation tactics there should be better education of what being armed means and what police have to deal with – combined with honesty about incidents (this latter point requires change in the legal system).  There is no reason interim statements could not be made quickly and not just of the form ‘we can’t say anything because there may be a court case – no reason, but there is law which is out of date.

There is no ideology behind the riots (unless a sect has found ways to influence and/or take advantage the ‘mindlessness’ – some of the fires are suspicious in this respect).  But this doesn’t mean some tragedy in our society is not responsible.  Most of the lackwits I’ve seen couldn’t get out of bed without being led by the nose.

If I get a message that a few mates are meeting for a few pints I’ll probably go.  I am not going to be moved by ‘let’s go looting’.  So why are any of these kids?  Mind is at work, even some kind of collective mind and we need to know its content.

My guess is that there is no longer moral authority in this country.  Most of the people who have expressed this to me have been living or working abroad.  The basic revulsion of the ex-pat is often yobbery and nothing being done about it.  The collapse of proper legal action – most of this being said to me in countries with dictatorship!

I despise what the culture of my own country has become – yet in Germany I hear the same thing.  There the comment is often ‘the country is flooded with foreigners’.  Germany treats its own non-academic youth much better than we do, as do other northern European countries.  The blight of non-onomics is there too, but better controlled.

Other countries around the world control the kind of ‘mentality’ that may be behind our riots through dictatorship and arrest and imprisonment more or less at will – with more or less unaccountable police.  Go go go the Gadget battalions?  I don’t think so.

We are not hearing a beep in our media about the economic conditions other than ‘youth clubs being closed’.  Factors from hardly any white taxi drivers through to the thieving rich probably play a part.  Police have been shown to be outnumbered, outclassed tactically and other jumble by these ‘mindless criminals’.  Even the cops in Miss Marple were smarter than that!  Of course, none of this rot is true – it’s argument from my dog can drive to the moon is blue cheese.

Now Channel 4 has a completely different story on Mark Duggan than first issued.  Only two shots were fired and both hit Duggan.  The Incompetent Poodles of Constabulary Corruption (IPCC) are just getting round to interviewing the taxi driver involved!  FFS!

No one was able to anticipate the scale of criminality last night – why not?  Last night followed a previous night of large scale rioting.  A no brainer!

Channel 4 finally ask a black lad in Grand Theft Auto garb and he says the problem is with police not liking black people, Asian people and they don’t even like their own people.  Why are we not hearing more from such sources – he may well be wrong, but didn’t sound ‘mindless’.  He had a rather clear view.  As did the guy ‘harassing’ Boris telling the reporter he didn’t need to comment because we all know about wages taxed to death and mortgage payments hard to make (think of Gadget refusing to tell the truth openly because she’d lose her mortgage-paying abilities).

Cops should be out with the Army tonight and there should be a tough crack down.  But not on sick old guys Gadget, while other cops look on.  That view is clown fascism and the start of the slippery slope to exactly the kind of ‘law and order’ of the police state.  Our cops are fortunately better than this, despite your agitation.  Frankly, it’s a mind-state as stupid as that of the rioters.  This stupidity is a result of “ejukation” so dim most of our population can’t ‘read’ GDP figures and balance sheets that show untold wealth in so few hands but probably sense the chronic unfairness and the fact we have no democracy to cope with putting it right.  We only have the fascist propaganda that it’s about meritocracy (debunked 40 years ago) and scumbags who won’t work and immigrants stealing our jobs (which is a problem for poor people and known to be).

We have lost compassion and our economists, politicians and vile rich are doing nothing to make markets honest and work to provide reasonably shares in wealth.  I have no problem with tougher policing to give us breathing space to do something effective about this.  At the moment, the only people who seem prepared to take action are ‘mindless, teen criminals’ – which says something about the rest of us.  I’m leaving – and it’s not the teen-thugs behind my reasoning – it’s the rest of us – spineless and mean, prepared to cling to clown propaganda when the evidence is clear.

There is no moral authority in this country.  It’s ripe to the point of something rotten in the State of Denmark.  The thieving going on in financial services, the suppression of jobs and wages (plus immigration to poor sectors) and funding of a special economy for the rich and a legal system accessible only to rich interests are the reasons for the riots – even if the daft sods doing it think they are playing Grand Theft Auto.

Arson, Looting and Violence Are Criminal – Shock Horror!

The London Riots are long overdue – Britain’s poor are very tame in comparison with our European neighbours.  Of course it’s all wrong, though so is our patronising Home Secretary for telling us.  If the knee jerk blather of such as Ms May and Herr Klegg is right, Britain must contain substantial pockets of criminality just waiting to burst out on the streets – a criminality we otherwise don’t see?  Police are in for a dire time if this is true.  I suspect, for once, that deeper sociological analysis is right and the causes of these riots are complex.  The symptoms are criminal, the ‘disease’ is not.  The revolting arrogance of well-off politicians and banksters on the austerity non-economics is a red rag to those who have been given no future and had very little.  I take a different view and have decided to leave, my country now a shameful place beyond repair due to years of nopolitics and theft by the rich.

The kids who are out smashing and burning probably have little articulation of what they are up to.  I doubt they are criminal in the normal sense of use – this is all people like this can do, much as the banbksters could not help but defraud us with useless loan insurance.  The policing involved looks bad and of the ‘arrest the survivors’.  It will be interesting to discover the full extent of whatever it is that is pent up.  To think of this as criminality is unhelpful.  To brand it as criminal is potentially highly inflammatory, along the lines of the blacking of Duggan’s character.  He now seems to have been shot in panic, though we’ll know more tomorrow.  We have not been listening to our poor and let our rich systematically steal our future.

Burning shops doesn’t seem to help, but nothing else does either.  The white collar versions have gone unnoticed, yet the thefts have returned us to 1900 and probably to the brink of war.

What we should have is answers that would prevent people being this pissed off.  Instead our turkey-government has been adding to the flames.  The answer is to replace unemployment by National Service and agree a fairer distribution of wealth and income and politics that genuinely represent across our society, rather than vie for enough votes to be in power.

There is no excuse for the riots, but the blame does not attach merely to those rioting.  Our attitude to the poor is one of my reasons for leaving.  Depression is coming and we aren’t hearing any sensible plans to help us work our way out of it.  The rich don’t want work – they can’t make enough money sitting on their idle arses from work.  We should learn from the massive bail outs and QE just how much money we could have thrown at unemployment and new investment if the scumbag rich hadn’t been running an illegal gambling game funded by tax payers.  Remember, when I’m gone, you brought this on yourselves through ignorance and callousness – you’ve been had.

We know the trashing of communities is wrong and all the rest.  But so is the massive hogging of our resources by rich interest groups who threaten to leave any country trying to produce a decent economy for all.  Police, as ever, have to stand up and be counted, which is a lot more than the rest of us have managed with the politicians who have presided over the flight of our capital.

I don’t know what these kids are doing or why they are doing it.  I’m waiting for someone to ask them.  In the meantime a curfew might have been an idea.  Soon ‘stop and search’ will be used to deflect responsibility onto policing and away from the nopolitics.  I assume, if this stuff was organised, there would have been a torch-lit march on Parliament.

These actions are criminal and should be dealt with as such.  This is obvious – so why aren’t our non-politicians asking deeper questions on why anyone would ‘support’ them by being on the streets?

In the meantime, the real story is the financial crisis and stock market collapse – all the doing of greedy rich people we don’t need and yet control our lives.  My heart goes out to the bobbies, fire staff and paramedics trying to cope.  They deserve some responsible politicians.  This isn’t about stop and search or the Duggan cock-up.  My guess is its about making so many people feel worthless.

The events are ‘simply inexcusable’ – but are we really convinced by ‘school’s out’ blather?  Those protesting elsewhere in the world have all been called criminals by horrendous governments.  It is, of course, very difficult to think of any of our rioters as political protesters – but it’s not impossible to see political reasons for some of our youth behaving like this.  We have done little for them and it looks like they finally know this.

Curfew and shooting looters might well be a fair response if we are prepared to do something about the real problems.  We won’t.

Cops Taking Bungs

Stephenson taking £24K (Telegraph) to live in as much comfort as possible is obviously wrong, even though he was ill. It’s weird because he could afford to pay and could probably excuse the Met paying.  He has a long history of turning down bonus money way in excess.  There’s an error of judgement here, but I’m not sure who’s it is.  That it’s connected with the ‘in-crowd’ Wallis stuff makes it worse.  He’s not on the take in brown envelopes here – but could favours of some kind be asked in return?  My own view is that the fact that there was no one about to say ‘no John, think of the impression this could give’ around suggests that he was left with only sycophants around him.  ACPO failed to stop chocolate dipped strawberries and champagne in a similar spree of unawareness.

More interesting in terms of what we generally hold as criminal corruption, is that the former DPP has said it only took him a few minutes to know that ScrewsNews emails were showing ‘dirty cops’.  The ‘bungs’ available to me when I started plodding were cups of tea, the odd bacon butty, curry, drops from the undertaker (£5 for the call to him from a sudden death, £10 if I helped out with the body) and vehicle recovery people and a few offered direct bribes.  I’m not sure how much I was offered in a couple of years.  Later, there were other offers that would identify people if I talked about them like this.  I was told over dinner by a modern police woman that all this is gone.  We were going Dutch, but the owner wouldn’t take the money.  All nothing to do with any police connections – it was to do with me helping him build the bar years ago when he was broke.  I am guilty of eating some bacon and drinking some tea.  And then there was VLP – visiting licensed premises – we did that by lot.  Not having that kind of drink would really have made me a raw prawn.  And I took drinks from criminals for a variety of reasons.  This was the culture and the closer to real money you got, the more opportunities.  What I took in bacon and tea wouldn’t pay from an ACPO’s individual reception bill.  There were cops on much more of a take 30 years ago and I don’t remember more than half-a-dozen dealt with.  The vast majority were more likely to stick a bribe attempt up where it hurts.

The world is much more corrupt these days and there’s more money awash in criminality.  I doubt much has changed.  This isn’t the kind of thing you can get rid of through bureaucracy, though the undertakers and vehicle rescue people have probably been sorted and VLP has gone.  Society has become more corrupt from selling pensions and mortgages to compensation culture and the rest.

There has always been another way to be corrupt.  The boys and girls who have been selling stories to ScrewsNews only service a form of economic niche that wasn’t around in my day.  There will be others.  But this isn’t what I mean.  They changed the way up the greasy pole.  GF Newman’s Terry Sneed will now rise in the lily-white form of career portfolio builder, conference attending and image management smoozing that is unarguably more corrupting in my view and certainly costs us more money as tax payers.

These people are corrupt in the way Soviet performance managers were – there is only ‘accounting’ no real market testing – they start, like bankers being able to mark assets to models and not to real market prices.  In the financial world, the losses are ‘hidden’ in myriads of transactions that will only show up if the banks are asked to fess up and are forced out of the benefit culture.  In police statistics, the losses are stacking up in antisocial behaviour and other gaming.  We might say that we should return to ‘primitive’ banking and policing.  The corrupt top not only serves no purpose but is a major drain on the real economy and real crime busting.  Politics, of course, has its hands in both sets of this corruption, as is most of our media.  Too many of us suck at its teat.

There is currently as much chance of getting anything done about the real corruption as finding the evidence of mine – though I can think of some I’d like to be looking for the remains of the bacon butties and tea!

You have to admire John Yates in all this.  The timing of his resignation was sublime – done before the awkward questions about security from terrorists that should follow from the custard-pie man!  I suggest they put Wendi Murdoch in charge.  On Newshite tonight they claimed she prevented something even worse happening.  This is pretty frightening on the quality of our journalists – she jumped on him from behind in retaliation – that’s assault.  Not that my corrupt blind eye would have noticed.  The question the press should be asking is whether the £24K bung is worse than one of my cups of tea.  It is you know, but unlike the current blighters at the top, I wouldn’t expect to investigate myself.

The whole ‘Champers’ thing of Sir Paul trying to rush his return to work against all medical, family and general expectation, as the determined soldier, falls to the rot such stuff is when it turns out we can do without him and a major deputy overnight.  Part of the corruption is beginning to believe the ‘excellence’ bullshit and how vital you are.  Shagger Todd was the bee’s knee’s and yet Peter Fahey is now admitted to have had to cope with an utter mess when he took over.  We can now ring the police in Manchester and not be told they are too busy and to stop bothering them.  All this PR and cosy crud with newspapers has more to do with telling us the chiefs are supermen – for so they are until they fall or just fade away.  I doubt one in ten is even any good – we need these image-managers and their lackeys and toadies gone.  Police news could be delivered on line very cheaply.

Typical academic consideration of police lying

Police lying is not best described as a "dirty little secret."' For
instance, police lying is no "dirtier" than the prosecutor's encouragement
or conscious use of tailored testimony2 or knowing suppression of Brady
material;3 it is no more hypocritical than the wink and nod of judges who
regularly pass on incredible police testimony4 and no more insincere than
the demagogic politicians who decry criminality in our communities, but
will not legislate independent monitoring of police wrongd~ing.~
Police lying is no "little secret" either.6 Juries, particularly in our
urban criminal courts, are thoroughly capable of discounting police
testimony as unbelievable, unreliable, and even .mendacious.' Judges,
prosecutors and defense attorneys report that police perjury is commonplace,'
and even police officers themselves concede that lying is a regular
feature of the life of a cop.g Scandals involving police misconduct-
brutality, corruption, criminality-are regularly featured in the daily
nei~spapers,'a~n d periodic investigation reports and blue-ribbon commis-
sions come up with the same conclusions: police scandals are cyclical;
official misconduct, corruption, brutality, and criminality are endemic; and
necessarily, so is police lying to disguise and deny it."
there has been a fierce
controversy on how the procedural requirements placed on police conduct
encourage police lying and duplicity in order to tailor the facts to these
legal requisites.I5 Specifically, scholars, judges, pundits, and law
enforcement professionals argue back and forth on whether or not the
exclusion of illegally obtained evidence actually deters police misconduct,
or rather encourages police perjury and "scamming," while rewarding
undeserving criminal offenders.16
Proving the Lie:
Litigating Police Credibility
David N. Dorfman*
Pace University

I take the view that police lying and the kind of stuff going on in the hacking scandal give us the paradigm case of much going wrong across society.  In this article, if you read long enough in the opening above, you can see part of the concern is that the apparatus of rules of evidence encourage lying.  This is not an attack on cops and it does not become one in the 50 or so pages that follow.

Our legal system has long relied on fictions like ‘witness credibility’ and our business system.  Journals on business ethics carry similar papers on the dirty world of commerce and banking.  For that matter, none of us in the UK or US know why our soldiers died and are dying and why we’ve been killing people in wars we don’t understand.  There are questions about our institutions, education, media and the state of public knowledge and how it is influenced we should be asking.  The repeated problem might be described as the ‘back-fire of ignorance’ – what should be dialogue turned to adversarial debate.  How can an MP, after the expenses scandal, be fit to ask a former Met detective about cover-up and corruption when they all so singularly failed with their own – a matter that only came out by whistle-blower leak for money to the press?

Scandal blows away – otherwise how could Keith Vaz be chairing a committee on, essentially, corruption (as Dickiebo despairs if you need reminding)?  There’s a better way to be doing this kind of thing.  It isn’t academic debate, though should be much better informed by this – a difficult matter as most people don’t read and are very set in their ways.  We still do public debate through Idols Francis Bacon outlined more than 400 years ago.

We have the technology (a combination of IT and ideas) to change.  History always throws up ‘cheating’.  Central banks all cheated the gold standard when it was being used, practising “sterilization” to prevent gold entering the money supply – a direct contravention of the rules.  They had ‘noble cause’ excuses just like the Met.  The ‘Innocent Project’ has thrown up at least 50 cases where DNA proves innocence and yet the defendants confessed (these are people without low IQ or mental problems).

My own belief is we are scared of transparency, partly because all our cupboards hide skeletons.  When the ‘red witch’ placed at the heart of the hacking scandal admitted she knew her organisation had paid police officers, this was seen as a blunder and admission of ‘criminality’.  This is not the right approach and seems to be putting people we want to tell the truth in the same position as the police officer having to ‘game’ in the legal system.

Our own IPCC (four words all made lies by the first?) privilege what police present in a manner that can only suggest they are ignorant of academic material – and they are well-populated with graduates (this is not contradictory to me as I mark graduate submissions and find little critical ability or evidence of reading).  For all the blather about not wanting a blame culture, they (and the rest of us as public) remain clueless about what one is.

If we didn’t live in such a medieval society, I’d be a rational optimist.

Crime Figures

Our national crime figures often make little sense.  How, for instance, does domestic violence rise by 35% in the course of 12 months?  It doesn’t seem likely that spouses start weiighing into each other a third more often (though even stuff like the local soccer team losing can put up the number of incidents).

The local crime map for my area shows around 330 incidents in May this year – half being antisocial behaviour.  There are 32 officers including the PCSOs – so that’s about 10 incidents each per month.  The ‘map’ is no map at all as no details beyond a set of types of crime and ASB is given.

It would be interesting to know how many of the 330 incidents is actually attended by these local team officers.  Nearly all response I’m aware of is via Response – the poor sods flying around like blue-assed flies.

The average length of police work done would be useful.  If these 330 incidents take an average on an hour, then our local plods are only doing 10 hours each a month.  I know it’s not this simple, but this figure could be accurately defined.

Steve Bennett at thinblueline has written extensively on the gaming involved in police statistics.  The BCS has shown a steady drop in crime across the UK – this survey evades senior officer juking because it’s generated directly from the public.  It generally runs at twice the police recorded level and sensibly it would.  Not all crime is reported to police.

What always gets me about these figures is what I’d do with them if they crossed my desk and were from my area of concern.  I’d toss them in the bin and see if I could get the costs of producing them off my budget.  I expect stats to help me run things – and these just don’t.  They reek of expensive PR and bonus-rigging.

One assumes none of the senior cops who were covering up the phone hacking and dubious police earners now droning 24/7 recorded the crimes they were doing nothing about.  If we could open up stuff being written off as ASB we might well find many more crimes.  The actual number doesn’t matter much – what we need to know is how they are being dealt with and the costs of this execution.  This can be done statistically and it’s precisely not what the public gets.

Most cops don’t believe ‘crime’ is falling.  It has in my parochial world because a criminal family finally moved on after 7 years of the authorities failing to deal with them.  We have hardly seen a police car since.  They went to prison, but are now active in new premises.

With only 330 incidents a month, it would be useful to know who is responsible for those incidents – 10 lousy bastards like our former neighbours or 330?  How many perpetrators are identified?  What happens to them?  What does a fair sample of victims think about police action and final outcomes?  What do those dissatisfied identify as the problem?  What would a research team looking in detail at one month discover?

The whole point of practical statistics is not the numbers, but patterns, correlation and help in control.

If the 330 incidents in May in my neighhood is all our 32 officers are doing, then it seems a very expensive solution.  With on-costs 32 times £30K  then £960K or about £3K per incident is being spent just in the local budget, probably to ‘contain’ a dozen highly dud families.  I’m doing guesstimate – but with some real stats I wouldn’t have to.  What is the actual police cost for a recorded incident?  How much of this is the burden of really serious incidents?

In comparison with any harm from phone hacking, the way lives are wrecked around anti-social criminals is far more damaging.  One would expect police statistics to identify and quantify this.  The point of statistical analysis ion organisations is quality in the broad sense.  If we take a guesstimate on each of my local officers working ten incidents a month, there seems room for substantial focus and prevention of the same people perpetrating.  Yet, as Response (rather than local) turn up, one hears the perps are well known.

I could easily database 330 incidents a month in a manner that would allow reporting to identify repeat victims and offenders, crime concentrations and so on.  Such effort is wasted if it doesn’t lead to better, different actions.  This is what we should expect to hear on police statistics.  In part we do – and the message is that we aren’t stopping the same, sad, druggie prats.

One can understand ‘scrap’ metal thefts going up as commodity prices rise – crime tends to move with other trends and what cops are targeting.  That domestic violence can leap by 35% suggests some change in reporting and classification has occurred.  The ASB rate has been going up – but is this a new set of problems or just a new bin for crime?  The point is that we don’t know.  Where is the statistic on who any of these statistics have actually led to changes other than in the wallets of some senior cops?

Or for that matter on the cost-benefits of taking 100,000 crap families out of our system by putting them in curfewed trailer parks away from the environment they mess up and commit anti-social and other crimes in?  For 500 towns that would be an estate of 200 mobile homes each.  One pilot might be enough to send the message.  Say ten places were reserved for my neighbourhood and the number of incidents dropped from 330 to 200 a month.  This is the kind of statistic I’m interested in.

If we cut policing back to 1973 levels, how much money might be available to give back to ‘deserving welfare’?  I’d like to know this – though I don’t approve of the idea.  Would the amount, for instance, be more than that available from a cull of scroungers?  Or cutting legal bills in half?  One needs some numerate grasp of spending – preferably the scum who get nicked need costing in terms of all the money they put into other people’s pockets and thus for us to know how much they are really stealing from ours as tax-payers and who has interests in maintaining the problems.

Half our neighbourhood team is PCSO.  If they can really do the job, why are we paying for ‘expensive police officers’?  A cruel statement in many ways – but unlike many parts of the private sector, wage costs are not under such easy control.  One also has to wonder at higher-level costs – could we not get decent judges and advocates at much lower cost through specialist training for criminal matters (say undergrad plus one year law school or experience plus same).  Why no statistics on this kind of efficiency gain?  If a cop is paid twice the market rate, she’s costing us as much as some delinquent families if a PCSO can really deliver or could given the powers of arrest.  Once into this kind of economic thinking, a lot of nasty savings crop up.  Everyone wants to be a special case.  What would be the wage spreadsheet on police pay if ‘marked to market’?

The likely means to curbing police pay will be cuts and inflation through other wage rises or the dumping of electronic money as quantitative easing or in exchange markets and tricks like the PCSOs.  They are only the flick of a pen away from ‘full status’.  A recruitment and promotion freeze on other ranks will help swell their numbers.  The history on this isn’t pleasant – the last real police strike led to a big cut in pay (1919-21ish).  Has your force issued real stats on what the cuts mean and how they intend to cope?

These are issues that the public should know about in order to make informed decisions on policing and no great numeracy is now required once spreadsheets are established.  This could be achieved by scrapping the police reported system and putting these resources into a costing system on incident response, actual police activities and some sampling scrutiny on what turns up in the BCS.

Police might well want to start recording more crime now – something that happened in CID years ago when the number of crimes became more important than the fudged detection rate in terms of promoted ranks that could be claimed.  Expect HMG to try to dodge this with some new criteria.  Certainly the stuff put in front of us over many years would only get short-shrift by any executive trying to run the firm.  Does ACPO have another set it works from?

They Are Feeding Us Lies On Police Corruption

Two police worthies are promising to chase police malpractice to the ends of the earth.  Orde and Stephenson should be sacked immediately for trying this one on!

“Police recorded crime and detections have been wickedly and deliberately manipulated for many years, resulting in millions being paid in performance bonuses to Chief Officers, gross misallocation and direction of fiscal and operational resources and perhaps the worst crime of all, the scurrilous conspiratorial deception of the tax paying public, perpetrated by Chief Officers and previous Home Office ministers that crime fell and detections rose dramatically under their watch.” from thinblueline.

We don’t see any ‘Untouchables-style’ attitudes towards policing in the UK (though in reality Eliot Ness wrote his own myth).  Policing and our wider CJS are corrupt in ways that many of the people working in them can’t see.  The very people making these ‘moral high ground’ statements should be culpable (I don’t mean these two specifically).

What we have is increasing anti-social crime from evil poor sprogs driving disabled people to their deaths to bankers carving us all up.  There is no decrease in crime.  The serious miscarriages going on look as bad as ever, as does the whole structure of police complaints.

We need a great deal off the backs of our cops – not least the management burden and managers who seek to cover up even when there is clear evidence.  There are ways forward, but the current culture allows no change and hasn’t learned any of the real lessons under its rhetoric of the same.

I can find no reports on any of the areas where police have claimed to ‘learn lessons’ or any useful statistics that give us a proper idea of what they are doing and for whom.

I’d like to see much of the involvement of lawyers and courts stripped away from summary offences and replaced by much quicker processes and new forms of case presentation and investigation.  I doubt that civil rights considerations are a block to this, just current vested interests and problems in trusting prosecutions.

Deep lying in the problem is the system of ‘credibility’ we are stuck with in general argument and the courts.  There is no consistency in this and it flies in the face of scientific findings.  The real arguments are quickly lost in a variety of posturing as people take offence.

The Soviet system was notoriously corrupt and there are many similarities in what has been going on here.  Performance management has become a dramaturgical performance and much like banking the actors are allowed to ‘mark to model’ (targets) and not to reality.  One might compare the money we’ve had to find to bail out the banks with the ‘off-balance-sheet’ of anti-social crime in police statistics, and police gaming with bent bank and company accounting.

White-collar Crime

Statistical reasoning is part and parcel of my daily routine.  Most people don’t get close to capability in this area and my own abilities soon pale when I meet the mathematical experts in this field.  I’m talking science here, not the much governments and performance management departments churn out.

Bwanking (there is acceptable banking) is an area that makes use of highly complex mathematical scheming, broadly to lie about real positions.  Police statistics and a wad of others from government and local government are also used to lie.  In science, the method is used to explain and manipulate complex interactions and to a fair degree we know we are still dealing with approximation.

We have an obvious problem in social statistics in that the ‘end-user’ is Jane Muggins and she is likely not to be functionally literate and numerate enough to spot flim-flam.  In science, we often start positing stuff like ‘dark energy’ only to find that the equations we are using also work well if we put in numbers from other assumptions such as ‘time slowing down’.  This doesn’t stop engineering being better than not doing it.  Generally, ‘realism keeps us honest’ – though these days scientific realism realises it is structured.

Economics and particularly ‘bwanking and accountwing’ can delay ‘realism’ until its ‘scientists’ have had it away on their toes with our cash and got this invested in the property under our feet; indeed literally taking the ground away from under our feet.  I’ll give one disgusting example (though these are as common as the stories Ambush Predator reveals on our ‘evil poor’ and buffoon laws).  Prestigious US university alumni funds are involved, through a British hedge-fund, in deals as revolting as the Scottish Enclosures, in taking African soil away from its tenant farmers.  One cannot even give money to world wild life funds without risking something like this.

I would just ask you to think about what’s on offer in Dispatches, Panorama and other bits of investigative journalism.  This is not proof and you have tor remember that most people don’t even get this far.

The most forceful contemporary statement of [the instrumental argument fort democracy} is provided by Amartya Sen, who argues, for example, that “no substantial famine has ever occurred in any independent country with a democratic form of government and a relatively free press” (Sen 1999, 152). The basis of this argument is that politicians in a multiparty democracy with free elections and a free press have incentives to respond to the expressions of needs of the poor [Sen, A., 1999, Development as Freedom, New York: Knopf.]  What one has to add is that the famines and deaths continue outside the democracies and that the first democracy (Athens) practiced genocide to ensure its own grain supplies and boost its own treasury (found empty despite ‘statistics’).

In the same way that we might posit ‘dark energy’ or ‘time slowing down’, I would like to see far deeper questioning of our economic system through a range of possibilities.

The first of these is to consider ‘economics’ not as a scientific subject, but as cover for white collar crime.  One can also do this in specific areas such as ‘police statistics’ and those on local government performance and supposed financial performance.  I don’t see this as essentially about numbers, but will give a few as a guide.

Fred Goodwin took more than £30 million (pay, bonus, shares and pension) from RBS in seeing it from a bank lending on the basis of its deposits to utter disaster.  One can only estimate and can only estimate the bank’s losses at, say, £28 billion.  The jobs of maybe a million people may also have been lost because of the ‘necessary’ bail out – the equivalent, perhaps, of the turfing-out of tenant farmers in Africa via greedy funds wanting the mineral rights.

We often hear that bwankers such as this are essential to our economic well-being. Questions arise as to whether Fred was ever worth a bean and whether selection for such roles is remotely correct.  My own view for a long time has been we are ‘choosing’ psychopaths as our management class. Many others in RBS took fortunes from building its collapse.  RBS is only one example in many.

We should be able to command a simple explanation of what has and continues to go on. Generally, finding that an elite group has made loads of money through claiming massive profits only for us to find the cupboard not only bare but full of liabilities, we suspect theft and organised criminality.

Our laws in intent include recklessness.

What ‘ecwonomics and accountwing’ have been providing is a system of denial of responsibility when things go wrong and justification of an enormous cut of the cake on the basis of ‘special skills’ that  are unlikely to exist.  The metaphor is that of betting on all the horses in every race – a surefire way of handing over your money to the bookmakers – but being able to continually defer the losses and live off the winnings.  The key is not to be betting with your own money, unless you can choose to pull out your bets when you are winning.  I will always win money off you on the toss of a coin if I can always double my stake and you can’t leave.  Bookies and casinos don’t allow this.

Imagine what short shrift you would get if you had engaged in such activities with the contents of your firm’s safe,lost the lot and claimed you never intended to defraud anyone, but were really trying to make everyone money using a fool-proof system.  ‘And throw away the key’ seems likely.

How could you advance a defence of no criminality because you believed in the system?  Remember Horace Bachelor?  He sold a worthless pools perm and made money because there were bound to be winners.  He just let a lot of people gamble and took a percentage from the winners.  Simples!  Lots of other people just lost their money.

If we can pin £30 million on Freddy Boy, how much can we pin on the whole process of speculation?  I believe we can build the spreadsheet of this, showing how much is involved and who the winners and losers are.  I believe this would demonstrate a scam very similar to Horace Bachelor writ large.

What we need is a massive social change that we organise.  We are in the hands of organised crime and rigged markets.  This is affecting food, gas and housing prices as surely as the Russian Mafia thug ensuring that traders don’t drop their prices in real markets to protect their margins.  It isn’t capitalism, it’s crime.  They are using our money as surely as if they’ve taken the notes from our mattresses.  It’s all real theft, based on lying about the future and taking money now.  We live in fear of what will happen when the protection racket is broken.

Just when were any of Freddy’s drawings from his business really justified?  The cumulative debt dwarfs anything of the supposed profits.If we add up what’s been taken in inflated salaries, bonuses and options and think what might have been had this been invested in public services  – why don’t we know, why is there no public accounting on the opportunity costs?  The answer is that they want to hide the crime from us.  We’ve been had.





Crime Figures From America

The modern American prison system evolved as an alternative to flogging: penitentiaries were designed to “cure” prisoners of their criminality—to render them penitent—rehabilitating them into productive members of society. On this score, as on most others, it has failed. Indeed, prisons seem to cause more crime than they prevent, hardly surprising when you throw a bunch of criminals together with nothing to do and lots of time. Today roughly 2.3m people live in America’s prisons, more than live in any American city other than New York, Los Angeles or Chicago. America’s incarceration rate of 750 per 100,000 is five times the world average; roughly one in every 31 Americans—and one in every 11 African-Americans—is under some form of correctional control, whether prison, probation or parole.  England and Wales have now exceeded 85,000. In France, with the same population as Britain, prison numbers are 59,655 and in Germany with over 20 million more people, 72,043.  The US system would mean about half a million in gaol here.

Nearly all of us think we are too lenient – one only has to look at the number of cases Ambush Predator raises and such matters as 1 in 30 rapes being committed by released rapists to think we should imprison more.  Yet the same matters should also lead us to wonder why criminality is so high and why apparent year on year on year drops in recorded crime and what the BCS picks up do not tally with actual increasing numbers in prison and our feelings more should be going for longer.  In the US the greater numbers banged up, often in dire conditions, has not acted as a deterrent.

About one third of UK men pick up a ‘list one’ conviction and about 6% do so 5 or more times.  A quarter of people in the US have criminal convictions, but I don’t know if their ‘list’ is comparable – it’s still 65 million people.

Farewell to the ASBO and Welcome to the ‘New ASBO’

The Home Secretary sounded rather good when she spoke of ‘making antisocial behaviour non-routine’.  The ZanuPFNulabour legislation was hopeless, but I find the notion that these problems can be sorted out by legislation stupid and something of a pointer that we have a ZanuPFCountrillition in place (one can drop the ‘o’ – but they do have a horsey, county-set feel).

What’s good in this legislation is that eviction has been brought in, but one wonders whether it has been in practice.  The ‘reason’ this obvious sanction was not available in the past was that it was thought people would start making false complaints just to get rid of people they didn’t like (some clown cross-party group of MPs – JUSTICE).  The real issues have never been addressed, and we continue now with statements that we should be making earlier intervention (true, but how without real resources and training) and simplifying legal processes, engaging communities and other blather that flies in the face of real practice.  What of ACPO and other high ranking local authority and other jerks who lied to us for so long that the system was improving things to satisfy political masters and their highly inflated pay?

I see nothing that addresses the real problems.