FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > WhatsApp Police
WhatsApp Police
Jump to: Newest in thread
"The messages were utterly repellent.
The attitudes displayed were horrific. People like that should not be in a position of responsibility."
This. It's bad enough if the average joe is so insufferably intolerant, but you can just ignore those people for the most part.
Serving police officers should have a solid moral compass, and not prejudge based on stereotypes of any kind. Yes that's an idealistic view, but they absolutely shouldn't show clear prejudice towards specific groups of people. How on earth can they be just and fair? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Tom your simply being grossly provocative in using the term 'banter', the language used by some if them was enough to be rightly treated under gross misconduct..
That's not banter as well you know.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
This is ridiculous. The fact you ask the question means you are questioning the right to free speech.
My work group WhatsApp is so full of non pc, anti woke humour that it would make your hair curl.
The Jewish guy makes anti semitic jokes,the Asian humour is self mocking and the Lesbian just continually goes on about who she finds hot.
But none of us hold these beliefs or even countenance them in reality. We respect each other and our differences...whilst taking the piss continually.
If a person's beliefs can be shown to affect their work, then yes they shod be disciplined. If they do something against a professional code of conduct, yes they should be taken to task.
But we have given enough liberty away in the last 2 years without losing free speech as well.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I completely understand it’s a fine line when it comes to banter however it seems to many people seem to use that as an excuse to make racist, sexist, inappropriate comments, if it offends people it’s not banter and yes people are also over sensitive these days so we should be smarter about who we have banter with ! That’s my opinion on it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The messages were utterly repellent.
The attitudes displayed were horrific. People like that should not be in a position of responsibility."
People who are employed to uphold the law should not discuss cases in a manner that brings the role into disrepute. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Ok let's look at what they said and you can say whether you still think it's "banter".
Messages about police officers attending a festival dressed as known sex offenders and a m@lested child (sent within a WhatsApp group containing 17 police officers)
Homophobic comments such as “Gayyyyyy”, “You f***ing gay!” and “F*** you bender”
An officer sending messages saying “I would happily r@pe you”; “if I was single I would actually hate f*** you” and “if I was single I would happily chloroform you”
Use of derogatory terms about people with disabilities, including “s***tics” and “retard"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The messages were utterly repellent.
The attitudes displayed were horrific. People like that should not be in a position of responsibility."
100% agree ( for once  ). Nothing else to be said really |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Depends on whether they were sent on work phones and during work hours
I believe you should be able to send your mates whatever you want out of hours without endangering your job. Isn’t that the right to free speech and privacy? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Ok let's look at what they said and you can say whether you still think it's "banter".
Messages about police officers attending a festival dressed as known sex offenders and a m@lested child (sent within a WhatsApp group containing 17 police officers)
Homophobic comments such as “Gayyyyyy”, “You f***ing gay!” and “F*** you bender”
An officer sending messages saying “I would happily r@pe you”; “if I was single I would actually hate f*** you” and “if I was single I would happily chloroform you”
Use of derogatory terms about people with disabilities, including “s***tics” and “retard"
"
Also the one where he tells his mate that he should slap his partner around, makes them love you more. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *adyBugsWoman
over a year ago
cognito |
"Ok let's look at what they said and you can say whether you still think it's "banter".
Messages about police officers attending a festival dressed as known sex offenders and a m@lested child (sent within a WhatsApp group containing 17 police officers)
Homophobic comments such as “Gayyyyyy”, “You f***ing gay!” and “F*** you bender”
An officer sending messages saying “I would happily r@pe you”; “if I was single I would actually hate f*** you” and “if I was single I would happily chloroform you”
Use of derogatory terms about people with disabilities, including “s***tics” and “retard"
"
If this is what was said that’s unacceptable privately or otherwise by anyone. If I was in that group I’d call them out on it and they’d definitely end up on my blocked list. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Ok let's look at what they said and you can say whether you still think it's "banter".
Messages about police officers attending a festival dressed as known sex offenders and a m@lested child (sent within a WhatsApp group containing 17 police officers)
Homophobic comments such as “Gayyyyyy”, “You f***ing gay!” and “F*** you bender”
An officer sending messages saying “I would happily r@pe you”; “if I was single I would actually hate f*** you” and “if I was single I would happily chloroform you”
Use of derogatory terms about people with disabilities, including “s***tics” and “retard"
"
Agreed..
I'm ex military and one of the other blue light jobs and no stranger to 'banter' but there's a line, even going back 20/30 yrs ..
A police officer having sex with a d*unk person when that person is on custody and they have a duty of care is not acceptable.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Ok let's look at what they said and you can say whether you still think it's "banter".
Messages about police officers attending a festival dressed as known sex offenders and a m@lested child (sent within a WhatsApp group containing 17 police officers)
Homophobic comments such as “Gayyyyyy”, “You f***ing gay!” and “F*** you bender”
An officer sending messages saying “I would happily r@pe you”; “if I was single I would actually hate f*** you” and “if I was single I would happily chloroform you”
Use of derogatory terms about people with disabilities, including “s***tics” and “retard"
"
All of this is absolutely deplorable. However, if it is in a private group, and none of those people are offended, then it should be private.
I am not going to argue about the moral standards of the police and the unconscionably low standards of their recruitment process.
That is clear from the content...which I was unaware of.
However, we are into the area of thought policing if we start to investigate private conversations that do not affect peoples ability to function morally in the real world.
The police have a tough job. So do nurses, fireman, prison staff and other low paid public sector front line staff. How they choose to communicate is their own lookout. How they do their jobs is their bosses responsibility. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Depends on whether they were sent on work phones and during work hours
I believe you should be able to send your mates whatever you want out of hours without endangering your job. Isn’t that the right to free speech and privacy? "
I think its slightly different because these are serving police officers....we are supposed to trust these people |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Depends on whether they were sent on work phones and during work hours
I believe you should be able to send your mates whatever you want out of hours without endangering your job. Isn’t that the right to free speech and privacy? "
You do make a really good point but does that also apply to politicians for example?! If Boris or Starmer text something like that to his mates should he lose his job ?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Depends on whether they were sent on work phones and during work hours
I believe you should be able to send your mates whatever you want out of hours without endangering your job. Isn’t that the right to free speech and privacy? "
If it was sent on a private phone outside of work hours and discussed a case or victim - what about that? If you see the comment I posted with examples of talk about "r@pe" do you see that there are concerns about men with such attitudes in the police? There is a systemic problem. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think some people are missing one important point.
NO ONE, no one ever should be saying things like this.
Are we saying it’s ok to say you’re going to r*pe someone?
Are we saying it’s ok to tell someone to hit their partner?
Male to female/female to male.
Unacceptable in whatever form. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Depends on whether they were sent on work phones and during work hours
I believe you should be able to send your mates whatever you want out of hours without endangering your job. Isn’t that the right to free speech and privacy? "
There's an expected standard of behaviour in public sector employees paid to provide a service, and yes that does mean out of hours behaviour if it falls below the services codes of conduct and is then made public it will be open to scrutiny..
It's accepted when you join that's the case.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Depends on whether they were sent on work phones and during work hours
I believe you should be able to send your mates whatever you want out of hours without endangering your job. Isn’t that the right to free speech and privacy?
If it was sent on a private phone outside of work hours and discussed a case or victim - what about that? If you see the comment I posted with examples of talk about "r@pe" do you see that there are concerns about men with such attitudes in the police? There is a systemic problem. "
Discussing a case or victim would breach data protection laws I’d imagine
As one poster says above, we are getting dangerously close to thought police when we start policing private conversations
Personally, I don’t think it’s a problem in private. I lean on the side of free speech. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Tom your simply being grossly provocative in using the term 'banter', the language used by some if them was enough to be rightly treated under gross
misconduct..
That's not banter as well you know.."
Tom you are being a total dick, grow up. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think some people are missing one important point.
NO ONE, no one ever should be saying things like this.
Are we saying it’s ok to say you’re going to r*pe someone?
Are we saying it’s ok to tell someone to hit their partner?
Male to female/female to male.
Unacceptable in whatever form."
I think it’s unacceptable to tell others what they can and can’t say to other consenting adults in a private setting
These are moral and ethical discussion, I don’t think you can make it as black and white as you want it to be |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think some people are missing one important point.
NO ONE, no one ever should be saying things like this.
Are we saying it’s ok to say you’re going to r*pe someone?
Are we saying it’s ok to tell someone to hit their partner?
Male to female/female to male.
Unacceptable in whatever form.
I think it’s unacceptable to tell others what they can and can’t say to other consenting adults in a private setting
These are moral and ethical discussion, I don’t think you can make it as black and white as you want it to be "
Not all the conversations took place between consenting adults as far as I’m aware.
I agree with you to an extent, but it’s still morally wrong in my opinion. You are of course entitled to your own opinion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Depends on whether they were sent on work phones and during work hours
I believe you should be able to send your mates whatever you want out of hours without endangering your job. Isn’t that the right to free speech and privacy?
If it was sent on a private phone outside of work hours and discussed a case or victim - what about that? If you see the comment I posted with examples of talk about "r@pe" do you see that there are concerns about men with such attitudes in the police? There is a systemic problem.
Discussing a case or victim would breach data protection laws I’d imagine
As one poster says above, we are getting dangerously close to thought police when we start policing private conversations
Personally, I don’t think it’s a problem in private. I lean on the side of free speech. "
Wayne Couzens worked in a unit where they exchanged messages like this. Another officer from his unit has been charged with r@pe. I think there IS a problem. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
I believe you should be able to send your mates whatever you want out of hours without endangering your job. Isn’t that the right to free speech and privacy?
"
So it's fine to send your mates photos of murder victims you took whilst on duty, with "jokey" captions ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
I believe you should be able to send your mates whatever you want out of hours without endangering your job. Isn’t that the right to free speech and privacy?
So it's fine to send your mates photos of murder victims you took whilst on duty, with "jokey" captions ? "
Those officers were jailed for that. Absolutely disgusting. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Ok let's look at what they said and you can say whether you still think it's "banter".
Messages about police officers attending a festival dressed as known sex offenders and a m@lested child (sent within a WhatsApp group containing 17 police officers)
Homophobic comments such as “Gayyyyyy”, “You f***ing gay!” and “F*** you bender”
An officer sending messages saying “I would happily r@pe you”; “if I was single I would actually hate f*** you” and “if I was single I would happily chloroform you”
Use of derogatory terms about people with disabilities, including “s***tics” and “retard"
"
The communication was abhorrent for any group and should be enough for criminal charges IMO. It should not be permitted in a work group and definitely never within the police. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Depends on whether they were sent on work phones and during work hours
I believe you should be able to send your mates whatever you want out of hours without endangering your job. Isn’t that the right to free speech and privacy?
If it was sent on a private phone outside of work hours and discussed a case or victim - what about that? If you see the comment I posted with examples of talk about "r@pe" do you see that there are concerns about men with such attitudes in the police? There is a systemic problem.
Discussing a case or victim would breach data protection laws I’d imagine
As one poster says above, we are getting dangerously close to thought police when we start policing private conversations
Personally, I don’t think it’s a problem in private. I lean on the side of free speech.
Wayne Couzens worked in a unit where they exchanged messages like this. Another officer from his unit has been charged with r@pe. I think there IS a problem. "
I personally don’t, and I don’t think we can absolutely rule there is or isn’t based on this 1 situation
There’s millions of people all over this country that are good decent people thaf make off colour jokes with their mates behind closed doors
There’s tonnes of sick psycho murders/rapists that you wouldn’t even guess by their behaviour
Just my opinion. I don’t think it’s as black and white as we make it out to be |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Depends on whether they were sent on work phones and during work hours
I believe you should be able to send your mates whatever you want out of hours without endangering your job. Isn’t that the right to free speech and privacy?
If it was sent on a private phone outside of work hours and discussed a case or victim - what about that? If you see the comment I posted with examples of talk about "r@pe" do you see that there are concerns about men with such attitudes in the police? There is a systemic problem.
Discussing a case or victim would breach data protection laws I’d imagine
As one poster says above, we are getting dangerously close to thought police when we start policing private conversations
Personally, I don’t think it’s a problem in private. I lean on the side of free speech.
Wayne Couzens worked in a unit where they exchanged messages like this. Another officer from his unit has been charged with r@pe. I think there IS a problem.
I personally don’t, and I don’t think we can absolutely rule there is or isn’t based on this 1 situation
There’s millions of people all over this country that are good decent people thaf make off colour jokes with their mates behind closed doors
There’s tonnes of sick psycho murders/rapists that you wouldn’t even guess by their behaviour
Just my opinion. I don’t think it’s as black and white as we make it out to be "
If it was just one situation I'd agree. But there is a lot of evidence of systemic racism and sexism in the force. This is merely a symptom. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think some people are missing one important point.
NO ONE, no one ever should be saying things like this.
Are we saying it’s ok to say you’re going to r*pe someone?
Are we saying it’s ok to tell someone to hit their partner?
Male to female/female to male.
Unacceptable in whatever form."
Ok. Most people agree with this. But, within a group of people, in private, where none of them are offended, then they should be allowed to say what they want.
As long as they are not inciting others to commit a crime, and you can argue that telling someone to hit their partner is that, then it should be allowed under free speech.
If people were closed down from expressing distasteful opinions then the next step would be to define what is acceptable.
Thats when the real liberties are lost. Pornography is offensive...ban it. Alcoholism is abhorrant...ban alcohol.
People talking about and watching their wives being fucked by numerous men is depraved...lock them up.
I am appalled by what these so called Public Employees said, but I defend their right to say it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"within a group of people, in private, where none of them are offended, then they should be allowed to say what they want.
As long as they are not inciting others to commit a crime
"
I don't agree. For example a group of teachers shouldn't text racist jokes and then teach classes of varied ethnicities. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think some people are missing one important point.
NO ONE, no one ever should be saying things like this.
Are we saying it’s ok to say you’re going to r*pe someone?
Are we saying it’s ok to tell someone to hit their partner?
Male to female/female to male.
Unacceptable in whatever form.
Ok. Most people agree with this. But, within a group of people, in private, where none of them are offended, then they should be allowed to say what they want.
As long as they are not inciting others to commit a crime, and you can argue that telling someone to hit their partner is that, then it should be allowed under free speech.
If people were closed down from expressing distasteful opinions then the next step would be to define what is acceptable.
Thats when the real liberties are lost. Pornography is offensive...ban it. Alcoholism is abhorrant...ban alcohol.
People talking about and watching their wives being fucked by numerous men is depraved...lock them up.
I am appalled by what these so called Public Employees said, but I defend their right to say it.
"
What about if they were talking about your mum or your sister or your friend? Still ok? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *hloetTV/TS
over a year ago
Nottingham |
Sounds like what they said was absolutely horrible. The problem is if you start saying you can have freedom of speech as long as you don't say such and such, then you don't have freedom of speech. You descend into the whole Orwell 1984 situation. Unfortunately if you want freedom of speech you have to allow horrible people to say horrible things. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think some people are missing one important point.
NO ONE, no one ever should be saying things like this.
Are we saying it’s ok to say you’re going to r*pe someone?
Are we saying it’s ok to tell someone to hit their partner?
Male to female/female to male.
Unacceptable in whatever form.
Ok. Most people agree with this. But, within a group of people, in private, where none of them are offended, then they should be allowed to say what they want.
As long as they are not inciting others to commit a crime, and you can argue that telling someone to hit their partner is that, then it should be allowed under free speech.
If people were closed down from expressing distasteful opinions then the next step would be to define what is acceptable.
Thats when the real liberties are lost. Pornography is offensive...ban it. Alcoholism is abhorrant...ban alcohol.
People talking about and watching their wives being fucked by numerous men is depraved...lock them up.
I am appalled by what these so called Public Employees said, but I defend their right to say it.
"
Well said, as the quote goes
“I might not agree with what you said, but I’ll die defending your right to say it” |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Hiding behind “freedom of speech” and “banter” is what most tend to do when they have been abhorrent… no excuse in their role .. makes no difference if it’s private or not… just not acceptable and is evidence of an exclusive culture … |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I don't think anyone is saying that people should not be free to have private WhatsApp groups or to share banter and at times have a laugh at work..
The role they do like others at times is beyond anything the vast majority of the public have any idea about, it can be distressing dealing with certain things but training kicks in etc and you crack on ..
Humour, making light of something even 'dark' humour is one way of dealing with some things, it's a bit of a pressure relief valve at times and part and parcel of such jobs..
The bottom line is no one is saying the right to free speech, expression and the like should be deprived from the police in this instance..
But there are lines, and whilst in a private group you might well say stuff that you wouldn't and shouldn't elsewhere because of your position if such things said come into the light then there are consequences.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think some people are missing one important point.
NO ONE, no one ever should be saying things like this.
Are we saying it’s ok to say you’re going to r*pe someone?
Are we saying it’s ok to tell someone to hit their partner?
Male to female/female to male.
Unacceptable in whatever form.
Ok. Most people agree with this. But, within a group of people, in private, where none of them are offended, then they should be allowed to say what they want.
As long as they are not inciting others to commit a crime, and you can argue that telling someone to hit their partner is that, then it should be allowed under free speech.
If people were closed down from expressing distasteful opinions then the next step would be to define what is acceptable.
Thats when the real liberties are lost. Pornography is offensive...ban it. Alcoholism is abhorrant...ban alcohol.
People talking about and watching their wives being fucked by numerous men is depraved...lock them up.
I am appalled by what these so called Public Employees said, but I defend their right to say it.
What about if they were talking about your mum or your sister or your friend? Still ok?"
Yes. The problem with that argument is you cannot use subjectivity to undermine objective judgement.
It should not be against the law to say things that others find distasteful.
There are laws against hate speech and inciting others to commit crime.
As for what others find offensive, that is the thin end of a massive wedge.
I am not saying I wouldn't be angered and maybe even violent towards people who said things about my family to me.. but they can say it to each other if no one finds it offensive.
I get abuse, threats, threats to life and enter into violent confrontations as part of my job. I deal with them professionally, as do my colleagues. Doesnt stop our humour edging towards the dark side as an escape valve occasionally.
I, nor anyone I know, would say things like those mentioned here, but if they did, I would be free to challenge, castigate or leave the group.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *etcplCouple
over a year ago
Gapping Fanny |
"My work group WhatsApp is so full of non pc, anti woke humour that it would make your hair curl.
The Jewish guy makes anti semitic jokes,the Asian humour is self mocking and the Lesbian just continually goes on about who she finds hot.
But none of us hold these beliefs or even countenance them in reality. We respect each other and our differences...whilst taking the piss continually.
"
Sadly its all fun and games until someone decides to use it for their own purposes.
Never commit something to paper you couldn’t stand up in front of your boss/HR dept and justify. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"My work group WhatsApp is so full of non pc, anti woke humour that it would make your hair curl.
The Jewish guy makes anti semitic jokes,the Asian humour is self mocking and the Lesbian just continually goes on about who she finds hot.
But none of us hold these beliefs or even countenance them in reality. We respect each other and our differences...whilst taking the piss continually.
Sadly its all fun and games until someone decides to use it for their own purposes.
Never commit something to paper you couldn’t stand up in front of your boss/HR dept and justify."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"My work group WhatsApp is so full of non pc, anti woke humour that it would make your hair curl.
The Jewish guy makes anti semitic jokes,the Asian humour is self mocking and the Lesbian just continually goes on about who she finds hot.
But none of us hold these beliefs or even countenance them in reality. We respect each other and our differences...whilst taking the piss continually.
Sadly its all fun and games until someone decides to use it for their own purposes.
Never commit something to paper you couldn’t stand up in front of your boss/HR dept and justify."
But this is in private, on private phones and, as far as I am aware, no one is offended. We never breach professional standards but I am sure someone could use it for promotion if they chose to.
If I suspected someone of actually being "ist" in reality, then this would change things. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself "
It's just banter innit.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"My work group WhatsApp is so full of non pc, anti woke humour that it would make your hair curl.
The Jewish guy makes anti semitic jokes,the Asian humour is self mocking and the Lesbian just continually goes on about who she finds hot.
But none of us hold these beliefs or even countenance them in reality. We respect each other and our differences...whilst taking the piss continually.
Sadly its all fun and games until someone decides to use it for their own purposes.
Never commit something to paper you couldn’t stand up in front of your boss/HR dept and justify.
"
There probably make the jokes first as a form of defence, they probably think being around a racist sexist person its easier to get the "jokes" in first...lessens the nastiness |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
It's just banter innit. "
No its not!!!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The Chief of Police is under fire because of inappropriate messages by some policemen on whattsap. Should they be allowed to banter in private or be sacked "
Banter, I hate that word. A fun, cuddly word that is used often to describe bullying, inappropriate, lazy words.
If it's just social interactions of course they should be allowed to do the same as the people they are policing. Why shouldn't they? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"My work group WhatsApp is so full of non pc, anti woke humour that it would make your hair curl.
The Jewish guy makes anti semitic jokes,the Asian humour is self mocking and the Lesbian just continually goes on about who she finds hot.
But none of us hold these beliefs or even countenance them in reality. We respect each other and our differences...whilst taking the piss continually.
Sadly its all fun and games until someone decides to use it for their own purposes.
Never commit something to paper you couldn’t stand up in front of your boss/HR dept and justify.
But this is in private, on private phones and, as far as I am aware, no one is offended. We never breach professional standards but I am sure someone could use it for promotion if they chose to.
If I suspected someone of actually being "ist" in reality, then this would change things."
But the police do have an IST problem. Some police officers.
"Some 2,000 allegations of sexual misconduct including r@pe have been levelled against serving police officers over the last four years, according to data released under freedom of information rules." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
It's just banter innit.
No its not!!!!!"
It was a facetious remark. Clearly if you'd read any of my other comments. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself "
You are being emotional.
We are saying the principle of free speech means that they have a right to say what they want if it doesn't break the law. No one has condoned what they said, just defended the right of free speech.
Others would find Fab distasteful and full of morally corrupt people. Are you saying that we shouldn't be allowed to express our thoughts here, or anywhere amongst others like us? We are not promoting crime. We are not breaking laws.
The same of those conversations could be said.
The fact these people are police officers speaks massively to the culture of the police force. It may well be breeding this mindset and the reasons for that are top down.
But they are entitled to protection under the law also.
Doesn't stop me from hoping they have broken the law and end up behind bars. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself "
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Isn’t that what this is all about? We are taking an opinion
“I found this joke funny” vs “I find it offensive”
And we are asking for it to be legally enforced.
Whose the judge and jury? Where’s justice in that?
How many people calling for action against these people have made an off colour joke before?
If we shifted through all your private messages. All your phone calls. All the conversations you had in your life. You’ve never made a joke that could offend someone? Should we chase you down with pitchfork because you made a ginger joke back in 1998?
We need to be really careful when it comes to legally enforcing “being offended” |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
You are being emotional.
We are saying the principle of free speech means that they have a right to say what they want if it doesn't break the law. No one has condoned what they said, just defended the right of free speech.
Others would find Fab distasteful and full of morally corrupt people. Are you saying that we shouldn't be allowed to express our thoughts here, or anywhere amongst others like us? We are not promoting crime. We are not breaking laws.
The same of those conversations could be said.
The fact these people are police officers speaks massively to the culture of the police force. It may well be breeding this mindset and the reasons for that are top down.
But they are entitled to protection under the law also.
Doesn't stop me from hoping they have broken the law and end up behind bars. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This is ridiculous. The fact you ask the question means you are questioning the right to free speech.
My work group WhatsApp is so full of non pc, anti woke humour that it would make your hair curl.
The Jewish guy makes anti semitic jokes,the Asian humour is self mocking and the Lesbian just continually goes on about who she finds hot.
But none of us hold these beliefs or even countenance them in reality. We respect each other and our differences...whilst taking the piss continually.
If a person's beliefs can be shown to affect their work, then yes they shod be disciplined. If they do something against a professional code of conduct, yes they should be taken to task.
But we have given enough liberty away in the last 2 years without losing free speech as well.
"
Well said and 100% agree
We’re the same at work in our down time but in our work time we are 100% professional.
It’s how you let off steam and cope with the stresses off live.
Much too stressful to having to watch what you say all the time ….. and boring |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Isn’t that what this is all about? We are taking an opinion
“I found this joke funny” vs “I find it offensive”
And we are asking for it to be legally enforced.
Whose the judge and jury? Where’s justice in that?
How many people calling for action against these people have made an off colour joke before?
If we shifted through all your private messages. All your phone calls. All the conversations you had in your life. You’ve never made a joke that could offend someone? Should we chase you down with pitchfork because you made a ginger joke back in 1998?
We need to be really careful when it comes to legally enforcing “being offended”"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *aitonelMan
over a year ago
Travelling |
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
You are being emotional.
We are saying the principle of free speech means that they have a right to say what they want if it doesn't break the law. No one has condoned what they said, just defended the right of free speech.
Others would find Fab distasteful and full of morally corrupt people. Are you saying that we shouldn't be allowed to express our thoughts here, or anywhere amongst others like us? We are not promoting crime. We are not breaking laws.
The same of those conversations could be said.
The fact these people are police officers speaks massively to the culture of the police force. It may well be breeding this mindset and the reasons for that are top down.
But they are entitled to protection under the law also.
Doesn't stop me from hoping they have broken the law and end up behind bars. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *hloetTV/TS
over a year ago
Nottingham |
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself "
If I remember correctly, yesterday you made a joke about BBW women being grateful to men for sleeping with them. I personally as someone who's attracted to BBW women found it offensive. But that doesn't take away your right to make that joke. If you start policing what people can say based on a collective emotional response then no one would be safe to say anything to anyone. That's why freedom of speech is so important. They sound like absolute scumbags but laws have to be objective. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'm sorry but the officers in question should be removed from service, there is banter and then there is warped twist comments, if you even think about those things then you have serious issues, let alone message them to other colleagues thinking they are funny, women and men too suffer horrific abuse and there lives ruined some even commit suicide. It's wrong on so many levels and it's scary to think these people uphold the law |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Isn’t that what this is all about? We are taking an opinion
“I found this joke funny” vs “I find it offensive”
And we are asking for it to be legally enforced.
Whose the judge and jury? Where’s justice in that?
How many people calling for action against these people have made an off colour joke before?
If we shifted through all your private messages. All your phone calls. All the conversations you had in your life. You’ve never made a joke that could offend someone? Should we chase you down with pitchfork because you made a ginger joke back in 1998?
We need to be really careful when it comes to legally enforcing “being offended”"
Wow...comparing being ginger to r@pe and murder jokes!!!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think some people are missing one important point.
NO ONE, no one ever should be saying things like this.
Are we saying it’s ok to say you’re going to r*pe someone?
Are we saying it’s ok to tell someone to hit their partner?
Male to female/female to male.
Unacceptable in whatever form.
Ok. Most people agree with this. But, within a group of people, in private, where none of them are offended, then they should be allowed to say what they want.
As long as they are not inciting others to commit a crime, and you can argue that telling someone to hit their partner is that, then it should be allowed under free speech.
If people were closed down from expressing distasteful opinions then the next step would be to define what is acceptable.
Thats when the real liberties are lost. Pornography is offensive...ban it. Alcoholism is abhorrant...ban alcohol.
People talking about and watching their wives being fucked by numerous men is depraved...lock them up.
I am appalled by what these so called Public Employees said, but I defend their right to say it.
What about if they were talking about your mum or your sister or your friend? Still ok?
Yes. The problem with that argument is you cannot use subjectivity to undermine objective judgement.
It should not be against the law to say things that others find distasteful.
There are laws against hate speech and inciting others to commit crime.
As for what others find offensive, that is the thin end of a massive wedge.
I am not saying I wouldn't be angered and maybe even violent towards people who said things about my family to me.. but they can say it to each other if no one finds it offensive.
I get abuse, threats, threats to life and enter into violent confrontations as part of my job. I deal with them professionally, as do my colleagues. Doesnt stop our humour edging towards the dark side as an escape valve occasionally.
I, nor anyone I know, would say things like those mentioned here, but if they did, I would be free to challenge, castigate or leave the group.
"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
In a mature, well balanced, society there should be tollerance and acceptance of others who may be different from ourselves.
In addition, although free speech is sacrosanct, what people say and are prepared to willingly receive without adverse comment serves as an indication of where their true thoughts lie.
Consequently misogynistic comments, racist comments, child abuse comments, zenophobic comments and other "inappropriate" comments serve to indicate the attitude of mind of those making the comments.
The Police, like other Government employees who can directly affect people's lives, should be institutionally tollerant of others and apply the Law and rules without fear or favour. It is therefore necessary for managers of those people to monitor and take appropriate action when serious issues arise related to their apparent true beliefs. If that involves reading private messages then so be it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Isn’t that what this is all about? We are taking an opinion
“I found this joke funny” vs “I find it offensive”
And we are asking for it to be legally enforced.
Whose the judge and jury? Where’s justice in that?
How many people calling for action against these people have made an off colour joke before?
If we shifted through all your private messages. All your phone calls. All the conversations you had in your life. You’ve never made a joke that could offend someone? Should we chase you down with pitchfork because you made a ginger joke back in 1998?
We need to be really careful when it comes to legally enforcing “being offended”
Wow...comparing being ginger to r@pe and murder jokes!!!!! "
When the point goes completely over someone’s head  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *hloetTV/TS
over a year ago
Nottingham |
"In a mature, well balanced, society there should be tollerance and acceptance of others who may be different from ourselves.
In addition, although free speech is sacrosanct, what people say and are prepared to willingly receive without adverse comment serves as an indication of where their true thoughts lie.
Consequently misogynistic comments, racist comments, child abuse comments, zenophobic comments and other "inappropriate" comments serve to indicate the attitude of mind of those making the comments.
The Police, like other Government employees who can directly affect people's lives, should be institutionally tollerant of others and apply the Law and rules without fear or favour. It is therefore necessary for managers of those people to monitor and take appropriate action when serious issues arise related to their apparent true beliefs. If that involves reading private messages then so be it.
"
So you can be punished for anything you have ever written or anything you will ever write? What I think about something today isn't necessarily what I'll think about it tomorrow. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *aitonelMan
over a year ago
Travelling |
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Isn’t that what this is all about? We are taking an opinion
“I found this joke funny” vs “I find it offensive”
And we are asking for it to be legally enforced.
Whose the judge and jury? Where’s justice in that?
How many people calling for action against these people have made an off colour joke before?
If we shifted through all your private messages. All your phone calls. All the conversations you had in your life. You’ve never made a joke that could offend someone? Should we chase you down with pitchfork because you made a ginger joke back in 1998?
We need to be really careful when it comes to legally enforcing “being offended”
Wow...comparing being ginger to r@pe and murder jokes!!!!!
When the point goes completely over someone’s head "
Generally to hone in on a tiny part of the opposing argument out of context, instead of being in context and as a whole is a lacking of one's own argument. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
This is a tough one. On one side you have freedom of speech and the other side what pertains to hate speech.
The lines between the two have become muddied due to what Joe public now define as hate speech. (Saying hello to a woman in passing is not hate speech because she didn't want to interact with the guy but thats the sort of BS level we're getting to).
Personal whatsapp messages are supposed to be exactly that, personal. And yes, we hold people in office or positions of power to a higher standard but at the end of the day they are just human. I'm sure we have all said things in the past, or even present, which when read in an open forum would bring the thought police to our doors.
However, judging the text above that's quite horrific. And calling for abuse of another is simply unacceptable. Especially for someone in the forces who the general public reply on or turn to in time of vulnerability.
Context is very important here and we don't have that. We have snippits of messages. However, I believe it warrants investigation with the potential for repurcussions. But that is for an enquiry to ascertain.
I disagree with the comments and find them abhorrent, but its not up to us to be judge, jury and executioner. That's mob rule and should be avoided at all costs. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Ok let's look at what they said and you can say whether you still think it's "banter".
Messages about police officers attending a festival dressed as known sex offenders and a m@lested child (sent within a WhatsApp group containing 17 police officers)
Homophobic comments such as “Gayyyyyy”, “You f***ing gay!” and “F*** you bender”
An officer sending messages saying “I would happily r@pe you”; “if I was single I would actually hate f*** you” and “if I was single I would happily chloroform you”
Use of derogatory terms about people with disabilities, including “s***tics” and “retard"
"
Totally disgusting!!  x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Absolutely sacked.
Police officers are held to considerably higher standards than joe blog in an office or other work place. Words have consequences, it’s not a freedom of speech issue, it’s not a “banter” issue.
The messages are not “banter”, they’re not funny at all. And for some to even think “we’re losing our free speech” over this shows how really worrying they are.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Racist and sexist the worlds gone mad you can’t ask for a tin of white paint nowadays without being called a racist. We always had a laugh about race , religion and sexuality years ago and people took it with a pinch of salt but now everyone is so easily offended
Wow! Are u for real?? x"
Agreed in no way shape or form was it ever ok or to be taken with a pinch of salt it's actually 3 things that should not be made fun of ,race , religion or sexuality and if you think otherwise then your part of the problem |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.
I've had public roles in the past and within those roles there have been clauses in my contracts to say I won't do or say anything that brings the good name of my employer into disrepute.
I can say what I want, but if it gets into the public domain I can expect my P45 to be served pronto.
These serving officers can have all the despicable "banter" they want, but they can't expect there to be no consequences from it. I expect officers to uphold the law without wanting to r@pe their colleagues or members of the public, to protect the vulnerable without showing contempt for them.
Given the increased scrutiny the police are currently facing they were idiots to send these messages and are facing the inevitable results of that idiocy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This is a tough one. On one side you have freedom of speech and the other side what pertains to hate speech.
The lines between the two have become muddied due to what Joe public now define as hate speech. (Saying hello to a woman in passing is not hate speech because she didn't want to interact with the guy but thats the sort of BS level we're getting to).
Personal whatsapp messages are supposed to be exactly that, personal. And yes, we hold people in office or positions of power to a higher standard but at the end of the day they are just human. I'm sure we have all said things in the past, or even present, which when read in an open forum would bring the thought police to our doors.
However, judging the text above that's quite horrific. And calling for abuse of another is simply unacceptable. Especially for someone in the forces who the general public reply on or turn to in time of vulnerability.
Context is very important here and we don't have that. We have snippits of messages. However, I believe it warrants investigation with the potential for repurcussions. But that is for an enquiry to ascertain.
I disagree with the comments and find them abhorrent, but its not up to us to be judge, jury and executioner. That's mob rule and should be avoided at all costs."
This
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Gallows humour" is often used by people to combat extreme stress - Freud recognised this, and so do those who work under very stressful conditions. Rather than instantly condemn these people I think I would talk to them, then offer psychological counselling if indicated. It's not as though there is a long queue of honest, decent, upright citizens who want to do this job at the moment, especially for the poor pay, conditions and, well, this kind of scrutiny into their private lives and coping mechanisms. Put down the pitchforks for a moment and listen to them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I reckon I'd be sacked if my employer found I'd been sending such messages, in private or anywhere else.
The content of the messages is indicative of the values and attitudes of the senders. There's already evidence of systematic discrimination on various levels within policing and all these messages do is serve to confirm it.
Young officers starting out in the force, seeing this sort of thing as normal banter among colleagues - what hope is there that they won't also follow in the same discriminatory attitudes? Not a lot, really. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""Gallows humour" is often used by people to combat extreme stress - Freud recognised this, and so do those who work under very stressful conditions. Rather than instantly condemn these people I think I would talk to them, then offer psychological counselling if indicated. It's not as though there is a long queue of honest, decent, upright citizens who want to do this job at the moment, especially for the poor pay, conditions and, well, this kind of scrutiny into their private lives and coping mechanisms. Put down the pitchforks for a moment and listen to them."
Gallows humour is not calling murdered woman...daft cunts... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The Chief of Police is under fire because of inappropriate messages by some policemen on whattsap. Should they be allowed to banter in private or be sacked "
It’s private! Guess what? A lot of people have a “facade” for the outside world, and they are super PC at work. However, behind closed doors, they have a right to say what they want. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The police, political gangsters in uniform.
I thought about the privacy angle in this thread and I do worry about breaking into a secure encrypted messaging system to gain information has been accepted by us. (as soon as I heard Facebook had brought WhatsApp I deleted the app).
it is a good insight into how these messaging platforms are being used and by who and what the topics of discussion are.
but at the loss of privacy I am not sure
Police officers have a uniformed code of conduct, and they have seriously breeched it with these messages so action must be taken against them.
I will keep in mind it was due to loss of privacy.
It was the police who lobbied for greater powers to get into our phones, read our messages and have access to our data, well this is what that law looks like it always comes back to haunt their own makers.
the police should of been careful of what they wished for. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I haven't said that I think the officers should be sacked for private messages?
But I think re-education and more is needed where there's evidence of these attitudes or sexual misconduct charges. Just calling them banter changes nothing and sends the message that it's acceptable to think of people like this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *aitonelMan
over a year ago
Travelling |
It's not just about free speech though. It's a combination of things, not just individual things within a vaccum.
Free speech
Privacy
Consequences
Attitude
Behaviour
Job/role
Offended
Funny
Banter
Lawful
Words vs actions
Morales - social and professional
Instead of discuss implications of all of these things together, the simple solution is to condemn, throw whatever consequences the mob's emotional knee jerk reaction sees fit, and move on to the next thing that upsets us or we disagree with.
Very few people take a step back, look and analyse. It's far much easier to do away with what we don't like.
Very few people actually are supporting what these officers have said (though some clearly do) but everything surrounding what was said is much more than just black and white.
Privacy is a sacred thing, and unless it's part of an actual criminal investigation it should be treated as such. To have privacy violated is a slippery slope, regardless of reasons. Sometimes it just needs to be, but those reasons need to be completely justified and not just because somebody didn't like something. Which again should be done logically and not with knee jerk reactions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
""Gallows humour" is often used by people to combat extreme stress - Freud recognised this, and so do those who work under very stressful conditions. Rather than instantly condemn these people I think I would talk to them, then offer psychological counselling if indicated. It's not as though there is a long queue of honest, decent, upright citizens who want to do this job at the moment, especially for the poor pay, conditions and, well, this kind of scrutiny into their private lives and coping mechanisms. Put down the pitchforks for a moment and listen to them."
There's a distinct difference between gallows humour following a traumatic shout where you and your colleagues have dealt with something pretty shocking and awful..
and saying to anyone that you would like to R#PE them..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I reckon I'd be sacked if my employer found I'd been sending such messages, in private or anywhere else.
The content of the messages is indicative of the values and attitudes of the senders. There's already evidence of systematic discrimination on various levels within policing and all these messages do is serve to confirm it.
Young officers starting out in the force, seeing this sort of thing as normal banter among colleagues - what hope is there that they won't also follow in the same discriminatory attitudes? Not a lot, really."
Agreed, it's pretty common that a person joining a team where the culture is toxic and in stark contrast to the principles and ethos of the organisation will fit in by adopting said behaviours..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
"
Violence against women and girls, VAWG, is not a sexist remark as it acknowledges that Women and Girls do not ONLY experience these things but they are overwhelmingly the victims most often. It doesn’t discriminate in practice but rather seeks to acknowledge the ways that certain behaviours overwhelmingly impact a specific group and there are government strategies to tackle this major issue. Of the wretched things discussed in that group chat, VAWG was one of them. That’s an objectively factual statement. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Mmmmmmmmmm banter:
Officer 1: “And my bird won't stop taking the piss. Swear to got [sic] I'm going to smack her”
Officer 2: “Slap her one…say you didn’t”
Officer 1: “I'll f***ing do it. She`s f***** off home.”
And separately:
Officer 1: “I f***ing need to take my bird out, won’t see her until next Saturday. Then I have to work. Promised to take her out the Friday after. Making it up to her from when I backhanded her”
Officer 2: “Grab her by the pussy”
Officer 1: “You ever slapped your missus?”
Officer 1: “It makes them love you more. Seriously since I did that she won’t leave me alone. Now I know why these daft c***s are getting murdered by their s***tic boyfriends. Knock a bird about and she will love you. Human nature. They are biologically programmed to like that shit.” |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'm in favour of free speech but I also think if your idea of banter is to talk like a prick it's a reasonable assumption that you're likely to be a prick.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Violence against women and girls, VAWG, is not a sexist remark as it acknowledges that Women and Girls do not ONLY experience these things but they are overwhelmingly the victims most often. It doesn’t discriminate in practice but rather seeks to acknowledge the ways that certain behaviours overwhelmingly impact a specific group and there are government strategies to tackle this major issue. Of the wretched things discussed in that group chat, VAWG was one of them. That’s an objectively factual statement. "
I don’t wanna turn this into that old debate but I’d check the statistics on violent crimes before you throw around those kinda statements
We’ve had 1000 threads on that kinda stuff, I don’t want this one turning into another, and I feel it’s a little daft you’ve picked one thing from my response that was made to make an overall point and zoned in on that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Violence against women and girls, VAWG, is not a sexist remark as it acknowledges that Women and Girls do not ONLY experience these things but they are overwhelmingly the victims most often. It doesn’t discriminate in practice but rather seeks to acknowledge the ways that certain behaviours overwhelmingly impact a specific group and there are government strategies to tackle this major issue. Of the wretched things discussed in that group chat, VAWG was one of them. That’s an objectively factual statement.
I don’t wanna turn this into that old debate but I’d check the statistics on violent crimes before you throw around those kinda statements
We’ve had 1000 threads on that kinda stuff, I don’t want this one turning into another, and I feel it’s a little daft you’ve picked one thing from my response that was made to make an overall point and zoned in on that. "
The violence against women was said because thats whats being talked about in the police WhatsApp report |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
""Gallows humour" is often used by people to combat extreme stress - Freud recognised this, and so do those who work under very stressful conditions. Rather than instantly condemn these people I think I would talk to them, then offer psychological counselling if indicated. It's not as though there is a long queue of honest, decent, upright citizens who want to do this job at the moment, especially for the poor pay, conditions and, well, this kind of scrutiny into their private lives and coping mechanisms. Put down the pitchforks for a moment and listen to them."
“Gallows Humour” is not saying that you’ll r@pe someone, or that you’ll hate fuck them etc.
Having been exposed to “Gallows Humour” first hand, it’s really not what you’re making it out to be in this case. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mmmmmmmmmm banter:
Officer 1: “And my bird won't stop taking the piss. Swear to got [sic] I'm going to smack her”
Officer 2: “Slap her one…say you didn’t”
Officer 1: “I'll f***ing do it. She`s f***** off home.”
And separately:
Officer 1: “I f***ing need to take my bird out, won’t see her until next Saturday. Then I have to work. Promised to take her out the Friday after. Making it up to her from when I backhanded her”
Officer 2: “Grab her by the pussy”
Officer 1: “You ever slapped your missus?”
Officer 1: “It makes them love you more. Seriously since I did that she won’t leave me alone. Now I know why these daft c***s are getting murdered by their s***tic boyfriends. Knock a bird about and she will love you. Human nature. They are biologically programmed to like that shit.”"
Is there a website link for these messages? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Violence against women and girls, VAWG, is not a sexist remark as it acknowledges that Women and Girls do not ONLY experience these things but they are overwhelmingly the victims most often. It doesn’t discriminate in practice but rather seeks to acknowledge the ways that certain behaviours overwhelmingly impact a specific group and there are government strategies to tackle this major issue. Of the wretched things discussed in that group chat, VAWG was one of them. That’s an objectively factual statement.
I don’t wanna turn this into that old debate but I’d check the statistics on violent crimes before you throw around those kinda statements
We’ve had 1000 threads on that kinda stuff, I don’t want this one turning into another, and I feel it’s a little daft you’ve picked one thing from my response that was made to make an overall point and zoned in on that. "
I did because you have quite clearly misunderstood what violence against women actually is in your initial response and I think it’s important that we don’t do that. Especially as it’s relevant to this specific thread. We don’t have to discuss it further lmao.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mmmmmmmmmm banter:
Officer 1: “And my bird won't stop taking the piss. Swear to got [sic] I'm going to smack her”
Officer 2: “Slap her one…say you didn’t”
Officer 1: “I'll f***ing do it. She`s f***** off home.”
And separately:
Officer 1: “I f***ing need to take my bird out, won’t see her until next Saturday. Then I have to work. Promised to take her out the Friday after. Making it up to her from when I backhanded her”
Officer 2: “Grab her by the pussy”
Officer 1: “You ever slapped your missus?”
Officer 1: “It makes them love you more. Seriously since I did that she won’t leave me alone. Now I know why these daft c***s are getting murdered by their s***tic boyfriends. Knock a bird about and she will love you. Human nature. They are biologically programmed to like that shit.”
Is there a website link for these messages? "
If you Google "WhatsApp police group" there are several articles |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mmmmmmmmmm banter:
Officer 1: “And my bird won't stop taking the piss. Swear to got [sic] I'm going to smack her”
Officer 2: “Slap her one…say you didn’t”
Officer 1: “I'll f***ing do it. She`s f***** off home.”
And separately:
Officer 1: “I f***ing need to take my bird out, won’t see her until next Saturday. Then I have to work. Promised to take her out the Friday after. Making it up to her from when I backhanded her”
Officer 2: “Grab her by the pussy”
Officer 1: “You ever slapped your missus?”
Officer 1: “It makes them love you more. Seriously since I did that she won’t leave me alone. Now I know why these daft c***s are getting murdered by their s***tic boyfriends. Knock a bird about and she will love you. Human nature. They are biologically programmed to like that shit.”"
Pretty twisted things to say, especially when they’re taken out of context.
To play devils advocate to my own points, I full agree with a comment made above
Free speech doesn’t mean free from consequences
I do believe if your hired with the understanding your bring bend to a higher standard and you breach that, you can’t be surprised when you face consequences
What I don’t go on with is the idea of taking private messages from a private chat and making them public. If it can happen here it can happen anywhere and I believe in a level of expected privacy.
If, however, these consequences involve criminal charges, I’m fully against it. I believe in freedom of speech which involves not being criminally charged for that speech. And even more so when that speech is made in a private place |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mmmmmmmmmm banter:
Officer 1: “And my bird won't stop taking the piss. Swear to got [sic] I'm going to smack her”
Officer 2: “Slap her one…say you didn’t”
Officer 1: “I'll f***ing do it. She`s f***** off home.”
And separately:
Officer 1: “I f***ing need to take my bird out, won’t see her until next Saturday. Then I have to work. Promised to take her out the Friday after. Making it up to her from when I backhanded her”
Officer 2: “Grab her by the pussy”
Officer 1: “You ever slapped your missus?”
Officer 1: “It makes them love you more. Seriously since I did that she won’t leave me alone. Now I know why these daft c***s are getting murdered by their s***tic boyfriends. Knock a bird about and she will love you. Human nature. They are biologically programmed to like that shit.”
Is there a website link for these messages? "
It’s everywhere. Just google WhatsApp police and it all comes up x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *al kalMan
over a year ago
london |
"Ok let's look at what they said and you can say whether you still think it's "banter".
Messages about police officers attending a festival dressed as known sex offenders and a m@lested child (sent within a WhatsApp group containing 17 police officers)
Homophobic comments such as “Gayyyyyy”, “You f***ing gay!” and “F*** you bender”
An officer sending messages saying “I would happily r@pe you”; “if I was single I would actually hate f*** you” and “if I was single I would happily chloroform you”
Use of derogatory terms about people with disabilities, including “s***tics” and “retard"
All of this is absolutely deplorable. However, if it is in a private group, and none of those people are offended, then it should be private.
I am not going to argue about the moral standards of the police and the unconscionably low standards of their recruitment process.
That is clear from the content...which I was unaware of.
However, we are into the area of thought policing if we start to investigate private conversations that do not affect peoples ability to function morally in the real world.
The police have a tough job. So do nurses, fireman, prison staff and other low paid public sector front line staff. How they choose to communicate is their own lookout. How they do their jobs is their bosses responsibility."
You really think there was a Homosexual, Disabled person on this private chat group taking seeing the funny side and taking the jokes on the chin, or coming out with Self-deprecation humor? Come on be real! Of course not, so yeah probably no one in this group got offended because there were non of this type of person.
So it would be fine if they came out joking about pedophilic acts also by that logic, because no one in that group is one... and it also it was private chat... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mmmmmmmmmm banter:
Officer 1: “And my bird won't stop taking the piss. Swear to got [sic] I'm going to smack her”
Officer 2: “Slap her one…say you didn’t”
Officer 1: “I'll f***ing do it. She`s f***** off home.”
And separately:
Officer 1: “I f***ing need to take my bird out, won’t see her until next Saturday. Then I have to work. Promised to take her out the Friday after. Making it up to her from when I backhanded her”
Officer 2: “Grab her by the pussy”
Officer 1: “You ever slapped your missus?”
Officer 1: “It makes them love you more. Seriously since I did that she won’t leave me alone. Now I know why these daft c***s are getting murdered by their s***tic boyfriends. Knock a bird about and she will love you. Human nature. They are biologically programmed to like that shit.”"
Really encourages trust in the police, doesn't it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Violence against women and girls, VAWG, is not a sexist remark as it acknowledges that Women and Girls do not ONLY experience these things but they are overwhelmingly the victims most often. It doesn’t discriminate in practice but rather seeks to acknowledge the ways that certain behaviours overwhelmingly impact a specific group and there are government strategies to tackle this major issue. Of the wretched things discussed in that group chat, VAWG was one of them. That’s an objectively factual statement. "
Women and girls aren't overwhelmingly the victims of violence. Men are. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's not just about free speech though. It's a combination of things, not just individual things within a vaccum.
Free speech
Privacy
Consequences
Attitude
Behaviour
Job/role
Offended
Funny
Banter
Lawful
Words vs actions
Morales - social and professional
Instead of discuss implications of all of these things together, the simple solution is to condemn, throw whatever consequences the mob's emotional knee jerk reaction sees fit, and move on to the next thing that upsets us or we disagree with.
Very few people take a step back, look and analyse. It's far much easier to do away with what we don't like.
Very few people actually are supporting what these officers have said (though some clearly do) but everything surrounding what was said is much more than just black and white.
Privacy is a sacred thing, and unless it's part of an actual criminal investigation it should be treated as such. To have privacy violated is a slippery slope, regardless of reasons. Sometimes it just needs to be, but those reasons need to be completely justified and not just because somebody didn't like something. Which again should be done logically and not with knee jerk reactions. "
It was part of an IOPC investigation (Operation Hotton) during which these messages came to light. Operation Hotton had nine strands to it:
Strand 1 The alleged bullying, sexual harassment
and harassment of a female officer by
subject officer 1.
Strand 2 The failure to report, challenge, or
appropriately deal with the allegation of
bullying, sexual harassment and
harassment alleged in Strand 1.
Strand 3 The allegation that a police officer had sex
in a police station with a d*unk person. The
allegation that officers failed to report or
challenge this alleged conduct.
Strand 4 Allegations concerning a police officer
assaulting his partner, misogynist
behaviour/actions and drug use.
Strand 5 Allegations concerning the use of steroids
by officers, and the failure by officers to
challenge or report this.
Strand 6 This investigation was discontinued. Due to
the sensitive nature of this investigation
details are not included in this report.
Strand 7 The allegation that officers deliberately
deleted material that was relevant to an
ongoing criminal investigation.
Strand 8 Allegations concerning discriminatory
actions and behaviours identified from
WhatsApp messages.
Strand 9 Allegations that two officers engaged in
sexual activity while on duty, officers
engaged in conversations that were
discriminatory in nature, and officers slept
while on duty.
The Operation Hotton summary report is freely available to read online. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Not going to get into this too much because well you know I’m the worst for this stuff.
But I think that we have to remind ourselves or ask ourselves to consider the role/ function/ responsibility of the police when it comes to things like this. And we have to ask how groups of people that are affected by these issues- VAWG, Racism, islamophobia, homophobia and others- are supposed to feel about the police having officers that harbour those views and joke about them? It’s difficult to put faith in officers to protect me or not treat me unfairly when their views about me or people like me or other minoritised groups are pretty violent and full of hatred.
I also think, and I maybe wrong, that people were offended in the group chat? And came forward? Not sure about that but is possibly relevant for those whose rebuttal has been ‘if nobody in the group is offended then it’s fine’. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Violence against women and girls, VAWG, is not a sexist remark as it acknowledges that Women and Girls do not ONLY experience these things but they are overwhelmingly the victims most often. It doesn’t discriminate in practice but rather seeks to acknowledge the ways that certain behaviours overwhelmingly impact a specific group and there are government strategies to tackle this major issue. Of the wretched things discussed in that group chat, VAWG was one of them. That’s an objectively factual statement.
Women and girls aren't overwhelmingly the victims of violence. Men are. "
Violence against women and girls is not violence in general. By the way. Violence against women and girls is a specific issue. If you have issue with the name- I didn’t create it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
There seems to be a media fuelled witch hunt against the police of late
Probably as a result of events in America
The police are no different from the society from which they are recruited and to expect them to be different is fanciful
How many WhatsApp groups contain similar conversations? do they get reported in the news?
Were these messages on police equipment? How did they get reported? For what malicious intent were they reported?
People need to stop reading these new feeds and forming opinion based on agenda led news |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Mmmmmmmmmm banter:
Officer 1: “And my bird won't stop taking the piss. Swear to got [sic] I'm going to smack her”
Officer 2: “Slap her one…say you didn’t”
Officer 1: “I'll f***ing do it. She`s f***** off home.”
And separately:
Officer 1: “I f***ing need to take my bird out, won’t see her until next Saturday. Then I have to work. Promised to take her out the Friday after. Making it up to her from when I backhanded her”
Officer 2: “Grab her by the pussy”
Officer 1: “You ever slapped your missus?”
Officer 1: “It makes them love you more. Seriously since I did that she won’t leave me alone. Now I know why these daft c***s are getting murdered by their s***tic boyfriends. Knock a bird about and she will love you. Human nature. They are biologically programmed to like that shit.”
Is there a website link for these messages? "
In true Essex Tom style, it's all over the news. I found them on the MyLondon news site: https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/i-would-happily-rape-you-22943239
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Everyone defending free speech etc - the messages came to light when the IOPC were investigating very specific allegations of bullying, harassment (of other officers) and of other illegal conduct, such as drug use. The vast majority of the allegations were proven to be true and various levels of misconduct proven. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It’s difficult to put faith in officers to protect me or not treat me unfairly when their views about me or people like me or other minoritised groups are pretty violent and full of hatred. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Not going to get into this too much because well you know I’m the worst for this stuff.
But I think that we have to remind ourselves or ask ourselves to consider the role/ function/ responsibility of the police when it comes to things like this. And we have to ask how groups of people that are affected by these issues- VAWG, Racism, islamophobia, homophobia and others- are supposed to feel about the police having officers that harbour those views and joke about them? It’s difficult to put faith in officers to protect me or not treat me unfairly when their views about me or people like me or other minoritised groups are pretty violent and full of hatred.
I also think, and I maybe wrong, that people were offended in the group chat? And came forward? Not sure about that but is possibly relevant for those whose rebuttal has been ‘if nobody in the group is offended then it’s fine’. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Violence against women and girls, VAWG, is not a sexist remark as it acknowledges that Women and Girls do not ONLY experience these things but they are overwhelmingly the victims most often. It doesn’t discriminate in practice but rather seeks to acknowledge the ways that certain behaviours overwhelmingly impact a specific group and there are government strategies to tackle this major issue. Of the wretched things discussed in that group chat, VAWG was one of them. That’s an objectively factual statement.
Women and girls aren't overwhelmingly the victims of violence. Men are.
Violence against women and girls is not violence in general. By the way. Violence against women and girls is a specific issue. If you have issue with the name- I didn’t create it. "
I'm a woman. Yes I know it's a specific issue. But violence in general - overwhelmingly the victims are male. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Violence against women and girls, VAWG, is not a sexist remark as it acknowledges that Women and Girls do not ONLY experience these things but they are overwhelmingly the victims most often. It doesn’t discriminate in practice but rather seeks to acknowledge the ways that certain behaviours overwhelmingly impact a specific group and there are government strategies to tackle this major issue. Of the wretched things discussed in that group chat, VAWG was one of them. That’s an objectively factual statement.
Women and girls aren't overwhelmingly the victims of violence. Men are.
Violence against women and girls is not violence in general. By the way. Violence against women and girls is a specific issue. If you have issue with the name- I didn’t create it.
I'm a woman. Yes I know it's a specific issue. But violence in general - overwhelmingly the victims are male. "
Apologies. My point about violence against women was made not in relation to violence in general? It was made to highlight that the use of the term by anyone, isn’t sexist as was suggested (not by you). Might’ve misread the tone in your original response - it is more difficult when typed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
We have quite a twisted and dark sense of humour. Sometimes between ourselves I wonder if we cross the line. I get dark humour, I get the frill of pushing boundaries in humour (oh no they didn't just go there) and I get it shouldn't always be taken at face value as a reflection of that person's ture intent or belief. It maybe said with irony or to poke dark fun at the existence of dark areas we disagree with.
However we are supposed to have faith in and look to the police to uphold values, standards and to be in the true service of all of our population. Our consent to be policed must be on a basis that the police serves the best interest of our society. The problem to me is not whether it was in private time/space or not. The officers may not deep down be homophobic, racist, sexist, misogynist etc etc. They may simply got carried away with it. Either/or it is misconduct because those attitudes or simply words are not fitting of a professional officer. Those words damage and undermine the trust in our police force, especially amongst them who the words seem aimed at. The breaking of that trust is bad for our police and even worse for those groups who already don't feel safe.
The individual officer is cog in a bigger machine. People (even police officers) are crap at being individuals and tend to flow with the stream. Therefore I'd suggest it's not a case of one or two bad apples. The force has a culture problem and it seriously needs to address it. Letting officers get sucked into and seduced by a wide spread vile culture is IMO a serious failure of care toward staff as well as the public. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *adyJayneWoman
over a year ago
Burnleyish (She/They) |
"Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.
I've had public roles in the past and within those roles there have been clauses in my contracts to say I won't do or say anything that brings the good name of my employer into disrepute.
I can say what I want, but if it gets into the public domain I can expect my P45 to be served pronto.
These serving officers can have all the despicable "banter" they want, but they can't expect there to be no consequences from it. I expect officers to uphold the law without wanting to r@pe their colleagues or members of the public, to protect the vulnerable without showing contempt for them.
Given the increased scrutiny the police are currently facing they were idiots to send these messages and are facing the inevitable results of that idiocy."
Thank you! It astounds me the amount of people who seem to think freedom of speech is some magic catchall for anything someone wants to say. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Hopefully looking at professional standards will allow the police to regain some of the trust that they've lost over the past several years. Reduce the effect of the bad apples, return honour to police force.
Or we could just let boys be boys and have the situation get even worse. Cool cool |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Mmmmmmmmmm banter:
Officer 1: “And my bird won't stop taking the piss. Swear to got [sic] I'm going to smack her”
Officer 2: “Slap her one…say you didn’t”
Officer 1: “I'll f***ing do it. She`s f***** off home.”
And separately:
Officer 1: “I f***ing need to take my bird out, won’t see her until next Saturday. Then I have to work. Promised to take her out the Friday after. Making it up to her from when I backhanded her”
Officer 2: “Grab her by the pussy”
Officer 1: “You ever slapped your missus?”
Officer 1: “It makes them love you more. Seriously since I did that she won’t leave me alone. Now I know why these daft c***s are getting murdered by their s***tic boyfriends. Knock a bird about and she will love you. Human nature. They are biologically programmed to like that shit.”
Is there a website link for these messages?
In true Essex Tom style, it's all over the news. I found them on the MyLondon news site: https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/i-would-happily-rape-you-22943239
"
Thank you.  I was avoiding Google because sometimes news sites report in different ways so just wanted to read that first as you'd quoted it.
Will Google WhatsApp police next. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
As with most professions they have to follow a Code of Ethics which does also go into your personal life.
So whether or not these comments were said on private devices, the pure content of them broke their code.
We had a similar code in my last workplace and sacked various individuals for similar behaviour when it came to light.
The examples here are just a snapshot into a bigger investigation of a team based in Charing Cross and has been dealt with.
Does it break my confidence in the police, definitely not. The hatred to all is not justified |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There seems to be a media fuelled witch hunt against the police of late
Probably as a result of events in America
The police are no different from the society from which they are recruited and to expect them to be different is fanciful"
But by virtue of their job they ARE different.
We enjoy policing by consent in Britain, but if we can’t trust the morality or behaviour of a significant number of individual officers it fundamentally undermines the institution.
I’m not saying we should expect them all to be saints; that’s patently ridiculous, but there really should be no place for racist, sexist, homophonic jokes or casual references to domestic violence in an organisation whose function is to enforce the law governing those very things. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
Police officers have a duty to uphold the law, sending racist comments over messenger services is a hate crime. Receiving it puts an officer in a position of choice, if they choose to ignore or go along with the messages they are party to the hate crime. The only option to not leave yourself open to further problems is to report it.
I have seen so many posts in these forums asking how can we feel safe, the police can't be trusted. This is why I am surprised to read a lot of comments supporting this type of behaviour with it is a private group, or they have a tough job.... You can't have it both ways, what do you want? Honest law abiding police officers or a group of racist, homophobic thugs?
The choice is yours |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There seems to be a media fuelled witch hunt against the police of late
Probably as a result of events in America
The police are no different from the society from which they are recruited and to expect them to be different is fanciful
But by virtue of their job they ARE different.
We enjoy policing by consent in Britain, but if we can’t trust the morality or behaviour of a significant number of individual officers it fundamentally undermines the institution.
I’m not saying we should expect them all to be saints; that’s patently ridiculous, but there really should be no place for racist, sexist, homophonic jokes or casual references to domestic violence in an organisation whose function is to enforce the law governing those very things."
It wasn't just references to DV, it was an allegation that an officer had actually COMMITTED an act of domestic violence against their partner. The IOPC investigation wasn't about thought policing, it was investigating genuine claims of harassment, bullying, violence and drug use and according to the report, 8 out of 9 allegations were upheld and misconduct proven.
If that's not deeply disturbing to everyone, then something is very wrong. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
As it's a work WhatsApp group it's still associated with work.
For example, a lot of businesses won't have work parties in bars because they don't want to be associated with stuff like this.
I feel like, often times, when people say it's only banter, it's an excuse for them to do and say the most disgusting things. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *avie65Man
over a year ago
In the west. |
Violence and taking about violence, either verbally or in messages is wrong.
I had to listen you a young guy talk about bottling people at the football or elsewhere just for the sake of it. This was on Wednesday before the game in Glasgow.
A few years ago Strathclyde Police started an initiative to visit known domestic abusers in the lead up to an Old From game as the scale of violence against women went through the roof at this time.
When people (not all) hear, read or witness this type of behaviour on a regular basis or are brought up with it they think it is the norm. This absolutely isn't the norm.
Education, I think, is the key to reducing this type of behaviour.
I also think we need to consider what the attitude of this minority, I hope, of police officers is towards women who do report domestic violence and worse to them when they are on duty. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Why the fuck would anyone defend them?
Fuck their privacy, they're discussing how they committed assault, and how they want to commit assault. They're justifying assault, racist remarks and spreading hate speech.
Any of the cops involved in this should be fired on the spot. Some should face criminal charges. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The attitude is the problem, wherever they are saying it, do we really need people like that working for the Police , I don't think so"
Exactly, it goes completely against the work ethos and breeds a toxic working culture. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *avie65Man
over a year ago
In the west. |
"The attitude is the problem, wherever they are saying it, do we really need people like that working for the Police , I don't think so
Exactly, it goes completely against the work ethos and breeds a toxic working culture. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Why the fuck would anyone defend them?
Fuck their privacy, they're discussing how they committed assault, and how they want to commit assault. They're justifying assault, racist remarks and spreading hate speech.
Any of the cops involved in this should be fired on the spot. Some should face criminal charges."
Exactly!
Why defend this abhorrent behaviour? It’s beyond me…. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?"
Excellent point. Sometimes we don't need to know everything about everyone. Imagine that was our private conversations being plastered across the media for days on end. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?"
If you're discussing how you assaulted your partner. How you think it's okay to assault women, how you're discussing sexually assaulting someone.
You should have no privacy!
God forbid child mol3sters would be protected by a fucking privacy law.
The dumbass reasoning of freedom of speech and privacy laws to justify these behaviours on here is disgusting. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *etcplCouple
over a year ago
Gapping Fanny |
"Depends on whether they were sent on work phones and during work hours
I believe you should be able to send your mates whatever you want out of hours without endangering your job. Isn’t that the right to free speech and privacy? "
Professional standards and conduct.
Some jobs you are never off the clock, and your actions and words can always be used against you.
Also the right to free speech is associated with the right to protest your government and not a right for people to just spout what ever they want without fear of consequences.That is why we have defamation and liable laws. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
If you're discussing how you assaulted your partner. How you think it's okay to assault women, how you're discussing sexually assaulting someone.
You should have no privacy!
God forbid child mol3sters would be protected by a fucking privacy law.
The dumbass reasoning of freedom of speech and privacy laws to justify these behaviours on here is disgusting."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
If you're discussing how you assaulted your partner. How you think it's okay to assault women, how you're discussing sexually assaulting someone.
You should have no privacy!
God forbid child mol3sters would be protected by a fucking privacy law.
The dumbass reasoning of freedom of speech and privacy laws to justify these behaviours on here is disgusting."
They are protected or thought they where by the encryption of the app, they were caught and up them I do not care about them as I said I find it really funny to be caught in ones own law. but at the cost of my privacy I would like to see what outcomes arise from this, how will they fix it, |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?"
There's no need to hack into any encrypted message system if your device is seized as part of an investigation and they click on your WhatsApp message icon. Also, at least one female officer alleged (and was proven) to have been bullied and harassed. If she was in the group(s), all it takes is for one person to show the messages to an investigator and then all the members and their comments can be seen. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
If you're discussing how you assaulted your partner. How you think it's okay to assault women, how you're discussing sexually assaulting someone.
You should have no privacy!
God forbid child mol3sters would be protected by a fucking privacy law.
The dumbass reasoning of freedom of speech and privacy laws to justify these behaviours on here is disgusting.
They are protected or thought they where by the encryption of the app, they were caught and up them I do not care about them as I said I find it really funny to be caught in ones own law. but at the cost of my privacy I would like to see what outcomes arise from this, how will they fix it, "
Go read Operation Hutton summary. This is all taken from that and already dealt with, recommendations proposed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *etcplCouple
over a year ago
Gapping Fanny |
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?"
I haven’t read the report so I don’t know the details, but were any of the messages attributed to specific officers? If not then it’s not surprising they included the examples in the report as they are trying to be transparent, and if they didn’t they would be accused of a cover up.
As for how they got the messages, the officers would have likely provided access to their own phones to investigators.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ysyphusMan
over a year ago
Starbase K-7 |
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
If you're discussing how you assaulted your partner. How you think it's okay to assault women, how you're discussing sexually assaulting someone.
You should have no privacy!
God forbid child mol3sters would be protected by a fucking privacy law.
The dumbass reasoning of freedom of speech and privacy laws to justify these behaviours on here is disgusting.
They are protected or thought they where by the encryption of the app, they were caught and up them I do not care about them as I said I find it really funny to be caught in ones own law. but at the cost of my privacy I would like to see what outcomes arise from this, how will they fix it, "
Whatsapp encryption only protects you ss long as someone in the message chain doesn't blow the whistle, which is what I suspect happened in this case. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
If you're discussing how you assaulted your partner. How you think it's okay to assault women, how you're discussing sexually assaulting someone.
You should have no privacy!
God forbid child mol3sters would be protected by a fucking privacy law.
The dumbass reasoning of freedom of speech and privacy laws to justify these behaviours on here is disgusting.
They are protected or thought they where by the encryption of the app, they were caught and up them I do not care about them as I said I find it really funny to be caught in ones own law. but at the cost of my privacy I would like to see what outcomes arise from this, how will they fix it, "
What about paedophiles / terrorists sharing content using whatsapp?
Should we still be saying they should have their privacy protected? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I find it scary that some people on this thread think its okay to say any of this in private...is it ok to joke about r@pe? Murder? Violence towards women? As long as its in private???? Take a long hard look at yourself
I find it scary that you stopped yourself at those examples? Violence against women? Not people? Aren’t you yourself now being sexist in that statement?
Should I take that statement to your employer and suggest your termination? After all, I found it offensive.
Violence against women and girls, VAWG, is not a sexist remark as it acknowledges that Women and Girls do not ONLY experience these things but they are overwhelmingly the victims most often. It doesn’t discriminate in practice but rather seeks to acknowledge the ways that certain behaviours overwhelmingly impact a specific group and there are government strategies to tackle this major issue. Of the wretched things discussed in that group chat, VAWG was one of them. That’s an objectively factual statement.
Women and girls aren't overwhelmingly the victims of violence. Men are.
Violence against women and girls is not violence in general. By the way. Violence against women and girls is a specific issue. If you have issue with the name- I didn’t create it.
I'm a woman. Yes I know it's a specific issue. But violence in general - overwhelmingly the victims are male.
Apologies. My point about violence against women was made not in relation to violence in general? It was made to highlight that the use of the term by anyone, isn’t sexist as was suggested (not by you). Might’ve misread the tone in your original response - it is more difficult when typed. "
I think it's just crossed wires. No worries |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
If you're discussing how you assaulted your partner. How you think it's okay to assault women, how you're discussing sexually assaulting someone.
You should have no privacy!
God forbid child mol3sters would be protected by a fucking privacy law.
The dumbass reasoning of freedom of speech and privacy laws to justify these behaviours on here is disgusting.
They are protected or thought they where by the encryption of the app, they were caught and up them I do not care about them as I said I find it really funny to be caught in ones own law. but at the cost of my privacy I would like to see what outcomes arise from this, how will they fix it,
Go read Operation Hutton summary. This is all taken from that and already dealt with, recommendations proposed. "
Hotton *^ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ikeC81Man
over a year ago
harrow |
Here we go!!!
I am in private football WhatsApp group. Pretty much anything is said in. Most of it would be classed as inappropriate. Tbh it’s 40 lads, mixed racial backgrounds, and probably a few with mixed sexuality but no1 has come out. We have a mixed job profile from office workers, to doctors, to YouTubers, to business owners.
Now all is said on a private phone. So we had an anti-semetic issue recently. Where someone said something, I didn’t think it was but it was inappropriate . 2 Jewish members of group 1 thought it was, 1 thought it wasn’t. It created a big divide, with allegations of racism being throw.
If your fat or thin you get abused, if your from Leeds or Hereford you get accused of being a sheep fucker. I regularly gets called a paedo even though I am not.
I would not for one, invite people from work as it would not be within the code of conduct even if it was private. Work what’s apps need to you need to be careful what’s is said
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
One police officer was referred to as “mcr@pey r@person” in a WhatsApp exchange. When officers on his team were asked to provide an explanation for this nickname, it was explained
that there were rumours about him bringing a woman back to the police station to have sex with. Others reported it related to his “particular fondness of IC3 and IC4.”2 A further officer clarified that he thought the nickname related to “harassing them [women], getting on them, do you know what I mean being like, just a dick.”
The above is from the Operation Hotton report. That last quote from an officer interviewed is just |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Don't forget that the Met whatsapp group were discussing the guy who murdered Sarah Everard in jokey terms. They tacitly permitted his behaviour in doing this."
Also the Bibaa and Nicole incident. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"One police officer was referred to as “mcr@pey r@person” in a WhatsApp exchange. When officers on his team were asked to provide an explanation for this nickname, it was explained
that there were rumours about him bringing a woman back to the police station to have sex with. Others reported it related to his “particular fondness of IC3 and IC4.”2 A further officer clarified that he thought the nickname related to “harassing them [women], getting on them, do you know what I mean being like, just a dick.”
The above is from the Operation Hotton report. That last quote from an officer interviewed is just "
It's so dispiriting as a woman to read that. Both because I fear for my daughter but also - how tough would it be for a man to intervene in that kind of scenario? It isn't easy to whistleblow, to challenge those around you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Here we go!!!
I am in private football WhatsApp group. Pretty much anything is said in. Most of it would be classed as inappropriate. Tbh it’s 40 lads, mixed racial backgrounds, and probably a few with mixed sexuality but no1 has come out. We have a mixed job profile from office workers, to doctors, to YouTubers, to business owners.
Now all is said on a private phone. So we had an anti-semetic issue recently. Where someone said something, I didn’t think it was but it was inappropriate . 2 Jewish members of group 1 thought it was, 1 thought it wasn’t. It created a big divide, with allegations of racism being throw.
If your fat or thin you get abused, if your from Leeds or Hereford you get accused of being a sheep fucker. I regularly gets called a paedo even though I am not.
I would not for one, invite people from work as it would not be within the code of conduct even if it was private. Work what’s apps need to you need to be careful what’s is said
"
I went to White Hart Lane to watch TRFC vs Spurs in the FA Cup and ended up sitting near Spurs fans who'd bought tickets in the away end by some method. I almost was assaulted by one because I asked him to cease and desist with the anti Semitic comments he was throwing around. I was 14 at the time.
Football also has a massive issue with racism, sexism and misogyny, but that's another story. WhatsApp groups like the one you describe just further reinforce that such behaviour is acceptable. Many people do not see the difference between what is said "in private" and actions in public. Namely, if someone is willing to write racist or homophobic or whatever comments in a WhatsApp group, many are also willing to use those slurs in public.
Why would someone write offensive comments if they didn't believe in what they were writing? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Here we go!!!
I am in private football WhatsApp group. Pretty much anything is said in. Most of it would be classed as inappropriate. Tbh it’s 40 lads, mixed racial backgrounds, and probably a few with mixed sexuality but no1 has come out. We have a mixed job profile from office workers, to doctors, to YouTubers, to business owners.
Now all is said on a private phone. So we had an anti-semetic issue recently. Where someone said something, I didn’t think it was but it was inappropriate . 2 Jewish members of group 1 thought it was, 1 thought it wasn’t. It created a big divide, with allegations of racism being throw.
If your fat or thin you get abused, if your from Leeds or Hereford you get accused of being a sheep fucker. I regularly gets called a paedo even though I am not.
I would not for one, invite people from work as it would not be within the code of conduct even if it was private. Work what’s apps need to you need to be careful what’s is said
I went to White Hart Lane to watch TRFC vs Spurs in the FA Cup and ended up sitting near Spurs fans who'd bought tickets in the away end by some method. I almost was assaulted by one because I asked him to cease and desist with the anti Semitic comments he was throwing around. I was 14 at the time.
Football also has a massive issue with racism, sexism and misogyny, but that's another story. WhatsApp groups like the one you describe just further reinforce that such behaviour is acceptable. Many people do not see the difference between what is said "in private" and actions in public. Namely, if someone is willing to write racist or homophobic or whatever comments in a WhatsApp group, many are also willing to use those slurs in public.
Why would someone write offensive comments if they didn't believe in what they were writing?"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One police officer was referred to as “mcr@pey r@person” in a WhatsApp exchange. When officers on his team were asked to provide an explanation for this nickname, it was explained
that there were rumours about him bringing a woman back to the police station to have sex with. Others reported it related to his “particular fondness of IC3 and IC4.”2 A further officer clarified that he thought the nickname related to “harassing them [women], getting on them, do you know what I mean being like, just a dick.”
The above is from the Operation Hotton report. That last quote from an officer interviewed is just
It's so dispiriting as a woman to read that. Both because I fear for my daughter but also - how tough would it be for a man to intervene in that kind of scenario? It isn't easy to whistleblow, to challenge those around you. "
I've seen how the police up here deal with a male youth who is trying to report a serious physical assault. I shall be trying to keep my daughter even further away from the police, because their attitude to my son was absolutely fucking abhorrent. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
There's no need to hack into any encrypted message system if your device is seized as part of an investigation and they click on your WhatsApp message icon. Also, at least one female officer alleged (and was proven) to have been bullied and harassed. If she was in the group(s), all it takes is for one person to show the messages to an investigator and then all the members and their comments can be seen."
yeh I get you now, they just provided the information as they were part of the group and got offended, I see.
whistle blowers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm all for being able to say what you want in private between friends, but comments in chat group full of your work colleagues is hardly private. "
Yeah. There's just some shit you keep away from work |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now all is said on a private phone. So we had an anti-semetic issue recently. Where someone said something, I didn’t think it was but it was inappropriate . 2 Jewish members of group 1 thought it was, 1 thought it wasn’t. It created a big divide, with allegations of racism being throw.
If your fat or thin you get abused, if your from Leeds or Hereford you get accused of being a sheep fucker. I regularly gets called a paedo even though I am not."
Sounds hilarious.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
If you're discussing how you assaulted your partner. How you think it's okay to assault women, how you're discussing sexually assaulting someone.
You should have no privacy!
God forbid child mol3sters would be protected by a fucking privacy law.
The dumbass reasoning of freedom of speech and privacy laws to justify these behaviours on here is disgusting.
They are protected or thought they where by the encryption of the app, they were caught and up them I do not care about them as I said I find it really funny to be caught in ones own law. but at the cost of my privacy I would like to see what outcomes arise from this, how will they fix it,
Go read Operation Hutton summary. This is all taken from that and already dealt with, recommendations proposed. "
will do thanks |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
There's no need to hack into any encrypted message system if your device is seized as part of an investigation and they click on your WhatsApp message icon. Also, at least one female officer alleged (and was proven) to have been bullied and harassed. If she was in the group(s), all it takes is for one person to show the messages to an investigator and then all the members and their comments can be seen.
yeh I get you now, they just provided the information as they were part of the group and got offended, I see.
whistle blowers "
I get the impression that some of the bullying and harassment took place via WhatsApp. This was upheld and so it's not a matter of "taking offence" but someone who had access to the group being bullied and harassed and have supplied the information to make a complaint. And quite right too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
I haven’t read the report so I don’t know the details, but were any of the messages attributed to specific officers? If not then it’s not surprising they included the examples in the report as they are trying to be transparent, and if they didn’t they would be accused of a cover up.
As for how they got the messages, the officers would have likely provided access to their own phones to investigators.
"
I didn't think of it that way, which is what forums are for, so thanks for the insight |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
If you're discussing how you assaulted your partner. How you think it's okay to assault women, how you're discussing sexually assaulting someone.
You should have no privacy!
God forbid child mol3sters would be protected by a fucking privacy law.
The dumbass reasoning of freedom of speech and privacy laws to justify these behaviours on here is disgusting.
They are protected or thought they where by the encryption of the app, they were caught and up them I do not care about them as I said I find it really funny to be caught in ones own law. but at the cost of my privacy I would like to see what outcomes arise from this, how will they fix it,
Whatsapp encryption only protects you ss long as someone in the message chain doesn't blow the whistle, which is what I suspect happened in this case."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
If you're discussing how you assaulted your partner. How you think it's okay to assault women, how you're discussing sexually assaulting someone.
You should have no privacy!
God forbid child mol3sters would be protected by a fucking privacy law.
The dumbass reasoning of freedom of speech and privacy laws to justify these behaviours on here is disgusting.
They are protected or thought they where by the encryption of the app, they were caught and up them I do not care about them as I said I find it really funny to be caught in ones own law. but at the cost of my privacy I would like to see what outcomes arise from this, how will they fix it,
What about paedophiles / terrorists sharing content using whatsapp?
Should we still be saying they should have their privacy protected?"
I am saying its private by default |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Banter just reflects a person's underlying character and attitudes. It's a problem if an individual does not have the same values of respect and integrity etc. as needed for a public office. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Banter just reflects a person's underlying character and attitudes. It's a problem if an individual does not have the same values of respect and integrity etc. as needed for a public office. "
Indeed. Banter isn't inherently benign. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I understand that because of the horrific things the police are witness to it can give them a black humour as a coping mechanism, my FWB is a serving officer, riot trained and armed. It's one thing to say this stuff, it's another to actually act it out. That said I'm not excusing those messages, that is pretty vile stuff |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I certainly could not defend these officers I would be the last to, I am very very pleased that what I always knew about them is being exposed, I also watch auditors on tube who audit the police and their behaviour in a lawful way.
For me it is how this information was gathered, and what need was there to make it public, this has never been done before usually the evidence would be kept out of the public domain thus keeping trust to police by consent.
WhatsApp is encrypted so one would need a key to read any massages, even though these officers have been exposed and I laugh at the irony of it was the police who pushed these privacy laws and then get caught by those laws is priceless.
But is that at the cost of my privacy?
There's no need to hack into any encrypted message system if your device is seized as part of an investigation and they click on your WhatsApp message icon. Also, at least one female officer alleged (and was proven) to have been bullied and harassed. If she was in the group(s), all it takes is for one person to show the messages to an investigator and then all the members and their comments can be seen.
yeh I get you now, they just provided the information as they were part of the group and got offended, I see.
whistle blowers
I get the impression that some of the bullying and harassment took place via WhatsApp. This was upheld and so it's not a matter of "taking offence" but someone who had access to the group being bullied and harassed and have supplied the information to make a complaint. And quite right too. "
I agree with you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
