FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > The MET
The MET
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
"There are nearly 11,000 police officers in the Metropolitan Police, and the vast majority of them are also angry, horrified and ashamed of what's happened. They are good people. The vast majority of them run to danger and put their lives on the line, day in and day out. Some are killed in the line of duty. Yet the press and public so rarely acknowledge this. Yes, changes need to happen, as with all Crown and public sectors, but let's not forget the thousands of officers doing their best, each day." 
Harold Shipman was a GP considered to be one of the most prolific serial killers in history.
I don't assume all GP's are the same.
A | |||
| |||
"There are nearly 11,000 police officers in the Metropolitan Police, and the vast majority of them are also angry, horrified and ashamed of what's happened. They are good people. The vast majority of them run to danger and put their lives on the line, day in and day out. Some are killed in the line of duty. Yet the press and public so rarely acknowledge this. Yes, changes need to happen, as with all Crown and public sectors, but let's not forget the thousands of officers doing their best, each day." And the Met is investigating 800 of its officers over abuse claims. 800. That seems like a hell of a lot more than a few bad apples... | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"There are nearly 11,000 police officers in the Metropolitan Police, and the vast majority of them are also angry, horrified and ashamed of what's happened. They are good people. The vast majority of them run to danger and put their lives on the line, day in and day out. Some are killed in the line of duty. Yet the press and public so rarely acknowledge this. Yes, changes need to happen, as with all Crown and public sectors, but let's not forget the thousands of officers doing their best, each day." so true, also don't forget all the abuse and violence they suffer doing there jobs and can't refuse to help like other proffessions, their is alit of things that are not portrayed or shown by the media which doesn't help. | |||
| |||
"Gonna say it again. 800." Being investigated. Not found guilty of anything yet | |||
| |||
"Gonna say it again. 800. Being investigated. Not found guilty of anything yet " Seriously? That's your take on this? | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. " I'd never date a cop. | |||
| |||
"Gonna say it again. 800. Being investigated. Not found guilty of anything yet " I have a number of friends and family in various forces. Every single one of them has had spurious complaints and accusations made against them, without any basis in fact, at some point. Any complaint or accusation made against a police officer has to be investigated by the Professional Standards Department of that force. Yes, a lot are being investigated. But that doesn't mean they have actually done anything wrong. Although the ones who have should absolutely be punished appropriately | |||
"Gonna say it again. 800. Being investigated. Not found guilty of anything yet Seriously? That's your take on this?" And yours is guilty until proven innocent | |||
| |||
"Gonna say it again. 800. Being investigated. Not found guilty of anything yet I have a number of friends and family in various forces. Every single one of them has had spurious complaints and accusations made against them, without any basis in fact, at some point. Any complaint or accusation made against a police officer has to be investigated by the Professional Standards Department of that force. Yes, a lot are being investigated. But that doesn't mean they have actually done anything wrong. Although the ones who have should absolutely be punished appropriately" A large part of the problem is they do NOT investigate & vet their own properly. Carrick, for example, has now admitted to at least 80 sex attacks. This prolific sex offender was working in the force for twenty years. The force had apparently ignored multiple warnings about his abusive behaviour. | |||
"Gonna say it again. 800. Being investigated. Not found guilty of anything yet Seriously? That's your take on this? And yours is guilty until proven innocent "Where did I say they were all guilty? But 800 gives a pretty big hint at the scale of the problem. | |||
"Gonna say it again. 800. Being investigated. Not found guilty of anything yet I have a number of friends and family in various forces. Every single one of them has had spurious complaints and accusations made against them, without any basis in fact, at some point. Any complaint or accusation made against a police officer has to be investigated by the Professional Standards Department of that force. Yes, a lot are being investigated. But that doesn't mean they have actually done anything wrong. Although the ones who have should absolutely be punished appropriately A large part of the problem is they do NOT investigate & vet their own properly. Carrick, for example, has now admitted to at least 80 sex attacks. This prolific sex offender was working in the force for twenty years. The force had apparently ignored multiple warnings about his abusive behaviour." Oh I totally get that. I've seen a sergeant in one force arrested 3 times, twice of which were for assault including once when he punched one of his own PCs and knocked him out. He had a warning put on his file for 12 months and was barred from applying for promotion for 2 years. In most other jobs he would rightly have been fired on the spot | |||
| |||
| |||
"Gonna say it again. 800. Being investigated. Not found guilty of anything yet I have a number of friends and family in various forces. Every single one of them has had spurious complaints and accusations made against them, without any basis in fact, at some point. Any complaint or accusation made against a police officer has to be investigated by the Professional Standards Department of that force. Yes, a lot are being investigated. But that doesn't mean they have actually done anything wrong. Although the ones who have should absolutely be punished appropriately A large part of the problem is they do NOT investigate & vet their own properly. Carrick, for example, has now admitted to at least 80 sex attacks. This prolific sex offender was working in the force for twenty years. The force had apparently ignored multiple warnings about his abusive behaviour. Oh I totally get that. I've seen a sergeant in one force arrested 3 times, twice of which were for assault including once when he punched one of his own PCs and knocked him out. He had a warning put on his file for 12 months and was barred from applying for promotion for 2 years. In most other jobs he would rightly have been fired on the spot " Wow | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Gonna say it again. 800. Being investigated. Not found guilty of anything yet I have a number of friends and family in various forces. Every single one of them has had spurious complaints and accusations made against them, without any basis in fact, at some point. Any complaint or accusation made against a police officer has to be investigated by the Professional Standards Department of that force. Yes, a lot are being investigated. But that doesn't mean they have actually done anything wrong. Although the ones who have should absolutely be punished appropriately A large part of the problem is they do NOT investigate & vet their own properly. Carrick, for example, has now admitted to at least 80 sex attacks. This prolific sex offender was working in the force for twenty years. The force had apparently ignored multiple warnings about his abusive behaviour." I think this is the key - it seems to be a fundamental problem that all police forces (all over the world throughout time) suffer from an inability to police their own. “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes” (Who will guard the guards themselves?) has been a problem since ancient times. What is really needed is a very strong external anti corruption force that can police the police. | |||
| |||
" Be interesting to see how many people on this thread, who seem to have an have an agenda, will openly reveal if they have criminal convictions, or have been investigated for offences?" Astonishing pivot there. Well done. I admit I have an agenda. I want to see fewer women get r*ped. | |||
" Be interesting to see how many people on this thread, who seem to have an have an agenda, will openly reveal if they have criminal convictions, or have been investigated for offences?" I once got put into detention at school but that is the limit of my #goodyTwoShoes criminal endeavours. | |||
" Be interesting to see how many people on this thread, who seem to have an have an agenda, will openly reveal if they have criminal convictions, or have been investigated for offences? Astonishing pivot there. Well done. I admit I have an agenda. I want to see fewer women get r*ped." Not a pivot, it's interesting. I like to see all the facts. Have you a criminal record? | |||
| |||
" Be interesting to see how many people on this thread, who seem to have an have an agenda, will openly reveal if they have criminal convictions, or have been investigated for offences? Astonishing pivot there. Well done. I admit I have an agenda. I want to see fewer women get r*ped. Not a pivot, it's interesting. I like to see all the facts. Have you a criminal record?" Wow. Astonishing. No. But I did also get detention at school, much like the chap above. Guess we can't be trusted at all. | |||
| |||
"The Met police is institutionally racist, just like the UK. The Met police is misogynistic, just like the UK. Those who attack woke thought, see above . " So a whole country is 'institutionally' racist and misogynist? We really have entered the clownshow era | |||
"How did all those bad apples end up in the same barrel?" When 1 apple gets in the barrel it infects the rest. They get ideas and see their mates getting away with crimes and learn tricks of the trade and loopholes. The barrel needs replacing. | |||
"How did all those bad apples end up in the same barrel? When 1 apple gets in the barrel it infects the rest. They get ideas and see their mates getting away with crimes and learn tricks of the trade and loopholes. The barrel needs replacing." 100% - which is why a really strong anti corruption force needs to remove that apple as soon as starts to rot. | |||
"How did all those bad apples end up in the same barrel? When 1 apple gets in the barrel it infects the rest. They get ideas and see their mates getting away with crimes and learn tricks of the trade and loopholes. The barrel needs replacing. 100% - which is why a really strong anti corruption force needs to remove that apple as soon as starts to rot." It's hard to argue with that. Then again, this is Fab. So just give it a while... | |||
" Be interesting to see how many people on this thread, who seem to have an have an agenda, will openly reveal if they have criminal convictions, or have been investigated for offences?" I'm not sure of the relevance of this question? And I think its against forum rules to answer it. But why would it be interesting, for the sake of arguing, say every person on this thread critical of the MET has a conviction? What point does that prove? | |||
" Be interesting to see how many people on this thread, who seem to have an have an agenda, will openly reveal if they have criminal convictions, or have been investigated for offences? I'm not sure of the relevance of this question? And I think its against forum rules to answer it. But why would it be interesting, for the sake of arguing, say every person on this thread critical of the MET has a conviction? What point does that prove?" It's actually against site rules to join if you have one. Buried deep in the small print of the T's & C's. But Fab is of course made up of members of society, so........... A | |||
" Be interesting to see how many people on this thread, who seem to have an have an agenda, will openly reveal if they have criminal convictions, or have been investigated for offences? I'm not sure of the relevance of this question? And I think its against forum rules to answer it. But why would it be interesting, for the sake of arguing, say every person on this thread critical of the MET has a conviction? What point does that prove? It's actually against site rules to join if you have one. Buried deep in the small print of the T's & C's. But Fab is of course made up of members of society, so........... A" **correction Not 'any' offence, just the violent and nasty ones. A | |||
" Be interesting to see how many people on this thread, who seem to have an have an agenda, will openly reveal if they have criminal convictions, or have been investigated for offences?" I could be reading your post incorrectly but I'm confused by your response. Are you suggesting nobody is squeaky clean so therefore don't judge the wrong doings of the Met? What is the agenda you mention, slating the police, or alarmed at the issues within the Met? | |||
| |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. " A corrupt policeman hey their are many I've been set up by a corrupt police officer myself, its a lot more common than you think, they have targets they have to reach and more recently a traffic officer called to an incident by a young boy, no need for the police to be there but they were and he made sure he got something out of it for the coffers  | |||
| |||
" Be interesting to see how many people on this thread, who seem to have an have an agenda, will openly reveal if they have criminal convictions, or have been investigated for offences?" Having a criminal record just means they got caught. There could be plenty of fab that have commited crimes, but not been found out yet. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Yes The Met has issues. It's not the only organisation in the country that does, it also doesn't mean that everyone who works for them is an arsehole. Some of them do the job because they genuinely want to help people. You can't tar them all with the same brush ( or shouldn't rather) Pxx" I don't think any1 said all Met officers are dodgy. But there's clearly a serious problem with that organisation. And time and time again, we get the bad apples mantra & nothing is done to fix it. | |||
"Yes The Met has issues. It's not the only organisation in the country that does, it also doesn't mean that everyone who works for them is an arsehole. Some of them do the job because they genuinely want to help people. You can't tar them all with the same brush ( or shouldn't rather) Pxx I don't think any1 said all Met officers are dodgy. But there's clearly a serious problem with that organisation. And time and time again, we get the bad apples mantra & nothing is done to fix it." Exactly this. I've got friends who are serving officers and have worked with retired MET officers. They are not all bad, no one has said that. But there's a problem, there have been problems first years and defending it as a minority is exacerbating that problem. I also don't think saying that the Met has deep rooted institutional issues is an attack on every officer. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. " There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. " Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this." Its a very large organisation, there are going to be a few, thats certainly not me excusing it you understand, simply a fact, there may appear to be too many (one is too many in truth) but remember, one in a organisation like that is going to be huge news, if as has been the case there are more it just compounds the notion that its riddled with wrong uns... Im pretty sure the higher ups are doing things to trying to fix it.. I was in a organisation that was similar, we see from time to time news of people in the same organisation who have turned out to be wrong uns, it doesn't make the whole organisation bad. | |||
| |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. Its a very large organisation, there are going to be a few, thats certainly not me excusing it you understand, simply a fact, there may appear to be too many (one is too many in truth) but remember, one in a organisation like that is going to be huge news, if as has been the case there are more it just compounds the notion that its riddled with wrong uns... Im pretty sure the higher ups are doing things to trying to fix it.. I was in a organisation that was similar, we see from time to time news of people in the same organisation who have turned out to be wrong uns, it doesn't make the whole organisation bad. " There have been so many awful stories about the Met for so many years. Trying to shrug & wave it off at this point just won't wash. | |||
"How many women are not surprised at the behaviour described? How many times a day do you get messages with men wanting to do those things? " | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this." If you’ve ever worked for a large organisation, you will know it takes years to steer the ship in a different direction. Right now what do expect them to do? You seem to very good at bashing the met but there’s been zero suggestions as to how to implement change. If there are 800 under investigation, what do you suggest happens to them until there is a conclusion? The commissioner has barely got his feet under the table, all while inheriting a poisoned chalice that seems to be overflowing, he needs at least 12 months in the job for any meaningful change to be noticed. | |||
"Yes The Met has issues. It's not the only organisation in the country that does, it also doesn't mean that everyone who works for them is an arsehole. Some of them do the job because they genuinely want to help people. You can't tar them all with the same brush ( or shouldn't rather) Pxx I don't think any1 said all Met officers are dodgy. But there's clearly a serious problem with that organisation. And time and time again, we get the bad apples mantra & nothing is done to fix it." | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. If you’ve ever worked for a large organisation, you will know it takes years to steer the ship in a different direction. Right now what do expect them to do? You seem to very good at bashing the met but there’s been zero suggestions as to how to implement change. If there are 800 under investigation, what do you suggest happens to them until there is a conclusion? The commissioner has barely got his feet under the table, all while inheriting a poisoned chalice that seems to be overflowing, he needs at least 12 months in the job for any meaningful change to be noticed." A Set up an external unit to investigate the case. A truly external one. With actual power. B Suspend any coppers who are under investigation until it's been completed. | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. Its a very large organisation, there are going to be a few, thats certainly not me excusing it you understand, simply a fact, there may appear to be too many (one is too many in truth) but remember, one in a organisation like that is going to be huge news, if as has been the case there are more it just compounds the notion that its riddled with wrong uns... Im pretty sure the higher ups are doing things to trying to fix it.. I was in a organisation that was similar, we see from time to time news of people in the same organisation who have turned out to be wrong uns, it doesn't make the whole organisation bad. There have been so many awful stories about the Met for so many years. Trying to shrug & wave it off at this point just won't wash." Whos trying to shrug it off ? Im certainly not, like i said, one bad apple is too many, but wether you like it or not, there will always be bad uns in any large organisation, is the whole of the NHS murdering scum bags just because Harold Shipman was in it ? As has been said, there are sever issues within the Met, issues which they are working to sort out and fix, these are not going to take effect instantly no matter how much we would like them to. | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. Its a very large organisation, there are going to be a few, thats certainly not me excusing it you understand, simply a fact, there may appear to be too many (one is too many in truth) but remember, one in a organisation like that is going to be huge news, if as has been the case there are more it just compounds the notion that its riddled with wrong uns... Im pretty sure the higher ups are doing things to trying to fix it.. I was in a organisation that was similar, we see from time to time news of people in the same organisation who have turned out to be wrong uns, it doesn't make the whole organisation bad. There have been so many awful stories about the Met for so many years. Trying to shrug & wave it off at this point just won't wash. Whos trying to shrug it off ? Im certainly not, like i said, one bad apple is too many, but wether you like it or not, there will always be bad uns in any large organisation, is the whole of the NHS murdering scum bags just because Harold Shipman was in it ? As has been said, there are sever issues within the Met, issues which they are working to sort out and fix, these are not going to take effect instantly no matter how much we would like them to. " The old bad apples line sounds a lot like shrugging it off, that's all. If they're actually working to sort it out, good for them. But after many years and many scandals, I think a lot of people are rightly v skeptical. | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. If you’ve ever worked for a large organisation, you will know it takes years to steer the ship in a different direction. Right now what do expect them to do? You seem to very good at bashing the met but there’s been zero suggestions as to how to implement change. If there are 800 under investigation, what do you suggest happens to them until there is a conclusion? The commissioner has barely got his feet under the table, all while inheriting a poisoned chalice that seems to be overflowing, he needs at least 12 months in the job for any meaningful change to be noticed. A Set up an external unit to investigate the case. A truly external one. With actual power. B Suspend any coppers who are under investigation until it's been completed." So with A it would take around 6-9 months to find suitably vetted personnel, then another 6-9 months to get the ball rolling - then how big is this super taskforce going to be to investigate 800 officers, say on average of 14 days per case (best result) that’s 11,200 days. You can’t seriously be saying that you suspend all of them for a prolonged period of time without actually being charged with a crime? | |||
 | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. If you’ve ever worked for a large organisation, you will know it takes years to steer the ship in a different direction. Right now what do expect them to do? You seem to very good at bashing the met but there’s been zero suggestions as to how to implement change. If there are 800 under investigation, what do you suggest happens to them until there is a conclusion? The commissioner has barely got his feet under the table, all while inheriting a poisoned chalice that seems to be overflowing, he needs at least 12 months in the job for any meaningful change to be noticed. A Set up an external unit to investigate the case. A truly external one. With actual power. B Suspend any coppers who are under investigation until it's been completed. So with A it would take around 6-9 months to find suitably vetted personnel, then another 6-9 months to get the ball rolling - then how big is this super taskforce going to be to investigate 800 officers, say on average of 14 days per case (best result) that’s 11,200 days. You can’t seriously be saying that you suspend all of them for a prolonged period of time without actually being charged with a crime?" There's no good solution. But project down the line to eg a year from now. You could end up in this situation... Officer X was under investigation for r*ping 3 women. He was susequently found guilty. Also, while still working as an officer, he r*ped a further 3 women. The Met knew of various allegations & warnings, but did not even suspend him... That situation would be far worse. | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. Its a very large organisation, there are going to be a few, thats certainly not me excusing it you understand, simply a fact, there may appear to be too many (one is too many in truth) but remember, one in a organisation like that is going to be huge news, if as has been the case there are more it just compounds the notion that its riddled with wrong uns... Im pretty sure the higher ups are doing things to trying to fix it.. I was in a organisation that was similar, we see from time to time news of people in the same organisation who have turned out to be wrong uns, it doesn't make the whole organisation bad. There have been so many awful stories about the Met for so many years. Trying to shrug & wave it off at this point just won't wash. Whos trying to shrug it off ? Im certainly not, like i said, one bad apple is too many, but wether you like it or not, there will always be bad uns in any large organisation, is the whole of the NHS murdering scum bags just because Harold Shipman was in it ? As has been said, there are sever issues within the Met, issues which they are working to sort out and fix, these are not going to take effect instantly no matter how much we would like them to. The old bad apples line sounds a lot like shrugging it off, that's all. If they're actually working to sort it out, good for them. But after many years and many scandals, I think a lot of people are rightly v skeptical." Certainly not shrugging it off, people can respond to these types of things without resorting to "hang the bastard's" or "they're all guilty, sack the f**kin lot".. granted you didn't say those things but it sounds a lot like you were heading that way.. See what i did there? Making assumptions about what people mean or what you 'think' they mean rarely works, you assumed i was shrugging it off, and i deliberately made a example of myself assuming you were heading or meaning something which you didn't.. it doesn't work well. I agree with you many people are and will be skeptical, and rightly so, for the reasons you mention.. we see these promises of change many times, how often have we heard 'never again' when a child is failed by social services.. but change does happen, it does take time, its never perfect, and as you say we should always remain skeptical. | |||
| |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. Its a very large organisation, there are going to be a few, thats certainly not me excusing it you understand, simply a fact, there may appear to be too many (one is too many in truth) but remember, one in a organisation like that is going to be huge news, if as has been the case there are more it just compounds the notion that its riddled with wrong uns... Im pretty sure the higher ups are doing things to trying to fix it.. I was in a organisation that was similar, we see from time to time news of people in the same organisation who have turned out to be wrong uns, it doesn't make the whole organisation bad. There have been so many awful stories about the Met for so many years. Trying to shrug & wave it off at this point just won't wash. Whos trying to shrug it off ? Im certainly not, like i said, one bad apple is too many, but wether you like it or not, there will always be bad uns in any large organisation, is the whole of the NHS murdering scum bags just because Harold Shipman was in it ? As has been said, there are sever issues within the Met, issues which they are working to sort out and fix, these are not going to take effect instantly no matter how much we would like them to. The old bad apples line sounds a lot like shrugging it off, that's all. If they're actually working to sort it out, good for them. But after many years and many scandals, I think a lot of people are rightly v skeptical. Certainly not shrugging it off, people can respond to these types of things without resorting to "hang the bastard's" or "they're all guilty, sack the f**kin lot".. granted you didn't say those things but it sounds a lot like you were heading that way.. See what i did there? Making assumptions about what people mean or what you 'think' they mean rarely works, you assumed i was shrugging it off, and i deliberately made a example of myself assuming you were heading or meaning something which you didn't.. it doesn't work well. I agree with you many people are and will be skeptical, and rightly so, for the reasons you mention.. we see these promises of change many times, how often have we heard 'never again' when a child is failed by social services.. but change does happen, it does take time, its never perfect, and as you say we should always remain skeptical. " Pretty sure I've said several times there are good people in the Met. So no I'm not hinting at the things you said at all. It was just the bad apples line you trotted out. That line has been used sooooooo many times to excuse the situations that crop up with the Met time & time again. | |||
"Perhaps the Met is too big to control now, and should rightly be broken up into smaller regional police forces that make it more easy to tightly run them. " It's a thought. Is there some sort of evidence smaller forces are better? | |||
"Perhaps the Met is too big to control now, and should rightly be broken up into smaller regional police forces that make it more easy to tightly run them. It's a thought. Is there some sort of evidence smaller forces are better?" I don't know enough about this to have an opinion about it. All I do know from personal life experience working in large organisations or doing group work is that larger groups aren't always better to manage. And it also takes a special kind of boss to run a tight ship no matter large or small. Met upper management has been too lax with standards and complaints about their officer subordinates. But I won't be surprised if it is just as much because they are snowed in with too much paperwork and management BS to want to deal with more complaints about their officers piling into their in tray, as it is about pure laziness. | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. If you’ve ever worked for a large organisation, you will know it takes years to steer the ship in a different direction. Right now what do expect them to do? You seem to very good at bashing the met but there’s been zero suggestions as to how to implement change. If there are 800 under investigation, what do you suggest happens to them until there is a conclusion? The commissioner has barely got his feet under the table, all while inheriting a poisoned chalice that seems to be overflowing, he needs at least 12 months in the job for any meaningful change to be noticed. A Set up an external unit to investigate the case. A truly external one. With actual power. B Suspend any coppers who are under investigation until it's been completed. So with A it would take around 6-9 months to find suitably vetted personnel, then another 6-9 months to get the ball rolling - then how big is this super taskforce going to be to investigate 800 officers, say on average of 14 days per case (best result) that’s 11,200 days. You can’t seriously be saying that you suspend all of them for a prolonged period of time without actually being charged with a crime? There's no good solution. But project down the line to eg a year from now. You could end up in this situation... Officer X was under investigation for r*ping 3 women. He was susequently found guilty. Also, while still working as an officer, he r*ped a further 3 women. The Met knew of various allegations & warnings, but did not even suspend him... That situation would be far worse." These investigations are private & should remain so - how many spurious claims are made against the police each year? It’s because of these false allegations that major ones slip through the net. There is no easy solution to routing out corruption in any organisation, all you can do is follow the processes, let’s not forget that fundamentally it’s down to the cps whether or not to proceed with the weight of evidence. If they choose not to proceed then there is no case to answer - you can’t sack someone for having a feeling that someone was dodgy. | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. If you’ve ever worked for a large organisation, you will know it takes years to steer the ship in a different direction. Right now what do expect them to do? You seem to very good at bashing the met but there’s been zero suggestions as to how to implement change. If there are 800 under investigation, what do you suggest happens to them until there is a conclusion? The commissioner has barely got his feet under the table, all while inheriting a poisoned chalice that seems to be overflowing, he needs at least 12 months in the job for any meaningful change to be noticed. A Set up an external unit to investigate the case. A truly external one. With actual power. B Suspend any coppers who are under investigation until it's been completed. So with A it would take around 6-9 months to find suitably vetted personnel, then another 6-9 months to get the ball rolling - then how big is this super taskforce going to be to investigate 800 officers, say on average of 14 days per case (best result) that’s 11,200 days. You can’t seriously be saying that you suspend all of them for a prolonged period of time without actually being charged with a crime? There's no good solution. But project down the line to eg a year from now. You could end up in this situation... Officer X was under investigation for r*ping 3 women. He was susequently found guilty. Also, while still working as an officer, he r*ped a further 3 women. The Met knew of various allegations & warnings, but did not even suspend him... That situation would be far worse. These investigations are private & should remain so - how many spurious claims are made against the police each year? It’s because of these false allegations that major ones slip through the net. There is no easy solution to routing out corruption in any organisation, all you can do is follow the processes, let’s not forget that fundamentally it’s down to the cps whether or not to proceed with the weight of evidence. If they choose not to proceed then there is no case to answer - you can’t sack someone for having a feeling that someone was dodgy. " Pretty sure I didn't say to sack someone on a feeling. But I did show why I think it's a good idea to suspend some1 who's under investatigation. You disagree. That's life I guess. We're all different. | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. If you’ve ever worked for a large organisation, you will know it takes years to steer the ship in a different direction. Right now what do expect them to do? You seem to very good at bashing the met but there’s been zero suggestions as to how to implement change. If there are 800 under investigation, what do you suggest happens to them until there is a conclusion? The commissioner has barely got his feet under the table, all while inheriting a poisoned chalice that seems to be overflowing, he needs at least 12 months in the job for any meaningful change to be noticed. A Set up an external unit to investigate the case. A truly external one. With actual power. B Suspend any coppers who are under investigation until it's been completed. So with A it would take around 6-9 months to find suitably vetted personnel, then another 6-9 months to get the ball rolling - then how big is this super taskforce going to be to investigate 800 officers, say on average of 14 days per case (best result) that’s 11,200 days. You can’t seriously be saying that you suspend all of them for a prolonged period of time without actually being charged with a crime? There's no good solution. But project down the line to eg a year from now. You could end up in this situation... Officer X was under investigation for r*ping 3 women. He was susequently found guilty. Also, while still working as an officer, he r*ped a further 3 women. The Met knew of various allegations & warnings, but did not even suspend him... That situation would be far worse." Every officer being investigated by IOPC and I think even the internal professional standards is reviewed as to their suitability to continue working. Some are suspended, sone carry on working and alone are put on amended duties | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. Its a very large organisation, there are going to be a few, thats certainly not me excusing it you understand, simply a fact, there may appear to be too many (one is too many in truth) but remember, one in a organisation like that is going to be huge news, if as has been the case there are more it just compounds the notion that its riddled with wrong uns... Im pretty sure the higher ups are doing things to trying to fix it.. I was in a organisation that was similar, we see from time to time news of people in the same organisation who have turned out to be wrong uns, it doesn't make the whole organisation bad. There have been so many awful stories about the Met for so many years. Trying to shrug & wave it off at this point just won't wash. Whos trying to shrug it off ? Im certainly not, like i said, one bad apple is too many, but wether you like it or not, there will always be bad uns in any large organisation, is the whole of the NHS murdering scum bags just because Harold Shipman was in it ? As has been said, there are sever issues within the Met, issues which they are working to sort out and fix, these are not going to take effect instantly no matter how much we would like them to. The old bad apples line sounds a lot like shrugging it off, that's all. If they're actually working to sort it out, good for them. But after many years and many scandals, I think a lot of people are rightly v skeptical. Certainly not shrugging it off, people can respond to these types of things without resorting to "hang the bastard's" or "they're all guilty, sack the f**kin lot".. granted you didn't say those things but it sounds a lot like you were heading that way.. See what i did there? Making assumptions about what people mean or what you 'think' they mean rarely works, you assumed i was shrugging it off, and i deliberately made a example of myself assuming you were heading or meaning something which you didn't.. it doesn't work well. I agree with you many people are and will be skeptical, and rightly so, for the reasons you mention.. we see these promises of change many times, how often have we heard 'never again' when a child is failed by social services.. but change does happen, it does take time, its never perfect, and as you say we should always remain skeptical. Pretty sure I've said several times there are good people in the Met. So no I'm not hinting at the things you said at all. It was just the bad apples line you trotted out. That line has been used sooooooo many times to excuse the situations that crop up with the Met time & time again. " Exactly my point, you made assumptions, so did i, both are wrong.. What we can agree on is there needs to be fundamental change, and meaningful fundamental change. | |||
"Perhaps the Met is too big to control now, and should rightly be broken up into smaller regional police forces that make it more easy to tightly run them. It's a thought. Is there some sort of evidence smaller forces are better? I don't know enough about this to have an opinion about it. All I do know from personal life experience working in large organisations or doing group work is that larger groups aren't always better to manage. And it also takes a special kind of boss to run a tight ship no matter large or small. Met upper management has been too lax with standards and complaints about their officer subordinates. But I won't be surprised if it is just as much because they are snowed in with too much paperwork and management BS to want to deal with more complaints about their officers piling into their in tray, as it is about pure laziness. " Met upper management dont investigate complaints, depending on the nature either professional standards do or the IOPC do. And it is literally their entire job role to investigate complaints and concerns raised against officers | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. There are wrong uns in all organisations, no matter how strict the entry requirements, there will always be a few who get through the vetting.. Problem A: there seem to be a lot more than a few in the Met. Problem B: the Met seem to be doing bugger all to fix this. If you’ve ever worked for a large organisation, you will know it takes years to steer the ship in a different direction. Right now what do expect them to do? You seem to very good at bashing the met but there’s been zero suggestions as to how to implement change. If there are 800 under investigation, what do you suggest happens to them until there is a conclusion? The commissioner has barely got his feet under the table, all while inheriting a poisoned chalice that seems to be overflowing, he needs at least 12 months in the job for any meaningful change to be noticed. A Set up an external unit to investigate the case. A truly external one. With actual power. B Suspend any coppers who are under investigation until it's been completed. So with A it would take around 6-9 months to find suitably vetted personnel, then another 6-9 months to get the ball rolling - then how big is this super taskforce going to be to investigate 800 officers, say on average of 14 days per case (best result) that’s 11,200 days. You can’t seriously be saying that you suspend all of them for a prolonged period of time without actually being charged with a crime? There's no good solution. But project down the line to eg a year from now. You could end up in this situation... Officer X was under investigation for r*ping 3 women. He was susequently found guilty. Also, while still working as an officer, he r*ped a further 3 women. The Met knew of various allegations & warnings, but did not even suspend him... That situation would be far worse. Every officer being investigated by IOPC and I think even the internal professional standards is reviewed as to their suitability to continue working. Some are suspended, sone carry on working and alone are put on amended duties" Read up about Carrick. Based on his case, the previous process you mention seems v insufficient. | |||
"How many women are not surprised at the behaviour described? How many times a day do you get messages with men wanting to do those things? " And similarly how many women trust the MET? | |||
"How many women are not surprised at the behaviour described? How many times a day do you get messages with men wanting to do those things? And similarly how many women trust the MET? " Fewer than used to trust it, I'd bet. | |||
| |||
"When people work in very stressful situations and very extreme locations they can become susceptible to very eccentric behaviour traits and they find ways of justifying it…. I was in the military for a lot of years and experienced it for myself People who are exposed to traumatic experiences really should be monitored and supported very closely. I confess I have not looked closely at Carrick’s history and he may have had no exposure to traumatic stress, but if he has… it could go a long way to explaining what he has done. I must emphasise that does not make what he did in any way less horrific than it was. And I don’t suppose any of his victims have any sympathy for the man’s psychological state. As always happens in these cases it becomes apparent that alarm bells were ringing but nobody paid attention. Maybe procedures will be adopted so that “alarm bells” will be investigated" Yep, no excusing any behaviour at all but the job must be traumatic enough to warrant the workforce being closely monitored/helped to deal with what they see and hear so it doesn't twist them mentally. | |||
| |||
I know there is good and bad in all walks of life. However with the power they have some think they're untouchable. | |||
"Gonna say it again. 800." A lot (not all) will likely be malicious or very low level. Pretty sure it's not 800 Carricks under investigation. What this man has done is beyond evil way beyond. I truly hope any other people that were subject to his depravity are strong enough to come forward and ensure he is never released. | |||
| |||
"How many women are not surprised at the behaviour described? How many times a day do you get messages with men wanting to do those things? " | |||
| |||
"“I’m not saying it’s just a few bad apples, it’s more than that - there are system failings,” That's from the head of the Met Sir Mark Rowley, he's quoted in the Independent andvi assume other media sources. He also said that in coming weeks there are multiple officers in court. So I'm interested is anyone still defending it as a few bad apples?" You’ve not been on the forums very long if you have to ask | |||
| |||
"The root problem is poor leadership. Lower and middle managers who do not have the moral courage to maintain standards in their teams and hold wrongdoers to account. Usually because they are all mates, and reliant on each other both for their own safety and to get the job done. A manager who does try to deal with anything is often seen as rocking the boat and creating problems for senior management. A career destroying move." My issue is lack of back up from HR. They're so scared of doing ANYTHING about under performance. All attempts to get things done have been met with quivering and "what if". Not helpful. | |||
"The root problem is poor leadership. Lower and middle managers who do not have the moral courage to maintain standards in their teams and hold wrongdoers to account. Usually because they are all mates, and reliant on each other both for their own safety and to get the job done. A manager who does try to deal with anything is often seen as rocking the boat and creating problems for senior management. A career destroying move." I’m sure you’re right on many points. I disagree with you to blame middle management wholly. Leadership comes from the top. If leadership is in denial of the issue of institutional racism, corruption and bad cops, nothing will change. | |||
"The root problem is poor leadership. Lower and middle managers who do not have the moral courage to maintain standards in their teams and hold wrongdoers to account. Usually because they are all mates, and reliant on each other both for their own safety and to get the job done. A manager who does try to deal with anything is often seen as rocking the boat and creating problems for senior management. A career destroying move. I’m sure you’re right on many points. I disagree with you to blame middle management wholly. Leadership comes from the top. If leadership is in denial of the issue of institutional racism, corruption and bad cops, nothing will change. " It's leadership throughout, but I take your point. These things will be spotted by lower and middle managers, but the senior managers have to trust their judgement and be prepared to act on it themselves. Yes if the lower and middle managers have no confidence that their seniors will act, then they will just think, what's the point? | |||
| |||
"Their is a majority of good and bad within the Met some turn a blind eye to what they hear or know so it doesn't effect their own career. But whilst the Met is supposedly being vetted most of the crimes are being committed whilst joining and complaints just get swept away. I can't honestly see the forces getting vetted it's only a public stunt. Even recently few high rank officers have been charged for cropping fellow colleagues at parties but given a suspended sentence the punishment is getting softer whereas folk within the Met for Scotland yard it's not been the first time they have been under investigation so be another cover up....." Totally agree. The re-vetting of all officers, and staff is nothing more than a publicity stunt, so they can be seen to be doing something. Basic vetting is a very low level and nothing more than a trawl of known databases. If the subjects had done anything real naughty, it will have already flagged up. Complete waste of time and resources. Investigate the buggers you know about, properly, and lean on their mates, like they do with crims. | |||
"Their is a majority of good and bad within the Met some turn a blind eye to what they hear or know so it doesn't effect their own career. But whilst the Met is supposedly being vetted most of the crimes are being committed whilst joining and complaints just get swept away. I can't honestly see the forces getting vetted it's only a public stunt. Even recently few high rank officers have been charged for cropping fellow colleagues at parties but given a suspended sentence the punishment is getting softer whereas folk within the Met for Scotland yard it's not been the first time they have been under investigation so be another cover up....." I don’t really understand the above post. There’s been no cover up. Just leadership not taking responsibility or admitting it’s failures. If you can’t recognise one’s failings you can’t begin to fix anything. | |||
"Their is a majority of good and bad within the Met some turn a blind eye to what they hear or know so it doesn't effect their own career. But whilst the Met is supposedly being vetted most of the crimes are being committed whilst joining and complaints just get swept away. I can't honestly see the forces getting vetted it's only a public stunt. Even recently few high rank officers have been charged for cropping fellow colleagues at parties but given a suspended sentence the punishment is getting softer whereas folk within the Met for Scotland yard it's not been the first time they have been under investigation so be another cover up..... Totally agree. The re-vetting of all officers, and staff is nothing more than a publicity stunt, so they can be seen to be doing something. Basic vetting is a very low level and nothing more than a trawl of known databases. If the subjects had done anything real naughty, it will have already flagged up. Complete waste of time and resources. Investigate the buggers you know about, properly, and lean on their mates, like they do with crims." All police officers WhatsApp should be accessed. Or they leave the force. We all know how cops enjoy their dirty, racist, misogynistic WhatsApp groups that incriminate their own criminality. | |||
"Their is a majority of good and bad within the Met some turn a blind eye to what they hear or know so it doesn't effect their own career. But whilst the Met is supposedly being vetted most of the crimes are being committed whilst joining and complaints just get swept away. I can't honestly see the forces getting vetted it's only a public stunt. Even recently few high rank officers have been charged for cropping fellow colleagues at parties but given a suspended sentence the punishment is getting softer whereas folk within the Met for Scotland yard it's not been the first time they have been under investigation so be another cover up..... Totally agree. The re-vetting of all officers, and staff is nothing more than a publicity stunt, so they can be seen to be doing something. Basic vetting is a very low level and nothing more than a trawl of known databases. If the subjects had done anything real naughty, it will have already flagged up. Complete waste of time and resources. Investigate the buggers you know about, properly, and lean on their mates, like they do with crims." Exactly and the reason why it's came to this even though their had been more than several complaints against an officer but got ignored and officer was able to join other forces without acknowledging previous notes which just got brushed under the carpet the Met was never fit for purpose and never will be far too much corruption... I just feel sorry for the genuine ones because they get judged | |||
"Their is a majority of good and bad within the Met some turn a blind eye to what they hear or know so it doesn't effect their own career. But whilst the Met is supposedly being vetted most of the crimes are being committed whilst joining and complaints just get swept away. I can't honestly see the forces getting vetted it's only a public stunt. Even recently few high rank officers have been charged for cropping fellow colleagues at parties but given a suspended sentence the punishment is getting softer whereas folk within the Met for Scotland yard it's not been the first time they have been under investigation so be another cover up..... I don’t really understand the above post. There’s been no cover up. Just leadership not taking responsibility or admitting it’s failures. If you can’t recognise one’s failings you can’t begin to fix anything. " Not taking something serious and turning a blind eye hoping it'll just smooth over is what happens people put complaints for a reason yet get made to look like liars because an officer never lies corruption has been going on for decades they just have a better way to cover things up until it becomes impossible | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. " A Nurse is currently on trial for murdering babies... the NHS Trust tried to cover it. Harold Shipman Beverly Allit.... But we don't demonise healthcare professionals do we | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. A Nurse is currently on trial for murdering babies... the NHS Trust tried to cover it. Harold Shipman Beverly Allit.... But we don't demonise healthcare professionals do we" Ajd bynthe head if the Met's own admission in coming weeks theor are multiple Met officers facing troll on the main for offences against women. I'm not sure how, when even the most senior person within the Met is admitting this isn't just a few bad apples this is demonising anyone. It's accountability | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. A Nurse is currently on trial for murdering babies... the NHS Trust tried to cover it. Harold Shipman Beverly Allit.... But we don't demonise healthcare professionals do we Ajd bynthe head if the Met's own admission in coming weeks theor are multiple Met officers facing troll on the main for offences against women. I'm not sure how, when even the most senior person within the Met is admitting this isn't just a few bad apples this is demonising anyone. It's accountability" But people are demonising the Police. | |||
| |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. A Nurse is currently on trial for murdering babies... the NHS Trust tried to cover it. Harold Shipman Beverly Allit.... But we don't demonise healthcare professionals do we Ajd bynthe head if the Met's own admission in coming weeks theor are multiple Met officers facing troll on the main for offences against women. I'm not sure how, when even the most senior person within the Met is admitting this isn't just a few bad apples this is demonising anyone. It's accountability But people are demonising the Police. " Demonising suggests that the attention that they ate getting is somehow unwarranted or unfair though? | |||
"I’ve always said that you cannot openly support the Police without holding them to account. As much as I support them, and the time I did as a Comms officer, this is a shockingly poor handling of someone in the Met ranks. At this point, the Met should be disbanded as, in my view, the damage has well and truly been done. " How would you go about disbanding a Police Force? A quick google of the numbers of people. 34,244 Police officers. 10,084 Police staff. 1,176 Police community support officers. That's a lot of people. Would you, for instance, just sack them all? (That would be very illegal, most of them are doing an adequate or even excellent job). Transfer them all elsewhere? (That would be very illegal and only shift problems elsewhere. You can't make another force accept them and you can't make someone move halfway across the country when they've done nothing wrong). Would you have a spare 45,000 or so people waiting in the wings to replace the disbanded people and if so, where are you getting them from? Where and when are you training the 45,000 replacement people? Blimey, whose footing the bill for that? We can't even pay UK nurses their true worth now, let alone funding an extra 45,000 people through a training programme pending a disbandment. If the Met's current vetting procedures are poor, then whose vetting the new 45,000 people? Do you even think there would be 45,000 living close enough that want to do the job? In summary, how do you disband the largest Police Force in the UK? What would that even look like? Genuine questions by the way. Gbat | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. A Nurse is currently on trial for murdering babies... the NHS Trust tried to cover it. Harold Shipman Beverly Allit.... But we don't demonise healthcare professionals do we Ajd bynthe head if the Met's own admission in coming weeks theor are multiple Met officers facing troll on the main for offences against women. I'm not sure how, when even the most senior person within the Met is admitting this isn't just a few bad apples this is demonising anyone. It's accountability But people are demonising the Police. Demonising suggests that the attention that they ate getting is somehow unwarranted or unfair though? " To you it does, to me it doesn't....You have your opinion I have mine. | |||
"Britains worst serial rapist was an officer for The Met. Sarah Everard was killed by an officer from The Met. How many more bad apples are there that are corrupt, covering up and pure evil. Did an innocent person get put away for David Carricks crimes? Why was he not caught or investigated? I hope hes put in prison and the rest of the inmates gets to him. Our tax money going on his upkeep is terrible. " It must be awful when you are a decent good police officer to become tarred with the same brush. | |||
"There will be loads of dodgy people in the police. You get dodgy people in all walks of life. " | |||
"There will be loads of dodgy people in the police. You get dodgy people in all walks of life. "Correct and many in the police will be cunts more than if they weren't in the police, because they feel they can get away with it in that job. Fact! | |||
"There will be loads of dodgy people in the police. You get dodgy people in all walks of life. " I feel this post completely misses the point. The police deal with life & death situations. They're supposedly there to protect & help those desperately in need of help. We need to be able to trust them & rely on them. Also, bad police are far more dangerous than - to take a random example - a bad road sweeper. A bad road sweeper might do a crap job or shout at someone. A bad copper might literally kill people then use their expertise & contacts to cover it up. Or they may steal money/drugs from crime in huge amounts. Or they may prey on vulnerable women they come into contact with then threaten them into silence by saying they're police etc Bad police are v well situated to do v bad things if they wish. It's why the police force really really really need to remove any bad coppers from active service. | |||
| |||
| |||
