[Livia]

I have complete trust in the police, but then I'm a white woman.

[smeagol]

you would be a fool to ever trust the cops.

[Livia]

yeah... I'm not a fool.

[Kizzy]

Only a fool would suggest one branch of the authoritative power in the UK could be considered corrupt but refuse to acknowledge others are too.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

That article is the biggest load of tory spin I have ever had the misfortune to read.
How unfair is parliamentary privilege?... the abuse, corruption, fraud and lies perpetuated against the police over the years?
The 30yr rule proved it wasn't the police that were responsible for failings in many high profile cases but senior politicians.
The suffering of sexual abuse victims associated with past government officials, Cyril Smith and maggies mate Savile?
Were the police at fault in their investigations?... No because there were no investigations.
Plebgate has done just what was expected and shook the confidence that middle england had in the police, they can lie but only when they are ordered to....
'Know your place!'
Those words will be ringing in everyones ears for generations.

You're just saying that because it's a Telegraph article, what is specifically Tory about it? Not sure what a lot of this post has to do with the article, it was hardly holding up the political establishment over the police, he even says that parliament is one of the institutions that has gone very wrong and says that his sympathy with Mitchell is limited because he was fortunate enough to be rich and had the backing of several influential friends, a luxury he wouldn't have had if he wasn't a politician

I think you either didn't read the article fully or missed the point of it

[Kizzy]

I most certainly did read the article, in particular the part that said that Andrew Michell is a 'close friend' of those involved in the paper.
That doesn't automatically suggest that anyone without influence has to be wary of the police, that feeds the myth that this is endemic.
I think the whole Mitchell situation stinks to high heaven, a don't doubt for one moment that he didn't say 'pleb' 'know your place' or swear his head off.
The fact that this has been swirling around so much during a time of acute social and economic pressure is sickening.
It's as far as I can see irreconcilably damaged public perception of the police, and set public relations back decades.
In this social climate is that wise?
Was that the plan, to damage the police as they have the NHS?
I think it was, I'm certain it was!

[Brother Leon]

Originally Posted by Livia

I have complete trust in the police, but then I'm a white woman.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I most certainly did read the article, in particular the part that said that Andrew Michell is a 'close friend' of those involved in the paper.
That doesn't automatically suggest that anyone without influence has to be wary of the police, that feeds the myth that this is endemic.
I think the whole Mitchell situation stinks to high heaven, a don't doubt for one moment that he didn't say 'pleb' 'know your place' or swear his head off.
The fact that this has been swirling around so much during a time of acute social and economic pressure is sickening.
It's as far as I can see irreconcilably damaged public perception of the police, and set public relations back decades.
In this social climate is that wise?
Was that the plan, to damage the police as they have the NHS?
I think it was, I'm certain it was!

A close friend of one journalist from the paper, that's all. It is a fact that at best three police officers lied about what happened and it might even have been worse than that, these were the findings of the IPCC not any politicians or journalists that were close to Mitchell.

Oborne's point is that for the police to be effective they need to be trusted by the public, something that won't happen if they are shown to have lied and gotten away with it, as they have done in other incidents as well. They're in a position where they have the power of arrest, are tasked with gathering evidence, and are generally given greater credence and special protections. Hence why they need to be held to such a high standard. With so many questionable incidents in recent years the police force should be scrutinised in the same way that MPs were after expenses, journalists after phone hacking, bankers after the recession and the intelligence services after Iraq. Seems a sensible idea to me.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by MTVN

A close friend of one journalist from the paper, that's all. It is a fact that at best three police officers lied about what happened and it might even have been worse than that, these were the findings of the IPCC not any politicians or journalists that were close to Mitchell.

Oborne's point is that for the police to be effective they need to be trusted by the public, something that won't happen if they are shown to have lied and gotten away with it, as they have done in other incidents as well. They're in a position where they have the power of arrest, are tasked with gathering evidence, and are generally given greater credence and special protections. Hence why they need to be held to such a high standard. With so many questionable incidents in recent years the police force should be scrutinised in the same way that MPs were after expenses, journalists after phone hacking, bankers after the recession and the intelligence services after Iraq. Seems a sensible idea to me.

The fact is nobody knows what was said for certain as mitchell won't express honestly what he did say will he, yes he is a friend of this journalist... funny that and he gets to help ruin the reputation of hard working officers up and down the country.
The government have been pivotal in ensuring that the country have NO faith in the police, and it's rather hypocritical of a government who the public have no faith in to ask that in all fairness.
As you mention expenses lets run with that, have we really had a full an frank explanation as to the implamentations to restrict further abuses?
Similarly with lobbying,the dubious business practices and alliances with despots.
That's not even taking into account Cameron and Brooks, Patton and the BBC and the obvious bias of the Mail run by a fascist.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

The fact is nobody knows what was said for certain as mitchell won't express honestly what he did say will he, yes he is a friend of this journalist... funny that and he gets to help ruin the reputation of hard working officers up and down the country.
The government have been pivotal in ensuring that the country have NO faith in the police, and it's rather hypocritical of a government who the public have no faith in to ask that in all fairness.
As you mention expenses lets run with that, have we really had a full an frank explanation as to the implamentations to restrict further abuses?
Similarly with lobbying,the dubious business practices and alliances with despots.
That's not even taking into account Cameron and Brooks, Patton and the BBC and the obvious bias of the Mail run by a fascist.

No, not this journalist. A completely different journalist. Oborne has no relationship with Mitchell, originally sympathised with the police in this case, and even now doesn't care that much about Mitchell.

It's a shame that a lot of genuine police officers might now not be trusted but the responsibility for that lies with those members of the police who brought the force into disrepute. We might not know for certain what Mitchell said but we can go on the findings and research of an independent body as well as evidence that was uncovered by C4, and it doesn't reflect well on the police at all. Not that this is just about Mitchell, as the article also says there's been so many cases of questionable action by the police that in reality they were lacking a lot of peoples trust anyway

[joeysteele]

I am very pro the Police, I accept some do wrong as they go about their jobs but overall I trust them and support them.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by MTVN

No, not this journalist. A completely different journalist. Oborne has no relationship with Mitchell, originally sympathised with the police in this case, and even now doesn't care that much about Mitchell.

It's a shame that a lot of genuine police officers might now not be trusted but the responsibility for that lies with those members of the police who brought the force into disrepute. We might not know for certain what Mitchell said but we can go on the findings and research of an independent body as well as evidence that was uncovered by C4, and it doesn't reflect well on the police at all. Not that this is just about Mitchell, as the article also says there's been so many cases of questionable action by the police that in reality they were lacking a lot of peoples trust anyway

Don't you think Osbornes connections could be used to help his colleague?... I do.
We don't know what was said that is the first fact we have, it is unsure why C4 felt the need to get involved in this isn't it?
When there was so many officers, independent bodies and government agencies involved too.
I appreciate that it states that this is not the only case however that smacks of supposition doesn't it, what are these other offences?
'He who is without sin' springs to mind, It's dirty politics to smear even organisations that work for the crown if they dare to threaten the power of government, the media is a powerful tool in this and are adept at it clearly.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I am very pro the Police, I accept some do wrong as they go about their jobs but overall I trust them and support them.

I would appreciate your opinion joey but will understand if you don't wish to comment.
Would you say the current government has harnessed the power of the press to discredit public services in the hope of smoothing the way for privatisation?

[Me. I Am Salman]

I trust the police tbh

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Don't you think Osbornes connections could be used to help his colleague?... I do.
We don't know what was said that is the first fact we have, it is unsure why C4 felt the need to get involved in this isn't it?
When there was so many officers, independent bodies and government agencies involved too.
I appreciate that it states that this is not the only case however that smacks of supposition doesn't it, what are these other offences?
'He who is without sin' springs to mind, It's dirty politics to smear even organisations that work for the crown if they dare to threaten the power of government, the media is a powerful tool in this and are adept at it clearly.

Osborne? This article is written by Peter Oborne, he's a journalist and nothing more, certainly not a colleague of Mitchell

Channel 4 got involved as they managed to obtain footage casting doubt on the police's story, part of their job to make the public aware of that I would say. The other cases are mentioned in the article

I know this will sound shocking, but few who spend time in British courts wait long before coming across cases where the police have misrepresented, or made up, or suppressed evidence. Here’s a couple of cases at random. Muslim student Rizwaan Sabir was held without charge as a terrorist suspect, yet West Midlands Police (according to its own professional standards unit) fabricated key elements of the case against him. Karim Allison accused an officer from Cleveland Police of making what he claimed was a racist comment. In response, the policeman and other members of the force produced evidence that resulted in Mr Allison being convicted at the magistrates’ court for obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duties. This was later overturned, and compensation awarded; the jury found that it was more likely than not that the evidence against him was fabricated, although Cleveland Police insisted the inconsistencies resulted from the officer’s inexperience.

These are cases which got next to no attention at all, before we get into the ones that have been going on for years like Hillsborough, Stephen Lawrence, the Jean Charles de Menezes shooting etc.

[AnnieK]

In response to the OP, I have no reason to distrust the police personally.

[Kyle]

No problem with them personally and I appreciate how cooly they handle some of the rent-a-gobs that like to piss about. At football though there's always a few that look like they want a good ruck.

[Kizzy]

Ok I misspelt the name that's not the issue,
I don't believe they did manage to obtain it, as part as an ongoing investigation it shouldn't have been exposed it was in the plan to spread distrust against those involved in the case.
The files released on the 30yr rule show it was Maggie herself who suggested the police blame the fans following hillsborough.
I don't feel we're finding much common ground here.
That's fine, I understand it's not everyone that understands my fear of this government... I hope i'm not right and we're not all doomed