Police officer faces sack after ramming moped thief Watch

username4454836
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#41
Report 2 months ago
#41
(Original post by TheRealSquiddy)
All I can say is I'm very sorry that happened.

I hope that in the future the police will do better by you.
Thanks

Unlikely with WMP.
(Original post by The RAR)
Security guards? Are you just making stuff up or what was the situation you got yourself into exactly? You seem to despise the police, if someone commits a burglary or just any crime against you who would you call other than the police? A private detective?
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
You have your own security guards? :lol:
I used to be a commercial property manager, on site at an out of town office block. Thieves on mopeds would frequent the car park looking for bikes to steal. We employed a security team.

If someone commits a burglary the police are unlikely to show up. Typically you get a crime number that you pass to your insurer. Case closed.

More likely to call friends.
0
reply
username4454836
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#42
Report 2 months ago
#42
(Original post by TheRealSquiddy)
He's a rich man
Not even a man
0
reply
username2923348
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#43
Report 2 months ago
#43
(Original post by Decahedron)
Not even a man
*Woman
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#44
Report 2 months ago
#44
(Original post by Decahedron)
Thanks

Unlikely with WMP.



I used to be a commercial property manager, on site at an out of town office block. Thieves on mopeds would frequent the car park looking for bikes to steal. We employed a security team.

If someone commits a burglary the police are unlikely to show up. Typically you get a crime number that you pass to your insurer. Case closed.

More likely to call friends.
It's completely clear that in most areas now, the police are chronically under-resourced.
0
reply
Just my opinion
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#45
Report 2 months ago
#45
(Original post by SHallowvale)
I'm aware that knocking down mopeds is a successful tactic but lines still need to be drawn and protocol still needs to be followed. It's there to prevent police from getting 'trigger happy', so to speak, and just hitting drivers however and whenever they feel like at whatever speed they, personally, think is acceptable.
To all intents and purposes this tactic is the only the police have to spiralling scooter crime. The sheer numbers meant that it was totally out of control and that's why it led to this desperate measure.
If the officer concerned in this case is disciplined or loses his job that will be the end of it, as no officers will carry out the practice.
Scooter crime will spiral out of control once again and the authorities will be forced to admit they don't have an answer to it.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#46
Report 2 months ago
#46
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
From the Mail article, it's hard to tell why they are bringing this case against him as he was indeed following agreed protocols.

It will be interesting to see what happens, but this sounds a bit like other cases where individual police officers are pursued by the complaints people for protecting the public and dealing firmly or decisively with very dangerous criminals, often at grave risk to themselves. Eventually we reach a point where the police can no longer defend us from predatory criminality. This is already the case in many areas due to severe and ongoing budget cuts to the police.
The disciplinary prosecutors are saying the officer didn't follow the protocols for a hard stop and in particular didn't seek authority from his control room.

He is saying he didn't undertake a hard stop at all. He was undertaking a low speed boxing in maneover for which there is no agreed protocol but misjudged the scooter's speed.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#47
Report 2 months ago
#47
(Original post by Just my opinion)
To all intents and purposes this tactic is the only the police have to spiralling scooter crime..
Which tactic?

The one the prosecutors say he adopted, or the one he said he adopted?

Until you answer that, you can't begin to say whether it was justified or not.
0
reply
Just my opinion
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#48
Report 2 months ago
#48
Using police cars to knock crims off scooters
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#49
Report 2 months ago
#49
(Original post by Just my opinion)
Using police cars to knock crims off scooters
So you are saying that the tactic the police officer said he didn't adopt, was justified.

So do you think Barco or Ajax will win the Champions League?
0
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#50
Report 2 months ago
#50
(Original post by Just my opinion)
To all intents and purposes this tactic is the only the police have to spiralling scooter crime. The sheer numbers meant that it was totally out of control and that's why it led to this desperate measure.
If the officer concerned in this case is disciplined or loses his job that will be the end of it, as no officers will carry out the practice.
Scooter crime will spiral out of control once again and the authorities will be forced to admit they don't have an answer to it.
Once again, I accept that the police should be using tactics like this to deal with moped thieves. However, proper protocols/rules are established for this kind of thing and the police officer in question did not follow them.
0
reply
Just my opinion
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#51
Report 2 months ago
#51
Well, just reading in the paper now, it looks like he has been cleared.

Telegraph
" The panel yesterdayruled that is action on may 21st 2017 was necessary for the application of a suspected criminal.
PC Sutton was in tears as the decision was read out"

In tears?
I'm not really surprised as he was 4 weeks from retiring after 30 years and had the decision gone against him and if he had been sacked he would have lost his job and his pension.
Even though it has gone in his favour I would be amazed if other police officers put their necks on the line like this in future.
I know I certainly wouldn't and would be happy for my employers to go back to the drawing board or admit that they don't have an answer to the problem.
0
reply
username4454836
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#52
Report 2 months ago
#52
(Original post by Just my opinion)
Well, just reading in the paper now, it looks like he has been cleared.

Telegraph
" The panel yesterdayruled that is action on may 21st 2017 was necessary for the application of a suspected criminal.
PC Sutton was in tears as the decision was read out"

In tears?
I'm not really surprised as he was 4 weeks from retiring after 30 years and had the decision gone against him and if he had been sacked he would have lost his job and his pension.
Even though it has gone in his favour I would be amazed if other police officers put their necks on the line like this in future.
I know I certainly wouldn't and would be happy for my employers to go back to the drawing board or admit that they don't have an answer to the problem.
The IOPC has hundreds of cases against police officers, they are important to ensure the police are doing what they are supposed to be doing.
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#53
Report 2 months ago
#53
(Original post by Decahedron)
The IOPC has hundreds of cases against police officers, they are important to ensure the police are doing what they are supposed to be doing.
Any investigative panel like this should also be taking account of the public interest and applying everyday common sense and an understanding of the realities of policing in the current climate, where gangs are engaged in cynical and brutal violence, using minors and the moped as a weapon of war. Unfortunately, this mock trial serves only to further undermine the ability of the police to defend the public and flies in the face of common sense, given the level of threat.

It would appear that what we have here is a group of bureaucrats run amok and accountable to nobody and indifferent to the safety of the public.
0
reply
jameswhughes
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#54
Report 2 months ago
#54
(Original post by The RAR)
Security guards? Are you just making stuff up or what was the situation you got yourself into exactly? You seem to despise the police, if someone commits a burglary or just any crime against you who would you call other than the police? A private detective?
If the police had come, he'd have likely just complained about the police trying to help anyway. :lol:
1
reply
username4454836
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#55
Report 2 months ago
#55
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
Any investigative panel like this should also be taking account of the public interest and applying everyday common sense and an understanding of the realities of policing in the current climate, where gangs are engaged in cynical and brutal violence, using minors and the moped as a weapon of war. Unfortunately, this mock trial serves only to further undermine the ability of the police to defend the public and flies in the face of common sense, given the level of threat.

It would appear that what we have here is a group of bureaucrats run amok and accountable to nobody and indifferent to the safety of the public.
This is not about what is in the public interest, it is a matter of ensuring police procedure is followed correctly to ensure innocent people don't get hurt. The IOPC has a duty to ensure police standards are maintained and investigated where necessary.

It is for the CPS to decide whether it is in the public's interest to prosecute.

The 17 year old that got hit broke his leg, he was not charged or even arrested. So the officer hit an innocent person.

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/new...ffic-box-moped
0
reply
username4454836
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#56
Report 2 months ago
#56
(Original post by jameswhughes)
If the police had come, he'd have likely just complained about the police trying to help anyway. :lol:
If the police had come I would probably have a completely different outlook on the police.

*she'd (it isn't that hard).
0
reply
rentalghini
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#57
Report 2 months ago
#57
Isn't this allowed though? I've seen other police officers do it.
0
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#58
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#58
(Original post by Decahedron)
This is not about what is in the public interest, it is a matter of ensuring police procedure is followed correctly to ensure innocent people don't get hurt. The IOPC has a duty to ensure police standards are maintained and investigated where necessary.

It is for the CPS to decide whether it is in the public's interest to prosecute.

The 17 year old that got hit broke his leg, he was not charged or even arrested. So the officer hit an innocent person.

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/new...ffic-box-moped
Innocent people don’t ride without insurance and charge directly at an officer. The moped had brakes.
0
reply
username4454836
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#59
Report 2 months ago
#59
(Original post by Andrew97)
Innocent people don’t ride without insurance and charge directly at an officer. The moped had brakes.
Innocent until proven guilty.
0
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#60
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#60
(Original post by Decahedron)
Innocent until proven guilty.
In a court of law, this is not a court of law.
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you tempted to change your firm university choice on A-level results day?

Yes, I'll try and go to a uni higher up the league tables (154)
17.64%
Yes, there is a uni that I prefer and I'll fit in better (76)
8.71%
No I am happy with my course choice (516)
59.11%
I'm using Clearing when I have my exam results (127)
14.55%

Watched Threads

View All