Different Rules Apply…

It seems someone has finally noticed the rise in deaths caused by officers with ‘Starsky & Hutch’ syndrome:

The Independent Police Complaints Commission disclosed that 40 people died in police-related traffic accidents in the past 12 months, up from 24 the year before.

The watchdog called for a nationwide policy on pursuits to be implemented urgently. They first raised concerns two years ago that the pursuit policy can differ from region to region and was confusing both for the public and officers alike.

The commission also called for police motorcycle chases to be stopped except in "exceptional" cases.

Now, no-one wants to see a bunch of criminals escape because the police are instructed to go ‘softly softly’ (and I’d like to see those figures split into true victims and those who initiated the chase by committing a crime in the first place), but the rise in innocent bystanders mown down by cars on a shout is unacceptable, and needs to be curbed. Most can be monitored from a safe distance, or by air.

The IPCC is right to bring that message home – chases should be restricted only to true life and death situations, where the risk of leaving fleeing drivers is greater than the immediate prospect of mowing down a passerby on a crowded street.

On the other hand, if the suspect is a middle-aged woman who has committed the grievous offence of parking in a bus lane, then it’s to hell with the rule book and GO GO GO!:

Chris Tarrant’s former wife Ingrid has been convicted of resisting arrest – after she was chased for two miles and wrestled to the ground by police in a row over a parking ticket.

Mrs Tarrant, 54, had been ‘abrupt and rude’ with an officer who tried to issue her with the ticket for leaving her Saab parked at a bus stop, a court heard.

The policeman, who said he feared she had ‘mental health issues’, was astounded when she suddenly leapt into her car and drove off, despite repeatedly being asked to stop.

Mental. Yes. Nothing to do with a member of the public being rude to you, I suppose?

Was a chase necessary? You had her number, I assume?

He then followed her in his van for two miles before eventually stopping her on a country lane, wrestling her to the ground and handcuffing her.

/golfclap.

People can walk the streets of Cobham, safe from mouthy middle aged women, when PC Groves is around!

PC Groves told the court: ‘I was not sure why the whole incident had taken place at all over the minor parking matter. I did not know what I was dealing with.

‘I was concerned that the car was stolen or the person had been drinking or if there were mental health issues. I was getting no response.’

Because if you give a cop a bit of lip, you are obviously mad?

You know, the police might have fewer PR problems if, when questioned in the media and court, they didn’t make you long for the warm, empathetic, proportionate service of Robocop or Judge Dredd instead….

Don’t Put Your Daughter On The Stage Party On The Internet…

Andrew Poole got the shock of his life when he decided to hold a barbecue for his 30th birthday in a field:

He was just about to light the barbecue and had not even turned on the music when the gazebo suddenly started flapping wildly and the sound of chopper blades filled the air.

He should have played ‘Ride of the Valkyries’ to make them feel at home…

Eight officers wearing camouflage trousers and body armour jumped out and demanded that the 'rave' to be shut down.

Which puzzled Mr Poole, because the ‘rave’ was just him and 15 pals…

Mr Poole said: 'We were nowhere near anyone. We weren't even playing any music. What effectively the police did was come in and stop 15 people eating burgers.'

Because it seems that, stung by the recent criticism of their inactions in other forces in dealing with raves, they have decided to go all-out, full-bore crackers on even the hint of a gathering.

Having surveilled the situation with the force ‘Airwolf’ though, realised it’s a tiny bunch of 30 year olds having a barbecue under the sort of teeny marquee you can pick up for a fiver in ASDA, you’d think they would realise their error and call off the dogs.

But oh no:

Four police cars, a riot van and a helicopter were involved in the swoop on Andrew Poole's gathering for his family and friends.

Obviously, crime is almost unheard of in this rural paradise…

What sparked their interest?

The party was organised using the create an event facility on Facebook.

Mr Poole, a coach driver, said he invited 17 family and friends and two had not even arrived by the time the helicopter was whirring overhead.

Mr Poole said: 'All of a sudden there was this noise in the sky. The thing then hovered over us for about 25 minutes, watching 15 people eat. They told us to take down the sound system and said everybody's got to leave.

Why? It clearly wasn’t a rave, as initially suspected.

What law were they breaking, then, other than – of course – ‘making the police look like a bunch of clueless, hysterical, tooled-up knobs’?

'It was 4pm and we hadn't even plugged the music in yet. We tried to reason with them but they were having none of it.'

Oh, that was a mistake…

And of course, they are, even in the cold light of day, when everyone’s laughing at them, totally unrepentant:

Yesterday, police insisted they were right to end the party. 'We were extremely concerned how the event had been advertised on the internet as an all-night party,' a spokesman said.

Somehow, I just knew the Internet would get the blame….

I Was Wrong…

I thought the person Labour would wheel out to crush the Rebellion of the Children’s Authors would be JK Rowling.

Instead, step forward Anthony Browne, Children’s Laureate, to defend his Labour chums and pooh-pooh the claims of his peers.

And in the process, show that he hasn’t really understood the reasons for their action:

Philip Pullman and three of my predecessors as Children’s Laureate, Anne Fine, Michael Morpurgo and Quentin Blake, say that as an act of protest they will stop visiting schools. These distinguished children’s authors and illustrators are infuriated with a government scheme that requires them to be vetted in case they are a danger to children.

I have a certain sympathy with them — but I will not feel compelled to join them in their boycott.

Well, I’ll bet they are all broken up about that, Anthony.

Although it will be irritating to have to pay £64 for the privilege of being on the Independent Safeguarding Authority database, I do not see why writers should be treated differently from others who work with children — from music teachers to dinner ladies.

The reason, apart from the assumption of guilt, is because the circumstances are different.

As Phillip Pullman explained on yesterday’s ‘Jeremy Vine’ show, he is NEVER left alone with children – he comes on, does his talk and leaves. At all times, he is accompanied by the teachers. This is the same for the other authors, unlike teachers and dinner ladies.

So why the sheep dip approach, and not a ‘risk based’ one?

School visits show children that writers and illustrators are no different from anyone else — we are just like them and they can become writers when they are older. There isn’t a hierarchy with writers and illustrators at the top and children at the bottom. So for writers to say that we’re not the same as other people — that we are special, and certain rules do not apply to us — goes against everything I strongly believe.

Oh, where to start….

Firstly, children’s authors ARE different from everyone else, as clearly outlined, because their contact with children is different. That is the thing that Pullman and the others have made clear, and I have to question your reading ability if you can’t understand that.

Or your honesty, if you understand it all too well, but wish to give the impression to your readers that the protest isn’t about what it clearly is about…

Secondly, what a load of wishy-washy socialist hogwash! No-one must be different in Anthony Browne’s world – anyone can become a writer, it doesn’t need anything as random or unfair as talent.

Everyone is the same as everyone else…

I don’t believe that registering will make a difference to how children feel about us — nor will it create or reinforce, as some claim, a gulf between children and adult society. There is an argument to be had about whether children are overprotected but if all those who work in a position of trust with children have to be checked, I won’t feel “insulted or degraded” by being included.

He positively relishes being ‘just another of the drones, nobody special’, it seems.

So, why did he accept the position of Children’s Laureate then…? Doesn’t that set him apart from all his peers?

Or is that somehow different, more acceptable?

It’s that creative impulse that will suffer if we let our irritation with a bureaucratic intrusion stop us from going into classrooms.

Yes, indeed, Anthony. Trust Big Brother, never question…

Another ‘Government is Good’ convert is the ever-amusing Bea Campbell in Cif, who contributes many an opportunity for the readers to rip her ‘argument’ to shreds with gleeful delight.

For me, this is the stand-out quote:

But if it is worth letting someone check your body and examine the contents of your bag at an airport, then it is worth letting the computer check whether you've committed crimes against children before you are allowed to attract their attention in their schools.

Yup. Children’s authors, terrorists – totally interchangeable….

Oh, and yes, it is (for anyone who hasn't come across her before), that Bea Campbell, of 'OMG! Satanist monsters under the bed! Protect the chiiilllldreeen!' infamy...

More Fun With Photography…

Harry Potter star Jamie Waylett, who plays Hogwarts bully Vincent Crabbe in the hit films, today admitted growing ten cannabis plants in his bedroom.
The tubby 19-year-old actor was arrested in April this year after police stopped him and a friend in an Audi car in London.

No sympathy.

You grow cannabis, which is against the law, then you can expect the law to take a dim view. Even if you are an actor in the latest merchandising opportunity exciting children’s film…

But this drew my attention:

The officers thought he'd been taking photos of them, the court heard.

That was their sole reason for stopping the car in the first place…?

A Glimpse Into The Priorities Of Some Facets Of The Justice System

What? You thought the top one might be justice?

Perish the thought:

A former magistrate cleared of rape has launched a landmark legal claim for £300,000 damages against his accuser.

Anthony Hunt, 66, was jailed in 2003 for after a jury found him guilty of raping a woman in her home after they both attended a flower show.

Who knew all that talk about stamens could have such an effect?

But it wasn’t long before the case fell apart and he was cleared. Though to Mr Hunt, it no doubt seemed far, far too long:

He spent nearly two years on a prison sex offender's wing before his conviction was overturned.

Now in a legal first, Mr Hunt wants to 'vindicate his reputation' by bringing a claim of malicious prosecution against the woman who alleged rape.

His first such application was turned down, but he’s now been given a chance to overturn that.

Mark Warby QC, representing Mr Hunt, however, said the move offered a vital legal remedy to those wrongly accused of rape.

Mr Warby said: 'It is 14 years ago to the day that my client had sex with the defendant with her consent at her home at the age of 52.

'It was nearly seven years afterwards that he was arrested and first learned of her allegation of rape. '

Eh…? Seven years after the act, this woman thinks to herself she’ll accuse a man of rape? Now I know why he wants his day in court, no matter the cost of the further publicity!

Meanwhile, over at the ‘Independent’, the emphasis is most definitely not on the unfortunate Mr Hunt:

Women who cry rape face being sued for hundreds of thousands of pounds in damages if the prosecution fails to secure a conviction in court, it was claimed during a landmark legal challenge yesterday.

Only if it can be proved they’ve lied, presumably?

Anyone would think that was a desirable outcome. Who, exactly, is arguing against this?

Lawyers and women's rights groups said that, if successful, the action could set back the prosecution of rape by decades. Mr Hunt has argued that the woman became the prosecutor by giving a witness statement to police in 2002 and by agreeing to give evidence against him, although the charge was brought by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).

There you have it, straight from the mouths of the vested interests themselves.

Not exactly ‘Let justice be done, though the heavens fall…’ is it?

Anna Mills, a lawyer at law firm Lovells, who acts for AB on a pro bono basis, said: "The case is unusual because Mr Hunt brought his initial claim against the complainant rather than the prosecuting authorities. This means that our client... is personally having to defend his claim for £300,000 in damages."

Ms Mills added: "Casting AB as the 'prosecutor' in a rape case brought by the proper authorities is oppressive... If the appeal succeeds, it will have serious public policy implications and allow rape complainants... to be sued by their alleged attackers."

No, Ms Mills.

It will finally allow some redress for men who have been falsely accused of the most dreadful crime, and hopefully make their tormentors think twice if they may be made to account for their actions financially.

Anyone interested in real justice, rather than the ideological kind, cannot fail to support this.

Modern Nursery Rhymes: Today’s The Day The Teddy Bears…

…cough up £ 70 insurance for their picnic:

There can be few things more sedate than a picnic.

But a council says they are so fraught with danger that organisers must take out insurance - of £5million.

It seems someone had an idea to hold a picnic on council land.

Ian Blackwell was stunned when he received the ultimatum from Totnes Town Council, in Devon, after organising a picnic for the local community.

He did this in response to The Eden Project's ‘The Big Lunch’ concept, which is pushing the touchy-feely ‘have lunch with your street’ concept in order to ‘bring communities together’.

Harmless fun, you’d think.

But they reckoned without the local council:

The council claimed that as the organiser, Mr Blackwell would be responsible for any accidents or injuries and needed 'public liability insurance cover'.

The 63-year-old businessman said: 'And yet if we had a birthday party in the park and invited friends and family along, we're apparently not responsible for their actions.'

Very odd…

He rang up for a quote - but couldn't get one because the insurance company didn't see his picnic as a risk.

'They couldn't understand why people would want to insure a picnic,' he added.

That’s because they don’t work for a council…

Three Cheers for Dr Pike!

Is he the only honest (and brave) scientist in Britain?

Top scientists were last night accused of trying to hush up a damning report on the dumbing down of GCSEs to avoid embarrassing the Government.

Scientists being less than impartial, and trying to hush up inconvenient evidence?

Surely not…

The report by the Science Community Representing Education (Score) group said some exam questions required no scientific knowledge.

It also found maths was examined 'in a very limited way' and in some cases 'the allowable answers given in mark schemes did not reflect correct science'.

So, you can give a wrong answer, and still achieve a mark?

Who said ‘Education, education, education..’ again? I’ve quite forgotten…

But the Royal Society of Chemistry, which is represented on the group, broke ranks last night to blow the whistle on a cover-up.

'It would seem to me the public interest is being subordinated for political reasons, which is unacceptable,' said Dr Richard Pike, the society's chief executive.

Good for you!

Although the report was available online and to those that specifically requested it, the press release containing some stark criticism was unavailable.

It included a quote from Sir Alan Wilson, the chairman of Score, who said: 'It is astonishing that there are questions in our GCSEs that have no relation to science and that mathematics, the cornerstone of sound scientific understanding, is so woefully represented.'

And so long as that was based in fact – and it clearly was – what’s the harm in saying it?

Sources at the chemistry society said the Score coalition - based at the Royal Society - was concerned the findings would play into the hands of the Conservatives and education spokesman Michael Gove, and upset key civil servants.

Because upsetting the government and key civil servants would cut them off from the gravy train of government grants, of course.

Dr Pike said: 'My concern is that the civil servants in the Department for Children, Schools and Families are becoming increasingly politicised, even when confronted with evidence.

'Within the learned society community, for the most part, they don't want to cause trouble. They are cosying up with the civil service and cosying up with all the people involved in writing exams.'

A damning indictment of the creep of politics into every sphere and the influence of the largesse it can provide if you are prepared, as Dr Pike clearly isn’t, to forego your principles.

But then, prostitution thrives in harsh financial times, doesn’t it? So maybe we shouldn’t be too surprised….

The March Of The Greens….

Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, announced yesterday that planning rules would be changed to make it easier for 6,000 onshore wind turbines to be built. Britain's "default position" would be to accept new onshore turbines, he said.

Because we’ve got to press forward with the big green con, or the public might start to realise that it is a con…

Still, good luck trying to hide it from them when their bills go up:

Government figures show that household energy bills could rise by up to £250 a year to pay for more renewable energy, although it claimed that efficiency measures would keep the increase down to £77 by 2020.

As part of the plans, motorists and air passengers were warned that they could face more "green" tax increases – although ministers refused to give details. And seven million homes would receive "green energy makeovers" to increase energy efficiency.

Ah, of course. The usual suspects victims. Motorists (Ministers have chauffeurs) and air passengers (Ministers get the public to pay their air fares).

And what houses are supposed to receive these ‘green makeovers’? Public housing?

Critics of turbines, which can be more than 300ft high, say they disfigure the landscape and cause noise. Some engineers also question whether they are efficient enough to be economically viable but Mr Miliband said people must come to accept wind farms as a necessary part of Britain's energy sector.

NuLabour in all its authoritarian glory – the people (who vote them in) must do as the politicians want, or else…

He said ministers would be sensitive to residents' concerns about turbines, but insisted: "They have to go somewhere."

Then I vote for them to go slap bang outside the house of every Minister and politician who voted for it. In the case of most of them, that’ll be ALL their houses.

And if that’s not enough, then we can move on to all those high profile green campaigners. Put your money where your mouth is, George Monbiot!

But it may all come to naught anyway. Like these other bold plans:

The government is expected to announce a scaled-down version of its grand plan to create up to 10 "eco towns".

Yet another of Brown’s ideas is quietly shelved once its usefulness – gaining headlines and green votes - has expired.

When are they going to do the same with the man himself?

But the zero-carbon developments - some earmarked on open countryside - have caused protests and a legal challenge.

The government is now likely to confirm a first wave of just three or four towns in areas with council support.

Note that: council support. Not the public’s support, but their local government lords and masters. Who may (or may not) have considered their views…

Opponents have included actress Judi Dench, author Jilly Cooper and former tennis star Tim Henman's father Tony Henman.

The Conservatives have also been critical of the way eco towns have been handled, but say they would not cancel schemes that enjoyed local support if they win the next election.

They need to clarify just what they mean by ‘local support’.

If they, too, consider that getting the council onside is all that needs to be done, they can think again…

”… Got the morning paper and the headlines read:"Danger to the queen" …”

“…Buckingham Palace better tighten things up...”:

Buckingham Palace and the Greater London Authority are under pressure to explain why a BNP member was last week allowed to attend a garden party hosted by the Queen.

And why, exactly, does the Palace have to ‘explain’ themselves to anyone over when a party is held? And who they choose to invite?

Questions were raised yesterday over whether officials had misled the public to avoid further embarrassment, following the scandal that erupted when Barnbrook invited BNP leader Nick Griffin as his guest. Mr Griffin later decided not to attend.

Both the Palace and the Assembly allowed reports giving the incorrect date of Mr Barnbook's visit to be published.

Which disappointed no-one, except those looking to make political capital out of it.

Like this group:

A spokesman for anti-fascist group Searchlight said: 'We were surprised to hear Richard Barnbrook's attendance at the garden party was kept so quiet.

‘Surprised’? No, I don’t think that was the word you first thought of….

The Uselessness Of ASBOs…

A gang of yobs have had a ban on hoodies lifted because two of them still have their clothes bought for them by their mum.

Hey, if ASBOs aren’t shaming enough, perhaps having the details of how your mum still buys your clothes for you at 18 and 22 splashed all over the press will do the job?

Oh, but I forgot. There is no shame any more:

Police say the four thugs are linked to more than 300 crimes, including violence, burglary, car theft, assault and shoplifting.

They were given an anti-social behaviour order for terrorising their estate and banned from wearing hooded tops.

And then even that hopeless little slap on the wrist was rescinded by a do-gooder magistrate:

But the hoodie part of the ban was lifted because Jonathan Webb, 22, and his brother Joshua, 18, have a wardrobe full of hooded tops which were bought recently by their mother.

Might I suggest a handy solution?

Magistrates altered the Asbo to let the Webbs and two other gang members wear the tops, but only with hoods down.

Why the two other gang members? Did the other two’s mum buy their clothes too?

The Webbs, Jake Allen, 18, and Adam Langdon, 18, had made life a "living hell" for residents of the Honicknowle housing estate in Plymouth.

The list of previous convictions for the four over four years filled 200 pages.

Why, then, are they even ASBO’d in the first place?

Why are they not behind bars, where they belong?