In his long career in newspapers, Dave has always been happy to help the police. Now he says he wouldn’t give them the time of day.Having read the details of the incident (yes, to forestall critics, we are only hearing his side. But even so...), you can't really blame him, can you?
He naturally wonders why the police would go to such lengths to criminalise a law-abiding, middle-class taxpayer.Targets, dear boy. Easy targets, at that...
9 comments:
I don't think it is so much targets, but revenue. A middle class individual is likely to be solvent, so can pay fines, and is unlikely to make a fuss.
When coming into contact with the police or any official ... record the conversation! Always!
You'll note the officer in this incident 'summarised' the motorists statement. This is NOT for the benefit of the motorist ... it is for the officer and it will be used against you ... period. Words are important and depending how they are put down can mean something entirely different to what you thought or intended them to mean when they are read out in court.
Personally, l would make no statement at all and certainly would not sign the officers notebook account of the incident.
Virtually everyone has the ability to record ... it's on your mobile phone. Learn how to use it. l'm surprised this motorist who is a press photographer didn't record the incident. He should know better.
He is often spot on. Especially when he insulted Polly T to her face on QT.
'Now he says he wouldn't give them the time of day.'
In the past we were told,'If you want to know the time ask a pleesmun'?
I'm not sure it's a good idea to refuse to make a statement, that can also be held against you. Simply decline to make one without a lawyer present.
And AP, I don't think it is targets, it is the much more sinister,'Because they can....'
Inspector Gadget haughtily declares on his blog that since JuliaM's daringly honest opinions of police contradict his own, the pair of them are "never going to be an item."
Julia may decide against granting Gadget's hypothetical scenario the respect of a reply but he might consider this rhetorical question: How more pivotal can negative opinion of police become when many older and retired officers of quality are already singing along with citizens from the same Hymn sheet?
To be fair to Gadget, something the Gadgeteennis do not reciprocate to critics, I met a lot of the 'why aren't you out catching train robbers?' stuff from total turds.
What worries me is that Gadget won't come forward and uses the 'can't pay the mortgage if I do' card, and many of the 'officers' clearly can't take any criticism.
The classic is the 'no one else has our experience and therefore knows nothing syndrome'. This and other blog-sign fit with well known organisational pathology.
I didn't follow it up, but only Shijuro noticed I was the only one offering practical advice on what could be done for PC Rathband, the rest wailing on about an injustice that isn't actually there.
I've been in a similar situation to the photographer with the same results and much worse. But sod such minor injustice - what about Nico Bento and others banged up on lunatic, collusive cop-prosecution 'evidence'? I watched something on Mexico CJS last night and felt right at home.
"A middle class individual is likely to be solvent, so can pay fines, and is unlikely to make a fuss."
Good point. Brits must start learning to MAKE a fuss, before they lose yet more rights.
"When coming into contact with the police or any official ... record the conversation! Always!"
Wise words!
"He is often spot on. Especially when he insulted Polly T to her face on QT."
Ahhhh, I love that video! :)
"I don't think it is targets, it is the much more sinister,'Because they can....'"
Individually, perhaps. There should still be some who don't play that game, though.
But it seems his WPC 'trainer' - the one supposedly doing the puppywalking - is one of the other kind...
"ulia may decide against granting Gadget's hypothetical scenario the respect of a reply..."
Heh! I'm just happy when a comment gets through moderation!
"The classic is the 'no one else has our experience and therefore knows nothing syndrome'."
Yup, that gets trotted out a lot. Not just on police blogs, though., There's always a bit of 'closing of ranks' when a putative outsider offers an opinion.
Too much of it will kill a public blog stone-cold dead, though.
The Nico Bento case is an odd one. I'm surprised it isn't better known.
Yep - I used to have unpleasant encounters with newbie PCs/WPCs, mainly in the City of London, and always in September/October.
The encounters always went the same way - stopped for a minor real infraction (eg cycling across deserted pedestrian crossing at 12.00 on a Sunday) or falsely accused of driving without safety belt/insurance/road tax). Trainee flexes their authority, presumably to gain confidence in a safe environment. If I pointed out their error, the supervisory Policeman came down like a ton of bricks - eg 'you may not have been driving unbelted/untaxed, but since you are in the City of London on a Sunday are you insured to drive to work?'
Frankly, those little encounters led to the Police losing their authority in my eyes.
Post a Comment