Further to the Braehead incident
the other day, it seems the Strathclyde Police are getting their retaliation in first, releasing a statement
that seems to boil down to 'We've investigated ourselves and found ourselves innocent, but this guy's a liar and a wrong 'un, trust us, though we can't tell you why, of course, *wink wink*'.
Which has to be quite the most extraordinary statement I've ever seen.
Once upon a time, I'd have unhesitatingly accepted the police statement as the unvarnished truth.
But after Tomlinson, De Menezes and all the others, I'm afraid I don't.
"They had a very specific concern, which I am not in a position to discuss publicly"
Why ever not? Quite unreal, War is peace, freedom is slavery etc.
I know who I believe
All this kind of trouble can be avoided when the troublemaker is permanently silenced.
I am not in a position to say anything about this paedophile but I can tell you that we have had terrible problems with this disgusting liar, who incidentally, walks in a very funny kind of way.
Only last year we had intelligence that he was planning not to pay his TV licence but as a result of one of my constables falling through this dastardly wicked man's ceiling, that our stakeout was rumbled and vital evidence lost. Believe me, you wouldn't want this chap as your neighbour and you would have to be a very dim employer (especially with a name like Elliots of Braehead Ltd) not to sack him.
But beyond these minor points I am not at liberty to say anything.
Strathclueless Police need a new spokesman or they need to give the one they've got a light tasering.
To release a statement on an episode whose salient details cannot be revealed for unspecified reasons might have worked in George Dixon's day.
The real issue here, and why certain senior members of The Farce should resign and crawl on broken glass in sackcloth towards Canterbury, is the fact that everyone seems ready to believe Mr.White.
Obviously too many people *have* been threatened with the CTA by the police when simply taking innocent photos or for having an A-Z London or 'walking in a manner liable to offend' or lighting a cigarette in a pub.
The fact that a large chunk of us believe Mr.White is what should tell the policeymen that they have lost the confidence of society.
"They had a very specific concern, which I am not in a position to discuss publicly"
Is it 'coz I is White?
Inspector Gizmo rules
If you read the article on the link in the post Strathclyde police may have reported Mr White to to PF over photographing a worker at the centre while his flies were undone... Or I suppose they may not!
A Strathclyde policeman stops a chap for speeding and starts the following conversation:
PC McWibble: May I see your driving licence?
Driver: I don't have one. I was banned for drunk driving.
PC McWibble: Is this your vehicle?
Driver: It's not my car. I stole it.
PC McWibble: The car is stolen?
Driver: That's right. But come to think of it, I saw the owner's DVLA stuff in the glove compartment whilst I was putting my gun in there.
PC McWibble: There's a gun in the glove compartment?
Driver: That's where I put it after I shot and killed the woman who owns this car and put her body in the boot.
PC McWibble: There's a BODY in the boot?!?!?
Driver: Indeed there is.
Hearing this, PC McWibble immediately called his Sgt.
The car was quickly surrounded by armed police and the Sgt approaches the driver to handle the tense situation:
Sgt: May I see your driving licence, Sir?
Driver: No probs, Sgt. Here it is.
It was valid.
Sgt: Who's car is this?
Driver: It's mine, Sgt. Here are my DVLA documents.
The driver owned the car.
Sgt: Could you slowly open your glove compartment so I can see if there's a gun inside?
Driver: Yes, Sgt but I do not own a gun. Sure enough, there was nothing in the glove compartment.
Sgt: Can you kindly open the boot?
Driver: No problem.
Boot is opened; no body.
Sgt: I don't understand it. PC McWibble who stopped you said you told him you were banned, stole the car, had a gun in the glove compartment and that there was a dead body in the boot.
Driver: Yes and I'll bet the liar told you I was speeding, too.
Hello Gang,i've been keeping my head down on this story until now.
I was waiting for someone to change the subject to Stockwell /Tomlinson/poor little Jody which always happens on here when the police are under fire.How is a story about a person taking pictures in Glasgow relevant to the above incidents?.Very predictable though.I'm sure it's the same PC involved in all those cases!.
For the police to release a statement in such circumstances is very odd.Usually the police say nothing which leads you armchair Generals to presume guilt on our part.Mostly it is because the matter is under investigation so we can't comment.
I think there is more to come out of this,read between the lines...
A better headline would be "Man slightly miffed at getting a bit of a telling off over a minor issue"
I bloody detest you lot.
I hoped my female Scottish relative would back me up!!
I've just googled this story.Do it yourself and look up the STV website.The crucial point is in the sixth paragraph.That may explain why the police were called.
Rob Shorthouse, Director of Communications for Strathclyde Police gave an astonishingly cack-handed and damaging response.
"Mr White chose to make his complaint public, to give interviews to the media and to seek debate on social networks."
Yes he did. That means he knows there is a chance that something he doesn't want said in public will come out. He doesn't seem awfully bothered. In fact, he seems very happy for the police to say their piece. So if you've got something to say, then get on and say it.
Quick, From the telly:
"A member of staff at the centre's ice cream stall is said to have told officers that Mr White took photographs of her with his trouser zip open.
STV News understands police reviewed CCTV footage from the time and were in close liaison with the Procurator Fiscal service, but police have now acknowledged that no crime was committed and it is understood Mr White will not face charges. "
So, the security report someone they think is a flasher who, when challenged, said he was taking a picture of his daughter. The security staff then get all officious and try to say it is about the centre's policy of no photography. Only, really, the staff just made that up.
Chris White thinks it is about his daughter and the police get arsey because they suspect they are talking to a flasher who has just made a good excuse. They haven't at this point had a chance to see the CCTV and are intent on getting his details - although they have no reasonable grounds - and don't want to make a direct accusation just in case.
They back down gracelessly, thinking they've done their job. If he's a flasher, he's had a fright, if he's not then they've not arrested him so it should end there. They've seen the photos on his phone, but they were never the issue. It could just be a girl on the icecream stand being hysterical about a wardrobe malfunction.
STV News understands police reviewed CCTV footage from the time and were in close liaison with the Procurator Fiscal service, but police have now acknowledged that no crime was committed and it is understood Mr White will not face charges.
Mr White, who has denied any wrongdoing, told the BBC's Reporting Scotland programme: "I'm quite relieved at that; they haven't said that to myself.
"There has been no kind of concern about the effect on myself, my wife and my daughter.
Mr Shorthouse said:
“For the avoidance of any doubt, we have fully investigated this incident and we can say that none of the independent and objective evidence presented to us by either the members of the public or the CCTV backs up the claims made by Mr White.”
For the avoidance of doubt, what the CCTV shows is that there was not a grain of truth in the original acccusation.
So WOAR,are we saying the police were justified in questioning him then?Your post is in and out on that issue.
What this boils down to is that he thought the police were a bit heavy-handed.Whoopy do.You say potato I say potarto.A nothing incident blown up out of all proportion in an anti-police Daily Mailesque way.
Good evening, Jaded.
What's that you say? You have four months of sickies due as a result of reading this shocking post?
Hello Melvin,I thought you would make your usual appearance as an anti-police story rears its head.You aren't the editor of the Daily Mail are you?
If you think I am going to defend the sad loser who is off sick with a broken heart then you are sadly wrong.Stories like that embarrass all of us real policemen.
I have insufficiently distinguished the exceptionally poor performance of the Director of Comms (who wants changing) from the averagely-poor performance of the police officers.
What I was showing was that while one might need to approach someone about who an accusation has been made, it is best to keep a civil tongue in the head because if it is all bollocks - and there was sod-all evidence at that point, as happens in the real world - then you will definitely have made an enemy unnecessarily.
In this case the consequence of handling an unsubstantiated accusation badly was that it created a global story which caused even the centre management to blow up. To get a statement from the Director of Comms means the Chief Cop has given him a kicking too.
Having been handed a public relations disaster, Shorthouse then tries to put out the fire by chucking petrol on, vaguely hinting darkly that White is a sex offender but he can't say how.
The correct approach:
Strathclyde police regrets that it was necessary to approach Mr White in relation to an report which was definitively discounted when the CCTV was examined.
However, during the investigation the officers may have wrongly alluded to the Terrorism Act, which was not appropriate here and officers have been advised of that. They have also been advised that generally, photography on private property is a civil matter.
Strathclyde police hopes that Mr White would agree that they acted in good faith and would want us to react if any of his family made a similar report, but accepts that on this occassion the standards of calm investigation and professional communication fell well short of the standards which the police force aspire to, for which we apologise.
Gizmo says it all.
Ironic that this story breaks in the same week that we learn that Police harassing the public with unwarranted "stop and search" under anti-terrorism law has gone down by 90% (Just 9,652* stops and searches were made under terrorism laws in 2010/11, compared with 102,504 in 2009/10 DT).
Just a shame that this is the result of a test case in the European courts rather than our own upholding our rights.
*"The 2010/11 stops led to a total of 77 arrests and none of these were terror-related" Do the math
When the Daily Mail published photos of hard-working coppers snorkelling in the Cayman Islands, the chief liar stated that 'The Daily Mail had been spying on us' and made suggestions involving the reporters' 'visas' and 'proper authorisation'.
If they hadn't had visas they wouldn't have been there, and who needs authorisation to take photos on a beach?
It's becoming common to 'fit up' anyone who annoys the police now. Which will have the effect of none of us trusting any charges they bring against anyone. We'll default to 'it's a fit-up' no matter what.
They don;t see that, do they?
" getting a bit of a telling off over a minor issue"
That's probably the scariest sentence you've come up with to date and if your colleagues share that sort of opinion then the growing public disquiet with policing methods shouldn't surprise you.
Oh but I forget, there is no 'disquiet', is there?
(although i'll give Gadgetistas their due-they're right when they say 'the public get the police force they deserve')
Hooray for WoaR - Strathclyde Police should get her to be their spokesman.
I'm afraid they're more likely to stick with what they've got or perhaps enlist WPC McJaded whom I find it rather more difficult to love than her patient, forebearing and stalwart but nonetheless jaded colleague.
"I know who I believe"
As SBC points out, the fact that no-one seems concerned at that, is even more worrying, isn't it?
"Strathclueless Police need a new spokesman..."
"Driver: Yes and I'll bet the liar told you I was speeding, too."
"How is a story about a person taking pictures in Glasgow relevant to the above incidents?"
Because it all speaks to particular mindset that seems to have infested the police over the last 15-20 years.
"A better headline would be "Man slightly miffed at getting a bit of a telling off over a minor issue""
Mmmm, sorry, but as SBC points out, that you can think of this issue in those terms is pretty worrying.
The police are not covering themselves in glory, here.
"That means he knows there is a chance that something he doesn't want said in public will come out. He doesn't seem awfully bothered."
Indeed. I think this one'll run and run, when silence would have seen it quickly over.
"Just a shame that this is the result of a test case in the European courts rather than our own upholding our rights. "
"They don;t see that, do they?"
A lot do. But a large subset of those don't seem to care, and that's even more worrying!
"A lot do. But a large subset of those don't seem to care, and that's even more worrying!"
This truth will never deter keyboard 'Gadgetistas' (tipping hat to SBC) from insisting the lifeless orchard is merely a couple of rotten apples.
WOAR's suggestion for a statement is admirable.
The actual statement released is superficially reassuring, but on examination it's a well-crafted piece of skilful deception containing no information and no identifiable lies. This is what "communications" people are really for.
"We have also seen global media coverage of the incident – all of which has painted the shopping centre, this police force and, arguably, our country in a very negative light."
Be nice if they did something about the fact that Scotland is awash with drugs. That might help as well when it comes to image.
"the fact that Scotland is awash with drugs"
Always was-to my certain knowledge. From the deep fried Mars bar and a 'fish supper with sauce' through to poteen, hash and smack, it's always been easy to get illicit substances there.
I worked there in the mid 80's and it shocked me how much easier it was to 'score' there than ,say, in Islington.
"insisting the lifeless orchard is merely a couple of rotten apples"
Outstanding imagery there, could stand for our whole society.
Post a Comment