Well, I suppose we shouldn't be too surprised about that, in a time when
journalists aren't expected to know anything beyond how to Google (and fail at that) and
teachers are no longer expected to be able to spell or use grammar...
PC Bensusan admitted she did not know ‘fully’ what the criteria were, adding: ‘At the time I believed it was the correct thing to do.’
PC Saunders admitted she did not know the criteria for when to use a spit hood ‘without looking it up’ and said she did not see the kick her colleague alleged Miss Perry had landed on her.
There's
a surprise, eh?
A spokesman for Sussex Police said: ‘We did receive a formal complaint about this incident before the court hearing and now the criminal prosecution has finished we will be in touch with the complainant in order to fully look into the matter.
‘Spit hoods, which were introduced in Sussex Police in 2009, have been used 1,291 times. They form part of the personal protective equipment available to operational officers.
‘Spitting has potentially serious health risks for officers and the public and the hoods provide valuable protection.
‘Officers receive training and guidance in the use of spit hoods.’
It's not very memorable then. But then, it seems
no training or updated advice ever is, when you are a police officer...
Mr Anastasi said: “The police officers admitted they had no suspicions about us but “in this day and age, we have to ask anyone with a camera like yours what you’re up to, because of terrorism”.
That'll be an interesting conversation with the training department, then.
A Hertfordshire Constabulary spokesman said: “We hope in those instances that the public understands our wider responsibility around protection and exercises patience while appropriate checks are completed and they can then go on their way.”
Papiere, bitte!
16 comments:
" A Hertfordshire Constabulary spokesman said: 'It is in the public interest for our police officers to be curious about behaviour that is out of the normal routine or where an issue like road safety might be at stake'.
What, walking around with a camera and pointing it at things and pressing the shutter is "out of the normal routine"?
“The force recognises that the public duty also has to be balanced against the public interest for law-abiding members of the public to be able to go about their normal business unhindered".
Except for anyone carrying what is recognisably a camera, obviously ...
Jings but we've got such wonderful and intelligent 'protectors' haven't we ...
Ah spit, it's all bollox.
I must admit I'm not surprised. Have you seen the story of the stolen caravan found on a Traveller site. NFA by police as Mr Maaughan produced a bill of sale for £300 from a 'man in a pub' - deemed suitable for 'civil remedies'?
Crazy and deeply worrying.
"The officers then got out and began to question the two men about why they were taking photographs before checking their drivers licences over the radio."
No prosecution then, for 'Wasting Police Time'. [Does that offence apply to police officers? ;-) ]
So their training is woefully inadequate and out of date. Shame the bullshit and pathetic explanations aren't as rare...
That's interesting. PC Karen Saunders knew there was a violent couple who had ALREADY beaten a pair of middle-aged women. The Argus covered the story back in 2008 when Saunders was the contact point.
"Two women were beaten around the head with a baseball bat seconds after telling two young people "mind your language". The savage attack happened outside the Co-op supermarket in Goring Road, Worthing. The two women, aged 68 and 44, both of whom are believed to be from the Worthing area, were left needing hospital treatment.
Police said the incident was sparked after expletives were shouted by a teenage boy and a woman in her 20s in a car at another motorist. One of the two women, who were walking along the pavement at the time, is reported to have made an innocuous comment of "mind your language".
At this, the woman in the car got out, followed by her companion who was brandishing a small baseball bat. As shocked shoppers looked on, the man violently attacked the two women, beating them both around the head and the arms.
They were both covered in bruises as they tried in vain to protect themselves. Both women suffered severe bruising and were taken to Worthing Hospital by ambulance as a precaution.
Their attackers made off in their car but were later arrested. An 18-year-old man and a 23-year-old woman have since been released on police bail pending further enquiries. Police have appealed for any witnesses to the attack, which happened at around 3.30pm on Monday, to contact PC Katrina Saunders on 0845 6070999 quoting serial 1347 of June 9.
Since magistrates dismissed the case against librarian Elaine Perry, we can take it that the CPS insisted on bringing this case instead of telling the police that there was no evidence on account of them having wrongfully arrested the complainant they were supposed to have protected.
57 Year old librarian upset in a chemist shop calls 999 and they arrest her instead of the person threatening her, despite having seen a similar situation before? Something stinks. Find out how Saunders is connected to the people in the car.
http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/2334941.print/
“in this day and age, we have to ask anyone with a camera like yours what you’re up to, because of terrorism”.
You can ask all you want. The answer will always be exactly the same:
"Taking photos"
I sometimes wonder at the unsurprising antics of assorted "Police Farces" across the Country. Are they actually going out of their way to be the most despised "public servants" in the country? Is there a league table of Keystone Kop wannabees with prizes awarded for the race to the bottom? Really, it has passed beyond satire as Richard Littlejohn puts it, "You couldn't make it up!".
@Diesel, a fair start. But the correct answer is: "It's none of your business."
“... in this day and age, we have to ask anyone with a camera like yours what you’re up to, because of terrorism”.
Would anyone in law enforce care to give just one example where a camera contributed to a terrorist act? Box cutters, shoes, underwear, castor beans, empty Tango bottles or stinger missiles; perhaps.
I mean, seriously, did these cops suspect the photographers were lying in wait to surprise the US 5th Fleet as it sailed down the Grand Union Canal? Let's hope these officers aren't sent out to investigate any real crimes because they don't appear to be very good at it.
i is prophitabul cos i ishoo moor penalti notisis than me wayjizz
xX As shocked shoppers looked on XX
Aye, and did fuck all.
THAT is the problem today.
XX wpc jilted said... XX
Oh? Not posting as annonymous this time Melvyn?
I'm disappointed in the normally astute readership here.
First, what we understand and define as 'terrorism' is not what 'our betters' do.
EDL (here), Tea-party(US), anyone who may disagree slightly with what .gov is doing = terrorist
I'd add 'anyone who may intentionally or inadvertently obtain photographic , video or audio recordings of politicians, bureaucrats or police doing something they may later wish/have to deny with a straight face' - anyone who'd reduce their ability to do so is obviously a terrorist, no?
Cameras, like guns, are only safe in the hands of 'properly trained' government officers, and if you disagree we'll add you to the 'watch list'.
"What, walking around with a camera and pointing it at things and pressing the shutter is "out of the normal routine"?"
Now everybody and his dog has a smartphone, it probably IS unusual!
"Have you seen the story of the stolen caravan found on a Traveller site. NFA by police as Mr Maaughan produced a bill of sale for £300 from a 'man in a pub' - deemed suitable for 'civil remedies'?"
Yup! Have mentioned it in a post to come.
"No prosecution then, for 'Wasting Police Time'. [Does that offence apply to police officers? ;-) ]"
It ought to!
"PC Karen Saunders knew there was a violent couple who had ALREADY beaten a pair of middle-aged women."
Well, well, well...
"I sometimes wonder at the unsurprising antics of assorted "Police Farces" across the Country. Are they actually going out of their way to be the most despised "public servants" in the country?"
Blimey, the social services and judiciary have such a head start, they'll never catch up!
"Let's hope these officers aren't sent out to investigate any real crimes because they don't appear to be very good at it."
Spot on!
"Aye, and did fuck all.
THAT is the problem today."
Too risky. YOU'LL then be the one arrested.
"Cameras, like guns, are only safe in the hands of 'properly trained' government officers, and if you disagree we'll add you to the 'watch list'."
Spot on!
Post a Comment