A police officer later exposed as a violent serial rapist passed vetting checks to join his force despite two existing reports of criminal behaviour against women.
What use are vetting checks that don’t work?
Alan Greer was investigated by police in 2002 and 2005 for making inappropriate phone calls to women and in one case was given a formal police caution.But he was given a job at Strathclyde Police – now Police Scotland – in 2009 despite vetting staff knowing about his history.
Police Scotland had claimed there were no 'missed opportunities' to expose Greer's offending sooner...
Really? Surely they wouldn’t lie about such a thing?
...but has now said its comments related only to the officer's police career, not his vetting.
Ah lying by omission. Or ‘clever PR’, as we no doubt refer to it these days…
Last month Lynn Ratcliff, assistant chief constable, said vetting was 'markedly different' compared to when Greer undertook the process and added he would not have passed current checks.
Is that another lie? Reader, it is, and an easily disproved one, at that!
A Strathclyde Police handbook from 2006, which details its standard operating procedures, said the force 'should not recruit people with cautions or convictions, which may call into question the integrity of the applicant or the force'.
Perhaps Lynn Ratcliffe should come under sctutiny for lying to the public?
A Police Scotland spokesman said: 'We have been completely open and transparent around information which can be shared in relation to the ongoing investigation into Alan Greer.
No you haven't - you've obfuscated and flat out lied at every turn so incompetently you've immediately been found out! I'm embarrassed for you.
