UK The UK Police Megathread - They may need to check your thinking - A butter knife to the chest will kill as surely as a Bayonet

The UK Police a fine body of men and women, that for various reasons seem addicted to being an international laughing stock. Poor judgement, self pity, angry bouts of rage, interspaced with cravenly rolling over when challenged. Much of which they document themselves on their social media of choice, Twitter. Like so many lolcows, they have no ability to analyse or modify their behavior and instead when criticised will double down.

Yes I realise sections of the Police do a good job, serious crime is investigated by the grown ups. However this thread mainly concerns the day to day public policing, and the highly politicized hierarchy of the Police,

Outside the UK the Police are most infamous for their handling of various Muslim child grooming gangs. Books could be written on the subject so I'll just leave this here.

0:42

Then there's the police love of hate crimes. There are a few different reasons for this, partly it's to compensate for their handling of the Stephen Lawrence murder. However the police have discovered that investigating (particularly online) hate crimes, has significant advantages. Unlike the typical burglar, often suspects in hate crimes have jobs, families and something to lose, also the complainants are typically well motivated and often get support from various organisation such as Hope Not Hate ,Tell Mama or Stonewall.

Due to legal Aid cuts, and the reluctance of UK solicitors to take cases like this, people will often accept a caution at the first opportunity. If they don't the police have other tactics, such as turning up at your workplace, just to ask Questions such as in the case of Harry Miller a guy who got in a twitter row with Suzy Green of the Trans children's charity Mermaids

Also at one point there weren't getting enough complaints rolling in, which was a problem as an actual complaint is a legal requirement before they can investigate. However Liverpool police found a way around this with the assistance of Constable Dominique Walker, It's PC Walker's job to be offended and make complaints. 19 Year old Chelsea Russell was convicted of a hate crime in 2018 for posting Snoop Dogg lyrics on Facebook after her best friend died, PC Walker was on hand to make a complaint as no member of the public was petty enough to want to.

So why are they funny?

Well there's the contrast between what they'll put up with from certain sections of the community

0:09

versus how they treat other members of the public

Then there's the way they've decided to tackle the Knife Crime epidemic.

Currently the Police are covering themselves in glory as they tackle COVID19. The police have struggled at the highest levels to tell the difference between government advice and actual law. Here's the Chief constable of Northhampton Police flat out saying that he may decide to check people's shopping baskets for non essential items.

Even though he must have recognised the thing he was talking into was a video camera, he spent the rest of the day denying he'd said it. While at the same time retweeting Toadie underlings who defended him.

There's so much more though, the Police's worst scandals, while serious have often tended to be quite farcical. Such as Plebgate where the Police Officers on duty at downing street decided it would be clever to leak a story to the Sun Newspaper accusing a government minister of calling them plebs, because they were all exceptional they gave overly detailed statements which ended up being contradicted by CCTV(which they had somehow forgotten that Downing street had a lot of) This ended with the Prime Minister making a statement saying the Police had issues with 'honesty'.

The Stephen Lawrence murder investigation spiraled out of control because the police decided that Lawrence's family were nobodies, (only to find out later his father was friends with the editor of the Daily Mail) . With the grooming gang scandals the only arrests they made were the fathers of two of the victims (for a public order offense, ie giving them shit) and on one occasion the victim herself. However because the police were such pedants they documented everything, and which is why they fought so hard to avoid a proper judicial inquiry.

So the previous thread on the UK Police was dispatched to Spergatory, (thanks to @mr.moon1488 , @break these cuffs for their contributions to it) . After some advice from a sympathetic staff member I'm reposting here, because in his words A&H loves to crap on the British .

There is so much stuff out there , the UK police are so shit at using social media, that a single thread to consolidate it all might be worthwhile.

 

[teriyakiburns]

To satisfy the curiosity of @Morethanabitfoolish, a quick history lesson.

In 1999, the NeopolitanMetropolitan Police armed response unit executed a man, less than 50 yards from his home, because an alcoholic fuckwit thought he was carrying a shotgun in a plastic bag. He was actually carrying a table leg that his brother had just repaired for him. Police didn't make any effort to question him, or to warn him that they were armed. They just yelled at him out of the darkness and then shot him in the back. The officers in question received no punishment for their acts, other than a brief suspension with full pay, and were later cleared of any wrongdoing.

'Gunman' shot dead by police was carrying table leg in bag
by BETH HALE, Daily Mail
Last updated at 14:26 02 June 2005

The widow of a man shot dead by police who mistakenly believed he was carrying a gun wept yesterday as she spoke of her husband's last moments.
Irene Stanley was in the kitchen of her east London home when she heard the shot that killed her husband Harry just 50 yards away.
Mr Stanley, 46, was carrying a table leg in a plastic bag when he was shot by police marksmen who had received a report of a man carrying a sawn-off shotgun.
At an inquest at St Pancras coroner's court in London yesterday, mother-of-three Mrs Stanley described saying goodbye to her husband, who had left hospital only ten days earlier after an operation for colon cancer.
The painter and decorator was on his way to his brother's house on September 22, 1999, to collect a table leg which was being repaired, she said.
Wiping away tears she said: 'He said he would see me at five o'clock and asked me to make his favourite dinner. He gave me a kiss and my grandson Kyle and I never saw him again.'
Despite hearing the fatal shot fired, it was not until nearly a day later that Mrs Stanley, of Hackney, east London, was told of her husband's death.
The inquest heard how Scottish-born Mr Stanley left his brother Sam's house carrying the Queen Anne-style table leg in a blue plastic bag, and in the early evening walked into the Alexandra pub in Victoria Park Road.
Drinker Clifford Willing was standing next to him at the bar as Mr Stanley ordered a lemonade and left soon after.
Mr Willing then called the police and told them: 'Hello, I believe that somebody walked into the pub with a gun.' Asked what type of gun it was he said: 'It actually looks like a sawn-off shotgun in a blue plastic carrier bag.'
Mr Willing later told police in a statement: 'I saw a man put a package on the floor. He then put his right foot over the package. The package was about 18 inches long and about five or six inches wide.
'The package was wrapped so tightly that I could see it was a sawn-off shotgun with the stock cut off.
'I could see the barrel and the stock of the weapon and even the trigger.'
He went on to describe Mr Stanley leaving the pub: 'Sylvia (the barmaid) gave the man his drink. He took one sip and looked around and then picked up the package in his right hand and put it down by his side and walked out of the pub using the door nearest the fruit machine.
'I would not describe myself as experienced with guns but I have seen them and held them. I'm absolutely certain that the plastic bag contained a sawn-off shotgun. I immediately dialled 999 on my mobile phone.'
Questioned yesterday by Dr Stephen Chan, Coroner for Inner North London, Mr Willing accepted that he could not tell what was in the carrier bag, but said that the object had the 'general impression' of a gun.
Mr Stanley's family are this week due to hear evidence for the first time from the policemen who fired the shots.
Following an investigation by Surrey Police, papers were passed to the Crown Prosecution Service but they twice decided there was not enough evidence for a prosecution.
So far the police constable and inspector have not been named, but yesterday the coroner rejected an application for the officers to remain anonymous during the inquest.
The hearing continues.

Killing of man with table leg 'unlawful'
Press Association
Fri 29 Oct 2004 16.52 BST

A man who was shot by police while carrying a table leg which was mistaken for a gun, was unlawfully killed, an inquest jury ruled today.

Harry Stanley, 46, a painter and decorator of Hackney, east London, was shot in the head and hand by police marksmen on September 22 1999. Two Metropolitan police officers fired the shots after mistakenly being informed that Mr Stanley had a sawn-off shotgun.

The father-of-three, who was originally from Lanarkshire, Scotland, was carrying a blue plastic bag with a coffee table leg inside, which had just been repaired by his brother Peter. He was shot as he walked home from the Alexandra Pub in Hackney.

Today a jury of six women and four men at St Pancras coroner's court took around seven hours to reach their majority verdict at the end of a two week inquest.

The inquest was the second to take place into Mr Stanley's death. The open verdict recorded at the end of the original inquest was later quashed by the high court.

The dead man's family and friends have campaigned for a new inquest and today there were shouts of "yes" from the public gallery as the verdict was read out.

The officers who shot Mr Stanley told the inquest earlier that they thought he was raising a gun and was about to shoot when they confronted him. One, PC Kevin Fagan, described how he saw Mr Stanley walking with a cylindrical object in his hand. He said: "It was tightly wrapped in a bag, about 18in long and the majority of it was pointing downwards ... the realisation struck me that I was about to be shot at 15ft with a sawn-off shotgun."

The officer said he shouted for the man to "drop it" by which time he was looking straight at the officer in a "boxer's stance". PC Fagan said Mr Stanley then moved his left hand to grip the object so he carried it with both hands. The officer said he fired just before his colleague Inspector Neil Sharman, hitting him in the hand.

Mr Sharman told the inquest he fired one round when he thought PC Fagan was about to be shot. "Fearing for Kevin Fagan's life, and believing that the contents of that bag was a sawn-off shotgun, and with the actions of the person holding it, I felt he was about to be shot. In response I fired one round," Mr Sharman said.

He told the court he aimed at Mr Stanley's "central body mass" but missed and shot him in the head. The Stanley family's barrister described Mr Sharman's version of events as "concocted".

After the verdict was delivered, the Independent Police Complaints Commission said it had recommended that the coroner invite the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers to commission research in order to try to prevent similar deaths. Coroner Dr Andrew Reid backed the recommendation.

The IPCC commissioner, Deborah Glass, said: "There is a need for further research into whether there are more effective methods for firearms officers in dealing with vulnerable people, such as those impaired by alcohol, as Mr Stanley was.

"Such people are often less likely to react rationally and more likely to react negatively to certain sorts of approaches and challenges." The inquest heard evidence that since Mr Stanley's death, the Met had substantially improved training for control room staff, as well as for firearms officers and tactical advisors. The inquest also heard that "less lethal" options such as tasers, or electrified darts, were now more readily available to Met officers.

Deborah Coles, co-director of deaths in custody campaign group Inquest, which has been working with the Stanley family, said: "This inquest is a vindication of the family's fight for the truth and the only just outcome of this shocking case ... We now expect them to be prosecuted for manslaughter. We have always believed that these officers should face criminal charges."

Mr Stanley's widow Irene, 51, said outside the court that she was pleased with the verdict but now she thought that the officers should be suspended.

She said: "Harry was an unarmed man. It is bad enough the family was devastated when Harry died. We should not have to fight for justice. My grieving has been fighting for justice. I have not had time to grieve."

The Crown Prosecution Service looked at the case in 2001 and concluded there was insufficient evidence to bring criminal charges against the police officers involved in the death. However a CPS spokeswoman confirmed today that it would review the case.

The Metropolitan police said it was "re-considering" suspending the two officers until the outcome of a review by the IPCC.

A force spokesman said: "The Met wishes to again offer its sympathy to the family of Mr Stanley and express our regret for his death ... the death resulted from the most tragic set of circumstances ... it must be remembered that the officers were called upon to make a split-second decision while confronting what they believed to be an imminent threat to their lives. They did not have the benefit of hindsight.

"Along with their colleagues working in police armed response units, they are required to regularly face the most challenging of policing situations in order to make the streets of London safer for us all."

Shot dead by police 30. Officers convicted 0
No charges for policemen who killed man carrying table leg
Robert Verkaik
Friday 21 October 2005 00:00
The killing of Harry Stanley, a painter and decorator from east London, raises concern about whether the criminal justice system is capable of holding police officers to account for shooting dead members of the public. In the past 12 years no police officer has been successfully prosecuted for any of the 30 fatalities caused by police marksmen.
Concern over police officers' accountability for their use of firearms has been heightened by the controversy surrounding the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell Underground station in London on 22 July. The Brazilian was shot dead after marksmen wrongly suspected he was a suicide bomber.
Last night, human rights campaigners accused the Crown Prosecution Service of giving the police immunity in gun death cases, while Mr Stanley's widow said she was "devastated" at the outcome of the inquiry.
The Justice for Harry Stanley campaign said: "The CPS and the Attorney General have illustrated very clearly that the police not only have the right to shoot to kill, but they will be afforded total immunity from prosecution. This is clearly the most serious attack not just on the Stanley family but a warning to all the other families whose loved ones are shot dead, while going about their everyday business."
Lawyers for the family and the group Inquest said they suspected the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, may have influenced the decision not to bring charges against any officers.
Daniel Machover, who represents Mr Stanley's widow, Irene, said he had " genuine concern that Lord Goldsmith's input may have influenced or determined the final decision". He added: "What we know is that there was dialogue between the DPP and the Attorney General and a lot of to-ing and fro-ing before the family and police were told of the decision."
Deborah Coles, a co-director of Inquest, said: "You must ask whether or not there is a political policy at play in these cases and whether there was a political context in which this particular decision was made."
Last night, the Attorney General denied there was any political interference in the decision. A spokesperson for the Attorney General said: "The decision not to prosecute was taken by an experienced Crown Prosecution Service lawyer on the advice of leading counsel and was reviewed and approved by the Director of Public Prosecutions. The Attorney General was consulted and agreed with the CPS decision. It is absolutely wrong and misleading to suggest that there was any political influence. It is standard practice for the DPP to consult the Attorney in high-profile or complex cases."
The death of Mr Stanley, 46, from Hackney, east London, has become one of the most controversial police shootings of modern times. The unarmed father-of-three was shot in the head and hand on a London street in September 1999 while walking home after a table leg he had in a bag was mistaken for a gun.
Chief Inspector Neil Sharman, 42, and PC Kevin Fagan, 38, firearms officers with the Metropolitan Police, were arrested in June this year on suspicion of murder, gross negligence, manslaughter and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, and bailed in connection with the case. The arrests followed new forensic evidence that contradicted the officers' accounts of the shooting and indicated that Mr Stanley was shot while facing away from the marksmen. The two officers told an inquest in 2004 that Mr Stanley had turned around "in a slow, deliberate, fluid motion" and pointed his wrapped-up table leg at PC Fagan, adopting a classic firing posture. This prompted Ch Insp Sharman to open fire, hitting Mr Stanley in the head.
A forensic scientist found that Mr Stanley had been shot in the rear side of his head - which indicated that he was not facing the officers at the point of impact. A bullet hole had also gone through the back of Mr Stanley's jacket, through the shoulder, suggesting he had his back turned on the officers.
Mr Stanley was shot dead after someone telephoned the police and told them they had seen an Irishman with a sawn-off shotgun in a bag. Mr Stanley, who was originally from Lanarkshire, Scotland, was carrying a blue plastic bag with a coffee-table leg inside, which had been repaired by his brother.
The inquest returned a verdict of unlawful killing, which was overturned in the High Court. The CPS, however, decided yesterday that there was " insufficient evidence" to bring any charges against the officers. Two specialists, one hired by the Police Federation, the other by Surrey Police, the investigating force, said the forensic evidence did not prove that the officers were lying.
In a statement issued yesterday the CPS said there was not enough evidence to rebut the officers' accounts that they were acting in self-defence. The CPS did, however, say it was "arguable that the officers' haste and lack of planning led them to breach their duty of care to Mr Stanley and cause his death".
After yesterday's decision not to bring charges, the dead man's widow promised to "keep fighting" for justice for her husband. Irene Stanley, who is consulting lawyers about a possible challenge to the CPS decision in the High Court and the European Court of Human Rights, said: "What happened today was an injustice. I am devastated by it, though I half expected it. I am going to keep fighting but can't say more until I receive legal advice. I am also disgusted that I first heard of the CPS decision at 7.30am because of a leak to a tabloid newspaper."
Ms Coles said public confidence in the criminal justice system would be severely undermined. She said it now appeared that British justice " puts police officers above the law". She added: "At a time when there is a massive increase of the number of armed police on our streets, it is imperative that the public have confidence in their ability to act professionally and safely."

https://archive.is/MTUKC

https://archive.is/2NVsr

https://archive.is/tADc1

This happened before the post-9/11 security state was imposed on us and a good few years after the IRA promised to stop bombing everyone all the time. The legal bullshittery concluded around the same time the metropolitan police shot a brazillian in the head until it disappeared, because he was brown and wearing a puffy coat, which rather put the lie to the idea that they had improved their training in any way. Nobody was ever punished; most of the participants went on to have lucrative careers and to retire with full pensions.

 

[Morethanabitfoolish]

To satisfy the curiosity of @Morethanabitfoolish, a quick history lesson.

You're a star. I'm disappointed not to see Cressida Dick involved somehow (though I see you mentioned her further down with the Met police stuff).
Also how is it STILL the fucking Daily Mail publishing the articles about this stuff almost 20 years on?

Mr Stanley was shot dead after someone telephoned the police and told them they had seen an Irishman with a sawn-off shotgun in a bag.

Scots getting blamed for the shit the Irish do again.

 

[Trig.Point]

The officers in question received no punishment for their acts, other than a brief suspension with full pay, and were later cleared of any wrongdoing.

The whole incident emboldened the met, because they realised that they had the government by the balls. All they had to do was to arrange with the Police federation that officers would threaten to hand in their firearms card. Because British police for some fucking bizarre reason aren't obligated to carry a weapon when neccessary that would have resulted in a massive security crisis.

 

[ロボ﹏§¤r﹏h¶rœ]

Pictured: The PCSO, 58, who refused to help when a mother-of-three was being 'attacked by teenage shoplifter' - as he insists he 'hasn't seen' video of him telling passerby 'he'll have to deal with it'​

Archive

• EXCLUSIVE: PCSO Stewart Metcalfe, 58, didn't want to 'deal with' assault
• READ MORE: Mum 'attacked by shoplifter' as PCSO refused to help slams police

This is the Police Community Support Officer who refused to investigate an alleged assault outside a supermarket as he did not want to 'deal with it'.

PCSO Stewart Metcalfe, 58, was approached by a motorist who had watched a suspected teenage shoplifter 'punch a woman who tried to stop her' outside a Co-op store in West Sussex.

He was sitting in his patrol car less than a minute's walk from the supermarket in Lancing - but despite the pleas from the man he refused to budge telling him: 'I'm not response.'

When asked to just drive round to the shop as a deterrent, PCSO Metcalfe told the man: 'But then I have to deal with it.'

The conversation was recorded last Thursday on the motorist's dash-cam and has since gone viral.

However, speaking at his home in nearby Worthing today, the PCSO told MailOnline: 'I haven't seen the video yet. I'm on a rest day from work.

'I won't say anything, it's probably best not to right now.'

Ironically PCSO Metcalfe joined Sussex Police and Crime Commissioner Katy Bourne and local MP Tim Loughton, for a walkabout around Lancing in January - posing for a photograph outside the same Co-op he refused to attend last Thursday.

The walk was organised following concerns expressed by residents about safety in the area.

Based in Lancing, PCSO Metcalfe is also a Wildlife Crimes Officer working closely with local farmers and small holders.

In 2015 he was rewarded along with two colleagues for saving a man's life on Lancing Beach.

The trio managed to stop the man from killing himself and were hailed at the Sussex Police's West Sussex Divisional Awards, held in Arundel Castle.

On Monday, the mother-of-three who was left to defend herself blasted the force in Sussex.

Rohany, 41, was punched and had a drink thrown at her by a 15-year-old suspected shoplifter outside the Co-op store.

Recalling her ordeal, she told MailOnline: 'I saw a number of teenagers stealing stuff.

'I felt sorry for the security guard, who [was] struggling and getting all sorts of physical and verbal abuse.

'I rang 999 from my mobile and told the girl as she came out of the store that I would film her so the police would know who she is.

'She was drinking a can of Malibu and she threw it at me and then as she got nearer she started punching me in the head.

'I was conscious of the fact that she was just a teenager and I didn't want to hurt her unnecessarily. But I needed to defend myself so I pushed and kicked her away from me.

'Fortunately some other people had seen what was going on and intervened. As I went to pick my bag from the floor, the girl kicked it out of my reach.

'She hung around briefly but later walked off. There is a field at the back of the Co-op where kids go and drink alcohol. That's what I believe she and her friends were up to.'

Rohany said she was left with swelling and bruising to her face and slight cuts to her hand after the assault.

The witness who filmed the Sussex Police PCSO refusing to attend a fight outside a Co-op has claimed the officer 'just couldn't be bothered and was more interested in scrolling through his phone'.

Fury mounted as he told the person who approached him for help 'but then I'll have to deal with it'.

The member of the public - who asked only to be named as Michael - urged the officer sitting in his marked police car to drive to the Co-op store around the corner where it is alleged a teenage shoplifter had assaulted a female shopper.

However, the PCSO refused to budge despite being parked less than a minute away, telling Michael he was not part of a response unit. The shocking conversation was captured on Michael's car dash-cam on Thursday, with the footage going viral.

Speaking exclusively to MailOnline, Michael, a 43-year-old transport manager, today said: 'What kind of message does this send out? The police refusing to police?

'The PCSO couldn't have seemed less interested. He was very dismissive, all I got from him was a "this isn't my job" vibe.

'He told me he wasn't in the response team so couldn't do anything. But all he had to do was drive around the corner to the Co-op where the woman had been assaulted and act as a visible deterrent.

'The kids who were causing the bother wouldn't have stayed around to know whether he was a PCSO or a fully warranted officer. They would've scarpered as soon as they saw the car.

'Failing that, he could have radioed for help and got the response team round. But he didn't do anything. He just sat there and told me it wasn't what he was there for.'

The officer's response is now being reviewed by the force, who have apologised for the 'clumsy language used by the PCSO' as they investigate.

The incident comes as police are increasingly criticised over high numbers of reported crimes that never result in a conviction.

Michael said he had driven to the Co-op near the centre of Lancing at around 6pm on Thursday just as a number of suspected teenage shoplifters were trying to make a getaway.

He said: 'There was one girl, around 15-years-old, who was trying to leave and she had a load of stuff hidden in her shoulder bag.

'The security guard had tried to stop her leaving but she screamed loudly in his face. She was clearly drunk and he was reluctant to challenge her any further because she was so young.

'A few customers took matters into their own hands and one woman got into a bit of a tussle with her.

'The teenage girl looked as though she was drinking a can of Malibu and coke and she threw it all into this woman's face, f-ing and blinding, before punching her.

'At that point, myself and a few others stepped in and split them up. The teenage girl kicked the victim's bag away which had fallen on to the ground and later walked off one way and her friends another. But the woman who'd been hit was really shook up.

'I drove away and about a minute later, I spotted the police car parked by the side of the road and when I slowed down I saw there was an officer in the driver's seat.

'I told him what happened and thought he'd be round like a shot... but I was wrong and was left in complete disbelief that he couldn't be bothered to do anything. It's such a sad state of affairs and doesn't exactly instil you with much confidence.'

A former Scotland Yard detective, Mike Neville, told MailOnline he was 'appalled' when he saw the video, saying every day the public's trust in the police 'ebbs away' and that the footage shows 'police are not on your side'.

Another ex-Scotland Yard detective, Peter Bleksley, has also since hit out at Sussex Police - telling Good Morning Britain the incident was a 'dreadful look' for the force and that an officer wearing a uniform and in a marked car should have dealt with the disturbance 'and actually done what they are paid to do'.

In footage of the incident, a witness is heard telling the officer: 'You need to get around to the Co-op. Honestly, there's just been a fight around there because people are trying to stop the shoplifters that you're doing nothing about.

'There's a member of the public that's just been assaulted by a 15-year-old girl who's drunk, had a drink thrown in her face, got punched.

'People have called the police, we've come round here and you're sitting here.'

But the police officer told him: 'I'm not a response unit unfortunately.'

The member of the public then says: 'I know you're not, but the sight of the car will make them scatter. '

The police officer then replies: 'Yeah but then I'll have to deal with it.'

'Are you afraid to deal with it then?' the man asks the officer, who tells him: 'That's not the point.'

But the member of the public is far from impressed and tells him: 'It kind of is the point, that's the perception.'

The officer then says: 'It's why I'm here and not round there.'

Mr Neville, former Scotland Yard detective, told MailOnline: 'When you join the police you join to help the community. They have got to be able to deal with emergencies.'

'It's no good just sitting there. I was appalled.

'Why was a PCSO driving a marked police car? Whatever they were doing there, if there's an emergency police have got to stop and deal with it.'

He said the public were losing trust in the police, adding: 'Every day the trust ebbs away.

'The average working person feels they are being let down by the police, and this is just one example.

'PCSOs are designed for low level crime and to trawl the streets.

'The presence of a uniform could have defused the situation.

'The video shows again that the police are not on your side.'

Good Morning Britain, who reported on the incident, said it took them 26 seconds to make the journey the police officer would have had to make from where he was parked up to the Co-op.

Sussex Police told MailOnline: 'We are aware of video footage of a single-crewed Police Community Support Officer being approached by a member of the public to report an incident in Lancing.

'The matter was reported to us and a police officer attended the incident as an emergency.

'The PCSO also then attended the scene.

'The investigation into a report of assault and shoplifting is subject of a live investigation, and the victim has been contacted by officers.'

West Sussex local policing Superintendent Nick Dias said: 'Keeping the public safe and feeling safe is paramount and our officers and PCSOs work hard to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour, often in challenging circumstances. We [work] closely with local retailers and partners to help prevent and respond to anti-social behaviour and assaults on shop workers.

'We are sorry for the clumsy language used by the PCSO in this exchange and acknowledge the public's concern.

'A police unit was dispatched to the scene as a matter of priority. Our response to this incident is being reviewed.'

Read more: Just what ARE the police for? ​

More than 200,000 burglaries – almost 600 a day – went unsolved by police last year, shocking figures revealed in April.
Crime statistics published by the Government showed 77 per cent of cases were closed by police in England and Wales with no suspect identified.

It means that 209,424 domestic break-ins, or 574 a day, went unsolved, the analysis of official data by the Liberal Democrats revealed.
Separate Home Office data showed only 5.1 per cent of 'violence against the person' offences led to a suspect being taken to court. For robbery the figure was 6.6 per cent and for thefts 4.3 per cent.

Across all types of crime reported last year, just 5.6 per cent led to a suspect being charged or summonsed – roughly the same as the previous year. A further 4 per cent led to the offender being given a 'slap on the wrist' punishment.

What powers do PCSOs have? ​

• In Sussex, PCSOs have the power to:
• Issue fixed penalty notices for cycling on a footpath
• Issue fixed penalty notices for littering
• Issue fixed penalty notices in respect of offences under dog control orders
• Require name and address
• Require name and address for antisocial behaviour
• Require name and address for road traffic offences
• Require persons drinking in designated places to surrender alcohol
• Require persons aged under 18 to surrender alcohol
• Seize tobacco from a person aged under 16
• Enter and search any premises for the purposes of saving life and limb or preventing serious damage to property
• Seize vehicles used to cause alarm
• Remove abandoned vehicles under regulations made under section 99 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984
• Stop cycles
• Control traffic for purposes other than escorting a load of exceptional dimensions
• Carry out road checks
• Place signs
• Enforce cordoned areas
• Stop and search in authorised areas
• Issue penalty notices in respect of offences of disorder
• Issue fixed penalty notices for truancy
• Issue fixed penalty notices for excluded pupil found in a public place (for up to 30 minutes for the arrival of a police officer)
• Deal with begging
• Enforce certain licensing offences
• Disperse groups and remove persons under 16 to their place of residence
• Remove truants to designated premises
• Search for alcohol and tobacco
• Enter licensed premises (with limitations)
• Stop vehicles for testing
• Direct traffic for the purposes of escorting abnormal loads
• Issue a fixed penalty notice for cycling without lights
• Require a person not to consume alcohol and/or to surrender alcohol where a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) is in place
• Source: Sussex Police. For full conditions click here.

 

[Vesperus]

I have more respect for traffic wardens than PCSOs.
At least the traffic wardens know why I hate them.

 

[Chaos Theorist]

Come on now they have better things to do such as hassle the homeless and other things?

 

[ロボ﹏§¤r﹏h¶rœ]

[Leeds] Autistic Teen Girl Brutally Arrested By Police For “Homophobic” Remark - The supposedly homophobic remark was "I think she's a lesbian."​

 

[teriyakiburns]

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/police-given-pride-dress-code-27435421

https://archive.is/wip/w1ZSG

Police given Pride dress code amid 'concern' over uniforms and rainbow badges under 'anti-woke' chief

Police officers have been told they cannot decorate their uniforms with rainbow badges and patches at this month's Manchester Pride.

The Manchester Evening News has learned that Chief Constable Stephen Watson has told officers that, if they are in uniform and working at the event later this month, they cannot adorn it with any Pride-related emblems. Officers who are off-duty have his permission to wear their uniforms to Pride, it's understood, but not to decorate it with anything.

At the same time, it's understood that Manchester Pride had initially told GMP that it does not want off-duty officers marching in uniform at all at the parade part of the event for the second year running.

It means GMP officers taking part in August 26's parade will have to stick to a dress code which suits both sides.

A source within GMP has claimed that Mr Watson's more 'old-fashioned' approach means he refers to the uniform as 'the King's cloth', and that as such it shouldn't be tampered with.

The news follows a decision made by Manchester Pride last year, in which off-duty Greater Manchester Police officers were asked not to attend the parade in uniform, after organisers warned of ‘increased levels of concern’ about the effect of the presence of cops in police gear at events on some members of the LGBT+ community.

Off-duty officers were instead asked to wear 'civilian clothing' or t-shirts with the Progress Pride flag.

The Manchester Evening News has been told by a police source that the reason for this decision was because feedback from the LGBTQ+ community said some people would feel 'oppressed' and 'threatened'.

Off-duty officers from Greater Manchester Police had marched in the parade in their uniforms in previous years and officers on and off-duty had worn rainbow emblems on uniforms at the event. Pictures taken from Pride in 2019, before Mr Watson became Chief Constable, show officers from Greater Manchester Police taking part in the parade with patches, epaulettes and lanyards in rainbow colours - the rainbow flag being a symbol of LGBT+ pride dating back to the late seventies.

Mr Watson's tenure has marked a culture shift. On taking the job two years ago, Mr Watson gave an interview in which he said he believed the public was 'fed up' with 'virtue-signalling police officers' and believed that the impartiality of officers could be undermined by responses to campaign groups including actions such as taking the knee or wearing rainbow pins, badges or shoelaces.

The interview led to Mr Watson gaining a reputation as the country's 'anti-woke' police chief.

At Pride in 2022, officers on duty were prevented from wearing rainbow epaulettes or laces, as per requests from Chief Constable Stephen Watson.

The previous year, Mr Watson told the Telegraph that police officers' traditional impartiality was being put at risk by 'making common cause' with campaign groups.

“Whether it be through adulterating the uniform with pins and tabs and badges or whatever, and having all manner of florid social media accounts. These are all things which I think leave the public cold, and I just personally don't think they have a place in policing,” he told the newspaper.

The Telegraph also previously reported Mr Watson was against 'police officers putting rainbows on their epaulettes and wearing rainbow shoelaces'.

Meanwhile, it is understood that for 2023, off-duty officers had again been asked by Manchester Pride not to wear their uniforms in the parade. However, after the M.E.N learned of this and approached both sides for comment, it is understood a meeting took place in recent days between GMP and Manchester Pride and that the force has now applied for permission for off-duty officers to take part in the parade in uniform. It's not yet known if they will be granted permission.

GMP's Deputy Chief Constable Terry Woods said: “GMP is honoured to serve and be represented by members of all communities within Greater Manchester, including the LGBTQ+ community. Members of the force LGBTQ+ Network, understandably, want to attend the parade so have made an application to Manchester Pride, which is currently under consideration by the board.

“GMP fully supports officers attending the parade in their uniforms but, as part of the focus on improving standards in GMP over the last two years, officers have been asked not to customise their uniform in any way so that it remains consistent across all members of the force and is appropriate during the response to any incident or emergency.”

A spokesperson for Manchester Pride said: “We have a longstanding relationship with Greater Manchester Police. As a partner of Manchester Pride Festival and the broader charity, we are in regular communication. We have received an application from GMP to take part in this year’s parade which is being considered through our normal process. We are proud of the relationship we have nurtured with GMP and will continue to work with them in the future to support our community.”

 

[Vesperus]

Ten years too fucking late but I'll take it.

 

[Muppetstudios]

Look at how polite and gentle they are arresting a baby killer, I fucking hate them

 

[ロボ﹏§¤r﹏h¶rœ]

Former police officer charged with more child sex offences - Lewis Edwards, 23, faces 54 additional charges on top of the 106 he already faces

 

[ロボ﹏§¤r﹏h¶rœ]

• Rapist police officer had 'fascination bordering on the obsessive' with young women, court hears​

• Social Media User Warned By Police After Expressing Concerns About Man Who Dresses Like A Baby, Speaks To Children In Schools​

 

[ロボ﹏§¤r﹏h¶rœ]

UK: Senior Woman Interrogated by Police After Taking Photograph Of Sticker Critical Of Gender Ideology
Archive

A senior woman in the United Kingdom was visited by police after being caught taking a photograph of a sticker critical of gender ideology. Eve, whose identity is being protected at her request, was questioned at her home for over 30 minutes by officers of the West Yorkshire Police.

Speaking to Reduxx, Eve explained that the ordeal began in March after she spotted a sticker she thought was interesting while on a walk. The small sticker, which read “Keep Males Out Of Women-Only Spaces” had been placed on top of a large trans pride poster outside of Happy Valley Pride, a Hebden Bridge pride organization. Finding it interesting, Eve says she snapped a photo before continuing on her walk.

Four weeks later, on April 30, Eve says West Yorkshire Police showed up at her home to question her on the photo she had taken.

Eve, who is in her 70s, explained to Reduxx that she was home with her partner when the two male police officers knocked at the door.

Upon seeing the officers, Eve says she had at first thought they could have been bringing news of a death in the family and became distressed.

“I could only think they must be bringing dreadful and tragic news about a family member. I could not think why else they would come. I was extremely shocked and upset,” she said.

But Eve explained that after she opened the door to them, their opening remark was: “We have received a complaint so we have a duty to investigate it.”

After inviting the officers into her home, Eve says they “gave a sermon” and explained that her personal information “had been given to them by Happy Valley Pride.”

The police commented that they had no previous information on Eve in their systems which made it difficult for them to trace her. They told her they were investigating the complaint on behalf of Happy Valley Pride because of “the sensitivity … for members of the LGBT community.”

While still expressing confusion as to how Happy Valley Pride ascertained her identity, Eve speculates that the organization obtained CCTV footage of her from Town Hall. She further says that Happy Valley Pride may have “stalked” her Facebook page where she sometimes expresses pro-woman views.

“Of course, this has been denied,” Eve said. “So there has been no explanation of who gave my full name, address, and post code to the police.”

Police questioned Eve for 30 minutes, apparently attempting to determine if she had been the individual responsible for placing the pro-woman sticker on the trans pride poster.

After the interrogation, the police advised Eve that “no crime had taken place.” But, through a Freedom of Information Request she later submitted, Eve says that the investigation into her was catalogued as a “non-crime hate incident” by West Yorkshire Police. According to the force’s website, a non-crime hate incident is defined as “any non-crime incident which is perceived by the victim or any other person to be motivated by hostility or prejudice.”

Speaking to Reduxx, Eve questioned how police decided to proceed in “investigating” her for “taking a photograph of an inanimate object on the pavement outside a building,” and said she submitted a complaint to police following the ordeal.

“No crime or potential was committed, even with a suspicion of a sticker being put on a poster. At most this should have been dealt with as a council matter,” Eve wrote.

“Due to clear investigations having been launched despite no evidence of crime, it is clear a crime was recorded on police systems and resources dedicated to requesting CCTV and supervisory decision making in sending out a resource by way of a doorstep police visit. Who is responsible for the decision making on this case and what is their recorded rationale for pursuing the matter as a police issue?”

She concluded that the police pursued “a politicized matter on behalf of the complainant” and expressed that their response was “overreach” and is part of a larger pattern of treatment towards those who hold views critical of gender ideology.

“I see this as police intimidation to censor my thoughts and to try and gag any voice of dissent,” Eve said, noting that most burglaries in her area do not result in an in-person police visit.

In addition to her complaint, Eve also made a Freedom of Information request to the police who sent her their police entry log in response and shared both her request and the police response with Reduxx.

In the response, an officer confirmed the visit to Eve’s residence, and wrote: “She denied placing the sticker there and stated she was merely taking a photo of it. Words of advice were given regards the harassment and alarm that this sticker could potentially cause the community.”

Reduxx reached out to West Yorkshire Police but did not receive a response.

This is not the first time West Yorkshire Police have been accused of having misplaced, politicized motivations.

On August 7, a 16-year-old autistic girl in Leeds was brutally arrested by West Yorkshire Police after one of the officers accused her of making a “homophobic” remark. The incident occurred after police had been called to provide a safe escort home for the vulnerable girl.

The mother of the child, who was interviewed by Reduxx, said her daughter had made a would-be innocent remark about one of the female officers who had assisted in bringing her home.

“She said ‘I think she’s a lesbian like nanna Julie,’” the mother recounted, noting that the female officer had short blonde hair. Police then “launched” themselves into her home and tried grabbing the 16-year-old girl, who ran into a cupboard under the stairs and began crying and self-harming in stress.

In shocking footage recorded by the girl’s mother, the officer is heard saying that she “doesn’t care” that the girl has autism, and that additional units were being called to have her arrested.

The child was ultimately arrested and spent 20 hours in custody.

After international backlash, West Yorkshire Police announced that “no further action” would be taken against the girl, and that the Professional Standards Directorate was “continuing to carry out a review of the circumstances after receiving a complaint in relation to the incident.”

 

[ロボ﹏§¤r﹏h¶rœ]

Reposting for wider exposure:

When police end up having their training outsourced by political organizations that are overrun with at best, indoctrinated simpletons, but more likely, a huge web of perverts. If you tally up all the little 'lol, UK is pozzed' stories we cover here, the only reasonable conclusion that you can come up with is that the UK police are wholly within the thrall of Big Troon and it's no accident.

As has been brought up before, Surrey Police Commissioner Lisa Townsend has actually been pushing back quite a bit on trans talking points, and has taken hits for it.

Archive

But she can't change the fact that the rot is institution-wide - to the point that even other trannies who oppose this nonsense get exactly the same treatment.

This 2019 Medium article (Archive) which mentions Farrow and Mumsnet by name amongst other little incidents covered by the Farms lays out pretty well the connection and scale of the madness. Keep in mind as you read these that some of these diversity 'training initiatives' have been going on since around the mid-2000s - I remember reading about them back when I was a bit of an anglophile. I would bet that even if this 'Stephanie' Hayden creature didn't have a contact or friend somewhere high up, he'd absolutely find a degree of sympathetic minds there, as have a number of these troons who have had 'communication problems' with private citizens. Some choice quotes, emphasis mine;

Ex-police officer Harry Miller was told his retweet of a lyric by feminist Ali Bee constituted a ‘hate incident’ against transgender people. The Telegraph reported: ‘PC Mansoor Gul told Mr Miller: “I’ve been on a course and what you need to understand is that you can have a foetus with a female brain that grows male body parts and that’s what a transgender person is.”’

Quite a statement, and one that leads us to wonder about the training that PC Gul received on that course. It might be unfair to single out PC Gul as a confused individual officer given that in their diversity monitoring form Humberside Police give the following definition of ‘Gender Identity’: ‘For monitoring purposes the term Transgender is used to include: Hermaphrodite/Intersex, Transgenderist, Transsexual, Transvestite’. There is no such thing as a human hermaphrodite, and ‘intersex’ refers to a medical condition, not an identity. Intersex advocates are unimpressed.

For the record, the Intersex advocates in that archived link are disagreeing with the trans label, affirming that it is a medical condition and not a gender identity.

...Kent Police work with a group called TG Pals, whose members include former boxing promoter Kellie Maloney (another person who calls women ‘terfs’). Maloney has personally delivered training while being a self-confessed domestic violence perpetrator. The following extract is from an interview in the Mirror: ‘the red mist descends. He [Kellie Maloney] snaps and lunges at her [Tracey Maloney, Kellie Maloney’s ex-wife], closing his hands around her neck. He sees fear flood her face. Then their two young daughters burst into the room screaming…’

Kellie Maloney is no stranger to the sensation of having one's face flooded, as can be seen in his infamous debut on the Tranny Megathread after his FFS;

What is it you guys say? Like pottery.

The TG Pals’ support group meetings are called ‘Drab Or Dress’ and TGPals list the meetings on Tvchix, a ‘Tgirl contacts and dating’ site which welcomes ‘ all TV’s, CD’s, TG’s, admirers, their partners and friends’. ‘CD’ is short for ‘cross dresser’, ‘TV’ for ‘transvestite’ and ‘TG’ for ‘transgender’ — ‘dressing’ is a term used by men who crossdress. TGPals are clearly connected to the seedy crossdressing subculture. Of course, crossdressing comes under Stonewall’s capacious ‘trans umbrella’, and ‘transvestite’ under ‘Gender Identity’ for Humberside Police. A sample profile on Tvchix is of ‘a gurl who is a bitch’ whose listed interests include BDSM, kilts, admirers and erotic nights in. Under the ‘Youth Engagement’ heading, their website says: ‘We offer support to young people who can access our peer support groups, the ‘Drab or Dress’. There is no mention of age requirement or need for parental consent or attendance.

Small print, eh?

In February 2019, Basildon Crown Court in Essex heard the case of Regina vs Miranda Yardley. Yardley is a transsexual male who is critical of transgender ideology and lobbying. Helen Islan of transgender lobby group Mermaids (Mermaids focus on ‘transgender children’) had reported Yardley to the police for harassment — Essex Police interviewed Yardley at length in April 2018 and then sent a file to the CPS.

‘Mr Yardley said: “The first I knew of my case was in April last year when two police officers turned up at my door and told me that I had to come in for an interview under caution. I was extremely shocked… I knew the allegation was nonsense but I was concerned because clearly the police were taking it seriously… If this had been successful it could have set a dangerous precedent that could have criminalized the legitimate expression of lawfully held views.”’

I think ye gonna be lucky!

[Megan] Key misrepresents the Equality Act 2010 by saying that a trans-identifying colleague must be granted instant access to the facilities of their choice, and that staff who express concern should be subject to a disciplinary process. Women and their rights at work don’t get a mention from Key, another trans equality advocate who refers to women as ‘terfs’.

Merseyside Police and ACC Cooke have a close relationship with Mermaids, going so far as to host their Christmas children’s party. Helen Islan, Miranda Yardley’s accuser, is Mermaids’ marketing officer. CEO of Mermaids Susie Green has reported critics of transgender ideology Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull and Caroline Farrow to the police for their online comments. These included describing the ‘sex-reassignment surgery’ performed on Green’s child Jackie as castration. Green took Jackie to Thailand for this surgery on Jackie’s 16th birthday (this surgery has subsequently been banned in Thailand for under-18s).

This is presumably the point where Farrow first got on the National Tranny Shitlist Decoder Ring.

Susie Green was a speaker at the Accenture panel event mentioned above, from which City of London Police took such swift action to remove Dr Julia Long. Also on the panel was Gina Denham.

A frequent reoccurring figure is Gina Denham (Farms thread with (possibly outdated) dox and extensive links), a retired celebrity police officer turned activist, the founder of Transpire, who looks like this;

And has been doing this;

Transpire recently forced a school to change its policies in service of this ideology. Under the guise of ‘inclusion’ and ‘integration’ Gina Denham led an aggressive campaign to force a school in Rochford to remove sex-based rights and protections for its female students.

The trans pupil in question has been known by the Transpire group for two years so has presumably been thoroughly conditioned into the belief that he is literally female. As with Lily Madigan at his school in Kent, this one pupil has been afforded the power to change policy affecting all other pupils at the school with the help of a powerful transgender lobby.

King Edmund School is praised for showing “flexibility and openness to change” whereas in fact they were coerced by a campaign designed to intimidate and shame them for their ‘abusive’ policy of ‘discrimination’ and ‘segregation’, clearly risking damage to the school’s reputation. One tweeter even likened it to ‘apartheid.’

Although the final tweet proclaims ‘Everyone wins!’ Denham freely admits in this BBC report that the victory is only for the transgender student and everyone else’s needs and rights are unimportant: "It’s about giving people the opportunity to use the toilet they are comfortable with, not what the school is comfortable with.”

The schools presentation shown at the start of this post is part of Denham’s Transitioning for Beginners project which sells to children the idea that ‘changing your gender’ can be “fun but daunting!”

Archive

It's not really a surprise now, is it? It's not a conspiracy or a slow-moving coup, it's a conveyor belt parade where everybody's bending over and flashing their winking arseholes at you.

If anybody at Reduxx happens to read the Farms, I'd say forget the Surrey police - check out this incestuous and connected network of sketchy characters and lobbyists running around the UK teaching the next generation of the Constabulary that the wellbeing of their public charges mean dick-all compared to the idle whims of pedophiles and fake women.

 

[East_Clintwood]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66636347

Police must investigate every theft and follow all reasonable leads to catch offenders, the home secretary has said.
Suella Braverman said it was "completely unacceptable" that criminals are often "effectively free to break certain laws".
She wants officers to use evidence from smart doorbells and dashcams to solve more lower-level crimes.
But the Police Federation of England and Wales said forces are already "stretched beyond human limits".
There are also concerns the approach may take resources away from high-harm crimes such as rape and sexual assault.
And Labour branded it a "staggering admission of 13 years of Tory failure on policing and crime".
Data shows that, in the year to March, just 4.4% of all theft offences resulted in someone being charged.
New guidance on investigating such crimes is to be issued to all forces in England and Wales.
It follows talks between the Home Office, the National Police Chiefs' Council - which is made up of senior officers from around the country - and the College of Policing, the professional body for policing staff.
Ms Braverman told BBC Breakfast: "There is no such crime as minor crime - whether it's phone theft, car theft, watch theft, whether it's street-level drug-dealing or drug use, the police must now follow every reasonable line of inquiry."
That means police must to follow up on evidence such as CCTV, doorbell videos or GPS tracking of phone location where there is a chance that a suspect may be identified, she said.
She said she had come across "far too many complaints" from people who had things stolen and "calling up the police only to be given a crime reference number for insurance purposes".
Home Office figures show that, of all theft cases closed in the year to March 2023, the proportion closed because no suspect had been identified was 73.7%, the highest rate for any category of crime.
In the same year, only 3.9% of residential burglaries resulted in someone being charged. The equivalent figure for vehicle theft was 1.8%, while for thefts from the person it was just 0.9%.

I'm sure they'll get right on that...

 

[Otterly]

I'm sure they'll get right on that...

I hope Suella has good blood pressure medication because she’s fighting against an establishment in Whitehall who are also fully indoctrinated just like the police
Colleague at work on Friday in tears because her sister is going through a terrible divorce, he’s turned up multiple times threatening to kill her, armed as well… neighbours witnessed it and called police, police said until he actually hurts her they can’t even warn him. This is the first time she’s ever called the police and she’s really upset that they won’t help.
If he’d misgendered someone maybe they’d take it more seriously.

 

[6MillionCoofs]

If he’d misgendered someone maybe they’d take it more seriously.

She should have honestly said he did. It may be dirty and wrong but if it gets the police to act do everything you can.

 

[East_Clintwood]

police said until he actually hurts her they can’t even warn him. This is the first time she’s ever called the police and she’s really upset that they won’t help.

Shit like this is why I hate modern police officers with a passion. Leaving aside the fact that, as you alluded to, they regularly warn people for shit that actually isn't a crime, what this guy is doing absolutely is. In fact I can think of literally 4 different potential charges off the top of my head, just based off the barebones description you gave. If I, a random internet shitposter, know that, why don't the mongs who are ostensibly in charge of actually fucking enforcing the laws, know it?

 

[Otterly]

they regularly warn people for shit that actually isn't a crime, what this guy is doing absolutely is.

I know. Turned up drunk and ranting with one of those stupid big Bowie knives. Police won’t even give him a stern talking to. He has to actually harm her.
So she’s waiting for him to harm her.
There was a case where a guy was attacking his neighbours door with a sword just upthread, they did bugger all there too. I thought even carrying one of those things was an offence these days but it seems like it is or it isn’t depending on who you are

 

[teriyakiburns]

I know. Turned up drunk and ranting with one of those stupid big Bowie knives. Police won’t even give him a stern talking to. He has to actually harm her.
So she’s waiting for him to harm her.

That's just fucking bullshit. They've got him bang to rights on making threats to kill(with intent) and public disorder, which should net him 10 years. Lucky for him, he's not an autistic little girl, or they'd have him banged up before you can say "due process".