Tuesday, March 25, 2014

Honesty doesnt pay

Met officer James Patrick has called time.

His case and the background is far more eloquently stated and the point made out in the article from the Thinblueline below


Saturday, March 08, 2014

Another day, another Police story....

OK, lets suspend belief for a minute and take the Daily Bile article below as a balanced piece of headline journalism....

Yeah....your right,  couldn't count to 10 seconds with that idea in my head.

It has a basic underlying strap line

'Another example of the insidious antics of the racist corrupt thugs in uniform fouling the annals of history with impunity'

Yeah, on reflection, that's probably at bit bland for the Bile.

They have managed to squeeze a relatively obscure review by a QC ( Mark Ellison) into the activities of the SDS ( Special Demonstration Squad) into an 'expose' of extended surveillance of the Lawrence family as they sought to establish what had occurred and how it was dealt with

There is a  reference to an undercover officer N81

The lurid account of ex SDS officer Peter  Francis was reviewed and no substance found to it.

However Officer N81 it is suggested, was tasked to monitor the fringes of those associating or attempting to associate with the family during those times and report back.

With respect... not exactly peering over the shoulders of the grieving inner family circle as they come to terms with what happened.

We have a suggestion of  ONE potential corrupt cop.
We have a suggestion SOME files have been shredded and the spin being it was due to a need to cover up.

In terms of the SDS.... another pair of  hindsight goggles re POTENTIAL issues of disclosure.

Basically a reluctance to 'disclose' the information came from undercover officers and the need NOT to divulge the full extent of their work in whatever group they had infiltrated.

Yes, they are 'undercover ' and would not want their 'identities' revealed.

Why would you put yourself on offer as a undercover officer?

To then find yourself ' suited and booted' for a trial (potentially years down the line).....in the box facing those you had infiltrated with NO protection from those who put you there in the first place?

Does that make sense? ..sure does to me.

This does not necessarily make their evidence less reliable  although the slant is that it does.

The MET covers the largest and most diverse population in the UK . Its catchment area covers the range of sensitive sites and covers HP and all linked areas of government both overt and covert.

A demo isn't really a demo unless your waving a placard in Central London.

OK Ms May...launch another enquiry....play the game and work the media.

You and the like minded of those in power will reach a tipping point to those putting themselves on offer to keep this City safe and wider afield in the UK.

They will... and are.. saying 'enough is enough'

Why put yourself out there?

Undercover work, firearms, public order .... anything to do with domestic violence or  children....

I could go on...

The politicians...the media....the rent a quote 'experts' who are  happy to sit and offer judgement, often years after an event,smug and all knowing... looking at a safe distance into the ring where life's reality plays out...

The blood pressure monitor is now glowing red... so I'll close this post now....


Thursday, March 06, 2014

Red dot ....means do as your told

Interesting article by the METRO.

The one thing it lacks is detail.

Why did my colleagues who carry decide to pull the trigger ?

I doubt it was a 'drive by' as they saw them walking home from choir practice.

What is a youngster?

Depends on the Act of Parliament you look at ....

I seriously doubt my colleagues who carry thought of the age when the red dot was pointed  but rather the situation that they found themselves in.

Another police 'oppress the Metropolis' youth story with no substance