Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 02/03/17 in all areas

  1. 2 likes
    Indeed, however high the amount goes it will never compensate. But if I were him it would have made me happy to know that my family was going to be able to pay for my funeral and have some financial security for years to come. HMS
  2. 2 likes
  3. 2 likes
    Zulu' To be frank, I think references are worthless unless they are properly examined - in the case of candidates for entry to any Police position (warranted or not), all referees should be visited and examined on their assessment of the individual (I wouldn't do this until the final stage when someone is seriously being considered for appointment). This used to happen - I know for certain that when I joined the Met Specials my three referees were personally interviewed by the then Manchester City Police. One was my former school headmaster who said I was unlikely to stick at it as my attention was quickly diverted - I saw this and the other referees' comments just after I received the first bar to my LS&GC medal (our Regular Liaison Inspector had a sense of the ironic in showing me the headmaster's comments). To get back to the references issue - no-one gives a person as a referee unless they think they will give a good reference. I have done maybe 20+ referee visits and only once did someone suggest that the subject individual might be unsuitable. A lot of background checking these days is done on-line - social-media is a potential mine of information about attitudes, opinions, acquaintances etc but you cannot beat a face-to-face interview with someone who knows the candidate! One way or another, these individuals were either very lucky or "love" made them irrational .............. I'm a cynic - so I think the seeds of dishonesty and poor character were there all the time - they just weren't identified for whatever reason!
  4. 2 likes
    We all know how they got through the selection process. Maturity, capability and a track record of ethical behaviour are no longer requirements. I don't say this with any cynicism- these qualities have been deprioritised. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  5. 2 likes
    From the information that is now coming to light - no assessment made of his mental health, suppressed evidence of the environment and the situation in his particular duty location, barring a senior RM officer who was critical of the local command and supervision, and a trial by his "peers" who were not actually anything like his peers - three of the panel being HQ RN officers not operational RM officers - suggests to me that justice could not have been at the forefront of the mind of the Military Prosecuting Authority. Perhaps they do training attachments with the CPS. It is difficult to defend someone who is intent on murder but all the circumstances suggest that any other service person might have done the same in those circumstances when they were under extreme pressure and had been badly let-down by their superiors - having seen pictures of the checkpoint that C/Sgt Blackman commanded, it was almost undefendable - low walls, no cover except sweltering hot metal containers, no toilet facilities and no defences again mortars, RPGs, not grenades / IEDs. I am with Frederick Forsyth when he suggests that someone needs to investigate not just the court process but also the chain-of-command. I was amused to see the PM say that the MoD have been supporting the Blackmans throughout the trial and appeal - what an absolute load of b#ll#cks. I rarely use this sort of profanity but this case is definitely an exception where only such a word can describe what was said! :-(
  6. 2 likes
    It is nothing less than a huge farce and what does it say about the hierarchy of the GMP. They look after their own why they will happily crucify junior officers for, compared to ACC Sutcliffe's offence, are minor issues.
  7. 2 likes
    The two years , I understand, refers to being in the area where you worked. I made such an application and received a reply which stated quote " Decisions on selection for interview are based on the need for each bench to be balanced in terms of age, gender, occupation and residence within an area. I regret to inform you that you are not among those selected for interview. The only item going against me would have been the occupation. Perhaps they failed to appreciate that checking many files, if the evidence was not sufficient then I would mark the file as "No Further Action" irrespective of the defendant. Perhaps it was that I was a White heterosexual Married man, father of three with experience of the Justice System. Now if they wanted a balance across the population they would not have had many Police Officers applying and I know of No Ex Police Officer sitting as a Magistrate anywhere in the Cheshire Lieutenancy. I was informed by an already appointed J.P. that it helps to have a serving J.P. sponsor you, which he and three other would have done. I am wondering if that is an old boys network. You can always apply and see if the mood has changed in the Lieutenancy area where you are.
  8. 2 likes
    I don't think that anyone can answer that. I am thankful that the many harrowing things I experienced have had no great effect on me - or rather I don't believe they had. I don't know why that is though. You I had colleagues not so fortunate who went wibble sometimes many years later. Not trying to worry you, just saying some are fortunate while others are not. You should have some sort of assistance through your occupational health department and if you are thinking about this in a day or two I strongly recommend making contact with them. The worst thing you can do is take the macho 'I'm a cop, it's what I'm paid to deal with.' attitude. A former colleague of mine, ex Royal Marine, loud, brash, dealt with anything and laughed it off type went missing about six months after he retired. Turned out he wasn't as capable of dealing with all that stuff as everyone thought. Happy ending but he came back to some psychological treatment to see him through that maybe he should have had years before. Good luck.
  9. 2 likes
    Your opinions and you are welcome to them. I must say though the polcomforum is not just for PCSO's or Specials, regular officers who have got ALOT of experience are some of our most regular contributors,just because they don't agree with you does not mean they "know nothing" As for this forum, yes it is quiet, it has been very quiet for a number of years now, however hopefully in due course it will pick up. What might be more constructive than insulting members from a different forum is to give your ideas on how this forum could be improved?
  10. 1 like
    A Muslim-born restaurateur has told how he fed hundreds of emergency service workers for free in the aftermath of Wednesday's terror attack. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/restaurant-owner-fed-police-emergency-workers-free-troia-ibrahim-dogus-a7650031.html Amazing. Fed 300-500 emergency services workers - offered them a place to warm up and get drinks & food for free.
  11. 1 like
    Well, I retired from the Met a year ago. Last five in Specialist Ops including the Olympics when Cressida was ACSO. In my opinion (and everyone else I worked with) she was an unflappable, outstanding leader and we had every faith in her. There was genuine sadness when she left for the Foreign Office.
  12. 1 like
    Totally agree with regard to references. Few people provide the name of someone as a referee without having first consulted them and ascertained that they will provide comments of a favourable nature. I have only heard of one instance of a referee failing to support the candidate. In my old force we always did unannounced home visits on candidates but I am informed this is no longer the case. There is little doubt in my mind that this aspect of enquiring into the background of candidates had deteriorated.
  13. 1 like
    An attack of this type was almost inevitable and, sadly, I suspect we shall see more. The lone wolf type of terrorist is probably the most difficult to deter. I am sure all our thoughts are with those who perished or were affected in any way by this incident and particularly the family of the deceased officer.
  14. 1 like
    To be fair I think it was two NARPO meetings.
  15. 1 like
    The decision would have been a good one if the information that she had been provided was true. She did not have command during that part of the surveillance phase and did what she had to do to protect the wider public. Yes it was terrible DeMenezes died, but when you pull that whole thing apart Cressida Dick was not to blame. She had the gumption to make a tough call and telling them to stop the target by any means necessary was what needed to be done in light of what they thought was unfolding. It was a horrific mistake but the mistake made was not hers.
  16. 1 like
    But I am sure you would still be a "key witness"- not least because you continue to be in the policing environment?
  17. 1 like
    RM I'm sure you had the makings of a reasonable man when you were 18 and this was noted! If you know what you are looking for, you can see the seeds of maturity in an 18 year-old and make a judgement based on a range of information gained during a selection process. My worry today is that many interviewers are not hard-nosed - they are too afraid of "upsetting" candidates. But that'sjust a view based on seeing some folk in action and trying to teach effective interviewing skills.
  18. 1 like
    When I read this I was amazed at the ridiculously light sentence they both received. Apart from the multiple offences they both committed, their victim lost his job and his driving licence for two months - and I dare say, he has had to suffer a lot of trauma in just dealing with what these two characters have put him through. So, to me, a custodial sentence more akin to a minimum of 5 years would have been appropriate with an associated order to pay compensation to the victim. On the wider issue, how the hell did these two get through the selection process; they do not appear to have any countervailing qualifications or attributes ffor the job; so presumably they must have reached some reasonable standard - or did they?
  19. 1 like
    Due to on going issues I've looked into going part time before leaving on a full 30 in two and a half years. It's worth conasidering if things get that bad. I found 2.5 years of part time would mean i commute 10k less and lose 1k yearly pension.
  20. 1 like
    They are never available when you need one, just like dogs………………..they have made a complete mess of it.
  21. 1 like
    Pros - cost and speed (getting on station quicker and being able to cover a wider area faster), use less aeroplanes to cover a wider area in comparison to a helicopter. Cons - speed (can't hover as Zulu pointed out),can't land on a six pence, can't mount or use searchlights like a helicopter(?)
  22. 1 like
    It may be hearsay but if it is then why are those serving officers (who are the root of the hearsay) telling lies?
  23. 1 like
    You allege this cannot happen any more but I know many officers who not only tell me that they deliberately fail to record crimes but are encouraged in this practice by their supervisors who, I understand, are under pressure from senior management to make it appear that there is less reported crime. If what you say is correct, a lot of my friends are telling lies.
  24. 1 like
    Hope the officer wasn't driving whilst taking his selfie and messaging !! He'll probably get a bollocking for misuse of his Police vehicle as a taxi, but it shows some good initiative and neighbourhood spirit.
  25. 1 like
    It's interesting that people who have been retired for some time are all quite sure that it still goes on (hearsay) and yet the people who are serving and actually going to the calls and putting on the reports are all quite sure that it doesn't happen. I wonder who to believe??
  26. 1 like
    It's pensionable service, not actual.
  27. 1 like
    It is a disgrace that the front line of your force was so depleted that the stabbings you refer to did not receive the attention they deserved. Did anyone inform the local/national press of this failing ? Has is become widely known in the area? I believe it is only when sufficient public anger and fear has been aroused that such matters will be properly addressed. The Federation should be feeding such stories as this to the Press as often as possible.
  28. 1 like
    Little wonder that regard for the police is much diminished in many places. I hear so many stories along these lines. Several people have told me that when police officers arrived at their homes/places of business in response to complaints of various types the police officers told them almost immediately that there was nothing they could do or tried to talk them out of making a formal complaint, the latter being along the lines of, ``There are no witnesses'' or ``We don't have much chance of catching anyone'' etc. etc. A couple of years ago I was in a neighbour's house when 2 police officers arrived in response to his complaint about theft of garden ornaments/furniture. The officers, from the very start, began to talk the neighbour out of complaining and although I thought their powers of persuasion were lacking they succeeded in their aim. Many complainers who receive this treatment conclude that the officers in question are simply lazy or incompetant and, although they may be correct in some instances, the real reason is that the Police Service appears to have lost its sense of priorities and forgotten that it is primarily a law enforcement organisation and not a social work department. Only 2 weeks ago I heard an experienced officer boast of his skill in talking people out of complaining and he said he always tried not record a crime that he did not think he could detect. This is all part of the same strategy about making it appear as if there is less crime than there really exists and that has surely had the effect of assisting HMG in reducing police establishments etc.
  29. 1 like
  30. 1 like
    I agree, the buck stops with the Senior Command. The Federation pointed out to Mrs May at Conference that you cannot do more with less and she derided them for saying so. I did not notice the Chief Constable's standing up and publicly agreeing with the Federation or supporting them in any way. The person in the firing line is the front line officer and you can understand when he(she) decides to short circuit the system by doing nothing. The main problem is that the public do not realise just what a mess Government and Senior Command are making. You cannot take criticism away from the MHIC's either as they should be screaming the faults in funding from the rooftops.
  31. 1 like
    Hi Very straightforward. As it stands now with 23 years in the 87 scheme, if you left tomorrow then your pension would be deferred until 60. If you stayed on for two more years to get 25 years pensionable service then you can take it at 50. You are tapered until 2019 so neither option would involve the CARE 2015 scheme so you are solely in the 87 scheme. Far be it from me to give advice, but if you can stomach the job for two more years then that gives you 10 extra years pension, potentially at least an extra £190k. (10 years of a PC's 25 year pension is about £19k per year). So you would be throwing away £19k per year from the age of 50 if you left now.
  32. 1 like
    This is nothing new. My force wont investigate shopliftings unless the victim produces the evidence, such as CCTV and statements. They have to attend the station and produce the evidence, this also includes local, small shops, who cant afford the loss. the service they are getting is pathetic and shameful.
  33. 1 like
    I wonder if Steve White noticed that very few departments other than the NHS, education and DFID got mentioned so the police weren't a special case. If I was him I wouldn't be too worried about this budget but I'd be lobbying the government now to head off the next round of cuts as HMG is talking about 3-6% budget cuts across all departments which presumably will be announced in the Autumn statement. We got off lightly 1 1/2 years ago due to the Paris attacks but the government has a short memory and probably thinks that we can sustain more cuts and as we know the largest departments such as health are reasonably well protected from cuts, whereas and despite the governments fine rhetoric, I don't think we are.
  34. 1 like
    Most of the DT story is almost word for word the same as the one carried by the Daily Fail so I wonder if it came from an agency and was just reprinted without any effort. I've heard that newspapers have had to cut back on the number of journalists they employ to cut costs so I wonder if they see the irony of reporting that the the police have had to reduce service in some areas due to budget cuts when newspapers have had to do the same. My force has toyed with doing the same thing and IIRC didn't Devon and Cornwall propose that they would stop dealing with petrol station bilkings last year? One positive side effect of this sort of policy is that larger shops at least might start trying to deter shoplifters rather than watching them come in and walk out with their stash before reporting it to the police. I also heard a story on Five Live today about a journalist for Vice who had researched shoplifting and concluded that shoppies like to steal meat as 'everyone eats it,' it is expensive and easy to sell. He made his discovery sound as if it was some sort of ground breaking discovery rather than something any probationer learns in their first week.
  35. 1 like
    Judging by the number of young people applying to join the Police Service it would appear that there are many out there who would willingly work for the current salary and conditions offered to potential police officers and it would also appear many of those currently serving are willing to continue in the Service despite the ravages imposed on police pay, pensions and conditions of service over the past few years, not to speak of the reductions in manpower. Furthermore, they demonstrate on a daily basis that despite what has been done to them they are still willing to go the extra mile and stick their necks out to make sure the system continues to work and the public receives the best service possible under the circumstances currently prevailing. Given all the foregoing is it any wonder HMG continues to operate on a `policing on the cheap' basis? After all, we all like a bargain. If the public were in any way interested in the plight of the Police Service and those who work in it they would make an issue of the matter. but they don't because most MOPs seldom think about the police until they find themselves a victim of some crime or misfortune.
  36. 1 like
    Most do. Sure there are the few 'Loadsa Money's picking up more, same as the story a few years ago of constables and Sgts earning upwards of £80k. My son is a works supervisor for road maintenance firm, directly supervises 22 staff and is responsible for their health and safety. Takes home less than £80 a day, closer to £70.
  37. 1 like
    Protected means different things to different people. To the government its a nice headline figure to show how generous they have been and how much they love the police but that doesn't take into account the reality that inflation has eaten into the protection, that some of the funding increase comes from council tax precept increases which have different effects depending on which part of the country you live in, and that some of the protected funds have been top sliced to go into HMG's pet police projects and have therefore been diverted by them away from the front line.
  38. 1 like
    I appreciate those comments. Not all Specials are like that, I have known and tutored many who had the right attitude. They valued experienced assistance, we're attentive and not arrogant. It seems that arrogance and a know all attitude prevail in such numbers. When we stopped recruiting we advised applicants to join the Met, do the 2 years and transfer. I was surprised how many transfered back and had very little good to say about the Met.They were also surprised how much we did. Listen and learn but also follow your instincts, and good luck.
  39. 1 like
    As a "hobby bobby" in the met I can assure you, we're really not all like that - but if I'm being fair and unbias... a lot of us are! Is it the wrong attitude to have? Absolutely. Will it change? Probably not... All I can do is be my best, listen to the advice of my regular colleagues and do as I'm told, which I do well! As for criticising the met, go for it - we get a lot wrong a lot of the time. Having said that, I know plenty of regular police officers who display similar attitudes and don't respect experience. In my opinion they won't get very far and special or not it shows the kind of person you are if you can't take it on the chin and follow advice from a colleague who's been doing the job longer than you've been alive.
  40. 1 like
    Is it something you should deal with, is it something you could deal with? Personally if someone offered me drugs but I didn't see them I would submit Intel when next on duty. If someone showed me a load of drugs the I would phone it in and try to get on duty officers there to deal (no pun intended). Step in and try to capture dealer may result in a couple of his minders bundling you into the toilet as he makes his escape and you are left feeling silly and bruised. My intervention while off duty went back to line one of the responsibilities - the protection of life and (sometimes) property. Sent from me using Witchcraft
  41. 1 like
    Based on the Information she had at the time - bearing mind she had only taken over the reigns 20 mins before - her decision making was found to be faultless. The result was bad but that's another matter. We often hear, and read on here, about junior officers who make decisions and then are castigated by the 'nine o'clock jury' who have the luxury of time and hindsight to find fault. Ms Dick was subjected to the greatest possible scrutiny and found to be blameless for her decision making. Quite rightly her career has not been halted by the end result of that decision being unfortunate. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  42. 1 like
    I think multiple exposures over the years have led me and likely others here to learn to cope. Eventually it doesn't feel like coping, it's just doing the job. If my neighbours child was to die I would be sad for them and express compassion which I would genuinely feel. If I was the one who dealt with that death as a scene that wouldn't change any. But as soon as I move on its gone. SUDI'S are always sad but I guess rather selfishly they aren't my child so I don't take that deep wound. If I have any advice it's be human, do the best that you can do to mitigate the terrible thing that has happened for those left behind and content yourself knowing you did all you could. Then move on.
  43. 1 like
    It is harrowing dealing with infant deaths, or other serious occurrence's. Whilst dealing with them we have to be professional, but that does not stop us from thinking about them at a later time. We owe it to the families that we are dealing with to bring that professionalism and the sympathy and understanding which is needed. I know of many who could not do that and they realised that this job was not for them. We have to remember that every time we report for duty we have no idea what that shift is going to turn up. I have dealt with 5 deaths of children together with 4 cot deaths, and believe me there is no training that can equal reality. My wife always knew when I had dealt with something similar, as I would be quiet and reflective at home. I would pick up the paper and read to take my mind away for that quiet reflection. I was lucky that I did not have flash backs except in one case. That was the cot death of a neighbours baby at the unusual age of 18 months. That one was different because I knew the parents and the child and I blamed myself, somewhat for not being able to revive the child. When it turned out that the child had been dead for several hours it lightened the guilt slightly as, even with my knowledge I failed to recognise the rigor mortis that was already becoming present. If you cannot come to terms with the circumstances do not be ashamed to seek professional advice, it is essential.
  44. 1 like
    I agree with Andy 100%. When a new Sergeant came to me we would sit in my office have a brew and a chat. I would lay out to him my aims and goals for the section. I would lay down what I wanted done, what I would accept and what I would not accept. No drinking on duty, no sexual encounters, no criminal conduct, and no lying. If the Sergeant made a decision on the street then I would back him. If he had made the wrong decision I would still back him but come up with a solution to correct any error. If I had cause to speak to an officer over some conduct or work matter the Sergeant would also know about it. No use him dealing with an officer for a matter if I had already had cause to speak over a similar matter. We all know, in supervision what the other(s) had dealt with. That was imparting knowledge and experience. We have all made errors at some time in the service. The important thing was that you learned by those errors, and that you did not make the same error twice. If he had cause to speak to an officer and reprimand him or correct him in any way then, I must know about it. Likewise if I had cause to speak to an officer his Sergeant would also be aware. We worked as a team. It was out job to see that the wheel did not come off, and on occasions when it did, that we could catch that wheel before it developed into an almighty mess. What happened, happened and it was ultimately my responsibility. A report for discipline was a very rare thing, as the Sergeants knew what I demanded, and the Constable's knew exactly what their Sergeants expected and demanded of them. On occasions a discipline report was the only option, criminal conduct etc and was deserved and the correct procedure. We looked after discipline and we also looked after welfare. If an officer had a problem then we went out of our way to solve that problem. If he/she needed time off, i.e. sick or injured child, childbirth, serious illness etc., then that was arranged. When a new officer arrived, Proby or experienced they had the same welcome chat together with their new Sergeant laying down the ground rules. It was impressed on all that if something had gone wrong, we had to know so that we could catch it When jobs came up the Officer dealing knew when he required the Sergeant to attend, just as the Sergeant would know that his presence was required. Likewise the Sergeants knew when it was necessary for me to attend, and advise or even take charge. A summons to the Chief Superintendent's office to justify action you had authorised, and the reasons for it. I have had many a discussion with authority, and many times heated, and have I had b***ckings from above, of course I have, it goes with the territory..
  45. 1 like
    A Direct entry officer would only pass through CID as a fleeting gesture and would perhaps learn of the officer and investigation routine. On CID it takes years of experience, interview techniques and procedure. After a life time of CID work you would still be learning something new every day. The Direct entrant would have moved on to higher things.
  46. 1 like
    What I don't get is senior, and not so senior, officers get a lot of criticism from the rank and file. Throughout my career there were many examples of people 'promoted beyond their abilities'; 'promoted to get them out of the way'; 'out of touch'; 'incompetent SMT' etc etc. This being reflected on this forum. All of these inadequate inspectors and above came through the existing system, they were those 'desperately trying to achieve promotion' people mentioned above. So what has gone wrong over the last 170 years that we cannot get the 'right' people promoted? Surely if we carry on as we have done those 'already qualified for and desperately trying to achieve promotion' people mentioned will be in five or ten years the same out of touch, incompetent, promoted beyond their abilities SMT members that we have now. So either the existing system actually does work and the rank and file are the ones who are out of touch and don't understand a good boss when they have one or if we want better quality leadership we need to look elsewhere. An expected response is that it is the system through the College of Policing that is wrong but that really cannot be seriously argued. The CoP is recognised world wide for delivering quality leadership programmes. Police forces across the world send their future leaders at great expense to attend CoP courses. They are not just a bunch of Superintendents who have thrown together a package to churn out people in their image. The college takes advice and copies/amends programmes from experts in leadership, including Sandhurst - and you don't have to go far to find someone to say the army gets their senior officers selection right (probably not from privates and NCOs though!) Sent from me using witchcraft
  47. 1 like
    Have any of the 'old timers' heard of the legendary 'Nine Elms Turd'