Xiaomi Mi Mix 2 review
I refer to the Plebgate inquiry.
Despite waiting almost a year for the outcome, from reading todays papers I still don't know who said what when and to whom.
And neither do the investigating authorities by all accounts. They can't even agree amongst themselves who is telling porkies or simply mistaken.
Imagine what the outcome would have been with a low profile "victim".
Please be careful what you say as the DPP is still considering prosecuting certain individuals, but to my mind this episode brings no credit to the police.
Mr M. I agree entirely.
'by the press'
And then exploited by the Police Federation.
'I still don't know who said what when and to whom'
I don't know if you mean the original incident or this meeting discussed, yesterday.
I do find it remarkable that, in the face of the release of the transcript, the Chief Constables of the forces concerned still say it has been dealt with properly.
Where will we be if a defendant just has to say 'the police lied' and a jury will agree?
Unlike the other thread, I agree with you on this. I am sure that the vast majority of our police are exemplary in character and devotion to duty - better than most countries. However if one looks at examples such as the Hillsborough cover up , the de Menendez case , the case where a guy holing a table leg in a plastic bag being shot, and others, there are a few officers who are prepared to tell untruths. It may be that the Police Federation members in this case who were going around (inappropriately)wearing "pleb" T Shirts were a tiny minority, but there is an odour of a "stitch up" here, and I hope someone gets to the truth of it.
No doubt "Lessons will be learned" from this episode.
It made headline news, and most probably will later, when this or a similar incident is revealed.
Cost a few £thousands plus man/woman hours, so what, someone as been exonerated, or have they?.
In 'normal' circles, a few words would have been said, and that would have been the end of the matter. It happens everyday in some walks of life, but in some, example have to be clearly made, depending on the importance of the person or person's involved?.
Had this not be jumped on by the press, it would have remained as it should have done. A silly and brief disagreement, between a tired politician and bored police, of absolutely no importance. The police involved, muttering to themselves about him being a self-important idiot, would have and should have, been the end of it.
I see Spuds broadly agrees.
I agree that the original issue was a storm in a tea cup probably at best caused by tiredness and stress and at worst by arrogance and could have been resolved by a simple apology after some reflection.
Behaviour unbecoming of a government official but quickly forgotten if a one off incident.
But events quickly escalated and we now have a situation where evidence was fabricated in a possible coordinated attempt to sway pubic opinion for political ends. It strikes at the very heart of democracy.
A number of recently publicised internal investigations by the police cast doubt on their ability to judge themselves in my mind.
Could somebody explain how West Mercia are involved?
This took place in Downing Street which is presumably the Met's bailiwick, or are the protection squad drawn foam all over?
(Genuine enquiry, not some heavily laboured sarcasm - I genuinely don't know!)
I believe that West Mercia were tasked with investigating the Met on this matter and, it would appear, decide to back-up their mates!
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.