Police officer DD,automatic prison time?
Discussion
randomeddy said:
A nice old chap works for our company as and when extra help is needed.(Total change of job for him,we do industrial plumbing and heating systems).
His big 'secret' is that he was in the police force for thirty years but ended up getting sent to prison for six months for drink driving.Obviously more to it that just that.
possibly sent down for PCoJ or some such rather than drink driving as others have said disciplinary dismissal or requirement to resign ( and consequent reduction in pension - contributory pensions cannot be forfeited in most circumstances) on top of the criminal penalities His big 'secret' is that he was in the police force for thirty years but ended up getting sent to prison for six months for drink driving.Obviously more to it that just that.
Edited by randomeddy on Saturday 24th January 08:52
liner33 said:
I guess that should surprise me but I knew people who were kicked out of the military for losing their licence to DD , shocked a police officer could keep their but they have better unions
kicked out for bringing the service into disrepute or somesuch the military is unique in that the higher end of it;s discips become criminal solely becasue the person is employed by the organisation ( some civilian employees in British forces Overseas are subject to the full extent of military law and then there;s the bits applicable to families accompanying service eprsonnel on overseas postings )
Rovinghawk said:
You asked why there are credibility issues for the fed- I answered.
Edited for typo
I don't see that as a reason for them to sit there tight lipped when they could be telling the public on behalf of its members exactly what has happened to the Police service. Edited for typo
Edited by Rovinghawk on Monday 26th January 15:33
You won't get any truth from Dave and his mates.
Greendubber said:
I don't see that as a reason for them to sit there tight lipped when they could be telling the public on behalf of its members exactly what has happened to the Police service.
You won't get any truth from Dave and his mates.
Unfortunately, they can't. It is now an offence for a police officer to be a whistleblower.You won't get any truth from Dave and his mates.
Bigends said:
Co opted was no different to any other type of Governor- just the reason I was on the governing body, same as LEA, local councillors etc. I chaired one of the committees within the main body-we were encouraged to get involved as neighbourhood officers. Took the role on in 1989 when Local management for schools was rolled out.There was never any conflict. One of the kids I gave stranger danger talks to at the school is now the neighbourhood cop for my old area and is on the governing body of the same school. The Inspector in charge of my unit recently resigned as Chair of Governors for his local school. Probably different forces have different views on membership
For years officers in my force could only live within our county so the job had the final say where we all lived =and who we lived with. Officers commute in from miles away now and the job has little or no control now
Emailed my old fed rep on this matter.For years officers in my force could only live within our county so the job had the final say where we all lived =and who we lived with. Officers commute in from miles away now and the job has little or no control now
Edited by Bigends on Saturday 24th January 18:49
It would appear that the decision about refusing a police officer permission to be on the board of the school of governors gives the CC the power to refuse in certain circumstances. It is not therefore automatic.
I asked about co-opting and he said that as there was no election involved he would have objected to any ban as the election process was raised in the case.
Now I've been told, I can see the objection. I think it is reasonable to stop an officer electioneering for a public role.
With regards the restrictions of where an officer can live, these are now limited to the specific location in my old force and not the abuse of the regs that the CC was using in the past. My view of the regulations is that no force had ever any control over areas. However, they could provide police accommodation and if the officer refused it then they could stop housing allowance. old hat now of course.
Derek Smith said:
Bigends said:
Co opted was no different to any other type of Governor- just the reason I was on the governing body, same as LEA, local councillors etc. I chaired one of the committees within the main body-we were encouraged to get involved as neighbourhood officers. Took the role on in 1989 when Local management for schools was rolled out.There was never any conflict. One of the kids I gave stranger danger talks to at the school is now the neighbourhood cop for my old area and is on the governing body of the same school. The Inspector in charge of my unit recently resigned as Chair of Governors for his local school. Probably different forces have different views on membership
For years officers in my force could only live within our county so the job had the final say where we all lived =and who we lived with. Officers commute in from miles away now and the job has little or no control now
Emailed my old fed rep on this matter.For years officers in my force could only live within our county so the job had the final say where we all lived =and who we lived with. Officers commute in from miles away now and the job has little or no control now
Edited by Bigends on Saturday 24th January 18:49
It would appear that the decision about refusing a police officer permission to be on the board of the school of governors gives the CC the power to refuse in certain circumstances. It is not therefore automatic.
I asked about co-opting and he said that as there was no election involved he would have objected to any ban as the election process was raised in the case.
Now I've been told, I can see the objection. I think it is reasonable to stop an officer electioneering for a public role.
With regards the restrictions of where an officer can live, these are now limited to the specific location in my old force and not the abuse of the regs that the CC was using in the past. My view of the regulations is that no force had ever any control over areas. However, they could provide police accommodation and if the officer refused it then they could stop housing allowance. old hat now of course.
Living outside the force area was a 100% no no in my force in the 70's up until at least the right to buy Police houses came into force. A mate, long retired requested permission to buy about 1/2 mile into an adjoining force area - refused point blank. For those that did try to live in addresses that werent those registered with the force they'd find themselves in hot water and posted to the ends far of the force - especially singles. The bosses would check hostels and houses allocated to single cops if they were suspected of co habiting elsewhere - to check they were actually staying there. Married officers lived in the Police accommodation they were allocated and didnt move without permission. Happy days.
Edited by Bigends on Monday 26th January 22:05
Edited by Bigends on Monday 26th January 22:56
carinaman said:
Interesting stuff Bigends.
Makes me think about stuff in Professional Standards documents about not misusing police access to IT resources to check the desirability of property.
Agreed - remember I was in post because I was a cop and held a position within the local community and not AS a cop.Makes me think about stuff in Professional Standards documents about not misusing police access to IT resources to check the desirability of property.
You don't honestly think I accessed Police systems to provide info for the governing body??
liner33 said:
I really cant think of any reason a governing body would need access to the pnc , nor that there would be any useful information on there with regards to school improvement
They might like to have the info held on PNC to vet potential governors, suppliers and staff. Highly illegal, of course.Bigends said:
You don't honestly think I accessed Police systems to provide info for the governing body??
No. I don't think that at all.I was going to say Police IT resources, but as I typed it I thought that an officer wanted to check the desirability of property that they may have access to other systems beyond the police estate.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff