Police too busy!
Discussion
RobinOakapple said:
singlecoil said:
bmw535i said:
If not, what else does he mean?
The usual way of deducing meaning is to read the actual words used. That only works with those people who are able to express themselves clearly, though, but it certainly works with Mr Apple.Prevention is better than the cure.
Sadly just ignoring the definition of victim blaming or deciding to use your own wrong definition doesn't stop it being victim blaming.
Once again from wiki:
"Victim blaming occurs when the victim of a crime or any wrongful act is held entirely or partially responsible for the harm that befell them."
Legendary nice guys Canada agree:
"Victim blaming is a devaluing act that occurs when the victim(s) of a crime or an accident is held responsible — in whole or in part — for the crimes that have been committed against them."
Even the Yanks:
"Victim blaming is a devaluing act where the victim of a crime, an accident, or any type of abusive maltreatment is held as wholly or partially responsible for the wrongful conduct committed against them."
Now, of course, I still lock my car, but if someone's car is stolen because they didn't lock theirs that is 100% the fault of the CAR THIEF not the guy who forgot to lock the car.
Once again from wiki:
"Victim blaming occurs when the victim of a crime or any wrongful act is held entirely or partially responsible for the harm that befell them."
Legendary nice guys Canada agree:
"Victim blaming is a devaluing act that occurs when the victim(s) of a crime or an accident is held responsible — in whole or in part — for the crimes that have been committed against them."
Even the Yanks:
"Victim blaming is a devaluing act where the victim of a crime, an accident, or any type of abusive maltreatment is held as wholly or partially responsible for the wrongful conduct committed against them."
Now, of course, I still lock my car, but if someone's car is stolen because they didn't lock theirs that is 100% the fault of the CAR THIEF not the guy who forgot to lock the car.
singlecoil said:
walm said:
Sadly just ignoring the definition of victim blaming or deciding to use your own wrong definition doesn't stop it being victim blaming.
Equally sadly insisting that it was victim blaming doesn't make it victim blaming whatever definition of it you may choose to misapply.This isn't a matter of opinion - it's black and white.
walm said:
singlecoil said:
walm said:
Sadly just ignoring the definition of victim blaming or deciding to use your own wrong definition doesn't stop it being victim blaming.
Equally sadly insisting that it was victim blaming doesn't make it victim blaming whatever definition of it you may choose to misapply.This isn't a matter of opinion - it's black and white.
walm said:
SC - he is partially blaming the victims of burglary they "need to take better care of their stuff" - how is that not holding them partially responsible????
This isn't a matter of opinion - it's black and white.
Anyone with any intelligence can see you're right. However, some people believe that by simply repeating their earlier point it somehow clarifies it. It's a pretty sad state of affairs that victims are blamed for the crimes they're subjected to. Still, I guess it's an easy cop out to blame someone else instead of diligently investigating said crime.This isn't a matter of opinion - it's black and white.
bmw535i said:
I know Dibble, but why can't other officers on here admit the failings of some of their colleagues?
Now you're going on leave and nobody is taking on your outstanding cases, the victims will no doubt feel let down. V6 has stated this is a problem and clearly it is. These victims will not care that you're on leave or there are officers on sick, suspension, attending inadequate training, maternity leave etc.
What will happen when you return from leave? Will evidence have been lost? Will statements go uncollected? NFA due to lack of evidence? All are possibilities.
I've not been up long and the older I get, the harder I find nights to recover from, so I can't be arsed trying to multiquote. Now you're going on leave and nobody is taking on your outstanding cases, the victims will no doubt feel let down. V6 has stated this is a problem and clearly it is. These victims will not care that you're on leave or there are officers on sick, suspension, attending inadequate training, maternity leave etc.
What will happen when you return from leave? Will evidence have been lost? Will statements go uncollected? NFA due to lack of evidence? All are possibilities.
I don't think any of my colleagues suggest there aren't bad/crap/corrupt/inept/lazy officers. But those bad/crap/corrupt/lazy/inept officers are a tiny minority of the over all numbers. The vast majority of my colleagues try their hardest within the limits of what we can realistically do. Every single night I was on duty this week, we ran out of officers to attend jobs. Every single night when I started, there were more jobs on the despatcher's screens than there were officers to attend. Each radio despatcher has a facilitator, who feeds the desptacher the jobs and does some of the enquiries for them. There were at least double the number of jobs on the facilitators' screens than the despatcher's... And that doesn't include the thousands of calls daily that don't even get to a facilitator, never mind a despatcher. Then there are the other avenues for demand - people calling officers direct, coming in to the Enquiry desks, self generated work, emails through the force website - demand has never ever been higher. Total numbers of officers have been reduced and some of the admin tasks that were previously done by very good admin staff, particularly with file preparation and disclosure, now have to be done by us.
We are not experts at disclosure/file prep. Every officer I know would rather be dealing with the sharp end stuff, grabbing hold of the baddies and preventing harm. So the admin tasks take a back seat to the "real" police work. Then a case gets to trial and form "X" hasn't been submitted within timescales, so the case is adjourned to sort out form "X" or worse, thrown out because form "X" or disclosure "Y" hasn't been done... Mainly because the poor sod trying to submit form "X" has spent 8-12 hours rushing from job to job without time to take a s
t, never mind sit down and have a break. A break isn't a luxury, it's a necessity. Would you rather have someone turn up at your burglary/theft/assault who was focussed and refreshed or ready to drop?I am not on leave at the moment, I'm on rest days. I'm very lucky in that I have my own desk and ready access to my cases/investigations. Patrol officers are slowly being issued with PDAs and laptops that enable much more remote working. A colleague last night dealt with a domestic wounding. They were able to complete a typed statement, book in the exhibits, get a medical consent form signed and sort various other admin tasks at scene, so things are improving. I don't have access to any of that, although I a told we will be getting the remote access laptops and PDAs "eventually". The current timescale is a couple of years... So every time I was asked to review an incident log on nights, it meant I had to physically be at a terminal. So if I was out and about looking for baddies, I had to come back into the nick. I only had to do that about half a dozen times. Each night...
Ownership of jobs is MUCH better than passing it round. We currently use a case management/investigation system that was developed in house and within its limitations, it's actually pretty good for recording where jobs are at. It's due to be replaced any day now by an off the shelf product which isn't really an investigation system, it's a file preparation system... We should be getting the investigation module of that system (Northgate Connect if anyone cares) in another 18 months or so... We are being expected in the meantime to run investigations on a file preparation system, which isn't designed to be used to manage investigations. I've raised issues about this, but it's happening, end of story. On the current system, I can record an "action" (something that needs doing) such as "Get a witness statement from Mr bmw535i". I can then "part result" or "result" it. So if I make an unsuccessful attempt to get hold of a witness, I can record it. I can record when I get hold of my witness and when I've arranged to get the statement. I can record when I get the statement and a brief précis of what is on there. At the moment, all this is recorded against the action in one place. On the new system, which isn't the investigation module, it's a file preparation module, there isn't the facility to "part result" actions and no way of recording the relevant information in one place.
All this of course supposes that on the current system, officers accurately record what they've done. With my investigations, you'd know if I'd farted or had a brew. Other colleagues use the system less. I like to record absolutely everything as after being treated for PTSD, my concentration and memory are still only about 60% of what they used to be. So if a victim rings up and I'm not there, a colleague should (in theory) be able to find my case and update the victim we do try and keep the victims updated in our office, but sometimes, people just don't listen to what they are told, or they have unrealistic expectations of what we can actually do. Thank you, CSI Las Vegas...
The reason my colleagues don't take on my caseload is because every single one of us is carrying a caseload we individually struggle to keep on top of there isn't time to deal with anyone's enquiries but our own, and even that is a struggle. We do try and keep our victims updated, but sometimes, because of the victim charter, this means contacting a victim every four weeks, just to tell them there isn't anything to tell them. They just LOVE that. "Why are you bothering me if there isn't any news?" Because I have to, to comply with the victim charter. A waste of my time, a waste of their time and a guaranteed way to piss them off.
If the evidence isn't there, there's not really that much I can do. Many of the people who ring in don't actually want to give a statement, much less go to Court. They expect me to "Sort it out, innit?", expecting that them ringing in means the suspect is getting jailed with no further input from them. I think the bosses refer to it as "managing expectations". People expect that CCTV (not generally run/owned by the Police) is 4K ready, broadcast quality. That's if it exists in the first place AND the user knows how to download it. I'm reasonably tech savvy, but I often struggle. I don't think I've ever seen two systems the same, ever. Some bigger outfits (supermarkets, etc) even have two or three different systems in the same premises...
Got a vehicle registration? Brilliant. As long as it's registered to someone. AND we can positively identify the occupants. AND those occupants were the person(s) responsible for the offence at the time...
I think V6pushfit mentioned eBay. Any job involving eBay is a ball acher of huge proportions. eBay are all but impossible to get in touch with from an investigative perspective. They are effectively a law unto themselves and really couldn't give two s
ts about a UK Court order compelling them to provide information. Can't prove the suspect actually physically conducted the transaction? Job is going nowhere (even if you do find out who the user is). eBay routinely refuse to provide details of users, even when the user themself wants eBay to release the details to us when they are the victim.Generally evidence won't have been "lost" with the type of job I deal with, because we prioritise what needs doing and any evidence that can be got is got early doors, including statements. The benefit of nights is that I've not picked up any jobs this week, I suspect that will change when I'm back next week, as I know NY colleagues have each picked up at least one extra job EACH this last week, so the next "live" job, I'll get. And that's presuming that no one else gets seconded to a major enquiry, goes off sick or on leave...
V6Pushfit said:
The making it harder to steal reasoning is a childish approach it doesn't reduce theft it just pushes it to someone else to become a victim.
I would not dream of blaming the victim of a crime. However, I would point out that research has consistently shown that the quoted sentence is utterly wrong. If, say, 5% of people in an area of a town secure their premises so as to make it difficult to enter then burglaries with reduce in the whole area.There are various reasons proposed for this - I have my own favourites - but no one can say for sure. All we can say is that making it harder to steal does not just displace the crime.
Just to make it clear, I am not criticising victims of crime. What I am doing is criticising a poster for making a false statement.
The reason I know this is that the criticism of town centre CCTV systems was that it might merely displaced crime, so V6 pushrod is not alone in his ignorance, merely in his willingness to propose it. So I did a little research.
bmw535i said:
I'd like to think the police have made some improvements since the 70's?
I retired in 2005 after 30 years. The reference to my first book was to show that some police officers, including retired ones, can be critical. The sequel shows a similar critical point of view, not only of the service but of the author as well, and this up to 2005.Let's look at this thread positively. We have gone from BMW335 having no time for the police whatsoever to having to admit that he has no evidence of all police officers not caring about the public and victims. He quotes a non injury RTA, in my force one which would not generate police attendance, even in 2003, to support his conceit and a burglary where the police interviewed suspects but were unable to gain sufficient evidence. Presumably the officer that phoned him to tell him so didn't care either. Or might have done as he wouldn't know, would he.
Overwhelming evidence that he has nothing to back his prejudice that police officers don't care. So a positive.
bmw535i said:
walm said:
SC - he is partially blaming the victims of burglary they "need to take better care of their stuff" - how is that not holding them partially responsible????
This isn't a matter of opinion - it's black and white.
Anyone with any intelligence can see you're right. However, some people believe that by simply repeating their earlier point it somehow clarifies it. It's a pretty sad state of affairs that victims are blamed for the crimes they're subjected to. Still, I guess it's an easy cop out to blame someone else instead of diligently investigating said crime.This isn't a matter of opinion - it's black and white.
Your determination to be right has unhinged you. We all have intelligence but have come to different conclusions.
RobinOakapple said:
Anyone with any intelligence?
Your determination to be right has unhinged you. We all have intelligence but have come to different conclusions.
Yes, the wrong ones in some peoples cases. And yes you have intelligence, but it's clearly limited. Walm has quite comprehensively shown that the previous posts were victim blamingYour determination to be right has unhinged you. We all have intelligence but have come to different conclusions.
bmw535i said:
RobinOakapple said:
Anyone with any intelligence?
Your determination to be right has unhinged you. We all have intelligence but have come to different conclusions.
Yes, the wrong ones in some peoples cases. And yes you have intelligence, but it's clearly limited. Walm has quite comprehensively shown that the previous posts were victim blamingYour determination to be right has unhinged you. We all have intelligence but have come to different conclusions.
because 'people who live in glass houses' etc
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff