100 IPCC lawyers quit

[streaky]

Citing "dismay and disillusionment" at the "consistently poor quality of decision-making at all levels".

This follows (but might not () be connected with) a Grauniad investigation that found evidence of favouritism towards the police, cases of indifference and rudeness to complainants, and extreme delays. The IPCC say that these relate to the PCA, predecessor of the IPCC. But of course, it's only the police that are "institutionalised".

Was it something we said?

Streaky

[Mg6b]

I can assure you Streaky, that the IPCC show no favouritism to the police! They have targets to meet and will make ludicrous decisions to pursue individual officers on the sort of evidence that would never usually be considered for any enquiry about the conduct of anyone else.

[flemke]

Mg6b said:

I can assure you Streaky, that the IPCC show no favouritism to the police! They have targets to meet and will make ludicrous decisions to pursue individual officers on the sort of evidence that would never usually be considered for any enquiry about the conduct of anyone else.

Targets?
Targets?


One cannot believe that any component of British law enforcement is subject to arbitrary government targets that pervert behaviour and cause unfairness.

[Vesuvius 996]

flemke said:

Mg6b said:

I can assure you Streaky, that the IPCC show no favouritism to the police! They have targets to meet and will make ludicrous decisions to pursue individual officers on the sort of evidence that would never usually be considered for any enquiry about the conduct of anyone else.

Targets?
Targets?


One cannot believe that any component of British law enforcement is subject to arbitrary government targets that pervert behaviour and cause unfairness.

Sadly, Flemke, old chap, this is exactly what is wrong with Britain.

I hear that they are now having targets for numbers of race crimes solved, and that any officer not closing a race hate crime per month will be subject to a Performance Improvement Plan, ergo the reason why fourteen year old children are being pursued by the police for calling someone a "raghead" in the playground.

Edited by Vesuvius 996 on Monday 25th February 11:03

[streaky]

Mg6b said:

I can assure you Streaky, that the IPCC show no favouritism to the police! They have targets to meet and will make ludicrous decisions to pursue individual officers on the sort of evidence that would never usually be considered for any enquiry about the conduct of anyone else.

It's the Grauniad you need to assure - Streaky

[Jasandjules]

Vesuvius 996 said:

Sadly, Flemke, old chap, this is exactly what is wrong with Britain.

I hear that they are now having targets for numbers of race crimes solved, and that any officer not closing a race hate crime per month will be subject to a Performance Improvement Plan, ergo the reason why fourteen year old children are being pursued by the police for calling someone a "raghead" in the playground.

I rather think Flemke is being sarcastic, based on his previous posts!?!

As for the Police being hounded with little evidence, could that be the same level of evidence (an officers "opinion&quot which can secure a speeding conviction and/or S59?

[flemke]

Jasandjules said:

Vesuvius 996 said:

Sadly, Flemke, old chap, this is exactly what is wrong with Britain.

I hear that they are now having targets for numbers of race crimes solved, and that any officer not closing a race hate crime per month will be subject to a Performance Improvement Plan, ergo the reason why fourteen year old children are being pursued by the police for calling someone a "raghead" in the playground.

I rather think Flemke is being sarcastic, based on his previous posts!?!

As for the Police being hounded with little evidence, could that be the same level of evidence (an officers "opinion&quot which can secure a speeding conviction and/or S59?

Perhaps just a touch sarcastic.
One could not resist noting the irony - after we have read many of our BIB friends here asserting that they were unaware of the existence of targets for BIB detections of MOPs - of another of our BIB friends rightfully criticising targets for IPCC detections of BIBs.

[bcnrml]

Vesuvius 996 said:

flemke said:

Mg6b said:

I can assure you Streaky, that the IPCC show no favouritism to the police! They have targets to meet and will make ludicrous decisions to pursue individual officers on the sort of evidence that would never usually be considered for any enquiry about the conduct of anyone else.

Targets?
Targets?


One cannot believe that any component of British law enforcement is subject to arbitrary government targets that pervert behaviour and cause unfairness.

Sadly, Flemke, old chap, this is exactly what is wrong with Britain.

I hear that they are now having targets for numbers of race crimes solved, and that any officer not closing a race hate crime per month will be subject to a Performance Improvement Plan, ergo the reason why fourteen year old children are being pursued by the police for calling someone a "raghead" in the playground.

Edited by Vesuvius 996 on Monday 25th February 11:03

I am surprised to read this from someone who, on the basis of at least one previous post, seems sensitive to anti-semitism. Presumably you prefer the IPCC to favour the police ahead of the police pursuing anti-semitism or other unacceptable (and illegal acts).

Presumably you think the targets exonerate the police from this:

"While Surrey Police missed an opportunity to register Bellfield as a potential suspect in the Milly Dowler case, Scotland Yard officers investigating the attempted murder of Miss Sheedy missed Bellfield’s car because they were examining CCTV footage from the wrong day. Before the error came to light, Bellfield had murdered Ms Delagrange." Source: Timesonline, today.

Keep providing excuses for them and using the search for targets as one. As if they shouldn't have targets and the rest of us should.

---

Edited to add: And if Blighty is as bad as you claim, why not do something constructive about it (join the police force, or emigrate)?

Edited by bcnrml on Monday 25th February 22:05

[mark69sheer]

I must have done very well the IPCC upheld my complaint.

So the IPCC has now morphed into the PCA which the IPCC was created to replace due to similar alegations of poor practice and police favouritism.

Police state getting nearer by the day when lawyers are jumping ship from the supposedly independent body.

[Ean218]

streaky said:

100 IPCC lawyers quit

Unfortunately the reality is that 2 bolshie lawyers quit the advisory committee.

The usually impeccably reliable Grauniad was outed this morning on the Radio 4 Today programme.

[streaky]

Ean218 said:

streaky said:

100 IPCC lawyers quit

Unfortunately the reality is that 2 bolshie lawyers quit the advisory committee.

The usually impeccably reliable Grauniad was outed this morning on the Radio 4 Today programme.

Which radio programme is always right and is absolutely not the voice of Nu Labia - Streaky

[FishFace]

No, of course not. The IPCC aren't the most ruthless investigators of alleged Police misconduct ever created. It MUST have been 100. *Insert Police state somewhere for no reason*.

[Ean218]

streaky said:

Which radio programme is always right and is absolutely not the voice of Nu Labia - Streaky

I would normally agree wholeheartedly but they actually interviewed the squirming wretch of a lawyer who was organising it. It was like pulling teeth for him to admit that sorry, no 100 lawyers hadn't actually resigned, just the two that represent their organisation.

As a typical lawyer he thought he could make his words mean anything he liked. In this case he was found out.

[havoc]

bcnrml said:

Edited to add: And if Blighty is as bad as you claim, why not do something constructive about it (join the police force, or emigrate)?

Why should a massively self-obsessed and incompetent government/Civil-service force citizens to emigrate just to get an environment focused on justice?!?

The Government and the Civil Service are PUBLIC SERVANTS! This last mob have forgotten that and have got ideas WELL above their station. Sadly, they've also put in place laws which restrict the ability of the public to protest about this, AND have gerry-mandered some constituency boundaries in their favour to assist them in the retention of the excess powers they have abrogated.

So...legally, what CAN we do, if we don't want to emigrate. And don't say 'vote'...assume this has been done twice and both times it's failed (indeed the last time Labour actually got FEWER votes than the Cons yet significantly more seats...).

[fluffnik]

streaky said:

Citing "dismay and disillusionment" at the "consistently poor quality of decision-making at all levels"

Good.

If good people refuse to work for the corrupt organs of the state it will collapse.