*Someone* in Nottinghamshire Police definitely is pond life.
*Someone* in Nottinghamshire Police definitely is pond life.
Author
Discussion

autismuk

Original Poster:

1,529 posts

270 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
This is utterly ridiculous. This has to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard (if it is true).

Four Notts cops are threatened with the sack, for using inappropriate language in a *PRIVATE* conversation ; to wit, referring to some criminals as "pond life". This strikes me as rather restrained ; I would imagine in private your average BiB is rather more explicit about the dross with whom he (or she) has to work.

This conversation was recorded in an attempt to catch another corrupt BiB (successfully). The other four are accused of nothing criminal.

Do I not also recall that Nottinghamshire is the place that claims it doesn't have sufficient resources to catch murderers. (Obviously they aren't pond life).

www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1986258,00.html

rewc

2,187 posts

263 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
There was the case of the woman who described someone as 'fat' in her statement. The plod taking the statement said she couldn't use the word.

You do have to wonder about the mentality of the Police at the top, but it goes a long way to explaining some of their other weird decisions.

silverback mike

11,293 posts

283 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
I think the term 'pond life' is rather complimentary.
The world is going mad. I must thank my lucky stars that my 'place of work' is not too bad when it comes to political correctness, there when it has to be but pleasantly absent where it can be too.



Still, on the positive side, it caught a bad egg, something I and every other hard working bib find hard to stomach.

WildCat

8,369 posts

273 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
autismuk said:
This is utterly ridiculous. This has to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard (if it is true).

Four Notts cops are threatened with the sack, for using inappropriate language in a *PRIVATE* conversation ; to wit, referring to some criminals as "pond life". This strikes me as rather restrained ; I would imagine in private your average BiB is rather more explicit about the dross with whom he (or she) has to work.

This conversation was recorded in an attempt to catch another corrupt BiB (successfully). The other four are accused of nothing criminal.

Do I not also recall that Nottinghamshire is the place that claims it doesn't have sufficient resources to catch murderers. (Obviously they aren't pond life).

www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1986258,00.html



Political correctness ist strangling this country - Liebchen. Thought police are everywhere now. You'll see - they will move from tracing DNA at birth to microship in brain which can relate all thought to central policing unit. Minute you think leader ist twit - "orf with yer 'ed!"

rich 36

13,739 posts

296 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
BAD EGG!


I think you should consider your pension very carefully young man,

that sort of egg-ist attitude will land you in a lot of hot water





(so to speak)

autismuk

Original Poster:

1,529 posts

270 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
I just find the whole thing astonishing. I have no problems with BiB holding any views they like - they can be homophobic racists if they want. As long as they keep it to themselves and don't let it affect their "Policing" so what ?

What sort of bloody country are we in if you aren't allowed to moan with your mates about things ????

Parrot of Doom

23,075 posts

264 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
autismuk said:
What sort of bloody country are we in if you aren't allowed to moan with your mates about things ????


A sh1thole country, where free speech is a thing of the past.

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

285 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
PC police in management rank have turned the police force into police farce....

They need to be flushed away now....

Any ideas how....?

rewc

2,187 posts

263 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
jamesson said:
rewc - there's a very good chance that the word "fat" couldn't be used in a statement because of CPS guidelines, not because the police officer involved thought it would offend someone.


Fat is a word in the English language and when a person is described as fat the population understand what that means. It is not up to the Police or anybody else to tell somebody what they should put in their statement - it is supposed to be in their own words.If it is indeed the fact that the CPS are trying to change a persons statement then that is very worrying, much more so than the word perhaps hurting someones sensabilities. Still it further confirms my belief that currently British law is an ass as are some of the people working in it.

rich 36

13,739 posts

296 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
Might've meant PHATttttt!


which means something altogether different
apparently

not negative you see

[]Nodsheadsagelyinsidehoodie[/]

_VTEC_

2,459 posts

275 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
What is with this PC malarkey? Aren't we allowed to dislike anything anymore? Do we have to be totally open minded about absolutely everything now?

rich 36

13,739 posts

296 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
Funny you should say that.

somebody on here was discussing this only the other day, and linked this report
on its history, its a good read if you've time

www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/4/4/121115.shtml


Imadreamer

353 posts

276 months

Sunday 15th January 2006
quotequote all
rewc said:
jamesson said:
rewc - there's a very good chance that the word "fat" couldn't be used in a statement because of CPS guidelines, not because the police officer involved thought it would offend someone.


Fat is a word in the English language and when a person is described as fat the population understand what that means.


I assume that jamesson's point is that if a criminal (or witness for that matter) is described as fat in the statement, then by the time the case comes to trial the person might have lost the excess weight and be thin, potentially leading to the case being thrown out because of doubt over identification.

autismuk

Original Poster:

1,529 posts

270 months

Monday 16th January 2006
quotequote all
I wouldn't have thought so, surely ? People could dye and cut their hair, change their clother, grow a beard etc etc etc .....

TangoAlpha

1,175 posts

284 months

Monday 16th January 2006
quotequote all
rich 36 said:
Funny you should say that.

somebody on here was discussing this only the other day, and linked this report
on its history, its a good read if you've time

www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/4/4/121115.shtml



Well worth reading

autismuk

Original Poster:

1,529 posts

270 months

Monday 16th January 2006
quotequote all
I'm not a cop, but I have worked with "difficult people" shall we say. I'd reckon a bit of private venting is probably a bit of a psychological necessity ; it allows you to let off steam harmlessly and refocus on what you actually need to be doing.

bimsb6

8,787 posts

251 months

Monday 16th January 2006
quotequote all
call a spade a spade i say but not to his face !