Met PC found guilty of neo-Nazi membership
Discussion
The Spruce Goose said:
La Liga said:
o?
Vetting isn't a crystal ball.
i thought the police go round your house, surely quick look in his bedroom would see the SS soldier on the wall, might be a slight indicator of his political views?Vetting isn't a crystal ball.
A lot of forces have outsourced the recruiting process .. the days of an Inspector or Sergeant attending your home and interviewing you and your family and seeing how/where you live have gone
One of the things I would reinstate
The Spruce Goose said:
La Liga said:
o?
Vetting isn't a crystal ball.
i thought the police go round your house, surely quick look in his bedroom would see the SS soldier on the wall, might be a slight indicator of his political views?Vetting isn't a crystal ball.
Earthdweller said:
The Spruce Goose said:
La Liga said:
o?
Vetting isn't a crystal ball.
i thought the police go round your house, surely quick look in his bedroom would see the SS soldier on the wall, might be a slight indicator of his political views?Vetting isn't a crystal ball.
A lot of forces have outsourced the recruiting process .. the days of an Inspector or Sergeant attending your home and interviewing you and your family and seeing how/where you live have gone
One of the things I would reinstate
I'm assuming they're going to trawl through the rest of the met looking for evidence of any officers wearing che guarva t-shirts when they were 17?
I mean the guy sounds like he might be a nonce by reading the story, surely that is of much higher importance?
I mean that bed alone at 22 is bad enough.
I mean the guy sounds like he might be a nonce by reading the story, surely that is of much higher importance?
I mean that bed alone at 22 is bad enough.
jmflare said:
I'm assuming they're going to trawl through the rest of the met looking for evidence of any officers wearing che guarva t-shirts when they were 17?
I mean the guy sounds like he might be a nonce by reading the story, surely that is of much higher importance?
I mean that bed alone at 22 is bad enough.
I would love for you to expand on that point? I mean the guy sounds like he might be a nonce by reading the story, surely that is of much higher importance?
I mean that bed alone at 22 is bad enough.
Earthdweller said:
La Liga said:
'm not sure it adds any real value.
A copper’s nous Worth ten thousand words on an application form
You mention someone seeing 'where you live'. Take two 20 year old men living at home, one white the other black. The probability of the black family living in a more deprived area is much higher due to household wealth disparities.
I don't want X person making a subjective judgement on where someone lives as part of their suitability for being a police officer.
La Liga said:
lus biases, prejudices and inconsistencies that come from intuition (nous).
You mention someone seeing 'where you live'. Take two 20 year old men living at home, one white the other black. The probability of the black family living in a more deprived area is much higher due to household wealth disparities.
I don't want X person making a subjective judgement on where someone lives as part of their suitability for being a police officer.
And you think it’s right that prospective Police officers are interviewed over the phone ? You mention someone seeing 'where you live'. Take two 20 year old men living at home, one white the other black. The probability of the black family living in a more deprived area is much higher due to household wealth disparities.
I don't want X person making a subjective judgement on where someone lives as part of their suitability for being a police officer.
Not actually seen in person till they turn up to start training ?
It’s not about race or wealth or where someone lives and If you think that your a fool
Perhaps, just perhaps if an officer had attended this lads home address they might, just might have thought something wasn’t right about him and asked for enhanced vetting on his application
Which might, just might have exposed him before he joined?
Or they might have realised he was socially awkward and autistic and maybe not suitable to be a Police officer
It’s about judging the character not their characteristics
Earthdweller said:
It’s not about race or wealth or where someone lives and If you think that your a fool
I know it's not about where someone lives, which is why it's odd you mentioned it: Earthdweller said:
the days of an Inspector or Sergeant attending your home and interviewing you and your family and seeing how/where you live have gone
Earthdweller said:
It’s about judging the character not their characteristics.
So fraught with bias and inconsistency risks, and a lack of tangibility to work within the legal frameworks. Earthdweller said:
La Liga said:
o fraught with bias and inconsistency risks, and a lack of tangibility to work within the legal frameworks.
Really ? Ok snowflake
I wonder if the College of Policing are aware of such risks...
La Liga said:
'm not sure how that word relates to me explaining my objections to trying to judge character in such a manner when trying to create a consistent, objective process, but I guess it's as good as anything when stumped.
I wonder if the College of Policing are aware of such risks...
You’re just using word soup I wonder if the College of Policing are aware of such risks...
I said I think the initial vetting/recruitment process is too weak and can fail to identify persons who are unsuitable and that a more robust approach may well have meant this person would not have been deemed suitable for appointment
Now if you think absolute minimum vetting by third parties and interviews over the phone is the best way to recruit the highest calibre of officers is the best way then god help us
The recruitment process should be robust, and if it was better we might not have this ( or other similar) thread(s)
It's simply this:
Vetting should, and does, aim to be objective, fair and consistent.
The more you allow the scope for human bias / error / prejudice, the more it detracts from that aim.
Trying to judge and make recommendations on 'character' in the way you've proposed detracts from that aim.
That's why such practices were stopped.
Vetting should, and does, aim to be objective, fair and consistent.
The more you allow the scope for human bias / error / prejudice, the more it detracts from that aim.
Trying to judge and make recommendations on 'character' in the way you've proposed detracts from that aim.
That's why such practices were stopped.
All the usual tit for tat aside, the last few weeks have been a bit problematic for the Met to say the least. It’s pretty clear (and has been for some time) that there recruitment methods and vetting need a serious rethink, but as someone with a professional interest, I’d say that the issues are top down.
Blue62 said:
All the usual tit for tat aside, the last few weeks have been a bit problematic for the Met to say the least. It’s pretty clear (and has been for some time) that there recruitment methods and vetting need a serious rethink, but as someone with a professional interest, I’d say that the issues are top down.
I doubt this chap was particularly overt with his hobbies when applying. I'm not sure how they could do much more than they already do to be fair. If someone's a secretive wrong-un then how do they weed them out? Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff