One Less cowboy

[Luckypants]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east_wales/10227920.stm

He got caught and has paid a very heavy price for such a minor offence as not having an MOT. He obviously thought he could get away with it right to the end. His previous disciplinary record suggest he had a 'cavalier attitude' full stop, not just to motoring law.

[Bibio]

hahahaha.. bet he gets the 'finger' pointed at him in jail.

[Jamesy D]

Gotta love it that these individuals and the media attention they get will then bring the Force (and to a lesser extent Forces around the country) into disrepute. At least he got done for it.

As the judge said, if the Police don't respect the law (or don't appear to), how can they expect the public to? It just undermines the hard work of the rest of the Officers who are there to maintain and uphold the law.

[Biker Biggles]

While in no way condoning what this t0sser did I cant help feeling there is something very wrong with our "justice" system that sends a man to prison for trying to fiddle a very minor motoring offence,while really nasty scrotes can get community service for some quite serious street crimes.Maybe he should be made to repay society in some form rather than have tens of thousands of our money spent to keep him at HMP for a few months.

[beabert]

thought you were on about red dead then

[Jamesy D]

While in no way condoning what this t0sser did I cant help feeling there is something very wrong with our "justice" system that sends a man to prison for trying to fiddle a very minor motoring offence,while really nasty scrotes can get community service for some quite serious street crimes.Maybe he should be made to repay society in some form rather than have tens of thousands of our money spent to keep him at HMP for a few months.

Well, to be fair he lied on a statement, and thus was guilty of trying to pervert the course of justice, which for a Police Officer is a very serious offence to commit.

That, and as the judge said, he was being made an example of.

[Biker Biggles]

No wonder our prisons are full and we are bankrupt.If these people are not a danger to the public they should be made to pay us back,not put somewhere they will cost us even more.

[Specialone]

What a knob, cant say the force will miss him.

Fair play to the judge, he was bang on with his comment about how the public will have no respect for the law if the police dont.

[gruntygiggles]

I just hope for his sake he wasn't married in 2007....if he was, his wife is not going to be a very happy lady!

[Bri w]

While in no way condoning what this t0sser did I cant help feeling there is something very wrong with our "justice" system that sends a man to prison for trying to fiddle a very minor motoring offence,while really nasty scrotes can get community service for some quite serious street crimes.Maybe he should be made to repay society in some form rather than have tens of thousands of our money spent to keep him at HMP for a few months.

In one way you are right but bearing in mind his disciplinary record and his mountain of lies and deception in this case would you want to be stopped by him? You'd find he's charged you with murder etc instead of speeding.

In the great scheme of things the sentence is 100% correct.

But equally, as you said, the sentencing of scrotes needs looking at too.

[Biker Biggles]

Im not suggesting for one moment he should remain a copper,just that he doesnt become a financial burden on our overstretched prison system as he doesnt actually need to be inside.(Like the vast majority of others that are in nick)

[Bluepete]

We've always been told that in the job, we are about fourteen times more likely to get a custodial sentence than Joe (or Joanne - see what I did there, I'm a PC PC!) public. It's an odd figure I know, but someone must have worked it out.

It's the position of trust thing. People who handle large sums of cash for a job are more likely to go to prison for stealing from their employer.

A breach of trust.

This kipper is a plonker, without doubt. He appears to have bullied a junior collegue into assisting his subterfuge.

However, he is a dumb-ass. If the only offence evident was that he had an exired MOT, all he would get (from my experience) would be a warning letter. Maybe a slap on the wrist from the force internal invesigtion unit, but no more. But the moment he took that step along the road of telling lies...

Yes, he breached the trust of his position and is, wthout doubt guilty of a serious offence. But should that carry a mandatory prison sentence?

Forget what you think of the Police for a minute;

Think about what the court has done. He has lost his job, his pension, future employment chances and has been put in prison. Is he a threat to the public any more, now that he is unemployed? Is he likely to re-offend? How will imprisonment rehabilitate him? After all, that's what it's for.

Some will shout loudly and without thought that he deserves to rot in jail. Fine, opinions are your own and are very important.

But prison?

Pete

[tigersaw]

I'm all for weeding out the bad apples from the police with extreem prejudice, after all I want to respect and trust the police force.
However, prison is a bit harsh on the fool, like BP says, he's lost plenty already

[Bluefish]

I guess the only reason he has been sent down, is because of being a police officer and then attempting to pervert the course of justice, seems like he won't be missed by his colleagues. Don't pick up the soap. :p

[carternd]

While in no way condoning what this t0sser did I cant help feeling there is something very wrong with our "justice" system that sends a man to prison for trying to fiddle a very minor motoring offence,while really nasty scrotes can get community service for some quite serious street crimes.Maybe he should be made to repay society in some form rather than have tens of thousands of our money spent to keep him at HMP for a few months.

I disagree with you there. I'm not a fan of the "send 'em all down" attitude, but perverting the course of justice is not a little matter, and for a policeman, who should, by the nature of his job, and the power and privileges that go with it, be an example of good conduct to society at large, to stoop to that level, not least by trying to force a junior officer to sign a form in his favour, deserves rigorous punishment. I hope for his sake the image I just had doesn't come to pass....

How is he going to repay society? What good can an immoral policeman do?

[yorkie_chris]

While in no way condoning what this t0sser did I cant help feeling there is something very wrong with our "justice" system that sends a man to prison for trying to fiddle a very minor motoring offence,while really nasty scrotes can get community service for some quite serious street crimes.Maybe he should be made to repay society in some form rather than have tens of thousands of our money spent to keep him at HMP for a few months.

I dunno, this c*** could have had the cheek to give you a speeding ticket.


However, he is a dumb-ass. If the only offence evident was that he had an exired MOT, all he would get (from my experience) would be a warning letter. Maybe a slap on the wrist from the force internal invesigtion unit, but no more. But the moment he took that step along the road of telling lies...

Yes, he breached the trust of his position and is, wthout doubt guilty of a serious offence. But should that carry a mandatory prison sentence?

Forget what you think of the Police for a minute;

Think about what the court has done. He has lost his job, his pension, future employment chances and has been put in prison. Is he a threat to the public any more, now that he is unemployed? Is he likely to re-offend? How will imprisonment rehabilitate him? After all, that's what it's for.

Some will shout loudly and without thought that he deserves to rot in jail. Fine, opinions are your own and are very important.

But prison?

Pete

But he was guilty, no doubt about it. Would the guilty verdict have lost him his job anyway even if he was given say a fine or community service?*

Maybe the sentence is not to rehabilitate him but more to say to Joe Public "You need to obey the law, we don't let the police get away with it, so you've got no chance".
Perhaps it won't work, but I can see the intent there.


* I saw it a while ago, young girly training to be nurse had a bit of a scuffle and ended up with some BS caution because she was daft enough to accept it... could not then get a job because nursing requires ECRB check.

[Ch00]

Would the guilty verdict have lost him his job anyway even if he was given say a fine or community service?

Pretty much.

[ceeshaw]

It's a harsh sentence -- but that's usually the case for those 'made an example of.' His previous disciplinary offences would no doubt have played a part in the judge reaching his decision.

A suspended sentence would have had the same effect with no cost to you and me.

[Biker Biggles]

I was thinking a combination of loss of job,a big fine and some community service filling in potholes in the roads might be more useful all round.

[Jamesy D]

I was thinking a combination of loss of job,a big fine and some community service filling in potholes in the roads might be more useful all round.

Community service actually being something of general usefulness and benifit? Pahaha! He'd be washing graffiti off an underpass or sweeping up litter in a park. Far better to have a custodial sentence than that.


Can you tell I'm cynical? :cool:

[Lozzo]

While in no way condoning what this t0sser did I cant help feeling there is something very wrong with our "justice" system that sends a man to prison for trying to fiddle a very minor motoring offence,while really nasty scrotes can get community service for some quite serious street crimes.Maybe he should be made to repay society in some form rather than have tens of thousands of our money spent to keep him at HMP for a few months.

It's North Wales; they have a different policy on motoring offences there. Simply a case of reaping what you sow in my opinion.

[Ed]

This bleeding heart liberal thinks that not only should he not be in prson, he should also still be in his job. I think that the whole thing is a show trial and that this bloke has been hung out to dry. Hardly the crime of the century now, was it. And what relevance does having sex on duty have to lying about an MoT certificate? All it justified was another disciplinary probably with a final written warning. People lie all the time, you dear reader included.

[Milky Bar Kid]

This bleeding heart liberal thinks that not only should he not be in prson, he should also still be in his job. I think that the whole thing is a show trial and that this bloke has been hung out to dry. Hardly the crime of the century now, was it. And what relevance does having sex on duty have to lying about an MoT certificate? All it justified was another disciplinary probably with a final written warning. People lie all the time, you dear reader included.

Hmmmm, whilst I don't think he should have been imprisoned nor do I think his discipline record is of any relevance, I am not convinced he should have kept his job.

It is drummed into us from day one in the job, if you do something wrong, own up straight away - lie about it and there is no coming back. At the end of the day, he had no integrity. No excuse for lying in that manner and it is people like him who give us all a bad name.

We all make mistakes bt for the sake of a rap on the knuckles over not having an MOT certificate the guy is CLEARLY an idiot.

[yorkie_chris]

This bleeding heart liberal thinks that not only should he not be in prson, he should also still be in his job. I think that the whole thing is a show trial and that this bloke has been hung out to dry. Hardly the crime of the century now, was it. And what relevance does having sex on duty have to lying about an MoT certificate? All it justified was another disciplinary probably with a final written warning. People lie all the time, you dear reader included.

If somebody who is so full of sh*t to gladly spend the ridiculous £1.15 I just paid for fuel on banging some tart tries to tell me to obey law... what is chance of me paying attention to that?

Just same as you said before in your profession there is no comeback from lying about a c*ckup.


It is simple, if your job is to enforce the rules you can't go taking the p*ss out of them yourself... who you working for? Idi Amin?

[Ed]

No Chris, I just have a bit of humanity.

[yorkie_chris]

This guy sounds like he had no respect for the law, and as a copper I guess he was free with his implementation of it on others.

How is that fair? It is exactly same as a traffic cop staggering out of his car with a bottle of scotch inside him and telling me I'm going to court for drinking a pint of bitter!


TBH I think loss of job, pension etc. is very harsh, but to let him continue as before is absolutely unthinkable IMO. If I was being charitable... move him to a desk job with a big pay cut.

[Lozzo]

No Chris, I just have a bit of humanity.

Shame the copper had no integrity. This non-liberal poster agrees with the court's decision, and the fact he's a North Wales copper, one of the hardline anti-motoring police forces in the UK, only highlites the fact that he should have been cleaner than sterilised when it comes to his own motoring. If jailing someone for something as innocuous and victim-less as speeding/dangerous driving is ok in North Wales, then why not jailing for no MOT and then fraudulently trying to escape a conviction for it by implicating someone else in a junior position. I'll lay bets the junior officer was intimidated into doing as he was told.

He was a copper, and if coppers break the law then they know they will be treated harsher than civvies because they, of all people, should be the ones setting an example.

He was caught having sex with a member of the public whilst on duty - that is fraudulently taking wages when he should have been working. He lied about his MOT, he then got a junior officer to lie on his behalf, which then put that young officer in line for disciplinary action... and you think he's worthy of keeping his job upholding the law? Do me a favour, Ed, and please think more when making these statements.

This country doesn't need coppers who lie and cheat, and ones who are willing to take time out of their busy schedules to satisfy their carnal desires and get paid for doing so. This guy is scum, and he deserves to be where he is - he knew the score and he not only flouted the law he positively tried to pervert it.

[yawny]

We've always been told that in the job, we are about fourteen times more likely to get a custodial sentence than Joe (or Joanne - see what I did there, I'm a PC PC!) public. It's an odd figure I know, but someone must have worked it out.

It's the position of trust thing. People who handle large sums of cash for a job are more likely to go to prison for stealing from their employer.

A breach of trust.

This kipper is a plonker, without doubt. He appears to have bullied a junior collegue into assisting his subterfuge.

However, he is a dumb-ass. If the only offence evident was that he had an exired MOT, all he would get (from my experience) would be a warning letter. Maybe a slap on the wrist from the force internal invesigtion unit, but no more. But the moment he took that step along the road of telling lies...

Yes, he breached the trust of his position and is, wthout doubt guilty of a serious offence. But should that carry a mandatory prison sentence?

Forget what you think of the Police for a minute;

Think about what the court has done. He has lost his job, his pension, future employment chances and has been put in prison. Is he a threat to the public any more, now that he is unemployed? Is he likely to re-offend? How will imprisonment rehabilitate him? After all, that's what it's for.

Some will shout loudly and without thought that he deserves to rot in jail. Fine, opinions are your own and are very important.

But prison?

Pete

well said Pete..............what a muppet

[yawny]

This bleeding heart liberal thinks that not only should he not be in prson, he should also still be in his job. I think that the whole thing is a show trial and that this bloke has been hung out to dry. Hardly the crime of the century now, was it. And what relevance does having sex on duty have to lying about an MoT certificate? All it justified was another disciplinary probably with a final written warning. People lie all the time, you dear reader included.

Ed......you are right fella. it isnt the crime of the century but he/we are in a posistion of trust. Your right, he shouldnt be in prision, thats just stupid but he shouldnt be keeping his job.

[Jamesy D]

Why are people saying he shouldn't be in prison!? He's been found guilty of Perverting the Course of Justice, a very serious offence, especially for a police officer to commit!

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think it carries a compulsory custodial sentence in the event of a guilty verdict by the jury.

[Milky Bar Kid]

Why are people saying he shouldn't be in prison!? He's been found guilty of Perverting the Course of Justice, a very serious offence, especially for a police officer to commit!

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think it carries a compulsory custodial sentence in the event of a guilty verdict by the jury.

You are wrong.

Yes it is a serious offence but people commit it frequently and it either gets plea bargined away or they most certainly don't get imprisoned for it!

[Jamesy D]

You are wrong.

Yes it is a serious offence but people commit it frequently and it either gets plea bargined away or they most certainly don't get imprisoned for it!

Fair enough, I'd always been told it was custodial. Rest of my argument still stands though.

[yorkie_chris]

Why are people saying he shouldn't be in prison!?

The strong argument against him being in prison is that he is not a threat to the public.

[Milky Bar Kid]

The strong argument against him being in prison is that he is not a threat to the public.

Yep, totally. This guy is an idiot, that is clear for all to see but he is most definately not a threat to anyone but himself. And he is already punished by losing his job and pension.

We don't have enough room in prison apparently for offenders of violent/sexual/weapons/drugs related crime but yet they can incarcarate someone for lying about his MOT certificate!!! I understand that as a Police Officer I am in a position of trust and therefore, there are harsher penalties but I don't think this is good use of public money.

[Jamesy D]

The strong argument against him being in prison is that he is not a threat to the public.

I can see that point of view I guess, but Prison isn't just about isolating potentially dangerous individuals from society, it's currently the highest level of punishment a judge can meet out.

Though I will concede that possibly if the officer wasn't having an example made out of him, he may have got off lighter.

[ophic]

Prison is a method of punishment, first and foremost. It is not there primarily to protect the public, nor to reform, although it can also serves these purposes. There are many people in prison who are no threat to the public whatsoever - we even have "open prisons" where they are allowed out on occasion.

Sounds like a perfectly fair punishment to me, although obviously on the heavy side as he is being made an example of.

The worrying part, is that he may have acted on the advice of his colleagues or have witnessed these methods being used by others, which is why he tried to pull it off himself.

[Ed]

I think that people should remember this. Generally speaking, when back is against a wall, people react in ways which might not be typical.

[ophic]

I think that people should remember this. Generally speaking, when back is against a wall, people react in ways which might not be typical.
True, but it still needs discouraging.

[timwilky]

If Wade Dooley was able to get just an official reprimand after knocking down a kid whilst drunk, I am sure this would have been another buried offence a don't do it again letter.

The issue here was not the MOT, it was his actions afterwards, the attempted perverting of the course of justice, the bullying of a junior into committing an offence etc.

Rules appear to dictate that those who abuse a position of trust must fall harder than others who commit the same offence.

He should have lost his job. It is one thing to be a copper who forgot to sort out his MOT, but this guy was corrupt. OK not brown evelope corrupt, but certainly morally corrupt and I am sure his force will be glad to see the back of him.

I don't see prison achieving anything. Better others more deserving take his place. I would rather have seen him on community service doing something of value to the public, something he should have been doing in his job.

[Lozzo]

I think that people should remember this. Generally speaking, when back is against a wall, people react in ways which might not be typical.

This was over an expired MOT, hardly a case of having his back against the wall. Maybe he should have given thought to the implications rather than barrel on implicating others and thinking he was above the law.

No sympathy from here.

[yorkie_chris]

I think that people should remember this. Generally speaking, when back is against a wall, people react in ways which might not be typical.

You would not be saying that if I had run some bugger over trying to avoid a £30 fine for a noisy exhaust

[Ed]

Perhaps we should look at it from a different perspective.

Nobody was killed
Nobody was injured
There was no violence
There was no knife
There were no drugs
There was no theft
Nobody's property was damaged
Nobody lost any money

...a totally victimless crime. Or have I missed something?

So why in prison? To teach him a lesson? No. To make an example? Yes. So, police officers, if you tell lies you go to jail even though it hurts nobody.

I don't hide from the fact that this man told lies. People ought to get out of their ivory towers and think 'when did I last tell an untruth/distort the truth/tell an incomplete truth/be less than scrupulously honest - simply because it suited me'? I would guess that it is perhaps more recent than you might like to think.

Now, what has all this little shenanigans really achieved? This is where I come unstuck, because I can't think what it has achieved. There is no positive benefit. Lost job. Lost pension. One more jail place where the bloke is no danger to others. Prison record. Probably unemployable so will be on benefits for evermore.

I think that the job of a Police Officer is rapidly becoming like a Social Worker. You're damned if you do, damned if you don't, and in the meantime you put a foot wrong and all hell breaks loose.

[yorkie_chris]

So what are you proposing? That the CPS have "looked the other way" at the case so as not to hinder this guys employability? That the offence have been ignored because he's a copper?
The cure sounds a lot worse than the disease.

Imagine the headlines "CPS in cover up scandal" "IPCC accused of bias" "Police above the law?"

I am not saying jail was best thing, but most of those downsides apply even if he was given a slap on the wrist like a fine or what have you.




TBH if someone is paid a good wage with good career prospects and pension (correct me if I'm wrong but it does not seem too bad), then I do not think honesty is too high of an expectation to make.

[Lozzo]

I think that the job of a Police Officer is rapidly becoming like a Social Worker. You're damned if you do, damned if you don't, and in the meantime you put a foot wrong and all hell breaks loose.

What a dispicable comparison - the average police officer deserves respect, unlike the majority of social workers

[Ed]

...then most of the last Government should be impeached.

You set out some very good options, because this is precisely what would happen. What I say is that we should rise above the populist call for blood and recognise (a) the circumstances that I set out above (b) that therefore this did not deserve jail and (c) that a disciplinary would be a more appropriate sanction.

[Lozzo]

...a totally victimless crime. Or have I missed something?



Possibly the point.

There is so such thing as victimless crime. When we turn the other cheek, hide our heads in the sand or look the other way to crime it's society that becomes the victim because every scrote out there thinks it's ok to do what they like... which is pretty much what's happened since criminals were given the amounts of 'rights' that they enjoy today, and since punishments handed down have become laughable in some respects.

All crime is punishable, which is why we have laws and punishments to suit those who break them. Obviously it's on the books that perverting the course of justice carries a possible custodial sentence, and in view of how harsh North Wales Police have been prosecuting other motorists and motorcyclists for so called 'victimless crimes' such as speeding/dangerous driving and getting jail sentences imposed on people whose only crime was to drive a bit too fast, then this copper going to jail seems perfectly justified to me.

As I said earlier "you reap what you sow"

[Milky Bar Kid]

What a dispicable comparison - the average police officer deserves respect, unlike the majority of social workers

PMSL! Quality.

[Lozzo]

...then most of the last Government should be impeached.

You set out some very good options, because this is precisely what would happen. What I say is that we should rise above the populist call for blood and recognise (a) the circumstances that I set out above (b) that therefore this did not deserve jail and (c) that a disciplinary would be a more appropriate sanction.

I see no-one calling for blood, I see people who are tired of crooked coppers agreeing that the sentence handed down was apposite.

[Ed]

What a dispicable comparison - the average police officer deserves respect, unlike the majority of social workers

It isn't despicable at all.

Look at what happened at Orkney. Social workers were castigated for being over-zealous. Look what happened in Victoria Climbie - social workers were castigated for being too lax. When police officers are over-zealous, everyone complains - how many pages on here are complaints about being nicked when the perp felt it unfair. And when police officers do nothing, again they are criticised. My point is that the role of these public servants is very difficult and becoming more so, because public expectations are unrealistically high. Here it's a question of how to treat a lying police officer. Why differently from a lying teacher, a lying IT engineer, a lying whatever? Why can't people accept human fallibility, or are we saying that police officers are a breed apart?

When, Lozzo, when, Chris, did you last lie?

I am still searching for the harm factor in all this, and I have failed.

[yorkie_chris]

As a brief, I'm supposed to uphold certain standards. So if I got done for anything other than a minor driving offence then I could be hauled before the Disciplinary Tribunal. If I was convicted of dishonesty of any sort - or any form of violence - whether related to work or not - I'd be struck off. If I was made bankrupt my practising certificate would be automatically suspended as I couldn't be trusted with client money. Similarly, failure to reconcile my client account not less frequently than once every 35 days is a hanging offence, and if there is a shortfall I'm personally liable to pay it. And if my business went bust then failing to pay suppliers is not simply a credit risk for them, it's bringing the profession into disrepute.

Here is you talking about a few quid.

And you are saying we should trust this silly c*** to honestly and justly carry out the law?

He lied about not having an MOT, this guarantees that every bloke sent down on his evidence is actually innocent while he has let murders go because they slipped him a tenner.

...then most of the last Government should be impeached.

We know that...

[yorkie_chris]

When, Lozzo, when, Chris, did you last lie?

I am still searching for the harm factor in all this, and I have failed.

I am a regular citizen, I can be as much of a c*** as I want.
You and rest of taxpayers are not paying me to have integrity, and I am not trying to force you to do things a certain way.

[Milky Bar Kid]

Possibly the point.

There is so such thing as victimless crime. When we turn the other cheek, hide our heads in the sand or look the other way to crime it's society that becomes the victim because every scrote out there thinks it's ok to do what they like... which is pretty much what's happened since criminals were given the amounts of 'rights' that they enjoy today, and since punishments handed down have become laughable in some respects.

All crime is punishable, which is why we have laws and punishments to suit those who break them. Obviously it's on the books that perverting the course of justice carries a possible custodial sentence, and in view of how harsh North Wales Police have been prosecuting other motorists and motorcyclists for so called 'victimless crimes' such as speeding/dangerous driving and getting jail sentences imposed on people whose only crime was to drive a bit too fast, then this copper going to jail seems perfectly justified to me.

As I said earlier "you reap what you sow"

Dangerous driving is only victimless until the idiot loses control of their vehicle and ploughs into the car coming the other way, or until the cops have to go and chap the door of some poor person and tell them their loved ones are dead....or the paramedics/fire brigade/police turn up to a horrific sight that they will never get out of their heads...no matter how many times they see something similar.

Lozzo, as much as I agree this guy deserved to be punished would you please stop using the North Wales Police being hard on traffic offences as justification. IIRC it does not say what dept this cop worked in, he could have been in any dept.

Given that we hear it from the day we join, all the way through our service, I don't think what this guy did was acceptable at all and by lying in the manner that he did he brings his whole force and his colleagues into disrepute. His previous disciplinary record showss he is somewhat of an idiot and to be honest, he would have gotten the boot even if he wasn't jailed. That said, I don't think imprisonment is the right answer, as someone said earlier, what about community service???????

[Bri w]

The expired MOT, lets call it an error - can't say too much when my last one was expired.

Lying about it was 'calculated'(?).

bullying a junior officer into helping pervert the course of justice - immoral.

Loss of job - definitely.

Custodial sentence... yes. The severity of a sentence not only reflects the severity of the crime but also acts as a deterent to others. but hey, lets slap his wrist and send a message to other, not so exemplary officers that if you get caught perverting the course of justice you get a slap and thats all.

I'm not saying there would be a plague of stupidity but there certainly would be less to fear.

And just think, every scroat that was charged by said officer can now shout stitch up by a habitual liar. He may well have been made an example of but in this case I think it is a valid message that goes out.

[Ed]

So what if he was a member of North Wales Police? He didn't set the drumbeat, he wasn't responsible for policy, and for all you know he might have disliked it as much as everyone else. And there is no evidence to suggest that his convictions are tainted.

As for it being OK for you to lie Chris, or anyone else for that matter, isn't that really having double standards. After all, isn't morality - and honesty - an absolute?

[Milky Bar Kid]

He lied about not having an MOT, this guarantees that every bloke sent down on his evidence is actually innocent while he has let murders go because they slipped him a tenner.
.

Please, YC, that is a ridiculous statement.


bullying a junior officer into helping pervert the course of justice - immoral.



It does not say in the report that he "bullied" anyone, it says he asked. Whilst I agree his actions are immoral can we please stop making up the bits we don't know in this story. Typical bloody media hype.

[Lozzo]

It isn't despicable at all.

Look at what happened at Orkney. Social workers were castigated for being over-zealous. Look what happened in Victoria Climbie - social workers were castigated for being too lax. When police officers are over-zealous, everyone complains - how many pages on here are complaints about being nicked when the perp felt it unfair. And when police officers do nothing, again they are criticised. My point is that the role of these public servants is very difficult and becoming more so, because public expectations are unrealistically high.

The social worker cases you make an example of above were classic cases of Social Services screwing up at both ends of the spectrum. This isn't about screwing up, it's about a guy who is trusted to be cleaner than clean trying to escape a prosecution.

Here it's a question of how to treat a lying police officer. Why differently from a lying teacher, a lying IT engineer, a lying whatever? Why can't people accept human fallibility, or are we saying that police officers are a breed apart?

When they are the people who uphold the laws of this land and are paid by us to do so, then yes. They have the ultimate position of respect and trust, when they abuse that trust then they deserve the highest punishment available.

When, Lozzo, when, Chris, did you last lie?


I am still searching for the harm factor in all this, and I have failed.

I lie every day in some way or other, but I'm not a copper and I don't do it to get myself out of the crap, and I don't implicate innocent people who could face disciplinary action because of it. I'll maybe tell someone we're out of stock of something costing £1-99 because I know it will take me 10 minutes to find it and I can see I have a shop full of people to attend to. I'd rather lose a £1-99 sale than lose a customer who may buy a new GTR1400 because he's waited far too long for the salesman to come out of the stores with Mr Smith's sprocket bolt.

That's acceptable lying, trying to cover your ar5e when you're in the position of trust a copper enjoys is not. The harmful bit is allowing a copper to do this sort of thing, and watching law and order possibly break down as a result.

[yorkie_chris]

As for it being OK for you to lie Chris, or anyone else for that matter, isn't that really having double standards. After all, isn't morality - and honesty - an absolute?

Yes, but I (Joe Bloggs) can have all the double standards I want, because I have not sworn any oath to "serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality". And I am not taking your money for doing so!

There is every reason to suspect this guys convictions are tainted. Same as you could not hold office as lawyer if you had been convicted for fraud.

[yorkie_chris]

Please, YC, that is a ridiculous statement.

It was meant to be an exaggeration, but you get point.

[Milky Bar Kid]

It was meant to be an exaggeration, but you get point.

I think I get what you were meaning by it but you didn't explain it well, were you meaning that people with convictions would be able to imply that they were wrongly convicted and that this guy had falsified evidence and such like??

[Lozzo]

So what if he was a member of North Wales Police? He didn't set the drumbeat, he wasn't responsible for policy, and for all you know he might have disliked it as much as everyone else. And there is no evidence to suggest that his convictions are tainted.

As for it being OK for you to lie Chris, or anyone else for that matter, isn't that really having double standards. After all, isn't morality - and honesty - an absolute?

In answer to MBK and yourself - I keep on about him being a member of North Wales Police because every single one of them I have had any dealings with has not been worthy of the slightest bit of respect. You would expect any copper with half a brain to look at a force's new policy on victimising motorcyclists and think "This is wrong, I'll have to pull a few to make it look good, but I'm damned if I'm going to victimise them once they're at the kerb". It's been the same with NW coppers who aren't traffic when I've been visiting a mate who lives in NW, they are the most arrogant scum in uniform I have ever encountered, and I've had a few run ins all over the country to be able to judge them against.

[Luckypants]

I never expected this thread to be picked up by so many. :-k

I cannot agree with you Ed that the guy should still be in post. He lied about a criminal matter, which is something a police officer should never do (even if it is about himself). I'll grant you we all tell lies, half-truths etc and no doubt your average police officer does as much as the next person in personal matters, how great they are riding a bike, what a love god they are, how much they earn, etc, etc BUT with regard to the applying the law, making statements to court etc they must always be truthful and the penalty for not doing so must be severe. Telling lies with respect to criminal proceedings must automatically disbar you from being a police officer surely? Why do I think out of the job? Because when you go through a traffic light on amber but a copper says it was red, who does the magistrate believe? If the word of a police officer carries more weight than mine then they had better be right.

But do I think prison is appropriate? No. As I said in my OP the guy has paid a heavy price for a misdemeanour of no MOT. As soon as he started the whole lying / cheating / bullying to get it avoided he was guilty of a more serious offence that rightly put him out of his job. As I understand it, dismissal from the job costs you a pension as well, but in this case the cop out 'required to resign' option would have seemed lenient. Prison in this case serves no purpose other than as a 'deterrent' to other police officers, same as jailing speeders is meant to.

So out of job, but also out of jail IMO.

[BanannaMan]

I think the difference is in where/how the lie was told.
Certainly we all tell lies in our everyday lives but hopefully not at work concerning our professional duties reguardless of what job we have.
Telling my wife her new hairstyle looks good when it doesn't, does not compare with me lying to a customer about work we've done on their car.
Even though there were personal issues were involved here for this policeman, this was done on a professional level and not a personal one.

I once heard a judge here say this in court, and can't agree more.
"I hold Doctors, Ministers, and Policemen to a higher standard. They have access to the complete trust of the public at any time with anything they say."

Having lied on a professional level he should get whatever the court decides.
However I will agree, I'm not sure the punishment fits the crime here.
Knocking him down a rank and 6 months unpaid leave seem somewhat more fitting. But then we don't know all the details.
Maybe he was lousy at his job, maybe he's been suspect for such breeches of trust all along, or maybe he was squeeky clean and just a lapse there trying to coverup for himself.???

No matter...he's got what he's got obviously because he crossed that line and has broken that trust and professionalism he is supposed to have as a policeman.

And like the judge I once heard, I do hold them to a higher standard.

[yorkie_chris]

I think I get what you were meaning by it but you didn't explain it well, were you meaning that people with convictions would be able to imply that they were wrongly convicted and that this guy had falsified evidence and such like??

Exactly.
Maybe not past ones, but certainly any future ones.

You can't have somebody who perverts the course of justice back in a courtroom! (on that side of dock anyway!)

[Ed]

Apologies for my slightly abrupt departure last night:rolleyes:

I did enjoy debating all these issues, and I hope that you did too:D

[Bri w]

Apologies for my slightly abrupt departure last night:rolleyes:

I did enjoy debating all these issues, and I hope that you did too:D

Wouldn't life be boring if we all agreed.

I guess thats why there is a jury of 12, i.e. in the hope for a balanced verdict - don't get me on about the 'new' trial without jury!