Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: The Police/CPS/IOPC dodgy behaviour
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
Wyot |
You may be underestimating what internal investigations and changes they instigate off the back of this. The last thing they want is exposure in the national press. There is a limit and process end to what is public knowledge. But yes this must feel unsatisfying in the circumstances. |
|
JK2006 |
I've noticed, and you may also be discovering - a cunning trick Official Bodies use. They UPHOLD complaints and then, in the small print, try to limit any punishment or disciplining. So they will say offenders have been "punished enough" or should do "management courses" which involve an afternoon in Milton Keynes being told not to use pencils on forms.
I think the time has come to expose this. If "independent bodies" can get away with it - first they simply REJECT complaints, knowing 95% of complainants will give up and go away. But if that fails, for the other 5%, they UPHOLD the complaints but find ways to suffocate them.
This is absolutely fine when dealing with time wasters and whingers. Police, CPS, civil servants etc all have quite enough to do without having their day occupied by people who will never be satisfied.
It's NOT fine when used as an excuse to cover up gross misconduct or even crimes by officers.
If bosses use this method to evade proper examination, they do not care about true justice.
EXAMPLE: my current complaint about Surrey Police. I'm making no accusations. But I am pointing out the need for proper investigation. If police officers caused people to die, it should be investigated. Going along the accepted, legislated route - the IOPC (reminder - Independent Office for Police Conduct) have UPHELD my complaint that Surrey Police did not properly investigate my complaints.
You would think any decent Chief Constable would be horrified by this conclusion and would immediately demand a full and detailed examination. Have his officers killed people? Will they kill more people in the future, unreprimanded? And why did not Surrey PSD (Professional Standards Department) do the job?
The IOPC, having found that the investigation was insufficient, decided that the bad publicity in media coverage was enough punishment. Kill people? Police should not even get a slap on the wrist. Negative coverage in the Mail was sufficient reprimand.
Am I alone in finding this odd? |
|
|
|
