www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1309136...l-59-year-woman.html

Thanks again to the Mail for being brave enough to confront and print another story of police brutality.

I believe it was another police officer who complained and started the investigation.

Nice to know there are some decent ones ... most would have just "lost" the tapes (evidence) ?

The BBC are showing the footage and have been investigating this incident for ages but had not shown the footage until the Mail story.....weird.

At least now everyone is seeing the TRUTH about what is happening in our Police Stations.

Things have changed in the last 7 years for the worse - and this is an example of the "Culture" that has led to DE MENEZES - TOMLINSON etc etc.

It is epidemic in the Police. Whenever you switch the CCTV on it is caught on camera. I can imagine this is just the tip of a very nasty and big iceberg.

Thanks BR, you write:

"I can imagine this is just the tip of a very nasty and big iceberg."

I agree. But the problem in this case is that it was a police officer who reported the incident, and the police who investigated themselves and successfully prosecuted one of their own officers. This counts against the iceberg theory.

It does, however, seem to suggest what I'm going to call the "good-apple" theory of policing. Unlike the "bad-apple" theory of policing which holds that there are always a few rotten apples in the barrel, the good-apple theory holds that there are always a few good apples in a rotten barrel.

For evidence of an iceberg below the watermark we need more than this. In fact in a curious way this case tends to exonerate the police as a whole, because it shows that they are able to investigate and prosecute themselves.

Best Wishes,
Jim

If there were good Police at that Police Station Jim they would have intervened to protect this woman and she would not have been injured. In addition the Woman PC who bravely reported the incident obviously did not have the guts to do so at the time because she feared herself the situation she would end up in.....

This is not the Police policing themselves - it is a brave women who has stepped outside of the bully culture and put her own life and job on the line.

There are hundreds of other incidents that never make the media - this one had already been covered up by the BBC and only came out because of a National Newspaper willing to take a punt on the story.

The Police themselves had NEVER made any press statement about this until they were forced into the open by a National Newspaper AFTER the conviction yesterday. This shows the Police tried to sweep it under the carpet.

Sorry Jim but you need to take your rose tinted glasses off and look at the facts surrounding this very distasteful case.

In addition if you believe that the Police will take action against violent Police - can you answer how the TOMLINSON killer is still in the Police on full pay - having been "sacked" twice before for violence and how he has escaped justice when the evidence against him is just as compelling. The De Menezes killers likewise lied in duplicate and gave false statements which were later disproved by the CCTV evidence - yet they have never faced any sort of prosecution or discipline from within the Police or without. They are out there now WITH GUNS on our streets - and helped to finish off a certain MR MOAT this summer ( once again in controversial circumstances when it has been shown that the Police shot first - and yet are trying to persuade the public that Moat too his own life - despite his head being totally intact when they claim he shot himself with a shotgun under his chin which as anyone who has read about these things causes most of the head to explode.

Sorry the facts dont fit the lies.

Thanks BR, you write:

"This is not the Police policing themselves.."

How do you account for the fact that the IPCC handed the investigation over to the police and that the police then went ahead and charged the suspect police officer with a crime, presumably after compiling a case that satisfied the CPS?

You go on:

"..this one had already been covered up by the BBC and only came out because of a National Newspaper willing to take a punt on the story."

This is interesting. What evidence do you have for this? Certainly I was not aware of the story. The BBC do not appear to have reported it earlier. The Mail on Sunday went national with it, but I wonder why they did not report it earlier? Were there, perhaps, sub judice restrictions in place? What research have you done on this? Obviously the scoop will always have to fall to just one media organisation and right now the Mail seems to be one of the most vigorous. I notice The Guardian was forced to accept the embarrassment of publishing the video with the Mail on Sunday's logo in the corner. But to say there was a willful cover up we would need to be sure that there were no reporting restrictions in place. Furthermore, it seems to me that if the Mail did report it then the media as a whole, being the competitive institution it is _did_ report it. I would count this as a glimmer of hope. We need to use these opportunities. If there are strong reasons for the BBC and The Guardian to have reported this case earlier then I, for one, am prepared to write to them and demand to know why they didn't. But I want to get my case together first. I suppose I could just write to them and ask in the first instance.

Bizarrely, you seem to think that my willingness to write to these people shows that I work for the police. In fact sitting around moaning and doing nothing is supportive of the police.

Best Wishes,
Jim

Jim wrote:
In fact in a curious way this case tends to exonerate the police as a whole, because it shows that they are able to investigate and prosecute themselves.

Jim

One swallow does not make a summer !

We need ALOT more evidence of this before we can draw such a conclusion.

Thanks ITK,

I wrote:

"In fact in a curious way this case tends to exonerate the police as a whole, because it shows that they are able to investigate and prosecute themselves."

Please note the "tends to".

Consider the sentence:

"In fact in a curious way this case exonerates the police as a whole, because it shows that they are able to investigate and prosecute themselves."

I suspect you may have misread me. Sentence two, I agree, is not justified by the evidence of the police successfully investigating themselves in one case. It would take quite a few more than that. But one on its own, each one, takes us in that direction, little by little. Therefore it "tends to" exonerate. Get it? It has that tendency.

That's all I'm saying.

Best Wishes,
Jim

Understand, Jim, Thanks

btw Six months jail !

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-11214026

In The Know wrote:
Understand, Jim, Thanks

btw Six months jail !

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-11214026

Jim - the victim did an interview with the BBC prior to the case. The BBC felt it was sub judice - though this is not the view they hold when reporting on terror or child abuse cases when "anything" goes.

The idea of Sub Judice is only applied to those who have not been remanded usually.....because they can fight back. When someone is remanded the BBC etc all continue to publish as if they are already convicted once thrown in prison.

Remember our prisons are full of unconvicted prisoners - people on remand make up a THIRD of the Prison population and probably less than half of them are actually convicted in the end.

The sentence is a joke btw. See my thread on the sentencing.

Thanks BR,

I was not aware of that.

Best Wishes,
Jim

6 months is a joke!

Imagine what a member of the public would have got had the roles been reversed.

Innocent Accused wrote:
6 months is a joke!

Imagine what a member of the public would have got had the roles been reversed.

and this is the problem for the Police spin doctors. They are getting the same cuts as everyone else in the Police Service - yet are bleating all over the media today with their ANTI GOVERNMENT rhetoric.

The Police Service have lost the public - and their left wing allies in the BBC and New Labour are rightly blamed for the recession.

In 1997 we had better policing. In 2010 the Police hide in their police stations and harass ordinary people as this particular case shows rather than criminals.

Hopefully the Police will prioritise fighting CURRENT CRIME as their priority. There is no point in chasing cold cases from over 5 years ago. Unless that person is still committing crime then it means there is no evidence and it is a waste of finite resources.

The Police could cut ALL their cold case work - and save the money without having to sack a single person. Simples.

But until then they will attack the co-alition ( as they used to cover up for New Labour )

Thank goodness we will have elected Police Chiefs from next May to get all the New Labour activists out of the Police Service and restore it to the people.

I think BR is right on this one...middle class woman...damning video of the assault.

Imagine if there had been no video..she wouldn't stand a chance.

all those years when there was no cctv in the stations..they got away with murder. Literally.