Policing for who?

Status
Not open for further replies.
ST4 said:
And why were those "targets" set. Presumably these were other areas the force were falling short on at the time, and maybe the money destined to investigate this case would have been better spent in policing other areas, be that road traffic offences, dealing with assaults, drunken and disorderly behaviour, drug related crime, robbery, arson, murder solving etc

It's very easy for you to sit back and pontificate about how this money was spent, but unless you were working in that force, at the time, in a position of authority you probably don't have a clue other than it upsets your feelings or goes against your grain of thought.

As you fine well know the trade unions were a source of massive disruption to life back in the day, and investigating their activity to prevent trouble makers stirring it sadly had to become part of their activity as the unions grew too big for their own good and created massive public order issues. Define endless funds, I am sure thats a turn of phrase to try suit your anti establishment agenda.

Never mind getting evidence sufficient for the CPS to take the case being tricky (lack of forensics and credible or even willing witnesses to put on the stand), and the communities in question likely to clam up when witnesses were called for questioning. There comes a time when merely money isn't enough to solve a crime.
Click to expand...

So for all the hundreds of thousands of pounds spent investigating lefties plotting to bring down the government, peace protesters and green activists, I'm sure it'll be easy for you to find the high profile court cases brought that kept us all safe? After all 'we all know what the Unions were up to', except as a union member at the time my memory of it is different to those people who relied on the media for their truth.

I didn't make up the news story about the Sheffield investigation, I based my opinion on the police officers statement on my telly. Funding that was agreed and apportioned was then removed without permission or discussion. We're not talking about a political decision not to investigate, we're talking about a relatively junior officer diverting funds to meet targets.

Again, I don't know why I bother...
 
ST4 said:
People seem upset money was diverted from one investigation to deal with other crimes. I guess they kind have upset through their outrage over that fact.

I should ask you what prioritise means?
Click to expand...

If money was diverted from one investigation to another thats fair enough (that goes back to phils point abouyt there not being enough money in that case) , however wasnt the original point that money was diverted from this investigation to completely pointless stuuf, not the investigation of serious crimes

(given how many well connected nonces have come to light recently, I have to wonder if derailing this investigation wasnt deliberate , rather than bureaucrati incompetence)
 
And no one actually says what these "targets" were and "why they were set". How can either of you say these targets were set over pointless stuff?

Phil V said:
You can't guess my opinion on targets? You really don't read any of this do you.
Click to expand...

This is what this thread is really all about, your arm chair opinion against decisions made by a police officer in charge who deals with crime day in, day out.
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
And no one actually says what these "targets" were and "why they were set". How can either of you say these targets were set over pointless stuff?
Click to expand...

In my case experience with the civil service suggests strongly that they would have been - when i worked at a county council for example we had a target for 'number of complaints dealt with per month' - if you didnt meet your quota you did poorly at PDR ... which was fine unless your team was doing a really good job and thus hardly getting any complaints... if your target is to deal with 25 complaints but you only get ten and deal with them , then apparently you are doing a worse job than a team that gets 50 and deals with the targetted 25. Common sense isn't a strong suit in the civil service.
 
big soft moose said:
In my case experience with the civil service suggests strongly that they would have been - when i worked at a county council for example we had a target for 'number of complaints dealt with per month' - if you didnt meet your quota you did poorly at PDR ... which was fine unless your team was doing a really good job and thus hardly getting any complaints... if your target is to deal with 25 complaints but you only get ten and deal with them , then apparently you are doing a worse job than a team that gets 50 and deals with the targetted 25. Common sense isn't a strong suit in the civil service.
Click to expand...

Possibly but its all anecdotal.
 
and this is a quote from the original report

Senior South Yorkshire Police officers diverted money away from a child sexual exploitation investigation, a former detective has told BBC News.
Thousands of pounds were used instead to tackle "priority crimes" like robbery, car crime and burglary, Tony Brookes has claimed.
South Yorkshire Police said they were not aware money had been diverted.
South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner Alan Billings wants a wide-ranging inspection of the force.
....
The money was re-allocated to meet Home Office targets and failing to meet them would have harmed the force's reputation, he said.
Crime targets were introduced by the Labour government in 2002. Police forces in England and Wales were told they had to prioritise certain offences, in particular car crime, robbery and burglary.
Like all forces, South Yorkshire's performance would be judged by how well they hit the targets.
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31872553

although diverting the money may have been a police decision , the targets were mandatorily set by the civil service, not by the police themselves, as i said another case of faceless and clueless bureacrat gets involved in decision they should have left to the experts

another quote from the same report

Meanwhile another former South Yorkshire officer has told the BBC that some attempts to reduce prioritised crimes were highly misleading and lacking in transparency.
The officer, who does not want to be identified, said distortion of the figures had been "happening every day".
Experienced detectives were prevented from recording certain crimes and instead had to submit a report with specially-created units deciding how it would be catalogued, he claimed.
He said: "They (officers in those units) would go to a meeting in the morning and the senior officer would say: 'How many robberies did we have yesterday?'
"Instead of there being eight reports of robberies, it would be: 'Well we had two' because they would have managed to (reduce it). They'd 'no crime' it, or they'd go back to the original complainant, get additional statements, and pressurise them to withdraw the complaint."
One example he recalls is a gang member shooting five bullets at a woman through her kitchen window, from a distance of about six feet.
Instead of the incident being recorded as attempted murder, it was marked down as "criminal damage to a window", he said.
Other forces have also been accused of distorting crime figures. In 2013 the chief constable of Derbyshire Police Mick Creedon said an "obsession" with reducing crime was creating a pressure on police to "manipulate" crime statistics.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Evening everyone. We're getting a lot of rtms about this thread so could we ask that everyone keep it polite and within the realms of a decent debate please.
 
ST4 said:
This is what this thread is really all about, your arm chair opinion against decisions made by a police officer in charge who deals with crime day in, day out.
Click to expand...

per the link i posted steve , its actually the opinion of two officers against decisions made by a home office bureaucrat and imposed on the police with no consultation (and the decision of some brass to go along with that rather than challenging it)

see also here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31859931
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
And no one actually says what these "targets" were and "why they were set". How can either of you say these targets were set over pointless stuff?



This is what this thread is really all about, your arm chair opinion against decisions made by a police officer in charge who deals with crime day in, day out.
Click to expand...
FFS is that really what you're seeing?

Is there any point in me pointing out this wasn't 'decisions made by a police officer in charge'... The 'Police officer in charge' is the one bleating about having his funding nicked.

And targets, they're a joke, they're fabricated as an answer to an invented question, and are the cause of most of the mismanagement in the public sector (and beyond). A common phrase in the public sector at the moment to try to manage this fiasco is 'hitting the target but missing the point'. Targets per-se are pointless, not any particular target, but the entire culture.

A great example of how targets work can be found watching the queues at Aldi, checkout staff have to process x items per minute to ensure 'customer service', that's 'the target' so hitting it must prove great customer service.

So they continually aim to close tills to make sure there's no measurable gaps in the flow of items through the checkout. This means customers will have to queue and may be diverted at short notice to other tills. In short, the result is crap customer service, but the stats say the staff are doing a great job keeping the lines moving at the right speed.

Edit: - oops cross posted with the above.
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
We're comparing the customer experience at aldi with the targeted reduction in burglary, robbery etc? Really....
Click to expand...

as an example of how targets are stupid , why not

for a more pertinent example of why target driven policing doesnt work , see the second quote i posted above (from an Ex SYP cop)

Meanwhile another former South Yorkshire officer has told the BBC that some attempts to reduce prioritised crimes were highly misleading and lacking in transparency.
The officer, who does not want to be identified, said distortion of the figures had been "happening every day".
Experienced detectives were prevented from recording certain crimes and instead had to submit a report with specially-created units deciding how it would be catalogued, he claimed.
He said: "They (officers in those units) would go to a meeting in the morning and the senior officer would say: 'How many robberies did we have yesterday?'
"Instead of there being eight reports of robberies, it would be: 'Well we had two' because they would have managed to (reduce it). They'd 'no crime' it, or they'd go back to the original complainant, get additional statements, and pressurise them to withdraw the complaint."
One example he recalls is a gang member shooting five bullets at a woman through her kitchen window, from a distance of about six feet.
Instead of the incident being recorded as attempted murder, it was marked down as "criminal damage to a window", he said
Click to expand...

Would you charecterise that as effective use of police resources ?
 
And what do you think about the credibility of putting the victims on the stand and getting an effective case for the CPS? Wtinesses have to be credible, and there has to be evidence. Heresay from a youngster often isn't enough. Particularly in a tight nit communibity where complainants may be pressurized to withdraw the complaint by family etc.

Most nonces are done via internet material these days. Easier and more concrete evidence.

As you know Moose, Attempted murder is very hard to prove.
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
We're comparing the customer experience at aldi with the targeted reduction in burglary, robbery etc? Really....
Click to expand...
No, I'm showing you what hitting a 'target' actually means in real life, as your post seemed to assume that targets are inherently good and that hitting them is a good thing.

Not being able to comprehend how unrelated examples can be pertinent would be a sign of a low IQ, which is why I assume your behaviour is trolling.
 
ST4 said:
As you know Moose, Attempted murder is very hard to prove.
Click to expand...

not really - and anyway you've missed the point , in that instance they didnt go for a lower charge because it was hard to prove , the misdescribed the offence so as to massage the figures for violent crime (because targets) ... no reasonable person would describe firing five through a window at someone inside as 'criminal damage' - if you couldnt prove intent to kill, you'd go with an intent to harm offence ... unless you were hell bent on showing whitehall that you've had a paper reduction in crime of that nature
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
And what do you think about the credibility of putting the victims on the stand and getting an effective case for the CPS? Wtinesses have to be credible, and there has to be evidence. Heresay from a youngster often isn't enough. Particularly in a tight nit communibity where complainants may be pressurized to withdraw the complaint by family etc.

Most nonces are done via internet material these days. Easier and more concrete evidence.

As you know Moose, Attempted murder is very hard to prove.
Click to expand...
I think it means you've exhausted your defence of your previous 'opinion' and you're now looking for a different fence to hide behind to throw your rocks.
 
big soft moose said:
as an example of how targets are stupid , why not

for a more pertinent example of why target driven policing doesnt work , see the second quote i posted above (from an Ex SYP cop)



Would you charecterise that as effective use of police resources ?
Click to expand...

Every year or two the government move the goal posts in the way crimes are recorded. On paper the figures look good. Recorded offences of burglary and auto crime is down. Forces have to to save money, from the year-on-year budget cuts.as there is less recorded crime we need less police officers to investigate it.

Policing is expensive, it doesn't work on the cheap but government cutbacks and performance indicators are the real reasons why the police are failing. There is simply not enough money in the pot.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Every year or two the government move the goal posts in the way crimes are recorded. On paper the figures look good. Recorded offences of burglary and auto crime is down. Forces have to to save money, from the year-on-year budget cuts.as there is less recorded crime we need less police officers to investigate it.

Policing is expensive, it doesn't work on the cheap but government cutbacks and performance indicators are the real reasons why the police are failing. There is simply not enough money in the pot.
Click to expand...
You can't go round making rash argument like 'not enough money' :runaway:
 
ST4 said:
I never said it didn't, but I'd want my stolen car case taken seriously, or the damage to my property not completely ignored because there happens to be a nonce on the loose. The whole law enforcement thing cannot come to a stop because of a few sick pervs.
Click to expand...


You haven't got a clue have you?:(
 
big soft moose said:
If money was diverted from one investigation to another thats fair enough (that goes back to phils point abouyt there not being enough money in that case) , however wasnt the original point that money was diverted from this investigation to completely pointless stuuf, not the investigation of serious crimes

(given how many well connected nonces have come to light recently, I have to wonder if derailing this investigation wasnt deliberate , rather than bureaucrati incompetence)
Click to expand...
Bingo ;) as I've been saying many a time this isn't about money and targets. As best it is the wrong interpretation of what is required by a junior as Phil has seen on his telly. Highlighting bad oversight and limited understanding of what is required and how to get it. At worst, well as you've just highlighted....something just doesn't feel right there.
 
big soft moose said:
In my case experience with the civil service suggests strongly that they would have been - when i worked at a county council for example we had a target for 'number of complaints dealt with per month' - if you didnt meet your quota you did poorly at PDR ... which was fine unless your team was doing a really good job and thus hardly getting any complaints... if your target is to deal with 25 complaints but you only get ten and deal with them , then apparently you are doing a worse job than a team that gets 50 and deals with the targetted 25. Common sense isn't a strong suit in the civil service.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately I can belief that. However in reality wouldn't you go to the DG if a manager really acts like that. I mean come on if a manager act and down grades a pdr based on that they should be sacked instantly.

And if the DG don't play ball id take it to the minister. They love that kind of stuff.

Ps. Sacked naturally means is that they'll get more training and even more time off. Naturally nobody gets sacked.
 
dejongj said:
Bingo ;) as I've been saying many a time this isn't about money and targets. As best it is the wrong interpretation of what is required by a junior as Phil has seen on his telly. Highlighting bad oversight and limited understanding of what is required and how to get it. At worst, well as you've just highlighted....something just doesn't feel right there.
Click to expand...

Perhaps in this case, but I was referring to the wider policing arena in the UK. The year-on-year reduction of police budgets at force and local level, government driven ridicules targets have certainly impacted on policing. Money and targets are an issue, to think otherwise is naive, having worked within the system I've seen it at first hand and seen the consequences, you don't really have to look very far to see this.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Perhaps in this case, but I was referring to the wider policing arena in the UK. The year-on-year reduction of police budgets at force and local level, government driven ridicules targets have certainly impacted on policing. Money and targets are an issue, to think otherwise is naive, having worked within the system I've seen it at first hand and seen the consequences, you don't really have to look very far to see this.
Click to expand...
Nick, that's just leftie propaganda.

Next you'll be suggesting that cutting funding for local councils has created over stretched children's services, reducing funding in schools has lowered education standards, and cutting staffing at HMRC has led to a direct reduction in ensuring the correct amount of tax is collected.

It's clear that a few bad police officers and managers, crap teachers, lazy social workers and incompetent civil servants are the cause of those problems. I saw it all in the Daily Mail, it must be true.

Of course the fact that private industry requires what's called investment to thrive and modernise is unrelated, the Public Sector isn't like the real world, it's just full of idiots.
 
Phil V said:
Nick, that's just leftie propaganda.

Next you'll be suggesting that cutting funding for local councils has created over stretched children's services, reducing funding in schools has lowered education standards, and cutting staffing at HMRC has led to a direct reduction in ensuring the correct amount of tax is collected.

It's clear that a few bad police officers and managers, crap teachers, lazy social workers and incompetent civil servants are the cause of those problems. I saw it all in the Daily Mail, it must be true.

Of course the fact that private industry requires what's called investment to thrive and modernise is unrelated, the Public Sector isn't like the real world, it's just full of idiots.
Click to expand...

It's not Phil, I can cite many cases where forensic examinations have not been carried out or items not sent off for forensic examination due to cost. CCTV evidence not examined due to lack of resources. I've been to plenty of attempted burglaries (by definition) where someone has attempted to jemmy open a door or use a screwdriver to force open a casement window for it to be crimed as a 'criminal damage' the only reason the offender didn't get in was because the individual was disturbed. By criming offences like this Burglaries are reduced (statistically),

Many reported crimes are not even visited by a Police Officer or even a PCSO, statements are not taken, there is no investigation, nobody identifies forensic evidence. The computer spits out a letter with dear Sir / Madam, sorry to here you have been the victim of crime. Here is your crime number...blah, blah. It's not even signed, automatically stuffed into an envelope and dispatched to you 2nd class. A few years ago a floor polishing electric bumper went missing at my station. It was crimed as a theft, the letter was sent addressed to a cupboard on the 2nd floor with the name of the person who reported it. Dear Sir....

There has been plenty of times on a Friday / Saturday night where there are not enough Police Officers on duty to cover the area in rural locations, there is no police presence, someone may have to drive 20 miles to an emergency. Due to the lack of cops on duty in city's and towns. Police are going out single crewed at times because there just isn't enough cops on duty. In recent years the Thin blue line got even thinner. Officers have been hurt as a consequence,


Even overtime has been significantly cut back. In the 80s during the minors strike. Cops were wearing shirts in South Yorkshire with 'Arthur Scargill pays our mortgages !"

Because of cutbacks forces have reduced firearms officers, dog sections, control rooms, even major crime investigation units between forces are merging. It's called 'collaboration'. Of course the PR spin doctors and media play out that everything is rosy in the police garden. It's not, officers are swamped under paperwork and stretched to the max on busy shifts not even getting a chance to grab meal breaks and working in their own time to catch up on paperwork.

At the heart of all these policing issue is funding not just Govenment funding and your local council tax contributions which increases year on year to offset the reducing Govt reductions, but national and local police targets which drives the service. They essentially dictate what is / isn't investigated and national guidelines suggest the best way to go about this.

Don't even get me started on education or even healthcare in the NHS. I'm not in possession of a tin opener, worms are off the menu today..... ;)
 
Last edited:
Blank_Canvas said:
It's not Phil, I can cite many cases where forensic examinations have not been carried out or items not sent off for forensic examination due to cost. CCTV evidence not examined due to lack of resources. I've been to plenty of attempted burglaries (by definition) where someone has attempted to jemmy open a door or use a screwdriver to force open a casement window for it to be crimed as a 'criminal damage' the only reason the offender didn't get in was because the individual was disturbed. By criming offences like this Burglaries are reduced (statistically),

Many reported crimes are not even visited by a Police Officer or even a PCSO, statements are not taken, there is no investigation, nobody identifies forensic evidence. The computer spits out a letter with dear Sir / Madam, sorry to here you have been the victim of crime. Here is your crime number...blah, blah. It's not even signed, automatically stuffed into an envelope and dispatched to you 2nd class. A few years ago a floor polishing electric bumper went missing at my station. It was crimed as a theft, the letter was sent addressed to a cupboard on the 2nd floor with the name of the person who reported it. Dear Sir....

There has been plenty of times on a Friday / Saturday night where there are not enough Police Officers on duty to cover the area in rural locations, there is no police presence, someone may have to drive 20 miles to an emergency. Due to the lack of cops on duty in city's and towns. Police are going out single crewed at times because there just isn't enough cops on duty. In recent years the Thin blue line got even thinner. Officers have been hurt as a consequence,


Even overtime has been significantly cut back. In the 80s during the minors strike. Cops were wearing shirts in South Yorkshire with 'Arthur Scargill pays our mortgages !"

Because of cutbacks forces have reduced firearms officers, dog sections, control rooms, even major crime investigation units between forces are merging. It's called 'collaboration'. Of course the PR spin doctors and media play out that everything is rosy in the police garden. It's not, officers are swamped under paperwork and stretched to the max on busy shifts not even getting a chance to grab meal breaks and working in their own time to catch up on paperwork.

At the heart of all these policing issue is funding not just Govenment funding and your local council tax contributions which increases year on year to offset the reducing Govt reductions, but national and local police targets which drives the service. They essentially dictate what is / isn't investigated and national guidelines suggest the best way to go about this.

Don't even get me started on education or even healthcare in the NHS. I'm not in possession of a tin opener, worms are off the menu today..... ;)
Click to expand...
You never spotted the sarcasm?
It was fairly obvious.
 
Last edited:
Blank_Canvas said:
Perhaps in this case, but I was referring to the wider policing arena in the UK. The year-on-year reduction of police budgets at force and local level, government driven ridicules targets have certainly impacted on policing. Money and targets are an issue, to think otherwise is naive, having worked within the system I've seen it at first hand and seen the consequences, you don't really have to look very far to see this.
Click to expand...
As I said previously, policing is changing. The way the "criminals" operate is also changing rapidly. Money isn't the issue, or perhaps better phrased as doesn't have to be the issue. As a suggestion take a look at capex and opex underspend. The end of year rush still exists with plenty of pennies in the jar.
 
Phil V said:
You never spotted the sarcasm?
It was fairly obvious.
Click to expand...

I didn't Phil, but perhaps that's just how you conveyed the information, or the fact that you didn't use an emojo to reinforce your message. It's also highly likely that I read it too fast.....I read that many posts on here and at speed and sometimes it's hard to tell when people are speaking seriously or tongue in cheek. Add to that the occasional troll, I certainly don't put you in that bracket though. I'm killing time at the moment on a tedious train journey with plenty of noisy distractions which doesn't help on a very small phone.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
It's not Phil, I can cite many cases where forensic examinations have not been carried out or items not sent off for forensic examination due to cost. CCTV evidence not examined due to lack of resources. I've been to plenty of attempted burglaries (by definition) where someone has attempted to jemmy open a door or use a screwdriver to force open a casement window for it to be crimed as a 'criminal damage' the only reason the offender didn't get in was because the individual was disturbed. By criming offences like this Burglaries are reduced (statistically),

Many reported crimes are not even visited by a Police Officer or even a PCSO, statements are not taken, there is no investigation, nobody identifies forensic evidence. The computer spits out a letter with dear Sir / Madam, sorry to here you have been the victim of crime. Here is your crime number...blah, blah. It's not even signed, automatically stuffed into an envelope and dispatched to you 2nd class. A few years ago a floor polishing electric bumper went missing at my station. It was crimed as a theft, the letter was sent addressed to a cupboard on the 2nd floor with the name of the person who reported it. Dear Sir....

There has been plenty of times on a Friday / Saturday night where there are not enough Police Officers on duty to cover the area in rural locations, there is no police presence, someone may have to drive 20 miles to an emergency. Due to the lack of cops on duty in city's and towns. Police are going out single crewed at times because there just isn't enough cops on duty. In recent years the Thin blue line got even thinner. Officers have been hurt as a consequence,


Even overtime has been significantly cut back. In the 80s during the minors strike. Cops were wearing shirts in South Yorkshire with 'Arthur Scargill pays our mortgages !"

Because of cutbacks forces have reduced firearms officers, dog sections, control rooms, even major crime investigation units between forces are merging. It's called 'collaboration'. Of course the PR spin doctors and media play out that everything is rosy in the police garden. It's not, officers are swamped under paperwork and stretched to the max on busy shifts not even getting a chance to grab meal breaks and working in their own time to catch up on paperwork.

At the heart of all these policing issue is funding not just Govenment funding and your local council tax contributions which increases year on year to offset the reducing Govt reductions, but national and local police targets which drives the service. They essentially dictate what is / isn't investigated and national guidelines suggest the best way to go about this.

Don't even get me started on education or even healthcare in the NHS. I'm not in possession of a tin opener, worms are off the menu today..... ;)
Click to expand...
You see to me a lot of the examples you've listed, whilst a harsh reality, isn't caused by lack of appropriate funding. It is not necessarily demonstrating good management of what is available. Throwing more money at it may relief short term symptoms but is not a sustainable model ongoing and will not remove the actual cause.

Sure I know that our regional colleagues find it bewildering at time to navigate through what seems a maze. And for some that are London based there is a greater experience in how the system works. I always help them out when they ask.
 
There are areas where I'm betting forces could better deploy funding though. much of it in admin, no doubt.
As one tiny example: my brother served for 30 years in the GMP, and three years ago retired from the force. GMP now employ him as a sub contractor. He carries out forensic photography for them all over the North of England, and makes more than he did as a road traffic officer.
 
dejongj said:
You see to me a lot of the examples you've listed, whilst a harsh reality, isn't caused by lack of appropriate funding. It is not necessarily demonstrating good management of what is available. Throwing more money at it may relief short term symptoms but is not a sustainable model ongoing and will not remove the actual cause.

Sure I know that our regional colleagues find it bewildering at time to navigate through what seems a maze. And for some that are London based there is a greater experience in how the system works. I always help them out when they ask.
Click to expand...

If only it was so simplistic. Many very good Managers/ Supervisors have had their hands tied, many are equally overstretched and are held to account at weekly / monthly prayers by ACPO ranks. Plenty of Chief Constables are now speaking out publicly saying that there will be dire consequences to policing if the further round of policing cuts continue. There is only so much jam in the jar and a limit to how far this will spread.
 
If the police said to me 'we're sorry mr norters we can't investigate your stolen car right now we need to divert all our resources into catching this child rapist' I'd be all 'that's fine officer I hope you catch the CHILD RAPIST as soon as possible, my car can be replaced.'

I would have thought that my view on that was kind of universal. Nope. Not here on TP.
 
norters said:
If the police said to me 'we're sorry mr norters we can't investigate your stolen car right now we need to divert all our resources into catching this child rapist' I'd be all 'that's fine officer I hope you catch the CHILD RAPIST as soon as possible, my car can be replaced.'

I would have thought that my view on that was kind of universal. Nope. Not here on TP.
Click to expand...

And in reality that's what the police do and rightly so in my opinion.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
If only it was so simplistic. Many very good Managers/ Supervisors have had their hands tied, many are equally overstretched and are held to account at weekly / monthly prayers by ACPO ranks. Plenty of Chief Constables are now speaking out publicly saying that there will be dire consequences to policing if the further round of policing cuts continue. There is only so much jam in the jar and a limit to how far this will spread.
Click to expand...
A lot of the times it is that simplistic and it is merely people getting in the way and making it complex. Happy to have a proper chat about it, just pm me your pnn address and pending gsc I'll return you mine.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
It's not Phil, I can cite many cases where forensic examinations have not been carried out or items not sent off for forensic examination due to cost. CCTV evidence not examined due to lack of resources. I've been to plenty of attempted burglaries (by definition) where someone has attempted to jemmy open a door or use a screwdriver to force open a casement window for it to be crimed as a 'criminal damage' the only reason the offender didn't get in was because the individual was disturbed. By criming offences like this Burglaries are reduced (statistically),

Many reported crimes are not even visited by a Police Officer or even a PCSO, statements are not taken, there is no investigation, nobody identifies forensic evidence. The computer spits out a letter with dear Sir / Madam, sorry to here you have been the victim of crime. Here is your crime number...blah, blah. It's not even signed, automatically stuffed into an envelope and dispatched to you 2nd class. A few years ago a floor polishing electric bumper went missing at my station. It was crimed as a theft, the letter was sent addressed to a cupboard on the 2nd floor with the name of the person who reported it. Dear Sir....

There has been plenty of times on a Friday / Saturday night where there are not enough Police Officers on duty to cover the area in rural locations, there is no police presence, someone may have to drive 20 miles to an emergency. Due to the lack of cops on duty in city's and towns. Police are going out single crewed at times because there just isn't enough cops on duty. In recent years the Thin blue line got even thinner. Officers have been hurt as a consequence,


Even overtime has been significantly cut back. In the 80s during the minors strike. Cops were wearing shirts in South Yorkshire with 'Arthur Scargill pays our mortgages !"

Because of cutbacks forces have reduced firearms officers, dog sections, control rooms, even major crime investigation units between forces are merging. It's called 'collaboration'. Of course the PR spin doctors and media play out that everything is rosy in the police garden. It's not, officers are swamped under paperwork and stretched to the max on busy shifts not even getting a chance to grab meal breaks and working in their own time to catch up on paperwork.

At the heart of all these policing issue is funding not just Govenment funding and your local council tax contributions which increases year on year to offset the reducing Govt reductions, but national and local police targets which drives the service. They essentially dictate what is / isn't investigated and national guidelines suggest the best way to go about this.

Don't even get me started on education or even healthcare in the NHS. I'm not in possession of a tin opener, worms are off the menu today..... ;)
Click to expand...
At last, real facts from a real person:)

Whenever I make the same points, someone invariably tells me that as I have never been a police officer I have no idea what I'm talking about, but the reality, sadly, is that I do. I have come across police incompetence, lack of effort, lack of forensic testing, burglary downgraded to theft, criminal damage ignored all together, uninsured, untaxed and unregistered vehicle used by the criminal but all these offences ignored, and police officers a very long way away when they're needed in an emergency - in rural areas, it's really about travel time not distance, even 7 miles can be a very long way when it's just single track roads, and especially when they have no idea how to find the place they're trying to get to...

The one thing that the police don't seem to be short of is senior officers doing non-jobs, complete with staff to help them. I don't see why it needs an ACC complete with 3 staff to deal with the press, when in fact all that they ever do is to say that they are unable to make any comment... I would rather see that money spent on 6 real police officers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
dejongj said:
A lot of the times it is that simplistic and it is merely people getting in the way and making it complex. Happy to have a proper chat about it, just pm me your pnn address and pending gsc I'll return you mine.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I'm retired now so no pnn. I'm just passing the time on the train. I'm really not that bothered. These forums are just a way to unwind and express opinion as a discussion. We all have different opinions and of course every force has its own way of doing business. Scarcely a day goes by where I don't read about policing issues being affected because of finance, it's the same right across the public sector. I'm more interested in the bigger picture. I really don't have time to get into email debates I'm way to busy for that but thanks for your kind offer.
 
Phil V said:
Nick, that's just leftie propaganda.

Next you'll be suggesting that cutting funding for local councils has created over stretched children's services, reducing funding in schools has lowered education standards, and cutting staffing at HMRC has led to a direct reduction in ensuring the correct amount of tax is collected.

It's clear that a few bad police officers and managers, crap teachers, lazy social workers and incompetent civil servants are the cause of those problems. I saw it all in the Daily Mail, it must be true.

.
Click to expand...

Don't be silly phil , its the giant muslim spiders with ebola which are to blame.. and we're paying for it :lol:
 
I wasn't intending on an email debate. It was an offer of help. Some of us are actually in the here and now and have access to hard facts and processes which can't be played out in public.

Heck I right now have a review on underspend. That is why I get so annoyed when I hear people keep on asking for more money yet the current allocation can't be spend.
 
dejongj said:
I wasn't intending on an email debate. It was an offer of help. Some of us are actually in the here and now and have access to hard facts and processes which can't be played out in public.

Heck I right now have a review on underspend. That is why I get so annoyed when I hear people keep on asking for more money yet the current allocation can't be spend.
Click to expand...

The madness of funding streams and budgets. Always happens this time of year, but you can't spend it when you really need it. ! You wouldn't want to run your own finances with the same restrictions placed on forces. It's been a bone of contention for years. Good luck with all that. Thanks for your kind offer though I fully understand where you are coming from.
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
No, I'm showing you what hitting a 'target' actually means in real life, as your post seemed to assume that targets are inherently good and that hitting them is a good thing. .
Click to expand...

I'm trying to get you to think deeper and ask why they were set in the first place. I'd also like you to think about the quality of evidence gathered and how likely that would see a conviction at the time given it wasn't forensic in nature.

The police have to do other work than investigate child abuse and iirc this is what happened here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top