Sense of humour failure…or needs a sense of humour transplant?


LOL!!!! Go RPU…

(nice buttons on the obviously lady RPU scruffy…)

Two dads didnt see the funny side either…mind you…he dont look like the type that would…

On a serious note… 6 of the PCSOs involved received WRITTEN WARNINGS!!!!!!! one has told them what to do with it and resigned!

FOR WHAT?????

Meanwhile…

GMP show how to GET A LIFE – respect to Sir Peter too…

Advertisements

27 responses to “Sense of humour failure…or needs a sense of humour transplant?

  1. I know these chaps Shij.They are a team of buffoons but this was a massive over-reaction.The one that resigned was being investigated for other stuff but foolishly didn’t keep his head down in the meantime.

  2. A good sense of humour attends good sense.

    Please don’t edit or delete my post… I would like the opportunity to post here as I have always liked your blog…

  3. Well done to the chums in GMP. And Peter Fahy in particular, that is not something I expect from someone of his rank and standing, but he was well into it. Respect

  4. Brief Encounter

    Guys nothing is harmless fun at present. A MOP watching that will not think that that is cops letting off steam at the end of a busy shift. They will think, oh that’s what they are doing when they should be out on the streets. In my day the only physical exercise at the end of a shift was employed in getting changed and leaving the nick as soon as possible, I can’t understand why anyone would hang around making a film. As I have said on numerous occasions in the past, positive public imagery is what is required right now. SBHH is right on this one.

  5. I see another press article having a go at the police over stop and search. Windsor has now waded into the argument as well but what exactly would he know about stop and search.

    I dread to think how many of mine might have been classed as “unlawful”. If I saw someone walking down the street late at night in a relatively quiet area, dressed in dark clothing I would have a chat and they usually got turned over regardless of colour. This to me was grounds but to the likes of Windsor and many others it probably isn’t. As I’ve said before I will no longer search anyone unless I actually see them doing/carrying anything illegal.

    • Brief Encounter

      I agree except that maybe Tom has been out at the sharp end getting a feel for what is suspicious. But surely this is a subjective thing and if you record why it was that you reasonably suspected that this person’s behaviour and demeanour provided the grounds required by law then you should be okay.

      • Like a firearms who reasonably belived a suspect was reaching for a gun so he shoots him? Look what happened at that recent inquest.
        I know this is entirely different to searching someone but the point I’m making is that it doesn’t matter what we deem as reasonable grounds at the time. If a complaint is made and the procedure looked at then somebody else with the wonderful ability of hind-site may decide there wasn’t reasonable grounds. I’m not going to risk that happening so I will no longer search people unless I know that they have been involved in a criminal act. If I see Billy the burglar walking down the street at 2am then he can continue walking safe in the knowledge I won’t turn him over.

  6. Tifftaff, nothing wrong with day,date,time,place, dress, area of high crime, evasive to Q&A etc….that’s sec1 PACE covered. The problem is putting the grounds for a search as ‘drugs’ or ‘manner of driving’ is pathetic.
    Either pisspoor supervision or pisspooor training and knowledge.
    GOWISELY ……….whilst insulting stops you looking an arse several months down line.

    I used to keep a file of the worst MG11’s etc. I stopped when I realised in 2010 that the worst in 2006 was the norm now….. the situation hasn’t improved and some of them now have serious shiny shitontheirshoulders.

    clocking off

    • Wavey,
      You are talking about the power of the pen and making sure everything looks right. How often have you been on nights and come across someone who is a prolific burglar walking around in the middle of the night. Just walking, more than likely dressed in dark clothing but not doing anything. My policing head is telling me that he is up to no good because he is a known burglar. When spoken to he’s calm because he knows the drill. The fact that its night and he’s in dark clothing does not amount to grounds and I refuse to flower it up or word it in a way that makes it look like I have grounds. The fact of the matter is that in the past he’d have been searched because he’s a thief and it would have been written up accordingly to show the grounds safe in the knowledge you would be back up by those above because you were targeting criminals.

      • Tifftaff. your preaching to the converted.
        Unless I’m bombproof, I won’t stick my paws in anyones pockets.
        and if the insp/supt want someone ‘locked up’ then they can do it themselves if I ain’t satisfied with the necessity.
        But I still think there’s a lot of good work, poorly written up…if at all.

        • I completely agree with you about good work being written up poorly. I’ve picked up some good jobs recently but the state of the hangovers, MG11’s etc were horrendous and I’ve had to work harder to clear it up.
          I’m with you about not getting my paws dirty unless bombproof. I seem to carry out petson, vehicle, house searches etc a lot less frequently than back in the day.

      • Not any more…the SMT well be querying up behind him with their kicking boots on…

  7. Underneath the Stop/Search scandal and HMIC drubbing, 2nd ‘headline’ on Huff Post news site is, “BIN LADEN WAS STOPPED FOR SPEEDING BUT LET OFF – REPORT SHOWS BLUNDERS THAT LET AL-QAEDA FOUNDER TO GO UNNOTICED”

    Only by clicking the link and reading the article does it become apparent that this was actually in Pakistan.

    The headline looks great underneath the stop/search one, though.

    • Such a damaging yet inaccurate article. Hmmm I wonder what is due to take place this month which could have a huge impact on police officers.

  8. Simple solution is just to stop doing stop and search, let the public see what it really does, why we use it.
    I’ve said for years the first entry on the stop slip should be CRO or PNCID no. If they have either then happy days if not then justify it. It would mean that the officer would as no have grounds BUT if they have previous then they don’t have to waste time filling out a form.
    Crimes commuted by a small part of the community, them let the police persecute the criminal. Putting an end to nice families living in fear, stopping proper anti social behaviour.
    Good guys win bad guys loose.

    • Good guys win?

      Not any more… now it’s loud guys with PUBLICISTS win…

    • Agree with Blue Bob, we should stop using our search powers and society will quickly feel the effects and see the importance of such powers.

      We should be allowed to search on previous convictions alone, no grounds or justification needed. If someone does not have pre cons then grounds and justification should be required

      • No…we don’t punish the normal ordinary folk to stick it to the morons and attention seekers…that’s just wrong…

        • I agree it’s wrong but even a huge amount of decent, ordinary folk have become increasingly anti. I have experience of this from relatives. The crap spouted in the media doesn’t help but I’m sick of it all and I really don’t care anymore hence the reason I’ve already put measures in place to get out. In the meantime I’m not going to do anything at all which would put me in a confrontational situation and that includes searching people unless I know for a fact they have been involved in a criminal offence.

  9. I am absolutely with Taff Taff on this. And it’s not just stop/searches. Anything, frankly, is not worth the risk to my income. And that is all I see it as now. A means to pay the bills. Little more, sadly.

  10. Respect to the guys, gals and the Chief for going for this… It is the second such ‘Gangnam Style’ video I have seen, involving plod, with obvious official backing, in aid of #SuperJosh. Well done all.

    By contrast (and especially as HH was involved – as the Boss) what could the PCSO’s have been thinking of, doing this, then posting the video for all to see. Asking for trouble in this climate, when any outbreak of morale is ruthlessly suppressed.

    The message seems to be ‘Get signed off from the top before making yourself look like a berk while on duty’.

    Simples!

  11. Brief Encounter

    I agree. Asking for trouble.

  12. Brief Encounter

    You wouldn’t catch us doing that, our wigs would come off.

    But why didn’t one of them think that this was a bad idea? Judgement in short supply?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s