Yesterday was a bad day for the Met, worse than it’s been for a long, long time. More bad times are coming, no doubt.
A lot of venom has been thrown at the Met on Twitter and the like, some of it really confusing.
I have been accused by some of failing to condemn corruption. That’s just ridiculous, anyone who actually KNOWS me will know what my view of corruption is. A lot of people confuse corruption with wrong-doing, not that I condone that either. A lot of people on my TL last night appear to think that just because an allegation is made that ‘so and so’ is corrupt, that is a fact, or because something can no longer be found, that it must have been destroyed in a corrupt act. It might have been, but it might not have been.. Those people seem quite happy to join with Liberty and dispense with everybody else’s Rights except their own. There exists such a thing as Standard of Proof, and the Standard of Proof for a criminal charge and conviction for Corruption (or any other crime) is Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. I do wonder sometimes how these people would feel if they were charged with an offence purely because someone had said they’d done something, with no investigation whatsoever. Now that would most definitely be wrong.
The Crown Prosecution Service have standards that must be met BEFORE an individual is charged with a criminal offence. Those standards apply to ordinary members of the Public and Police Officers alike. Is there a valid reason that this should not be so?
Purely because some individuals need convincing I will quite happily place on record that I abhor corruption. I abhor corruption in the Police, in the Civil Service, in the NHS, in Local Councils and in Parliament. I also abhor corruption in private individuals seeking to feather their own nests, but unlike some of the Hang ‘em High Brigade I’m happy to await the outcome of the (hopefully) competent investigations before I go spouting my mouth off that there is corruption round every corner.
Corruption – What is it? Corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain, and I do NOT approve of it.
There is no international legal definition of corruption.
In its narrowest sense, corruption is interpreted as referring to bribery and extortion
In its wider sense, corruption includes one or more of bribery, extortion, fraud, deception, collusion, cartels, abuse of power, embezzlement, trading in influence and money laundering. These activities will normally constitute criminal offences.
A lot has been made last night regarding a certain DS John Donaldson and his allegedly corrupt links with a certain family. Personally I have no idea whether these claims are true. I will say this however; It is absolutely unforgiveable if the corrupt actions of one individual have plunged the Met into such a deep crisis, but this most definitely does NOT mean that every cop you meet on the streets is corrupt.
Much, if not all, of the evidence/intelligence against John Donaldson appears to originate from a fellow officer who was charged, convicted and imprisoned for his own corrupt activities, so who says the Police don’t like charging their own with corruption? This officer would hardly have made a reliable witness of truth in the absence of any corroboration. Corroboration – a concept seemingly quite alien to some our Twitterati.
Much has been made last night of the activities of the Undercover Officer known as N81 and his infiltration of the Lawrence family. Again let me make it quite clear that, if true, such infiltration/surveillance of the family of a murdered teenager is wholly unacceptable and inappropriate. However Mick Creedon, Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary, stated on National TV last night that his investigations indicated that N81 had been nowhere near the Lawrence family. I don’t know which is the true version, but there is most certainly doubt.
So there you have it. If you didn’t know before I hope my views on corruption are now quite clear. I just find it a little sad that some short-sighted people made it necessary for me to explain myself. They sit behind their anonymous Twitter accounts and spout any old rubbish, corroborating none of it.
If I said that a certain politician was corrupt it wouldn’t mean that he/she was. It would need investigation to PROVE IT.
I hope I have been clear enough for the doubters. I will not be entering into any further debate with you on this particular subject. Do not judge today’s officers by the actions of those from a generation or more ago. Today’s Police Service is a much different animal to that of the 60s, 70s and maybe the 80s
If you really don’t like this blog just unfollow me, I really won’t mind.
Finally let me reassure you all that 99.99% of all the cops you see out there feel exactly the same way. There is absolutely no reason why you should not trust the vast majority of them.
Yes, that’s why it’s such a crying shame that just 0.01% can still do such damage by undermining and giving such a bad name to all the rest still working so hard on everyone’s behalf for so little thanks.
For example, those scandalously unsupervised bullies of whistleblowers wasting scarce resources instead of dealing with issues raised in the public interest.
For example, those latecomers to the plebgate saga who, despite loyal intentions and justified anger, have shifted the focus away from the unimpeached word of an honest cop at the no.10 gates (whose character has been attested to 100% by at least 2 widely-respected retired colleagues) to questions of puerile collusion unworthy of any those 0.01%
Yes, that’s why it’s such a crying shame that just 0.01% can still do such damage by undermining and giving such a bad name to all the rest still working so hard on everyone’s behalf for so little thanks.
For example, those scandalously unsupervised bullies of whistleblowers wasting scarce resources instead of dealing with issues raised in the public interest.
For example, those latecomers to the plebgate saga who, despite loyal intentions and justified anger, have shifted the focus away from the unimpeached word of an honest cop at the no.10 gates (whose character has been attested to 100% by at least 2 widely-respected retired colleagues) to questions of puerile collusion unworthy of any those 0.01%