What The Flying **** Does The Met Think It’s Doing?
Last Updated on April 24, 2014 by RetiredAndAngry
I should think you’ve all heard by now the latest sorry chapter in the James Patrick saga.
More Disciplinary proceedings. Why?
I know what for. Appearing on BBC’s The One Show and giving a radio interview on Five Live without the Job’s authority. Under the circumstances, who would actually have granted that authority? Yes, I know James is still a serving Police Officer and as such is still subject to the discipline regs etc until the day he ceases to be employed by the Met, but is this really Gross Misconduct? Is this really a sackable offence?
I have frequently used the word VINDICTIVE in relation to the way in which the Met have pursued James. I have heard other people use the same word, and then this evening I read a Channel 4 news item that suggested that the Met wanted to sack James rather than allow him to resign in order to put him on the newly formed list of officers who have been “Struck Off”‘
Now that’s VINDICTIVE.
I have received a lot of messages from serving and former Police Officers, all of whom have supported James, and offered various kinds of help and/or advice, but one thing rang out loud and clear.
This is a course of conduct designed primarily to shut James up. Demoralise him. Starve him. Isolate him. Screw with his future career prospects. It took DPS 18 months to prepare his last Disciplinary case, are they really going to get one ready in under 3 weeks? That would be a first.
An element of revenge is also incorporated I am sure.
The Home Office Document entitled “Home Office Guidance, Police Officer Misconduct, Unsatisfactory Performance and Attendance Management Procedures” contains the following;
Twice the word PROPORTIONATE was used. Is what has happened to James Patrick in the past couple of days PROPORTIONATE? I suggest not.
I have heard from two previous Police Whistleblowers. It didn’t end well for either of them. Both describe a series of events more or less mirroring James’ experience. One even got to the point of contemplating suicide but, thankfully, retreated from that particular course of action.
I have lost count of the number of former officers that have contacted me who are willing to testify that James is telling the truth about #crimestats and recount their experiences of how it’s done. If you want their details James I’ll pass them on to you.
Not one of these people has said that James is wrong, not one has said that James is not telling the truth, and not one person has ever contradicted my use of the word ‘honourable’ in respect to James.
James has his next appearance at the Employment Tribunal soon and after that he will no doubt make some decisions as what to do next.
Now James has to learn some new skills. First he has to learn some Employment Law and how to present his own case to the ET, but also has to learn to survive the onslaught that the Met are heaping on him. They are surely trying to crush him. Aren’t they?
I’m sure James is strong enough to overcome, but spare a thought for his family. Do they deserve this? I served the Met for 30 good years and held my head up high, but I am ASHAMED of what they have become. I no longer recognise them as the same organisation I was part of.
James has previously been accused of undermining public confidence in the police service. Well I would dare to say that this with-hunt combined with other, well-publicised issues has led to the Metropolitan Police itself undermining public confidence in the Police Service, across the entire country.
James can hold his head up high.
Can Sir Bernard Hogan-Who?
Just what is the Met trying to achieve?
Posted from WordPress for Android