Mass 'bobby lobby' being contemplated

Federation representatives up and down the country are considering whether it is time for a mass 'bobby lobby' of the Government over police pay, Police Review has learnt.

It is understood there is a growing support among local federations across England and Wales for some form of mass protest by officers outside the Houses of Parliament.

Police Review sources have confirmed the idea was given serious consideration at last week's meeting of federation chairs and secretaries, although no firm decision was made.

One person at the meeting said "When we talked about pay it seemed there is not much appetite for the right to go on strike. But the general feeling was that we want it to be recognised that we have no right to strike."

The last 'bobby lobby' took place in 2002, when more than 10,000 police officers came to Westminster to lobby MPs over the Government's proposals for pay and conditions and police reform.

Another source, also at last week's meeting, said "As police are seen as the last line of defence, if we were to fight for the right to strike, we would lose public sympathy. It is about making the point that we have not got the right to strike."

The 2007 police officer pay rises are to be decided by arbitration on 2 November after the Staff and Official sides of the Police Negotiating Board failed to come to an agreement over the summer. The Staff Sides's claim is for a 3.94 per cent pay increase while the Official Side offered 2.325 per cent. Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is not bound by the arbiter's decision.

Both sources from the federation's chairs and secretaries meeting confirmed that there seemed to be 'a lot of support' fro some form of mass lobbying of Government.

The national federation is understood to be considering what percentage of each force would need turn up to ensure any demonstration would have big enough impact.

All I have to say on this matter is "When and what time?"

There are Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics

Sir Ronnie Flanagan made some excellent points about officers not being allowed to use their discretion. Due to the target driven nature of police forces these days, officers are being told to make arrests with absolutely no discretion so their force can make their targets in particular crimes so to guarantee their budgets for next year.

I just wish that someone had told my force about Sir Ronnie Flanagan's findings!

Due to some administrative cock up by person(s) who shall remain anonymous, we all received an email regarding the number of low level disorder detections that had been calculated at our particular nick. We are a very successful police station if I do say so myself but in many ways probably too successful. When the predicted detection rate for the year we are in now was sent, somebody over-estimated it by nearly 400 detections!

So what, you may say but the problem that faces us now is that each officer has now been instructed to detect an extra two low level disorders a week to be able to make that target.

Meeting that target isn't really a problem but what the problem is, is that once again discretion has been chipped away so that there is hardly any left.

In a normal situation regarding low level disorder you could have used your discretion to decide on the outcome. The person committing the disorder could have been moved on or ejected from a location in order to stop that disorder from occurring. That person after being spoken to goes home with a flea in their ear and a little bit wiser and the chances are they will not come to police notice ever again.

But, if we are now being instructed to detect these extra disorders then people who would have not normally come to notice are being put through the criminal justice system and could end up with a criminal record for something extremely minor! We are therefore making criminals out of people who are not criminals just to make targets!

The problem doesn't stop there.

Who's going to deal with all this extra paper work that goes with these extra detections? Us that's who! Sir Ronnie Flanagan has already stated that there is too much bureaucracy and unnecessary paperwork that the police officers have to do and this is just adding to it. It takes at least 2-3 hours to put together a comprehensive file for court and that's not including the time it takes to book the detained person into custody assuming they have been arrested for the offence rather than reporting them for it.

So for those extra two detections they are instructing, you can expect to find the officer spending at least a shift off the streets to deal with the paperwork and procedures. A shift which will no doubt be short of an officer to detect, what is in my opinion, more serious crime which if the officer would have been allowed to use their discretion in the first instance, that more serious crime would have been dealt with.

The Federation have already spotted the potential flaw with constabularies following the recommendations of Sir Ron with their response to his review of policing:

"The Police Federation would agree with many of Sir Ronnie’s recommendations, but you could be forgiven for thinking we have been here before. In 2002 a predecessor of Sir Ronnie’s chaired a Bureaucracy Task Force that made many similar proposals. Regrettably, without the cash and political will needed many of these recommendations will fail to become a reality."

It looks as if Sir Ronnie's words are already being ignored!

Give Us Your DNA!

I finally managed to watch Monday's BBC Panorama this afternoon regarding the DNA debates and the pros and cons of having a national DNA database.

I was extremely pleased to hear of the success of the two murder cases which because of DNA matches the murderer was caught.

In 1995 18-year-old Louise Smith, went missing after visiting a nightclub with friends. Seven weeks later her body was found hidden in a local quarry. She had been raped and murdered.

The police found the murderer's DNA at the scene. They then took samples of DNA from thousands of local men to find a DNA match, and the killer.

It took 14 months to find him, and he was someone with a completely clean record.
It was this case that led to a change in the law in England and Wales so that samples of the innocent could be kept, moving a step closer to a universal database.

The police dealing with the murder case said to Louise Smith's parents Gill and Rob Smith, that if there would have been a National DNA Database the killer would have been identified within 14 days as opposed to 14 months.

Kim Newson's killer was identified through DNA being obtained as the result of a previous burglary. During a burglary in a bar in Lincoln the thief took bottles of drink and in an alley around the corner of the bar he sorted through what was needed. However, he pulled his glove off using his mouth and saliva on that glove gave the forensic scientists the sample they needed. It matched a sample of DNA taken from a burglary 7 years earlier. It led the police to Steven Charles Hughes and a search of his flat which was below Kim Newson's uncovered a much more serious crime. They found a copy of a birth cerificate of Kim Newson in Hughes' jacked pocket and it had her blood and a foot print in the blood on it. After taking a foot print sample of Hughes it matched. Hughes was eventually charged and then convicted of the murder of Kim Newson.

A specially commissioned opinion poll for Panorama has revealed that two thirds of people would be in favour of a national DNA database.

Sixty-six percent of those questioned by ICM said they would approve of a new law requiring all adults to give a sample of their DNA to help with the prevention and detection of crime.
There are currently over four million DNA profiles on the database and in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Those who are arrested for a recordable offence - anything from drink driving to murder - have to give their DNA sample for the database. Even if they are innocent their DNA will still be kept.

However of those questioned for the ICM poll for Panorama 64% were against the idea of taking samples from newborn babies.

The success of DNA in solving crimes has been massive! Clear ups in burglary, cold cases with the use of DNA have seen the offenders locked up but senior forensic scientist Professor Allan Jamieson who is Director of The Forensic Institute, based in Glasgow warns that too much trust is already placed in DNA results.

He says: "People put too much faith in DNA. They're giving it an infallibility which it does not have."

He explains that finding DNA traces does not always tell you what you think it does.
"We've shaken hands. My DNA will be on your hand. You may touch something outside of this room that I have never touched, and therefore my DNA will be somewhere where I have never been," he adds.

There has been a documented case of mistaken identity with DNA. In Swindon a man with Parkinson's Disease was arrested, and charged with a burglary in Bolton. He was frail and had never been there. But his DNA sample - it is claimed - matched one taken from the crime scene.

Eventually the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) admitted that he could not have done it.

In my personal opinion I have no issues with giving a DNA sample should it be made mandatory. I have no reservations in giving a sample should a voluntary request be made in the event of an incident. I have nothing to hide! I believe that you should be worried if you do have something to hide.

Civil Liberty groups believe that it is wrong to hold information about parts of you being held on a database but for this doubt I ask just one question...

Suppose your daughter, son, wife, husband, partner was murdered....wouldn't you want the police to use everything in their power to find the person responsible?

Night Shifts

Nights are a strange set of shifts. For me my entire life is upside down for 7 days. You eat when you should be sleeping, you're sleeping when you should be up and about and now the nights are drawing in the chances of seeing any daylight for the week is nigh on impossible. I work a 5 week roster so the other 4 weeks of the shift are during daylight hours.

Now, I understand and accept that due to the nature of the job night shifts are inevitable but why in the modern age I have to do 7 of them is beyond me?

The most common performance challenges of night-shift work come from the human biological clock or cycles. Three main cycles, or rhythms, have been identified: ultradian (20 hours or less), circadian (20 to 28 hours), and infradian (28 hours or more). Circadian comes from the Latin (circa, about; dies, day) and is based on the human internal-body clock that runs on a schedule of about 24 hours. To understand this 24-hour cycle, let's look at what influences it.

Biological factors include the rise and fall of human-body temperatures throughout the day and the daily cyclical production of different hormones. Human-body temperatures can vary by nearly five percent in a single 24-hour period. A low temperature peak at approximately 4 a.m. and a high temperature peak near 5 p.m. coincide with a police officers typical alertness extremes.

The social cycle is dictated by societal norms, such as when the smell of breakfast wafts into your dream, or when the bin men tumbles the dustbins down the street. It's difficult to overcome these sleep influences, even with reduced light and noise for daytime sleeping. The clock on the wall, habitual sleep, meal times, and work and leisure activities are prime examples of social time cues. People seldom or never adjust completely to the night shift or to a new rhythm.

Sleeping at the right times, in best coordination with the circadian rhythm, is referred to as having good sleep hygiene. Postshift sleep should be coordinated with the circadian rhythm. Studies show daytime sleep periods are typically 41 percent (three hours) shorter and less restorative than nighttime sleep. A shift from the normal sleep, work, leisure schedule to one of work, leisure, sleep is required to allow sleep during the normal afternoon trough in body temperature and peak in error tendency. Studies show a moderate error peak around 3 p.m., with a much more severe error peak around 3 a.m.

There is an old saying that shift work takes ten years off your life and in many ways I believe it. It takes two days for the human body to adjust its hormones to cope with night shifts. This switch from diurnal to nocturnal mode then allows your body to cope with extended night shifts. Hence the reason you tend to sleep better and longer towards the end of your set of night shifts. The problem lies when you need your body to switch back from nocturnal to diurnal. This takes 6 weeks. So if you are working a 5 week roster and it takes 6 weeks to switch back, technically you are working with your hormones on permanent nights. To counter this problem, night shifts shouldn't be over more than two shifts then switch back to days to counter the hormone imbalance.

Then there is the problem with fatigue. You have to be extra careful with response driving at night. The glare from headlights, poor or cold weather takes its toll on a drivers ability to concentrate but when you're responding on blues and twos in the middle of the night you have an extra responsibility to be able to get to your destination safely.

All of this and you have to deal with potentially dangerous and or violent situations involving people who maybe more alert than you when you arrive!

Over time this accumulates into stress which can lead to illness. I already suffer with a thyroid problem which is upsetting the balance of my hormones. The Federation are looking into the possibility that it may have been caused by the shifts. There are scientists studying the effects of night shifts and an increased risk of cancer and heart problems.

I love the job to bits but as the song goes "Too much love will kill you!"

A healthy bunch aren't we?

Police defend drowning death case

Snippets taken from the BBC and interlaced with my thoughts on this subject.

Police chiefs have defended two community support officers (PCSOs) who stood by as a 10-year-old boy drowned in a pond.

Jordon Lyon leapt into the water in Wigan, Greater Manchester, after his eight-year-old stepsister Bethany got into difficulties on 3 May.

Two anglers jumped in and saved Bethany but Jordon became submerged.

The inquest into his death heard the PCSOs did not rescue him as they were not trained to deal with the incident.

His mother, Tracy Ganderton, and stepfather Anthony, of Bluebell Avenue, Wigan, are demanding to know why the PCSOs did not try to rescue Jordon and why they did not give evidence at the inquest held by deputy West Manchester coroner Alan Walsh.

Mr Ganderton told the inquest: "I don't know why they didn't go in. I can't understand it.

"If I had been walking along a canal and seen a child drowning I would have jumped in.

"You don't have to be trained to jump in after a drowning child."

Mrs Ganderton said on Friday that the PCSOs in question should be named.

"If you're walking down the street and you see a child drowning you automatically go in that water.

"You don't care if you're going to lose your job or not, you don't care do you.

"I want them to be named. I want to know why they didn't go in, I want to know why they weren't at the inquest when I had to turn up there, and go through the pain of it all.

"I want to know why they didn't have to be there as main witnesses.

"They should have to be there. They shouldn't have a job."

Paul Kelly, chairman of the Police Federation in Manchester, said PCSOs do not have the same level of training as police officers to deal with life-saving situations.

He said: "The message is clear and unambiguous - it's the government, they are trying to fool the public.

"They take a person and dress him up as a police officer but they just don't have the same powers.

"Every single police officer I trained with left training school with a life-saving certificate of some sort."

He said the PCSOs might not have been able to swim and in that case they should not have risked their lives.

But he added: "People throw themselves into rivers and ponds to save people every day because it's the right thing to do.

"This is an accident waiting to happen again."
----------------------------------------

My heart goes out to that family! What on earth must have being going through those PCSOs heads as the boy struggled in the water to save his sister then his own life?! Then to watch two anglers go in the water to rescue them whilst they just stood there adds insult to injury!

If they couldn't swim then fair enough to a certain degree but what are the odds of both PCSOs not knowing how to swim? Paul Kelly is right about one thing, you would go into the water to save them, I would most certainly do it! Even if I did lose my own life but I rescued the child at least I can rest peacefully! It is the right thing to do!

You don't just stand there and watch a child drown because you didn't have the correct training! That's absolute bollocks! You're own survival instincts and protective nature should kick in and you would go in after them.

What the hell everyone helping must have thought whilst these two cowards stood on the bank is beyond me?! I'm sorry to say it, but in my opinion they are just that, "Cowards!" to hide behind the excuse "We've not been trained" not to go in the water is inexcusable!

This will happen more and more often, cheap officers who don't have the powers to deal are only going to injure themselves and others and in this case the loss of a life!

Scrap the PCSOs now! Re-invest the money back into the force and employ more Police Constables! We are trained to deal with these situations and we have an oath to save life and protect property!

If you train and equip a PCSO properly then surely they are Police Constables!

Rest in peace young Jordon! You were very brave and far braver than those PCSOs!

All Rise! (again!)

Typical really, I should have known having had it happen to me already twice this week. I was warned for Crown Court again last night for the case which was supposed to have gone ahead on Monday but it didn't and no bugger told me! I later found out that even the defendant turned up expecting it to go ahead.

After faffing about trying to find which court the sentence hearing was in I was told by listings office that it wasn't going ahead again! I was literally on the verge of stepping out the front door when I saw the barrister who was prosecuting the case. He said "Where are you going we're just about to start?" I must have looked like a rabbit caught in headlights as he said "What's the matter?" "I was just this minute told that it wasn't going ahead and was leaving." It was then his turn to look like a rabbit caught in headlights as he said. "What do you mean not going ahead? The defendant is in the court room and we're ready to go!" "Well that was what I was told by listings two minutes ago."

Half an hour later I was leaving the court after hearing the sentence of the defendant which I was pleased with and because Crown Court is a duty commitment and official tour of duty, my day was done and I was heading home missing my first night shift this evening.

What I would like to know is how many hours are wasted through sitting around at court waiting to be called to give evidence? Even being the Officer in Case is bad enough as if you have to give some evidence you're not allowed in the court for the entire time of the case but must be prepared to run around for the barristers and Judge all day.

The number of times I have prepared a file, put several hours into making it, obtaining statements, medical reports only to find that the defendant suddenly changes their plea or the case is adjourned further still wasting more time.

I cannot think of the number of times I have arrived at Magistrates or Crown Court only to find that I am not needed or the date has been changed. Usually we find this out as we are about to go in to the court and most of the day has gone.

I don't mind rest day workings but when I've been sat in a court all day waiting to be called only to find that I'm not needed until the next day when I would have been working, or even not at all annoys me. It's a waste of time and money and I'm pretty sure I could have been doing something more important with it.

My advice to you if you ever have to go to Crown Court to give evidence is take a book and make sure it's a big book!

All Rise!

Well what a fun week I've had! Apart from being away for the weekend, my computer crashed taking with it the hard drive. It was repaired and then in the middle of a back up it crashed again leaving the hard drive stone dead!

A trip to a mates place saw me ordering a nice new one and an expected delivery time of last night. It turned up this afternoon...go figure!

I arrived back from my annual leave which was mainly filled with decorating the imminent arrivals nursery, knackered and wanting yet more time off! I hate going back into work after A/L as you can guarantee that even with the out of office assistant on you'll still get emails sitting in your inbox saying that they want something doing straight away. The annoying thing is that I've got emergency contacts in my OOA reply directing them to send the emails to my skipper yet the senders never bother to email them and then I get a snotagram asking why I haven't replied even though they receive the OOA and will get one for the email they just sent!

Any way, I digress. My first day back was a Crown Court sentence hearing. I arrived in the office to switch off my OOA and to check my emails, all 71 of them. Most were usual circulars which I usually hit delete. I couldn't see any de-warnings and I never received a de-warn via telephone so off I trotted to the CC.

Walking in through the doors I looked at the TV screens for the listings and couldn't find it on there. I knew it was that day as I was in the Court when they all ordered the date for the sentence hearing to be held.

The job was a year and a half old and was dragging on and on. The fool of a defendant decided to be tried by a jury of his peers and was found guilty for the offence after a two day hearing and a twenty minute deliberation. This case had been adjourned over and over for all that time. I was warned, de-warned at least 15 times during the life time of the case. As the OIC (Officer In Case) I had no choice but to attend and be on the beckon call of all and sundry.

Finally when it did go ahead it would have to be on my rest days! I don't mind the overtime but what's the point of completing MG10's (dates to avoid list) if the CJU (Criminal Justice Unit) and court ignore them!

Well, I as I said, I arrived for the sentencing hearing which was scheduled for the 17th of September and agreed by everyone as no one could make it any other day. I was asked by the CPS (Criminal Protection Service) to attend as I was the OIC. I couldn't see the trial listed so off I trotted to the CPS office who said "It's not listed for today" a little shocked I was directed to the Listings Office who after searching the records said "It's not listed for today, the Recorder has pencilled it to Friday 21st" I was a little annoyed at this and said "I know it's not your fault but why have they moved it? No one could make it any other day and this is why it was set for today." Apparently, according to the lists officer, I was the third officer that morning it had happened to!

I was warned for Crown Court for the rest of the week with another case, in fact the dates clashed so a bit of jiggery pokery with the CJU bods from another nick saw me heading to another Crown Court for the second time yesterday. This job was quite a simple one and frankly I was surprised that I was warned for it. I was arresting officer and was scratching my head as to what the defence could cross exam me for.

I arrived with plenty of time again in full dress tunic and walked to the CPS office. The case (I assumed) was already a day old and the CPS were on the understanding that I couldn't attend the Monday. I asked the CPS officer about the case and he just looked blank saying I should phone the lists office. I phoned, and guess what? The case wasn't even listed!

Two days wasted! The really annoying thing is that I received no de-warnings either via email or telephone for both of these cases and the CJU have my mobile number as they knew I was going away.

They warn you quite happily that a case will occur in the middle of your days off, courses, annual leave or slap bang in the middle of nights despite being given the dates to avoid... yet when it comes to a de-warn, nothing!

I received a phone call this evening from my witness care department and I thought, "Here we go, the case will be tomorrow on my day off."

"Hello PC Response Plod, this is the witness care unit, you are warned to attend (yet another) Crown Court for the case of, Crown versus ***** on 21st October to 2nd November at ******* Crown Court. Will you be able to attend?"

I wonder if this one will be cancelled without prior warning?

Bureaucracy Gone Mad!

I saw an interesting article on the BBC website today which says that according to the Chief Inspector of Constabulary, police officers in England and Wales are bogged down in red tape and afraid to use their own judgement. A video clip of the report can be found here.

In an interim report, Sir Ronnie Flanagan said forces would "over-record and under-deliver" for fear of missing something or being criticised.

And he said "excess bureaucracy" must be cut to free up police time.
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said changes were needed to make police "more effective" at fighting crime.

This isn't exactly new to us on the factory floor. Red tape bureaucracy slows our jobs down so much, it's a wonder that any police officers are seen on the streets at all.

First of all on the bureaucracy list of madness is a so called piece of accounting called "bench marking" Where years ago officers could use a thing called "discretion" to decide on the outcome of incidents and encounters, this "bench marking" means that each officer must make an individual number of arrests, process, stops and intelligence reports by the end of the month, "or else!"

For those who joined the force...sorry! service, recently, you may not know what "discretion" is, so here is the dictionary definition:

dis·cre·tion

the power or right to decide or act according to one's own judgment;
freedom of judgment or choice: It is entirely within my discretion whether I will go or stay.

and there you have it, it is the freedon of judgment or choice and discretion was one of our biggest tools in the job and has been chipped away bit by bit by petty bureaucracy and I include "bench marking" within the bounds of it too.

It was great, in the old days you turned up to an incident, eg. a common assault which quickly transpires that there's counter allegations. The usual kind of job where they could have easily sorted this out with an apology but the decide to waste everyones time by calling the police.

No one actually has any injury yet both are complaining to you that they have had a scrap. "Six of one" jobs are common and counter allegations are a familiar phrase you hear, especially when one realises he's about to be locked up.

You would then turn to each IP (Injured Party) and explain that due to the fact they are counter alleging assaults, both will be arrested and possibly charged to go before court. So are they likely to drop it now, rather than later when wasting everyones time? Usually they would and all would be forgotten with a handshake. The incident would be updated with "no party willing to pursue allegations" it will then be closed and job's a goodun!

In today's red tape world both parties would have to be arrested and investigations would have to take place into what would happen. Hours and hours of officers time is then wasted: awaiting custody space, booking in the prisoners, writing up the notes, then interviewing (as we all don't have case building teams) bailing, gate keeper appointments, CPS appointments (who will likely boot the case out) and if they make a decision to charge, the file needs to be made. As well as all this the crimes would have to be put on the system even if both parties are unwilling to pursue the complaint!

So, if I turn up to an incident and a crime has been committed but no party is willing to pursue or no party is there, the crime gets recorded as a "Crime Related Incident" What is the point in that? All it does is upset the figures, over inflates them and it means that more time is wasted by the officer because they have to put it on the system!

Basic things like stopping and talking to people these days is a nightmare! In days of old you just spoke to them, took name, date of birth, address details and that was that. In red tape world you have to record what they were wearing, location of stop, time of stop, and what ethnic background they wish to be counted as being part of! The form is now the length of a fixed penalty notice and can take about ten minutes to fill out if done neatly. No wonder people you stop get the hump if you're having to fill out this form and waste their time too!

God forbid if you have to search them! as even more questions need ticking or filling in. But that's not the end of it. You then, on return to the nick, have to input all these onto the computer assuming you can find a terminal that's available in the writing room as all the other officers are completing their bureaucratic nonsense!

I welcome Sir Ronnie's interim report as it states quite clearly what we've been saying for years and it's about time that someone has finally stood up and said "enough is enough!"

Among his recommendations are:

• A drive by police chiefs to encourage officers and staff to "rediscover their discretion to exercise professional judgement"


• The introduction of voluntary police community support officers to supplement neighbourhood teams


• The creation of standardised forms for recording crimes to minimise excess bureaucracy


• A nationwide consensus on "what is and isn't important" for police to record in an effort to cut paperwork.

Sir Ronnie added: "We risk diverting officers' priorities to recording crimes rather than getting out on the streets solving them and preventing them."

Some forces are taking advantages of technology, for example the British Transport Police are using handy little PDA's (Personal Digital Assistants) which record stops and searches on handy drop down boxes and simple section filling. Once complete, one button sends everything you need to whoever needs it and prints a slip for the person stopped too. According to Jane's Police Review, the 400 hundred officers given them, have vastly improved logged intelligence submissions and seen officers spend more time on the beat. The PDA allows them to log incidents without having to come back to the police station.

I'm all for this kind of equipment (if it works!) as it makes life easier and cuts down on what I need to carry. Some people joke about the amount of forms I have to carry in the pockets of my stab vest and find it amazing that we have to complete all these documents and submit them for the most simple of reasons.

One of the main reasons we have to complete so many of these forms is for recording of statistics. The Home Office apparently needs all this information to see how many black, white, Asian, Chinese, Arabic etc we stop and to make sure we are getting an accurate record of where they were born. This is so they can pass on the information to any focus groups and yogurt knitters to assess if we are being over-bearing on a particular ethnic group regardless if they have committed a crime or not.

So next time you call the police and they don't show within a time span that you define as respectable, please bear in mind that yours is not the only crime being committed at that particular time, we don't have officers we can pull out of a hat and send to you and the others are probably stuck dealing with the petty bureaucracy explained above that will not allow them to leave the police station!

We Can Talk To Man On The Moon But......

I can't talk to my colleague standing a hundred yards away!

This "wonderful" new toy came to us about three years ago and was expected to make our job all the much easier and all the more safer. It was called "airwave" to me it sounded like a brand of chewing gum but when I walked into the room for training I was given something that looked like a mobile phone that had let itself go.

We were told we would be able to talk to other forces, dial each other up and talk privately to each other and more importantly, the clarity was supposed to be excellent and secure.

Then we started using them and it was quickly realised that not everything in a new box which shines is good!

We initially were using them on the old analogue system because not everyone had changed over to airwave and were still using their old brick radios. It quickly became apparent, that although the old ones were big, at least they worked!

We switched over to digital and that's where things went from bad to worse. The annoying little beeps on opening and closing of the channel soon sent everyone of us running for the mode functions to turn it off. We were seeing on regular intervals the emergency button being pushed but no one had actually pushed it. Our radios were keying up without the PTT button being pressed and we could hear our colleagues talking about what they were having for dinner, or worse still, they were talking about someone else and we could all hear it!

The funniest scenario was an Inspector who was taking a shower and was heard singing in there whilst his radio was on permanent send and sitting on the bench with the rest of his kit!

Then there's the outages. I've never known a radio where you can be sitting in an area car and your colleagues radio is picking up a transmission but you, sitting three feet away get nothing. Then all of a sudden it kicks in and you pick up half a message.

Great if you want to avoid work but when it comes to officer safety, airwave is next to useless! We've joked about getting paper cups and string because it would be more reliable! Notting Hill Carnival recently is a casing point! The system was so overloaded due to 11,000 officers all trying to use it at the same time!

Then there's the problem with buildings! They don't always work in there! which makes for a really useful situation when confronted with danger and nothing happens when you press your emergency button.

Now if I went to O2 to buy a mobile phone and it didn't work in a building I wouldn't expect them to turn around and say to me;

"Well, you didn't buy the 'Inside Buildings' package, If you want it to work inside, you'll have to pay extra!"

Airwave have said they can and do provide guaranteed in building coverage solutions that forces can buy according to their own operation needs. Please tell me which force are permanently working outside and never go into a building?

In my opinion it sounds to me like they are trying to find another way to stitch the forces up out of more cash!

But that's what the people who supply Airwave say and that's an absolute disgrace! Apparently, according to the Health and Safety Executive the problems are due to the types of contracts signed by the forces when adopting the new system. They decided whether they wanted coverage inside buildings and in particular areas!

Great! They could have told me that when I walked onto a housing estate and the damn thing wouldn't work until I came out! Thank God for mobile phones, as that worked perfectly well!

Airwave still doesn't work on the London Underground! Considering 7/7 was two years ago, you would think that they would have pulled the stops out to get the system working wouldn't you?

Thankfully the newer systems have GPS on board to know where each officer is at any time.

Trick is, will that work in a crisis?

......Out to you.

We Are Still Waiting!

It's been said by many that policing could be done by trained chimps and for many of our tasks that we carry out that wouldn't be far from the truth!

But we are an emergency service that is 24/7 365 days a year in all weathers and conditions and is fraught with the unexpected, dangerous and stressful situations and when that happens you cannot rely on trained chimps or CSO's for that matter.

We have a unique job which is involving officers who can and will, directly intervene in the lives of the public everyday, sometimes using force when necessary. This brings with it an air of responsibility as often first at the scene of a major incident is a constable.

We deal with crime scenes, serious accidents, seriously disturbed persons, domestic disputes, sexual assaults, murders, domestic assaults, child abuse, gun crime, knife crime We deal with the body retrieval at major incidents like train crashes, car crashes, railway fatalities and then deliver the bad news to the families of the deceased.

Recently, we dealt with the London bombings, the floodings, the Heathrow protests, the recent terror attack on Glasgow airport and the failed terror attack in London the list goes on and on! Couple this up with routine run of the mill calls such as burglary, shop lifters and car crime it's a wonder we have anyone left to do anything.

I would safely say that many people who work outside the police service would baulk at the idea of having to put up with half the amount we have to do if they were required to do it.

I said in a previous entry about the prisoners strike that I think we should bundle the teachers, nurses and other emergency services in with each other, we are here to do a job and we do it knowing what the stress could do to us, knowing that debt, gambling, alcoholics and divorce rates are high among us because of what we have to do and see each and every day. But we continue, why? because we are driven by morals, ethics and we swore an oath to do this job.

However, government policy is set to destroy the already heavily dented morale of the over stretched police service. Even if the arbitration finds in our favour and the ruling is binding on both the staff and official sides of the Police Negotiation Board, it is not binding on the Home Office!

It is possible that if we do receive a pay rise it will be staged, meaning it will come in two parts to add up to the amount we requested. This means that it will be devalued as inflation would have made the first amount worthless, and the same again for the second part later that year.The pay claim from the staff is 3.94 per cent pay increase while the Official side tabled only a 2.325 per cent offer.

At a conciliation meeting back in August no agreement was reached and we are still waiting for the date for the arbitration hearing.So far nearly 20,000 people have signed the on line petition to Downing Street urging Prime Minister Brown to "stop the Home Office interfering in the negotiating of police pay"

Apparently a Home Office spokesman said that "Pay arrangements must be fair and affordable both for the police service and the tax payer"

Last time I checked, I was a tax payer!

The Fair Pay online petition can be found here: 10 Downing Street Petition and there is an online poll on the right about the right to strike.

ACPO: UK Not Awash With Guns

The most senior policeman spearheading efforts to reduce gun crime has insisted that the country is not "awash" with firearms and that the problem was not out of control.

Chief Constable Keith Bristow, the head of Warwickshire Police and the Association of Chief Police Officers' (ACPO) spokesman on the criminal use of firearms, stressed that gun crime had declined in recent years.

Speaking ahead of a major ACPO conference to discuss how to tackle gun crime, Mr Bristow said a "concerted effort" was needed from police, communities and other agencies to tackle gun-related violence.

Here again is another yet pointless conference in a series of "how to tackle things"

Usually they throw money at these sorts of things because when the government and public want to know what has been done by the police they can show the budget spent on it and claim they did all they can.

We suddenly end up with teams of fantasy squads who are about for the life span of a May Fly, usually joined by the station cats and Olympic torches so they can get all of the latest bits of Gucci kit which will no doubt be gathering dust in their lockers as soon as the squad is finished. We all get Monday morning emails detailing to us the wonderful way we are going to tackle the latest problem that has cropped up. For "We" read you or me, not the ones who sent it.

Simply put, the way to deal with these latest problems is cut the red tape! Allow us to get back on the streets and be a presence in the neighbourhoods so these gun, knife wielding nutters can see us. I am fed up of arresting someone then to be stuck in the nick doing paper work for it for the next six hours and fed up putting case files together and gathering statements for a job that has already been closed by either No Further Action or a caution! We have plenty of weak and weary officers who are close to being pensioned off for having a finger nail out of place, why not use these as case builders and allow us to write our notes and just go back out there?

I agree to a certain extent with Mr Bristow that this country is not awash with guns but it is most certainly is heading that way. The story of murdered schoolboy Rhys Jones is still fresh in everyone's minds and thus can fool the spirit into thinking that this country is a gun riddled toilet. In my 5 years of being in this job I've only ever had one gun incident. (Thank God!)

Allegedly the FBI warned the UK government some years ago that inner city gangs would be the new thing, what with the rise of Yardie and wannabe Yardie gangs in the USA. Drugs and guns would soon follow. Allegedly the government did little or nothing to act on stopping it.

The rumour that you can walk into any pub in most towns and buy a gun must be wrong. (surely!) Either I look like a copper off duty as well as on because I have never been approached by anyone who's asked me if I've wanted to buy a gun (or drugs for that matter). In fact, most pubs I've been into in the past 15 years I've legally been allowed to drink, you can barely buy cigarettes let alone a hand gun! Anyway, how on earth do you start a conversation about buying a gun in a pub?

"Barman, a pint of John Smith's and a Walther P38 please"

or in some pubs "Is that a gun in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me?"

In my humble opinion, gun crime is being highlighted by the press more and more. This sparks a general consensus that this particular crime is spiralling out of control. Because we hear of it more.

Yes, it's great that the public are hearing of the horrors which hopefully will dissuade others from committing the same crime but I'm not so sure it is a good thing to keep on and on about them because what I do know for certain is that if you keep highlighting the same subject over and over, people will eventually take no notice, they get bored of it and that can be dangerous, because then it's becoming the norm.

Eventually it no longer becomes front page news which is where it should belong. It ends up migrating through the newspaper and shrinks in size until it makes a small footnote at the bottom of a page. Stories like the one about Rhys Jones should always belong on the front page national news because here is a young boy gunned down at 11 years old on his way home from football practice.

However, hearing about a gang fight between youths and a gun being seen or heard, (especially if it's at the Notting Hill Carnival as it's always happening there) should never make the national news as it waters down the major tragedies and that most certainly is a crime.

Cop Pleasures Himself On CCTV

According to The Sun, human rights inspectors were shown CCTV footage from a police station’s cells — and were shocked to be confronted by a Police Inspector secretly ‘pleasuring’ himself.

The shamed Inspector Brian Smith was unwittingly captured on film after sneaking off to be on his own during a night shift.

His solo sex act in the custody suite at London’s top-security Paddington Green police station was exposed months later by pure chance — when the watchdogs picked a random tape to view from thousands on a shelf.

The human rights monitors had been checking for ‘abuse’ during their routine visit to Britain’s most secure police station — which is used to house terror suspects, and immediately complained to the officer’s supervisors.

The Metropolitan Police have confirmed: “An officer has been required to resign after it was found proven he had engaged in conduct likely to bring discredit to the Metropolitan Police.”

Why was this one particular officer asked to resign when someone who has killed is allowed to keep his job?

One particular officer kept his job despite being convicted of jumping a red light 27 seconds after it had changed and collided with a scooter rider and killed him on Camden High Street at the junction of Delancey Street and Pratt Street in North London, which has a 30 mile per hour speed limit. He was driving at the time of the crash between 54 and 66 miles per hour when he passed through the red light.

He had pleaded Not Guilty to "Causing Death by Dangerous Driving" which carries a maximum penalty of 14 years but before the Jury retired to consider their verdict he changed his plea to 'Guilty of Careless Driving'.

Desmond Russell, an Acting Police Inspector, for the British Transport Police, was fined £2000 and banned from driving for three years.

Russell claimed the accident happened after the "most stressful shift" of his career!

Pardon me, Mr Russell but if your mind was not on your driving because of "the most stressful shift" of your career then why did you drive home? You as the driver are responsible for your actions and trying to mitigate killing someone by claiming you were stressed is bang out of order!

There you have one officer who hasn't hurt anyone, hid himself out of view from others and pleasured himself, yes maybe he should have waited till he got home, or even to a toilet!

Then you have another officer who destroys the life of an innocent man and his family and just walks away keeping his job! He was lucky considering new plans that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said the very worst cases currently prosecuted as death by dangerous driving should instead be prosecuted as manslaughter, which carries a maximum life sentence.

Perhaps the Inspector who was asked to resign for pleasuring himself should have said he was stressed!

Bon Appétit!

Just reading Totally Un-Pc's excellent blog post entitled "A Relative of the Colonel" reminded me of some scenarios that have occurred to me in the past.

Shift work invariably leads me ending up in the local kebab shop and walking away with a heart attack in pitta bread mainly because it is quick and simple and depending where I got it from, tasty. I used to cook my own food but sods law dictates that just as I am about to heat something up or half way through stirring it an urgent call comes out over the radio and I have to attend.

I was coming out of the local kebab shop with burger and chips nicely wrapped up in polystyrene box and carrier bag when walking to the car we received an urgent call to attend someone who must have seen us buying our food and wanted us to waste it so dialled 999.

We dealt with the call which was LOB and didn't end up in an arrest. Just as I said to my mate, "Right, time for grub!" another call came out. Blue lighting it to the other side of the borough to another LOB call resulted again with no arrest.

Dejectedly I opened the polystyrene box to find a cold burger, colder than a McDonald's burger and it had sweated through leaving the chips quaggy and moist! Still, I was starving and reluctantly, down the hatch it went. I was in no doubt, that I would be regretting that later!

I get a good reception from that kebab house and they are GTP which is handy for penny saving. I've helped them out in the past with the occasional drunk who wants his kebab and wants it now but doesn't want to pay for it. Also we put quite a lot of cash across their counter as practically every nick in the area uses it.

I am supposed to get 45 minutes for break and if I've booked off for "refs" and then get called out I am allowed to take the break again and claim back for the lost food.

What does annoy me though, especially if I'm walking, carrying food or wandering round the aisles at Tesco, Sainsbury's or Morrisons looking for something to eat, are the looks and comments I occasionally receive.

I feel like I've grown a second head sometimes because of the open mouthed stares I get because I dare to shop for something to eat!

I've even had some people have the audacity to say to me "Oh, It's alright for some!" What the hell is that supposed to mean? They are in their free time, I'm working and my lunch time, getting something to eat and they say that!

I had one bloke say to me "No wonder you lot are so fat eating that!" I responded by looking into his trolley and said:

"Well, you could do with the diet version of all that in there yourself mate!"

and walked off with him probably writing down my collar number to complain about me. It's not like I had a piled up trolley, like him, it was a "Be Good To Yourself" chicken curry for Christ's sake!

On the odd occasion I've been stopped by people who want to chat or ask for crime advice. That's great, but I only get 45 minutes if I'm lucky and if a copper is in a supermarket carrying shopping he's there to buy his dinner not to talk about your rhododendrons being trampled on by next doors cat however frustrating it can be.

So the next time you see me coming out of a food establishment, please don't pass a sarky comment, it's alright for you, you've most likely had or going home to a nice cooked meal. Why not tell me where the latest buy one get one free deals are instead!

What Do You See?

What do you see, what do you see?
What are you thinking when you look at me?
A crabby policeman shallow and unwise,
No life of my own just blank heartless eyes?

Nothing better to do than keep fighting crime,
Who constantly hears “I didn’t do it this time!"?
Who seems to notice everything that you do,
And forever is seeking out to blame you?

Who is only out to retain your free will,
With cuffing and questioning, the long day to fill?
Is that what you're thinking, is that what you see?
Then open your eyes, you’re not looking at me!

I'll tell you who I am if you take time for me,
Stop looking right through me, look closer and see.
I have a family, a wife and a home,
A mother, a father and kids of my own.
We laugh and we play, even watch DVD’s,
We playfight and joke, tickle and tease.

I do what I do not for the thrill of the chase,
But so your children and mine can grow in a safe place.
You do not see the tears I have shed,
For the times I have had to deliver the news that you dread.
When I see what makes my heart want to bleed,
I have to step forward and take the lead.

So open your eyes, look and see...
I’m not a crabby policeman.
Look closer... see me!

by a good friend "Dogberry"

Grand Theft Auto

I've just been watching World's Most Shocking Police Videos on Bravo. Mostly American pursuits usually ending up in a large pile of scrap metal and a felon slammed over the bonnet of a police cruiser.

What I find impressive with these American pursuits is the way the American cops prosecute offenders who drive recklessly or steal a vehicle.

Take for example a pursuit involving an 18 wheeler articulated lorry. The driver of this lorry had not one thought for the persons around him as he crashed through streets and smashed through police vehicles in an attempt to escape custody.

He piled onto a highway slamming into vehicles but was eventually stopped by a traffic jam ahead. What did this driver do? He revved up his engine and pushed his way through all the traffic to break through the other side to make his escape. There were cars pushed onto their sides, other vehicles roofs and driven over. The officers, justifiably started opening fire on the truck, blowing the tyres, shooting the engine till eventually it stopped. They wrestled the driver out of his cab and he was promptly arrested.

He was charged with assault on a public servant and got a prison sentence of

.....wait for it

TEN YEARS!

Now, imagine that took place in this country. The offender would have probably got a 2 year driving ban and 100 hours community service!

Our cousins across the pond deal with the punishment for these types of crime in a far more satisfying way than the way we do here!

Why don't we have the equivalent of grand theft auto in this country?

In my opinion, TWOC'ing isn't taken seriously enough by the CPS and the courts. The punishment for taking a conveyance without owners consent is so lame compared to the American version.

If you stole my car in America and drove it across state lines, not only would you get charged with GTA, you would also get charged with transportation of stolen goods! You would be held in police custody until someone paid a 4 figure dollar sum for bail and then face anything up to 10-15 years in a penitentiary.

If you stole my car in this country (assuming you were caught) you would be carefully placed into cuffs, booked into custody, interviewed, released on bail and probably never seen again!

If you did turn up for bail, the CPS would have probably lost interest in the case (assuming you managed to get an appointment!) and tried to find the easiest, the most crappiest charge for them to run with and they would have most likely dropped all the other charges because it was just too difficult for them to proceed with!

How the other half live eh?

Another Youth Murdered!

Police are searching for a group of youths seen running away from the scene where a 17-year-old boy was stabbed to death.

Officers were called by ambulance staff to Chesterford Road, in Newham, east London, at 2339 BST on Thursday.

The victim has been named as Mohammed Ahmed from east London.

A post-mortem examination confirmed he died of a stab wound. Two 16-year-old youths arrested over the death have been released without charge.

This death brings the total of teenage murders in London this year to the grim total of 19!

The sad thing for me on a personal level, is that I was in that very road at that very spot an hour or so before hand dropping off a court summons to someone not connected with the stabbings.

The only two words in my mind at the moment regarding this incident are:

"If only....."

What on earth is happening with this country and all these teenage murders? Although this one is not believed to be gang related, the number of gang related incidents is constantly on the rise.

Kids in deprived areas need to be encouraged to steer clear of gangs and the carrying of weapons but the problem is, how?

Schools have lost the discipline they used to have, the yoghurt knitters have made it plain and simple that if a teacher so much as raises a voice against a trouble making child they either face the sack or they get sued by their parents who some seem to think that the school is responsible for the up-bringing of their child.

The police have lost the respect of the younger generation. I am more likely to get a two fingered salute by a ten year old when I drive onto an estate in my area car than them coming over to see what's in it.

I used to be terrified of my local home beat bobby! He was a giant of a man and seemed to have a sixth sense for smelling trouble. His mere presence was enough to stop a crime from occurring.

So maybe that's where the problem lies. We don't see police officers on the streets like we used to do any more. Thanks to the wonderful idea of expanding areas so big it takes most the shift to get round them and the closure of village police stations, constables are not able to get "out there" and mix in. Thank God the force mergers never took place!

Areas of towns shouldn't be no go areas after dark. One particular town I know has a problem with large numbers of kids gathering outside an off licence after dark. They would be loud and smash windows, fight and damage cars because there was no police presence.

Because of the lack of officers due to holidays, sickness, paper work, red tape, court and the spreading thin of officers across the constabulary, the area becomes over run with the youth culture that appears to be spiralling out of control.

Kids are "tooling up" with everything from screwdrivers to butchers knives to protect themselves from being robbed by other youths. They are forming gangs to "feel safe" and to protect their image from where they come from. I have seen a sudden increase in postcode gangs named after the postcode they come from. Woe be tied anyone from a rival gang found in their area!

The youth are not fearful of the law anymore. Very little happens to them if they are arrested in possession of a blade or other weapon. The yoghurt knitters need to stop interfering with the course of the law. Stop trying to protect the offender and make excuses for them! Start making the offender realise their own mistakes and if that means putting them in a 8x8 cell for a year or so then so be it, giving them iPods, CD tokens and holidays or trips away are not encouraging ways to stop them offending and stop using the Human Rights Act as a way to protect the criminals!

Invest in the schools more, especially for the deprived areas. Give the teachers back their discipline powers and perhaps we should start seeing some respect in the youth.

However, the problem could lie somewhere more simple than all of the above:

Respect starts at home!

If a child does not learn that it is wrong to hurt, steal or disrespect others whilst they are still impressionable from their *parent, parents, guardian, older siblings (and rather than them dumping them onto the streets for someone else to look after) we will end up with a never ending cycle.

It reminds me of the lyrics of the Elvis Presley song, "In the ghetto"

*Delete where applicable

Dedicated to the Police Services of the UK

I thought I would have a go at creating one of these myself. The music is by The Hollies and the song title is "He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother".

I hope you like it