Plod happy to risk killing an old bloke for a carrying walking stick

Status
Not open for further replies.
John Steed said:
What had the yodel driver done to get the sack for?
Click to expand...
Dropped a parcel off but didnt say whereabouts on the card. Rang the number on card, driver turned up drunk to try and sort out the problem. Shouted and screamed at all female neighbours as he gave it to a women. Stormed off. Came back with his mate threatening the neighbours and accusing them of lying. Rang Yodel, they said it would be dealt with locally by the manager. Said i wasnt happy and they then investigated it and sacked him
 


pavarotti1980 said:
Dropped a parcel off but didnt say whereabouts on the card. Rang the number on card, driver turned up drunk to try and sort out the problem. Shouted and screamed at all female neighbours as he gave it to a women. Stormed off. Came back with his mate threatening the neighbours and accusing them of lying. Rang Yodel, they said it would be dealt with locally by the manager. Said i wasnt happy and they then investigated it and sacked him
Click to expand...
Did he drive back drunk?
 
pavarotti1980 said:
Whats a defence lawyer got to do with it? It isnt a criminal investigation
Click to expand...
No it's not my silly little braindead one. It was an enquiry as to whether the were independent tribunals looking at the police and it turns out that according to you, there arn't. Having defense lawyers on IPCCs would help their work, no? If not then please explain why.
 
AlpineExile said:
No it's not my silly little braindead one. It was an enquiry as to whether the were independent tribunals looking at the police and it turns out that according to you, there arn't. Having defense lawyers on IPCCs would help their work, no? If not then please explain why.
Click to expand...
TO be honest with comments like "silly little braindead one" i will treat the post with the contempt it deserves.

Why would they have to be defence lawyers? Could the equally not be prosecution ones? A laywer would only be proficient in the area they practice. Would you want a criminal or employment lawyer?

There arent tribunals as the structure is different. If you read the links i posted you would understand exactly what the process was. And the IPCC are the overarching independant body who look at police complaints

John Steed said:
He lives near you then. I'd watch out incase he decides to get even.
Click to expand...
Possibly does but he wouldnt remember the face as he was drunk
 
Last edited:
pavarotti1980 said:
TO be honest with comments like "silly little braindead one" i will treat the post with the contempt it deserves.

Why would they have to be defence lawyers? Could the equally not be prosecution ones? A laywer would only be proficient in the area they practice. Would you want a criminal or employment lawyer?

There arent tribunals as the structure is different. If you read the links i posted you would understand exactly what the process was


Possibly does but he wouldnt remember the face as he was drunk
Click to expand...
Ok mate, il leave you to the Spanish Inquisition that's going on there.
 
pavarotti1980 said:
TO be honest with comments like "silly little braindead one" i will treat the post with the contempt it deserves.

Why would they have to be defence lawyers? Could the equally not be prosecution ones? A laywer would only be proficient in the area they practice. Would you want a criminal or employment lawyer?

There arent tribunals as the structure is different. If you read the links i posted you would understand exactly what the process was


Possibly does but he wouldnt remember the face as he was drunk
Click to expand...
Thank you for running away.

Other folk will see that you're avoiding admitting that its the police who control the process and so said process can never be considered as impartial until the police and ex-police are removed from the equation.
 
AlpineExile said:
Thank you for running away.

Other folk will see that you're avoiding admitting that its the police who control the process and so said process can never be considered as impartial until the police and ex-police are removed from the equation.
Click to expand...
Im not avoiding anything. I have explained it and you are unable to understand it.
  • You complain to the police force in question about misconduct
  • They decide whether they investigate the complaint or not.
  • The complainant is informed of the decision.
  • If they are not happy they can escalate it to the IPCC
  • As part of the Police Conduct Regulations all forces have to follow the same statuatory guidance on dealing with complaints
  • The IPCC are independant of the police and the Chair and Commission are prevented from holding any police involved post to maintain impartiality.
No initial complaints procedure by the police, NHS, Argos, Sainsburys is 100% inpartial as the intial phase of any complaint and investigation is done "in-house"
 
Last edited:
pavarotti1980 said:
Im not avoiding anything. I have explained it and you are unable to understand it.
  • You complain to the police force in question about misconduct
  • They decide whether they investigate the complaint or not.
  • The complainant is informed of the decision.
  • If they are not happy they can escalate it to the IPCC
  • As part of the Police Conduct Regulations all forces have to follow the same statuatory guidance on dealing with complaints
  • The IPCC are independant of the police and the Chair and Commission are prevented from holding any police involved post to maintain impartiality.
Click to expand...
So all to do with the police force that crapped on them to begin with 'investigating', followed up by other police forces who will have mates on the original police force and who are looking forward to their pensions having a look.

Brilliant. :rolleyes:
 
AlpineExile said:
So all to do with the police force that crapped on them to begin with 'investigating', followed up by other police forces who will have mates on the original police force and who are looking forward to their pensions having a look.

Brilliant. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well since my post doesn't say that I can only assume you have got that from somewhere else. IPCC is not a police force and it's chair and commissioners must not have had any police posts in their career. Not sure how that is looking after their mates if I am honest.
 
pavarotti1980 said:
Well since my post doesn't say that I can only assume you have got that from somewhere else. IPCC is not a police force and it's chair and commissioners must not have had any police posts in their career. Not sure how that is looking after their mates if I am honest.
Click to expand...
Your comments on the PDC, of course.

Linkie for that claim, please.
 
AlpineExile said:
Sorry, PDS ... although you couldn't have worked that out due to your own low brain level, of course ... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
No I thought I would make you look like it was a darts thread all of a sudden.

You haven't read my posts properly. Passing onto another force was in response to @Jardin and how it could be improved. I have never stated complaints are passed between forces ad hoc but an improvement would be not to investigate your own complaints but investigate the complaints of other forces at their initial phase. Thus reducing the potential for exploitation and being a more robust process.
 
pavarotti1980 said:
No I thought I would make you look like it was a darts thread all of a sudden.

You haven't read my posts properly. Passing onto another force was in response to @Jardin and how it could be improved. I have never stated complaints are passed between forces ad hoc but an improvement would be not to investigate your own complaints but investigate the complaints of other forces at their initial phase. Thus reducing the potential for exploitation and being a more robust process.
Click to expand...
So you're happy that it's the police who investigated themselves, right?
 
AlpineExile said:
So you're happy that it's the police who investigated themselves, right?
Click to expand...
At the moment yes as there isn't an alternative but as I have pointed out to you there is some ways of improving that system to make it more robust.

Unless you can think of an alternative which works in another industry which could be easily replicated in the police
 
pavarotti1980 said:
At the moment yes as there isn't an alternative but as I have pointed out to you there is some ways of improving that system to make it more robust.

Unless you can think of an alternative which works in another industry which could be easily replicated in the police
Click to expand...
Of course there's an alternative: just include defence lawyers instead. :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top