Click on the picture to watch the clip.
Jess McCullough called the police because her father slapped her across the face.
She had been terrorising the neighbours. There were no injuries. He had never slapped any of his kids before.
Now that her father’s career is over due to him having a record for violence against a child, she wishes she had not called the police.
This was one slap. Not a sustained attack or a violent incident. Who has taught these kids that they should call the police for things like this? What do people think will happen once they involve the authorities? Where is GMP’s discretion in this matter?
The days when we were allowed to make the distinction between violent child beaters and decent parents using “last ditch” tactics to save their kids from a downward spiral are gone. Sacrificed on the altar of political correctness by the liberal elite, along with Mr McCullough’s career. It is not easy to find a job in his area, now it will be impossible and he and Jess will live on Benefits.
Once again, GMP’s statement shows that their own officers are not trusted to make a decision on this case. They talk about “Domestic Violence” and almost blame Mr McCullough for admitting the offence and therefore putting himself in the way of a caution.
If McCullough had been difficult, used a duty solicitor and refused to comment in interview, the CPS wouldn’t have run this in a million years. Thus he becomes a double victim of the brave new world of policing. A real lowlife would have used these tactics and walked away.
Once again, a decent working man trying to bring up his kids properly gets punished for telling the truth.
You couldn’t make it up.
Gadget Note: Debbie and I do not slap our kids; but we are lucky enough to have a supportive family network, good adult role models and a crime-free environment in the village. We also do not ‘morally” judge others who live in more difficult circumstances.
I too am a parent- of a girl- so far so good!
When I was a kid growing up, I went off the rails a bit at 14 and my Dad- then a Supt in the force- took me ‘out with the dog’ and knocked seven bells out of me.
The best thing he could have done- I’m now in the job myself and parents have my sympathy and what is left of my discretion. The trouble is, the minute an assault on a minor with a named suspect gets on the box thats it- the parent is coming in either way.
Pity the officers didnt conduct a wee pre pace interview on the way in outlining what Gadget has said above- keep Sthum, get a brief.
Although I suspect that the dad might be too straight for his own good.
Tragic.
I was advised to accept a caution 10 years ago by a couple of officers for something I didn’t do. I was told it would go to court, and would be very stressful, and I would probably be found guilty regardless, would have to pay for my own solicitor, would have my picture in the paper etc etc, so I accepted it.
Funnily enough, according to the Rehabilitation of Offenders, I still have to state it on any job applications, meaning I am currently in low paid menial work. If I’d gone to court and been found guilty, I wouldn’t have to declare the conviction.
Moral: Never, ever, ever accept a caution unless you are completly guilty, and know there is incontravertable evidence against you (not eye-witnesses, they won’t stand up in court, as I now know, to my cost!)
Disclaimer: I still support (most) of the rank and file police (except those two mentioned above, and a few other jobsworths) but you are doing yourselve no favours by still nicking victims (http://tinyurl.com/6hvs5f) instead of the offenders. You may have targets to meet, but you could freeze out those officers who routinely do this, and concentrate on the known scum yourselves. Otherwise you risk complete disenfranchment with both the public AND this waster Govt.
To get a caution in our force requires the authority of the duty Inspector.
I suspect that the same applies in GMP.
Has common sense been sacrificed on the altar of sanctioned detections? Keep the Home Office happy and screw the public?
It would seem to be the case.
NCRS and the demand for detections explain incidents like these. With NCRS there is no discretion. end of.
The solution is simple. Get rid of the chaos that is NCRS or drop the meaningless push for detections.
In an incident like this one, without NCRS it could easily have been written off at the start after giving strong words of advice ( to the daughter) or without the push for detections, crime it as required and leave it at that. No arrest/interview, no conviction/caution. Writing jobs off under NCRS is an art form in itself. Something which, if not done correctly, will cause the OIC no end of grief from above.
(past experience with similar jobs, I have managed to write these off with words to the effect of Lawful Chastisement, no offences..)
We have completely lost any sense of context whatsoever. Our “system” does not allow for life’s irregularities, upsets, one-offs, or anything else done by otherwise decent folk on the spur of the moment. If he was a speeding motorist he may have been given words of advice. The same could have been done for this situation. The trouble is that the odd bit of ’speeding’ doesn’t fall under the paranoia-inspired remit of ‘Domestic Violence’, ‘Crime Recording’, ‘Detections’ and, of course, Child Abuse’ – add all of these together and it is no wonder that this incident has panned out this way. Yet again it is context that has been forsaken in the toxic fog of our ‘victim focused’ and mollycoddling policing mentality.
For what it’s worth I don’t have any kids. I’m in my 20s to put the generation of my parents into context. My dad smacked me 3 times in my life, I can’t remember what I’d done for the other 2, but the first one I’d managed to stick a screwdriver into plug socket (we still don’t know where that came from but that’s another matter). After I was told not to do it again, I had another go. At which point, my parents were essentially trying to workout how to stop me from killing myself. I got smacked, and I’m still here. PC Pinkstone, you’re totally right, we have lost our sense of context, the law allows for the moderate correction of a child, it’s a shame that. In the area I work, as with many others I suspect we have a positive action policy. That is to say the lowest requirement applies, suspect an offence, suspect this person comitted it, you *must* arrest. That’s fairly context removing.
As per 4- it is often the case that an experienced officer will have words with the victim at home with the parents present, and very often the victim decides that no further action is needed. Log updated- Lawful Chastisement by parent, no injury present, all sorted!
Slightly sensationalist take on it IG, but still fair overall.
Took look at it through a personal lens for a mo thought and came up with the following conculsions:
I’m actually grateful for a swift clip around the ear from my parents when i stepped too far out of line as a kid.
I had strong role models who believed similarly outside of my family;my old sensei for example. Again, he had no issues about punishing me (extra cardio training, or a slap upside the head) when i acted up badly.
Take those role models away, take away the consequences of misbehaving and i’m pretty certain i’d be considerably different to who I am now.
The above treatment, (obviously where words don’t work, and in moderation without causing harm to the child other than discomfort and humiliation) instills a sense of consequence in kids when they misbehave.
Some kids never had this, even before the changes made by success liberal governments, however they were in the minority – most were disciplined as needed and grew up into responsible, decent adults.
Now the reverse is true, very few are disciplined any more. Those that weren’t grew up and had children, who were in turn badly behaved and not disciplined. And so we come to today, when we’re on the Third (or Fourth generation in some families) of people who have had no consequences for behaving badly, and there’s a lot more of them than ever before! In time they will again spawn another legion of badly behaved kids etc etc…
Don’t misunderstand me, i’m not saying smacking your children when they’re badly will cure all society’s ills.
However, it’s a step in the right direction.
[...] August, 2008 by landedunderclass Having now returned from The Field, Inspector Gadget remarks upon the ruin of the life of one Mr. McCullough, who made the mistake of accepting a [...]
What’s sensationalist about the piece, Surfer?
I can see nothing sensationalist about it at all. Mr McCullough’s career is over. There is now no job that he can lawfully obtain that will put more money in his pocket than taking benefits. Cautions are the gift that just keeps giving.
Incidents like this, and that of Paul Lawson – and that’s two just today – are why us MOPs might tend towards viewing you chaps in blue^W black as being increasingly our enemies rather than our protectors.
Does that have any consequences for you? Maybe, maybe not. You get paid the same either way. But when a mob attacks you, and not one single MOP comes to your aid, you might want to question why not.
The old balance of Ordinary Decent Britons and Police vs thugs now seems to be a 3 cornered conflict. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend, if he’s got sanctioned detections to make up.
What he should have done was to call the police on her after she ‘terrorized’ the neighbors. (Whatever that means.) And then testified against her.
Well, the daughter(who looks 16) has done for him. He won’t get a job. There won’t be anything for her to inherit, except funeral costs. He can start drinking now, full time, and won’t that be fun for her to come home to.
And probably, she’ll end up pregnant and on the dole. More dirt ignorant voters. Another victory for leftist policies. When England starts to circle the bowl, (and the hand is already on the flusher) you’ll only have yourselves to blame.
The reduced to living on benefits bit just struck me as a bit so – unless IG is just quoting what was in the paper in which case i withdraw that comment
Ah, cheers (Surfer).
Yep, I suppose he will be able to get another job. But it will be hard for him, particularly in a looming recession.
‘The brave new world of policing’. You’ve said it, brother!
Is “reasonable chastisement” no-longer lawful?
Well here a little story from my still functioning memory-
a certain Sgt -OK me- is working at a small town nick with custody facilities-CPT bring an adult male in for ABH-I know the family “professionally”-the mother has several children by different fathers used to be a pain but has seen the light
is hard working and trying to do her best to stop her kids going down the same path-she has been living with this male for a couple of years and who has a couple of minor convictions-D&D etc.The teenage daughter to whom he is step dad is being teenagery and having a fit over something minor-she is Fing at her mother.Step Dad keeps out of it as long as he can but eventually says to daughter-Dont speak to your mother like that-the girl immediately tells him to F off.He again remonstrates with her and is again told to F off.At this he slaps her on the leg leaving a small mark.Daughter subsequently phones Childline and whole panoply of the state lurches into action.Male admits striking girl in interview but says he did no more than anyone would do under the circs and that it was reasonable-he didnt have a brief.DC comes out and says he is going to be cautioned-Why I ask-cos my Sgt says so .Isay But have you really got an offence and what is the effect on the family going to be.He doesnt know but I do-the whole family will come crashing to a great halt because neither parent will be able to control any of the children.DC phones his Sgt Sgt phones me-His Insp phones me as the Station Insp is not there-still I refuse to caution him even though the Insp orders me too-I point out the rquirements of PACE-”Dont get clever with me Sgt”.Chief Insp phones-same order same reply “Dont get clveretc”.Eventually the Supt is winkled out-fortunately he knows me and is practical minded-he agrees with my judgement and the whole thing goes to CPS who say-reasonable chastisement.
Crime is “NO crimed”and we saved family from a teenage hell.
Looking at the length of this perhaps I should start my own blog
PS Why do guvnors who are out argued always say “Dont get clever with me”?
ANd would I do it again-you bet your boots
Can you tell us non-police what would have actually happened? Who was it that would have taken the decisions which made things end up this way? Is there no room in the system for someone sensible in authority to have dismissed it all?
Jack
“When England starts to circle the bowl, (and the hand is already on the flusher) you’ll only have yourselves to blame”
I like that line – thanks.
Terry
The problem is that there IS NO-ONE SENSIBLE anymore-its all about performance figures and results-the human side of policing that gave me 30years of real pleasure-and some pain some grief and I admit at times a few tears – has just about gone-like the tiger it is nearly extinct but you the public might just might be able to save it.
Well, Gadget, you can’t say fairer than that. Though it is probably a mistake to encourage me.
I think that what ails England can be explained in Darwinian terms. Two world wars killed your best and brightest and left you (the country in general) with a disproportionate number who were ’smart’ enough to look only after themselves. And you didn’t treat those who came back very well, either. And the ‘me firsters’ have been making policy ever since.
60 plus years of social policies based on theory and a determined effort to ignore the consequences of those policies are producing the results we see today.
And the policies of today are, in all truth, Monty Pythonesque: “Bloody Hell”, says the pol, prof or police chief, “That didn’t work. All right lads, same as before then, but faster, harder and deeper. I am sure it will work this time. And if it doesn’t, it isn’t my social policy that’s wrong, it’s the way you implement it.”
Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results.
First rule of holes: If you don’t want to get in any deeper, stop digging.
Do people in England know that in the USA “poor” people actually have a higher standard of living than your “middle class”?
http://www.heritage.org/Research/welfare/bg2064.cfm
Of course, we imprison over 2 million people as well, which is 0.6% of the population(300 million). But what that means is that for every 200 people, one of them is attracting the undivided attention of the police, and one or two of his victim/citizens. What is the ratio of ‘police attention’ per person in the UK?
In the US, we know that some people would prefer to steal, rob, kill. In the UK, you seem to think that criminals only steal, rob, kill out of desperation. Our attitude here is that they do it because they think they can. Your attitude is that they do it because they must.
She looks a stroppy little cow to me and really enjoyed the attention. Should have had a few good slaps earlier on to let her know the rules.The trouble is the people responsible for these policies simply cant tell the difference between a beating and a sharp non injurious reminder used when kids ignore their parents and dont behave.Just for the record four children all with successful careers eighteen grandchildren,never beaten any of them but the timely slap across the arse worked wonders when they were younger.
When did it all go wrong – an actual time? 5 years ago? 10 years ago? Was it a specific govt diktat?
Being lawful or otherwise has got very little to do with cautions.
Had Mr McCullough not been an honourable, decent sort of chap, he’d have been briefed by the duty solicitor, sat on his hands, and walked free. Even if the CPS had taken it on – which seems vanishingly unlikely – I can’t see any court in the land convicting him, especially with a hostile witness.
His big mistake was in accepting a caution, doubtless after being told that it would “End the matter here”, and that Social Services wouldn’t have to get involved.
Had he been told that he would be required to disclose that caution on every job application for the rest of his life, then he might not have been so quick to take it. I take it that little detail doesn’t come up when cautions are being offered?
Picture this scene. Man in his 70s is accused of causing GBH to a man in his 80s after they collided in the street (older guy being frail suffered broken hip). 70 yr old arrested, denied all knowledge but eventually charged. Persuaded to go guilty as he was given a guarantee of a lesser sentence – real reason being that he couldn’t bear the stress of a trial.
Then has pre-sentence Doctor’s report which states he suffered a medical / mental condition at the time of the incident which meant he could not be held responsible for his actions. Clear cut evidence which should provide an effective defence. Still goes guilty and declines to use the defence because, at his age, he simply can’t cope with a trial and having wait a further 3 months. Even if it means being found not guilty. Talk about falling on your sword.
Talk about an un-safe conviction. Now tell me that is justice ?
That man is my Dad.
As a cop, this can make it hard for me going to work everyday, but there is my motivation for applying common sense to policing. Forget targets. At least, as an Insp, I have more scope to apply this approach. Let’s not forget the human cost for all involved. Let’s get some balls and stand up for what is right.
What I meant to say @19 is that there is no-one in policy making area of the police who is sensible-ACPO is full of HOme office place people(AARRGH the chip has sprung back to life) and many police “managers” have been promoted beyond their capabilities having no proper proffessional grounding nor the moral fibre to call a halt to the lunacy.
Terry-this has come about because the Govts obsession with targets and the National Crime Recording System(NCRS) police league tables and bonuses being paid to senior police managers.I also understand tthat Pcs also have to make a specific number of arrests FPTs and crime
detections which leaves no room for “common sense”.I believe in the not too distant future we will see Pcs pay judged on their performance-which will be measured by the above and will result in even more lunacy like this example
I have been in positions before, where I have tried to argue over what is basically nonsense.
It took me having to go to the Sergeant, who I know then made great efforts to ‘no crime’ an incident.
It took weeks to get resolved, when I had in essence sorted it all out in five minutes by chatting to both parties.
What was the crime ?
A gent who had had enough of someone letting their dog dump all over the pavements around his home, placed one of said dog turds and a little note onto the doorstep of the dog owner. The note only asked her to clean up after her dog. It wasn’t rude or aggressive nor threatening. He used the word ‘please’.
Did I really have to get involved ? Was I allowed to have discretion with this ?
No. The powers that be wanted him interviewed about it all and the gent to be then given a formal adult warning.
Only through good sense of my skipper did we avoid all that.
NCRS is the whole reason this happened. That and the fact the fact that GMP have a policy of compulsory arrest for anything that even smells remotely like domestic violence, so discretion is sadly not an option, and once the arrest wheels start turning….
D’you know the first thing I thought of on seeing/reading this? Does anyone remember the story of the teenager in ’50s Soviet Russia who put his parents away after they spoke against the State in their own home? I believe that children were encouraged to do this sort of thing at the time. His parents were both executed “pour encourager les autres” and he was feted as a hero.
Or am I overstating it slightly?
P.S. She did come over as a proper little cow, didn’t she? We’ve all dealt with them.
@Rogerborg: Thanks for the explanation, but another question: doesn’t he have the option to appeal the caution for the next six months?
I agree with Northern Cop. I would have written up the log to the effect that it was lawful chastisement. In fact, I have done this many times (obviously for minor incidents like the one above; I’d like to believe I’m capable of recognising ‘real’ child abuse when I see it, and I have dealt with such jobs appropriately).
Some of my colleagues relish the thought of an easy detection. Some are afraid of writing such jobs off. As long as it is NCRS comlpliant on the log, I couldn’t care less….
In my force any attempt to apply common sense to any situation with a whiff of a detection is swiftly beaten out of the officer dealing by those who “manage” our crimes. These individuals sit in a cosy office several floors above me and trail through every incident I go to and send my Supervisors (and myself) messages asking why I haven’t submitted a crime report for this, or arrested someone for that…
Fortunately for me I have excellent Supervisors who are prepared to back up the common sense approach when applied correctly.
@XTP (28)
You may have seen how npower are trying to turn kids against parents ( http://www.climatecops.com/ ) with some comment about the questions that raises at: http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/07/climate-nazis.html
As no one in authority seems to be willing to do anything about it, we are surely on the way to the situation you describe.
No I don’t think you are overstating it at all.
I wonder what the length of service is for the officers that attended because this is becoming a real issue in this sort of instance. I have over 20 years in and quite often find myself dealing with situations differently than those younger in service and looking on in disbelief. It seems that the ‘robotic’ approach to policing is creeping into the front line as supervisors and managers get younger they know no other way. Good old fashioned common sense is becoming as scarce as good ’supervisors’. I am lucky with the supervisors I have, and those that aren’t so good I will ‘help out’, but this cannot be good for the service.
If the officers have more than about 10 years in then no excuses.
Somebody asked when this all started going wrong, I reckon it was about the same time that labour formed a government and started interfering in, and trying to micro manage all aspects of British life even down to what kids can eat at school!
Bobby at 26. What is the offence, I cannot see one, or have things changed greatly since I hung up my spurs.
My daughter’s boyfriend has just joined GMP this month. (I said he should have joined Lancs or Cheshire constabularies instead!) I hope that his future supervision is better than that exhibited in this case.
Of course it was no crime – it was unreasonably light chastisement. From reading this blog and others like it, I would never accept a caution under any but the most extreme circumstances.
Obviously this is a result of target-oriented policing. Yes, there should be targets in policing – the individuals who commit crimes that do real harm. Numerical targets make no sense.
Once a caution is given or a guilty verdict reached, the “criminal” is pigeonholed. This bloke is now a “child abuser”, along with those who starve their kids and with violent paedophiles.
Similarly, if a wife smothers her terminally ill husband, because she can’t bear to see him suffer any longer, she’s a murderer – just the same as gang members who shoot people.
We have become more bureaucratic than the French (who invented the term). A bobby was always someone who could be relied upon to use common sense. Now too many are expected to behave as robots, carrying out the diktats of their benighted “superiors”.
Incidentally, if a woman had hit her son in the same way, would it have made a caution?
This is making the papers as well. I do not know any more details than those that have been printed, but it does sound like a similar story.
A retired police chief was arrested after a yob who had threatened to kill him claimed that the cop attacked him.
Paul Lawson – an inspector with the Met for 30 years – was fingerprinted and had his DNA taken. The 52-year-old’s ordeal began when the gang threw a beer can at his car.
He got out and challenged the thugs who then vowed to kill him. One yob said the ex-policeman grabbed him, bruising his arm.
Paul of Morpeth, Northumberland, was held for two hours. He said: “I was furious.
Paul of Morpeth has then received a taste of his own medicine.
So, what the f*ck?
Now he has the faint glimmer of understanding of what he has put decent, law-abidinbg people, throgh for years.
Poetic justice.
Heard this on the news and nearly spat out my keebab.
Like Insp G says, the only reason this poor sod has been made a ‘crim’ is because he was honest and admitted what he had done. I can almost imagine the GMP officers ’selling’ him the caution to get a detection.
I’d like to think that if I had arrived to speak to a gobby teenage girl who had been slapped by her well meaning father then I would have told her she deserved it and left having completed my 124D and a subsequent MERLIN.
The job’s F***ED
What spineless numpty nicked him in the first place.
It aint a domestic – ACPO means under 18’s can’t be involved in domestics.
Child abuse – bet the Child Protection unit folks took one look at that and went “jog on back to relief”.
So a PC has taken it on, fine.
Firstly needs a VWI – make the appointment with her – bet she don’t appear. Make a second and same.
Now you have no evidence so pop round have a chat with the dad and suddenly this whole pile of **** goes away. A quick PNB No comment i.v and that is that.
I am still front line and you know when a nipper is in danger and you know when to act. Yes this is a gut reaction, yes it can’t be trained only learnt on the street but honestly please.
Blue knight – re the boss and the yobs – same circs.
I simply do not buy the fact that PC’s are robotic idiots. As well all know – after 17:00 they are the lords of the nick. The senior PC on a shift ( heck I am after only 6 and a bit my new skip has barely 5 and all on beats but another woe for another time) should be able to direct a PC to do whats right.
PC’s have to stand up and make sure that they deal fairly and firmly with what they see, not what the gov’t and the 9-1700’s want. If a 9-5′er gets stroppy then simply wait till a day turn, walk into their office fully kitted and simply face it out with them. They will back down.
I had a great example recently while on nights- two heroin brothers had a barny, one pushed the other etc and heroin sister called. Basic sh** on sh** that no sane person could ever hope to understand let alone deal with. Written off accordingly. Then I got assaulted in a unralted large public order incident ( note to self DUCK!!) , not badly but looked nice – lots of claret. In the nick at the end of shift and a early bird from DV ( dom. violence) unit comes in and puts a report of the two brothers demanding I update fully and damn well explain why one was not arrested. I walk in, partially cleaned up but very pee’d off demand that she wind her f’in neck in and back off and suddenly that report is deleated and filed as a non crime and I get a word in the ear for bringing claret stained uniform into the DV unit !
Basically PC’s grow a pair and stand up for what you know is right and you’ll be fine.
I cannot believe that there wasn’t one police officer involved in the chain of events that didn’t say to him ‘get a brief and whatever you do, don’t accept a caution’.
There must have been some reasonably old fashioned police officer, a parent themselves, with common sense and decent values somewhere along the whole sad business, no?
Are all the front line Gtr Manchester police officers a bunch of robotic wankers?
You can’t simply blame policy or the removal of discretion it is still there.
At the very least the inspector called up to adminster or even authorise the caution should have said ‘bollocks to this load of old tosh’ – but the sad thing is….no one did, not even when ‘Dad’ said ‘I don’t need a solicitor, I’ve done nothing wrong’, probably believing that he was decent bloke who’d lost it a bit with his ‘Vicky pollard’ daughter, but that isn’t a crime is it?
Think again mate.
There are some police officers that should be very ashamed of themselves, but I bet they aren’t you know….and that is why public support is flowing away…fast.
Angry & Ranter
Please do not underestimate how the Detection “culture” has been embedded in the 21st Century police. Remember, there is a whole generation of Response officers now, trained and selected by the stasi-like competency based socialists, and they simply DO NOT KNOW ANY BETTER.
It simply would not occur to them to use discretion because it has never been offered to them as an option.
This is what you get when you make policing a “business” and run it on US corporate models.
We should all be thoroughly ashamed. As for the Inspector, he/she was probably about 12 years old with a degree in Public Space Management or something.
I-G, it wasn’t so long ago that I was a shift inspector in SE London.
When the loonies really got a grip on the running of the asylum, and around the time of the Paddick drugs experiment in Lambeth; I used to refuse to caution anyone for drugs possession and would note on the disposal form (anti-bureacracy?) my reasons stating that although the person had admitted the offence and all criteria for cautioning applied, I would be authorising their release without official sanction because some 10 miles away in another London Borough a similar individual in similar circumstances would not face this sanction.
Easy – I was never challenged once by anyone from the SMT.
Same thing where it was clear for any other offence that an individual deserved a chance or the circumstances made me feel unhappy that because of me and because of the desire for statistical box ticking a person’s life could be quite seriously affected.
I was not, believe me, a social worker in uniform, but I had a brain, I had life experience and nearly 30 years policing experience, all in uniform and on shift.
I also knew that matters could be disposed of, clear-ups (whatever they are now called) registered and a person may have learned a lesson.
I also knew right from wrong.
If they ever came back, or they were a nasty robbing, drug addicted little shit, or they were simply obnoxious and incapable of accepting and understanding what was potentially on offer etc – no probs, then I would move to charge rather than caution, reprimand etc.
I hear what you say re the 12 year olds running the ‘business’, they sickened me then and they sicken me now.
However I was often amazed at how quite ‘normal’ officers, for the sake of expediency, would be happy to potentially ruin someone’s life, yet if it happened to a member of their close family would have whinged and moaned and been really very angry.
The Job’s Fucked – no doubt about that, but there are things that ‘normal’ officers can do, but the ‘normals’ are being diluted by the ambitious 12 year olds who never even had a paper round as a kid, and by the divide and rule tactics introduced by the Home Office & Acpo based along race/creed,gender & disabilty.
Good luck to The Feds and their attempt to get a ‘work to rule’ going – fat chance, there’s no solidarity anymore, no unity – and it is a shame to say it, but will the silent majority really notice any difference if there was a work to rule?
Now, let’s move on, where’s that ‘good news’ story about the PCSO who did something pretty mundane but is getting the keys to the City plus a commissioner’s commendation? Is there a photo?
Of course there will be and lots of quotes in police ploddlygook ‘around’ various ‘issues’ with ‘transparency’, ‘robustly’ and blah, blah blah!
33 were doomed
Breach of the Peace – north of the border.
Tis a great catch all offence. Well most of the time it is. Until nonsense like the dog turd appears on the horizon.
Retired Sgt @16– Please please please come out of retirement and come and work at my nick…please please….
We need good stripeys to exercise common sense even more now than ever.
It’s good to see the majority of serving officers disagreeing with the approach of their colleagues in this case. However, IG seems to intimate that discretion is lost and that the officers were obliged to take the action they did due to the target driven culture of modern policing. I have seen many critics of Mags claiming that they hide behind the inflexibility of sentencing guidelines to excuse ineffective sentences. It has also been said that if Mags don’t agree with the guidelines they should resign their posts in moral protest. If IG’s take on this story is as I described, shouldn’t Police Officers, who have a clear hatred of the performance culture hand in their Travelcards? (sorry, I meant Warrant Cards).
44, Those of us who do not agree with this performance culture are the ones who have disagreed with the actions of the bobbies in this incident. If we gave our warrant ( never used it for travel myself) cards in, all you would have left is, as a previous poster has pointed out, robotic Pc’s following strict guidelines. What kind of state would that leave us all in. I for one am not giving up the fight. I still cling to that slim hope that one day we can return to some real common sense policing.
There’s some stuff about this on the BBC today:
Police chief criticises targets
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7562477.stm
Chasing targets – not criminals
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_7559000/7559395.stm
I like McNumpty’s comment “that round the edges, at its worst, there were perverse incentives in the target regime”.
I wonder what he would have said if he’s been a historian? “Round the edges, at its worst, Hitler’s foreign policy caused friction with neighbouring countries”.
Bobs Dad
At the moment I am spending my retirement in a Southern Mediterranean country where it has been in the 30s for the
last few weeks
In England it is pissing down yobs are rampaging and its going down the toilet
If you were me what would youdo?
Ps Chuck Gadget for Supt!
PPS DLTBGYD
@ XTP at 28 who wrote “… the story of the teenager in ’50s Soviet Russia who put his parents away … ”
Just have a look at what nPower are doing. OK its only this climate change nonsense, but the packs clearly indicate that parents and family members should be reported if they do not abide by the rules of the new eco-religion.
What are nPower doing?
I kind of agree with ranter a little. Why didn’t someone with clout say they would not administer a caution?
C’mon lads. How many cases like this are going on that do not make the papers? I’m afraid that this bloody nonsense is now the ‘norm’!
PS. Please PS, start a blog. Please!
There is much to do with
1.Targets
2.Policy
3.Protecting one’s arse
apparent through this sad episode.
There will be a target for increased sanctioned detections and this will have played a part.
There is also likely to have been a policy decision for any act perceived to be domestic related violence, common assault or not. This will lead to a guaranteed arrest and subsequent investigation. The easiest process for the officer in the case would have been a cough followed by a caution, as likely following the little matter of a chat with the CPS for a decision. There have been numerous moans about the Police failing to deal with domestic violence firmly and not sending out a message that it is not to be tolerated. Effectively discretion does not exist in matters of domestic related violence.
Then comes the arse covering.
The officer attending will make the arrest because that is what the instruction is from policy.
The chain of events follow the same sequence because each link has to justify their involvement in the process. So play by the rules and no one drops in the cacky.
So the scene plays out to its conclusion.
We have a victim, we have an offender, we have the complaint and subsequent arrest, investigation, detection and resolution.
Sadly, we also have the aftermath of the above. now that is a completely different matter. The consequences leading from the call of the initial complaint were, as likely, not even considered apart from knowing that one has certain rights and don’t even think about the consequences.
Very sad, very inevitable and no one gets asked any awkward questions because they have been seen to be acting in a way that scrutiny through the hindsight spectacles sees everything done in a way that is measurable, accountable and auditable, done by the book. So the Police have not done anything that may have breached anyone’s human rights, all contact is appropriately recorded and there is a bean to count at the end of it all and sod the aftermath.
Sad………….but an inevitable progression towards being seen to be accountable and transparent and no complaint because of a perceived lack of Police action.
This sort of thing really angers me, i blame the following:
The Detection Culture – Its turned (some) impartial investigators into political tools for a deceitful politicians!
The “liberal elite” for creating a culture whereby such a thing could happen.
The Inspector who authorized the caution for not knowing his law, not applying common sense and selling out to the detection game. Seriously, you have to take a stand somewhere!
If that man has any sense he will appeal his Caution through the courts and generally cause enough fuss to wake enough people up, it wont cost him anything. The grounds?
Sec 58 of the Children Act 2004 provides that lawful chastisement is available provided it falls short of offenses of ABH and cruelty to a person under 16.
Seems to fit here, one slap, no injuries, purpose slap to chastise, person (shes not a victim) under 16 and not a cruel act particularly as its only ever happened once.
In my opinion an Officer, when investigating a offense of violence by a parent onto a child, should always approach from the position of “Is there evidence to show that this is not lawful chastisement?” if not, its not a crime or there exists is a lawful defense. Officers should always know there defenses, it makes them better at negating false claims by suspects when appropriate and prevents them from prosecuting the innocent.
Any Inspector should also apply this MO when considering a caution and should not rely on the often, very junior, Officers to know and understand this piece of law. Most importantly however they should not sacrifice their souls to the detection scam for the sake of us all. Many a parent has walked free, lawfully, from where i work and more importantly its helps Officers really appreciate the difference between chastisement which this is and child abuse or assault which this isn’t. Being an impartial investigator means exactly that, getting to the truth as per the law regardless of any other considerations including whether you local Senior Guvnor needs an extra detection for his bonus this year.
Anyway thats what i do, i haven’t found many other Officers of any rank or CPS to object, largely because its lawful and also sensible. This is job looks like a travesty of justice, the Officers seem to have failed to apply the law and in doing so have caused more harm to the very people they are sworn to protect.
I have never hit my kids, never had to, the Mrs has given out a couple infant smacks once, (running into the road) i just do “The Look” its works for me (or used to if they are reading this comment).
I base the above opinions on the information covered in the piece. I could of course be wrong and not be privy to non disclosed facts of the case which would alter my opinion. That said however i would be very surprised if any such facts exist, but you have to remain open and impartial on the off chance that their is. I could also be misunderstanding lawful chastisement, but if i am so are a lot of people and CPS too, its not really a complex piece of law.
Inspector G @ 40
Pretty sweeping Statement. I am/was a response Officer recruited by the Stasi. I managed to keep my common sense and used my discretion. So include us all in that basket.
Thankfully I police in a foreign country and use my head even more.
I am a schoolteacher. A pupil (15 year old girl) living with Mum and Step Dad (he has been with Mum for 10 years). She gets a boyfriend – complete waster, his Mum is an alcoholic and regular drug user. Girl’s parents are horrified and ground her – she is not allowed out at night to meet him. So she starts sneaking out of school at lunchtime, during lessons etc (he is of course not working, not at college). We find out what is going on and girl is carefully monitored – has to spend her lunchtimes etc with a member of staff, on attendance report, you name it. She is not a happy bunny! She climbs out of bedroom window at home and runs off to meet the boy. Parents go apesh*t! When she gets home there is an almighty row and Step dad grabs her by the upper arms to ‘get her attention’. Girls calls cops. Mum is given a choice – either Dad or daughter has to leave the family home. Mum says that she wants daughter to go! Social services agree to girl staying with boyfriend’s family !! (waster alcoholics and drug users!!) After about 3 weeks, girl is thrown out by boyfriend’s druggie mum and is now living with Foster parents at of course state expense! What a mess. Relationship between girl and Mum not ompletely broken but very badly damaged and girl now very much alone. No other family in UK. In my naivety I was horrified that the Police took this seriously but I too know the joy of targets and performance related pay!
My first post here after reading the blog for a long time. This entry struck a cord with me as a similar situation has happened to a family friend.
The stroppy daughter in question (being a typical teenager) had been getting worse and was somewhat crossing the line and as a result the father slapped her. She called the Police and they came around to ‘have a word’. The end result of this is that he is now too scared of the consequences to administer any sort of reproachment for her actions and all efforts to control said daughter have now fallen upon the mother.
The sad thing for the daughter is that they feel that the only thing they can now do is the day it is legal to do so she is out the door to fend for herself. Not exactly what one would call a good result.
This man is a skilled professional in a ‘caring’ profession, and TBH I’d put him way over to the liberal end of the scale, not exactly what you’d call scum.
Why do I read this blog?
Whilst I am not ‘job’, my father was a PC for more years than I can remember (division, traffic, local, firearms, pretty much everything really) before he recently retired due to ill health. I have to say that I am immensely proud of him and what he did. Having briefly entertained thoughts of joining up myself I can say that I’m glad I didn’t. But then I also considered being a teacher, so that is looking like two good decisions I made in my life.
I’ll always try and help the Police whenever I can. The good ones (and I think that’s most of them on the streets) deserve support and I hope that comes back to me if ever I need you guys.
I could go on for hours, but I’ll leave it there for now except to say;
Back when I was young my sister once said to the dustmen “my mum’s the hardest smacker in the whole world”. I shudder to think what would have happened had she said that 30 years later than she did.
If my dad’s reading this (which I doubt), that’s just given me away ;o)
Re XTP @ 28 and strobelwort @48
Sorry for leaving out the references, but the boss binned a previous version of the comment when I put in the links to nPower’s Climate Cops handouts (they have a special Climate Cops web site) and a comment on the EUReferendum blog attacking it.
It *can* be viewed only as a bit of fun, but given the background of this post it should instead be seen as the thin end of yet another bloody great wedge that would have done the Spanish Inquisitors proud (I leave it to your imagination where they used to shove it!) If my fears are right, our kids are now being groomed (word chosen carefully) to shop their parents and other adults for “not being good citizens” in years to come.
whichendbites said “There will be a target for increased sanctioned detections … ”
Whatever happened to Sir Robert Peel’s Principle that said: “The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.”
Something’s got lost somewhere!
I agree with whichendbites when he talked about protecting one’s arse. That officer who cautioned that father can, if nothing else, say they were doing their job as it is now prescribed to them the cases of domestic abuse.
Hooray for the police!
Another evil, violent criminal, whom thanks the our brave boys in blue is now safely out of work. That’ll learn him!
Hibbo,
it isn’t funny. The majority of cops reading that article are quite frankly appalled about it.
I know I am. It is shameful.
Bobby,
I know full well it isn’t funny; but who arrested that man? Who gave him the caution? Who fought over the easy detection? Who’s eyes lit up at the thought of a good honest man trying to do his best = easy collar? Who can’t have believed their luck when the good honest guy said he didn’t need a solicitor as he’d done nothing wrong?
Answer: Cops.
This kind of thing certainly doesn’t seem to the unusual either.
You will reap what you sow, and what the police are sowing isn’t good.
Yes Hibbo, cops did it.
As I said, the majority of posters on this topic who are cops find it shameful and very wrong.
We do actually catch the bad uns too you know.
He shouldn’t have been arrested, but blame the crappy policies in place for domestics and any that have children possibly being victims of crime. With those in place, forget any cop being able to do the right thing.
Discretion ( aka common sense) doesn’t even enter the equation I’m afraid.
Blame those who set the policies. As for cops being able to tell a supervisor ‘no’, that gets ruled out really. We are a disciplined service and at times you have got to do as you as told, no matter how shitty it is.
But you don’t sound like the type of person who would listen to any of this, you’d prefer just to blame cops in general.
Some things sting, awfully. Up here in Flatshire a couple of years ago when the Sanc Dets juggernaut was gathering momentum like Stalin’s tanks at Kursk….1.Postie nipped by old lady’s dog;2.Postie consults Unison 3.Advised to report to police, phones up. 4 Incident + named suspect + NCRS = won’t go away or get written off by the DI. 5. Old lady interviewed by AN Other & takes a caution for Dog Out Of Control, Photo’d FP’d & DNA’d. Postscript – 2 years later, old lady, now 84, wife of late/former Lord Lieutenant of Flatshire & ardent lifelong supporter of the Job,writes to Chief stating she evidently has little time left on this Earth and could the whole thing be expunged so, in effect, she can die without it on her conscience. No idea what the outcome was, and no doubt we all have similar examples of where the Sanc Dets drive has seen our discretion vanish and generally decent citizens criminalised under circs which could have been solved far easier without such recourse a few year earlier. Very poignant, very sad, very Soviet.
I apologise Bobby, fancy blaming cops in general for something that was done by cops in general.
This man’s life has been hampered just so some general copper could get a tick in his/her box.
Hibbo, sadly, is spot on.
Unfortunately policing today is based upon ‘covering ones arse’. Common sense & discretion are actively discouraged and the whole management culture of the police ’service’ is fear based. This is why people like Mr McCullough get arrested and processed as he was.
The system is morally bankrupt and I for one am glad that I am nearly at the end of my service and out of it.
I’ve just dealt with an almost identical case- scary!
I got the Dad in for a voluntary (not arrested) and after a full admission and explanation I went to the CPS and explained that in my opinion lawful chastisement was adhered to and that a prosecution was not in the public interest. My Sgt agreed, as did the CPS.
Result- no prosecution.
I wonder why the officers in the GMP case didnt just get Dad in for a voluntary. After all SOCAP does apply and if we know where he lives, he’s compliant and there is no danger of a repetition, then I for one dont see how an arrest in these circumstances is either justified or proportionate. ( I know the officers would say ‘for a prompt and effective investigation’….)
“Sacrificed on the altar of political correctness by the liberal elite” – Oh come on, Gadget, you can’t have it both ways.
You are always accusing the “liberal elite” of making the country soft and not supporting proper punishment. Well, here’s a bloke who has been punished for doing what any good parent ought to have the freedom to do. The fact that he has had his life messed up has got nothing to do with any “liberal elite” and everything to do with politicians of all hues chasing the right-wing “law and order” vote.
Jack @ 11 has also suffered the same knee-jerk right-wing reaction and blamed “leftist” policies without engaging his brain and thinking it through.
West Country JP,
proper punishment involves punishing those guilty of committing crimes. This wasn’t a crime, it was parental discipline “detected” as a crime.
Leftist policies involve sereral things, but most noticible involves granting more and more power to the state. And so what have we here? The state deciding that a parent should be charged and a juvenile delinquent the state refuses to control is left to run wild……and parental discipline be damned.
Unless she is very lucky, she might well end up in court, once she is of age, actually being charged with a crime. Though it won’t matter, because she won’t have anything to lose, and she won’t be punished anyway. And she will have learned to keep her mouth shut and not take responsibility for her actions. She’s already learned where that gets you.
Perhaps there might be a case for people being able to challenge cautions on a point of law even after accepting them – so this man would be able to say that even though he doesn’t dispute any of the facts he admitted, he now realises that no offence was made out. After all, it’s not really reasonable to expect people (especially, often, without legal advice) to “confess” about what the law does or does not say.
Luitenant Verkramp @ 63: with respect, assuming the dog was indeed in a public place (otherwise, I think, no offence), why on earth shouldn’t action have been taken? The dog had bitten one person going about his lawful business, and there’s no reason to suppose it wouldn’t have bitten another, since the lady was clearly failing to control it properly, and should take responsibility for that. Being 82 and female does not make you above the law.
As IG says at @40, these young cops are simply doing as they have been taught, and know no better.
The other week I turned out three Response officers to police a town of 80,000. Their combined service totalled five years. Whilst each is a bright and diligent young kid who has joined for the same laudable reasons as most other cops, they don’t have the life or job experience to do anything other than blindly observe what they are taught in their training. And it was explained to me the other day that the first four weeks of police training cover diversity, human rights and health and safety, before they get on to arrest powers and definitions of crime. It seems they are never given anything in depth about the meaning of “Reasonable Grounds to Suspect”. I am having to re-programme my probationers into thinking like proper cops, and have them un-learn what they were fed during their training.
For as long as a “diversity above all” atmosphere prevails, for as long as NCRS demands unquestioning adherence to Kafka-esque principals, for as long as a “sound operational foundation” is frowned upon in promotion boards (a bit of personal experience there), for as long as our Chiefs dance unquestioningly to the Home Office’s tune, and until the Home Office enjoys the root and branch clear out only a new government can provide, catastrophes such as the McCullough case will continue to crop up on a very regular basis.
You want to know when it all started to go tits up? Try 1968: the year when a generation of ‘right on’ Ché-worshipping students graduated and infested every quarter of society with their bloody-minded naivete and insane ideas about social engineering. From government to education, they – and their successors – are the ones responsible for this mess. It must have been them, ’cause it wasn’t my father’s generation’s fault (with the exception of Tony Benn perhaps).