Dan
3.5K posts
@SC__Dan
Special Constable 👮🏽♂️ This is a personal account - all views & opinions are my own! RTs are not an endorsement.
All police forces in England and Wales will be expected to answer phone calls from journalists under updated police media guidelines pressgazette.co.uk/news/breakthro…
Some heroes wear capes — Chief Aaron Edwards wears blue.
If someone is actively stabbing innocent people, should police be able to shoot them on sight to stop the attack?
London has 1,460 fewer officers than a year ago - so what better time to introduce new mandatory paperwork for every time an officer dares to stop a vehicle... What an absolute waste of time. It will make policing less productive. It will make London less safe.
Another example of policing being gripped by institutionally bad leadership—not racism. Around 9 in 10 traffic stops happen with no idea of the driver’s race—yet officers must now spend time filling in forms like this after every single stop. A self-inflicted own goal, sapping proactivity, productivity and morale.
The Metropolitan Police force has won a legal challenge after an officer who was dismissed for failing the force's vetting procedure claimed his sacking meant he did not get a fair trial. Sergeant Lino Di Maria took the Met to court after his clearance to work was revoked as a result of sexual assault allegations, which he denies. He was found to have no case to answer in respect of misconduct allegations, and argued that having his vetting clearance removed without the accusations being proved was a breach of his right to a fair trial. Last year, High Court judge Mrs Justice Lang agreed, ruling that Scotland Yard cannot lawfully dismiss officers by withdrawing their vetting clearance. The Met challenged part of the decision, and on Tuesday, three Court of Appeal judges in London granted its appeal. Lord Justice Singh, sitting with the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr and Lady Justice Whipple, said what's needed in vetting and disciplinary proceedings is different. The judge said vetting "is to be used in the context of an assessment of risk" and requires "an evaluation of risk as to what may happen in the future". In a 25-page ruling, she said: "No particular event need be proved to have happened at all." disciplinary proceedings, where a decision-maker "has to decide whether an event occurred in the past, the balance of probabilities is a sensible way to decide that question of fact," the ruling said. "Either an event happened or it did not," it added. New regulations were introduced to Parliament in April, giving police forces the power to dismiss officers if they fail their vetting clearance. Met Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley said the ruling "will be welcomed as common sense by the public who must have faith our officers do not have a back catalogue of alarming allegations". Equally pleased will be "the tens of thousands of good officers we have in the Met who care deeply about the safety of the public and their colleagues", he added. He said the force will continue "to sack those who corrupt our integrity". A spokesperson for the College of Policing, which backed the Met's case, said it illustrated "the important role vetting plays in keeping the public safe and maintaining confidence in policing". "It is vital policing maintains the highest ethical and professional standards and acts with the utmost integrity - and vetting is a fundamental part of making that happen," the spokesperson added. In February last year, the Met had 29 officers who had their vetting clearance removed but remained on paid leave at an annual cost of £2m, but the figure is now 20. Link to the article: news.sky.com/story/court-of…
Mahmood to call for more police patrols and faster responses to 999 calls bbc.in/4sWKpmq
Licence to Practise for police officers? Devil will be in the details. Lots of unanswered questions. Our view on @BBCNews and full statement here facebook.com/share/1BYMQ13P…
