Jump to content

Police priorities ?


observer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Seems the Police Services are always crying poverty nowadays, so why have Wilts Police spent £1.5million of tax-payer's money investigating "allegations" about a dead man.  Such cases are going nowhere and serve no purpose, as no justice can be secured; unless the police have access into the after life.         :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Such cases are going nowhere and serve no purpose, as no justice can be secured; unless the police have access into the after life. 

As far as getting a prosecution goes they are going nowhere as even if the allegations are proved true then you cannot prosecute a dead man. (unless vampires and zombies really exist"

as for serving no purpose then they do. they show that the police will look into any allegations which helps the victims to deal with what has happened to them. it also gives victims of similar criminal activity the courage to come forward knowing that at the least they will be listened to and taken seriously even if the allegations are later proved false. They also show that the police are willing to investigate without prejudice, fear or favour, whether the person under investigation be peer or pauper.

securing justice against the person when they are dead may be impossible b ut investigating what they are alleged to have done may turn up others who were involved that are still alive and so justice can be sought against them.

finally depending on your religious views then everybody has access to the afterlife, it is called dying.:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So maybe we should draw up a list of crimes that are not worth investigating then to save money and resources.

Start with burglaries. most burglaries are never solved and the ones that are usually end up with the person who committed the burglary getting a suspended sentence and a fine. So you could argue that was a waste of public money and police resources.

you could argue that any crime that does not carry a custodial sentence or a 90% chance of conviction should not be investigated.

These things have to be investigated and be seen to be investigated. not just to get justice for the victims but to give people in general confidence in the police force, that they are doing the job they are supposed to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you only have to watch some of the cop shows on Channel 5 like "Police Interceptors" and the like.... 5 police cars, a dog car and a helicopter to chase down a guy in a stolen car.... 15 miles of unbelievably bad driving until the chased car finally crashes into a ditch. A foot chase follows with the helicopters thermal image camera catching the culprit in someones garden shed....

 

at the end, Jamie Theakston says "And the driver of the stolen Saxo who led the police on a 15 mile chase in the car and on foot were found guilty of taking a car without permission and driving with no insurance and were find £100 with an £80 victim surcharge.... and 6 points were added to his license....." Yaaay, that'll teach 'em

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Evil Sid said:

So maybe we should draw up a list of crimes that are not worth investigating then to save money and resources.

Start with burglaries. most burglaries are never solved and the ones that are usually end up with the person who committed the burglary getting a suspended sentence and a fine. So you could argue that was a waste of public money and police resources.

you could argue that any crime that does not carry a custodial sentence or a 90% chance of conviction should not be investigated.

These things have to be investigated and be seen to be investigated. not just to get justice for the victims but to give people in general confidence in the police force, that they are doing the job they are supposed to do.

For a start, these are not proven crimes, they are allegations; many of alleged events over 30 years ago, concerning alleged perpetrators that are now dead. Not only are the Police running after these shadows, but so too are Government, spending £millions on public inquiries,  with comments like "we can learn lessons"; but lessons are never learned, the results parked on a library shelf and forgotten, with possibly compensation for the alleged victims, which is probably what it's all about in the first place.          :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A former colleague of mine,an ex policeman , told me a tale one night that he had been on duty one evening near a large hotel in Manchester & children were allegedly ushered in at regular intervals to allegedly satisfy the alleged needs of a music icon of the day. A customary blind eye was turned.

One of the problems that hamstrings the police is the path of any arrestable crime through the judicial system ,probably firstly due to costs of legal representation ,then secondly ,the limp wristed sentences meted out by judges. The British legal system does seem to have a two tier application in regard to criminals though....firstly, your average Sweeney  type scrote & then your white collar & probably wealthy villain who maintains that his fraud case or theft from the public purse was a victimless crime. These child molesters though really are the lowest vermin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought there was now separation between the investigation (Police) and the prosecution (PPS); in which the Police submit their findings for the lawyers to decide whether there is a winnable case or not ?     The problem with this 30 year old allegations is that allegations can go unchallenged, as the accused has died, and certainly can't sue for defamation. So it all seems rather one sided, and a complete waste of time.      :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I meant about the Savile case is that the £3million or so in the charitable trust fund that he built up has gone to the lawyers rather than to the intended charities or, indeed, to his alleged "victims".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/13/2017 at 9:13 AM, asperity said:

What I meant about the Savile case is that the £3million or so in the charitable trust fund that he built up has gone to the lawyers rather than to the intended charities or, indeed, to his alleged "victims".

Many of the charities that Savile raised money for, openly said they did not want anything to do with the money in the fund... so either the lawyers or the government get it.... the two most money grabbing organisations in the country.... take your pick :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...