It may seem as if I'm the only one in the world who doesn't have an opinion on the resignations of Sir Paul and John Yates, there is a reason for that.
I am one of the MPA members who sits on the Professional Standards Cases Sub-Committee. This may sound like an innocuous little bureaucratic backwater but it is the committee which deals with public complaints about senior Met officers. As a member I have been and will continue to be directly involved in disciplinary matters relating to phone hacking.
It would be unfair and unprofessional to comment publicly on issues I may have to decide upon in the future, hence the lack of posts on this issue.
Protest rally over school shake-up
1 hour ago
Posts
5 comments:
Does the Professional Standards committee have any powers over ex-police officers?
Boris's stooge was never fit to be Commissioner, he was always way out of his depth. That's the problem when you force a Commissioner out of post for political purposes and replace him with a yes man. There must be no political interference in policing.
Kit Malthouse should obviously be next to resign, if he has any integrity. After all, he's the man whose hands have "been on the tiller" of the Met (copyright Kit Malthouse).
The Metropolitan Police need a safe pair of hands as next Commissioner, someone untainted by scandal, well respected by the troops and someone who will stand up to the pathetic point scoring politicians of this day and age. Step forward.............Tim Godwin.
Please assure us that despite their resignations, that if investigations find that these two officers have behaved inappropriately that you will protect the public purse & remove their pension entitlements retrospectively?
OK I'm just going to come out & say this.
Forgive my simple mind, but;-
The police have been asked to investigate aspects of the hacking scandal.
BUT
The police are part of the hacking scandal in that they have wined & dined & employed at times those who were also part of the hacking scandal. Even more, the police have supposedly withheld information about who was hacked or at least not bothered to inform those those who had their phones listened in to. This could be laziness and / or bad judgement or it could be more sinister.
There is a dead body in Hertfordshire that also needs investigating (it may be a sad suicide, but it still needs investigating, and this scandal runs so deep that nothing can be ruled out). This too can not be investigated by the Police.
I would suggest that the police are never going to be impartial on this subject and that they SHOULD NOT be allowed to investigate it.
What if the investigating policemen are old mates of some of those possibly in trouble, or friends of friends? What if they belong to the same lodge?
I don't have an answer for any of this but it is so rotten to the core that a more independent body needs to do the investigating.
We all know how organisations cover their tracks and each others backs.
St. Crispin raises good points regarding the impartiality of any police investigation and we also learn that Lord Leveson has been to parties at Elizabeth Murdoch's home as recently as last year. Any inquiry led by Leveson cannot properly clear the Murdoch family of any suspicion. Did Cameron not ask about such connections before he appointed Leveson to this role?
I have provided a solution early this month on this site; The International Criminal Court in The Hague needs to fully investigate the full extent of hacking, bribes, perjury, cover up, and collusion by the media, the police, and politicians of all parties.
Post a Comment