Police on police bullying and racism (FAO nobs, partly) | Page 3 | Vital Football

Police on police bullying and racism (FAO nobs, partly)

I posted earlier the sequence of events
What i believe you posted was: one version of events that the police were claiming, but possibly not the actual version of events. Thats what i was asking for proof of or more information on really. Is there any more specific detail in an article here? Certainly the quotes i saw from the athlete, she didnt just 'conveniently' miss out bits as you suggest, but she vehemently denied some of these specific accusations of her driving.

EDIT: Heres a quote from an article i just saw supporting this..."However, Williams - who says she has been left "really shaken" by the incident - insists "at no point did we drive on the wrong side of the road or speed off".

I mean, absolutely, if it happened as you say then it seems absolutely valid reason to be stopped and searched. But i cant find anything other than the police statement that says this was the version of events as opposed to the athletes version, where as i say, she specifically denies some of these accusations.

I also thought the investigation had reviewed the behaviour of the police officers while they were arresting them, rather than in regards to whether there was true justification for them to stop them.

But that was just one article i saw, and i couldn't tell you what it was. Nor am i silly enough to trust one article, hence my question. I try to keep an open mind and base my opinion of right or wrong on facts rather than trusting one viewpoint or another, which undoubtedly always have a reason to tell the version of the truth that suits them the most (shall we say).
 
Last edited:
I have not really been keeping up with this story, I've seen the stop element of the episode, but have not seen anything to support the detailed account as given by Lancs and supported by Nobby. Is there something on social media (which I do not use)?
 
I have seen a photo of the vehicle , a stereotypical lowered Merc with illegally tinted windows.
It wouldn't be happening ( the racist accusations ) here in Spain
The car would be impounded , the first time it was seen. Then try getting stroppy and see what you get.
 
I have not really been keeping up with this story, I've seen the stop element of the episode, but have not seen anything to support the detailed account as given by Lancs and supported by Nobby. Is there something on social media (which I do not use)?
I was going to post the link to the original Sky news report but, unfortunately, the story has been taken down leaving just an interview with Ms Williams. It reported a police account of why the car was stopped, an account supported by BWV, hence a decision of "no further action" by professional standards.
I have to say, the stop looks text book to me. Two people refusing to leave a vehicle to be searched in an area where knife crime is rife, after appearing to make an attempt to evade police by car, justifies removing them by force and handcuffing to prevent further escape attempts.
It's all justified under PACE (sections 1 & 117). As Lancs says, absolute non story.
BTW, I was interested to see the former head of the CPS voice his concern over a totally legal stop, search and use of force powers 🤔
I also had a chuckle at Chrissie Hynde (local resident and witness to the incident) who complained that the police are doing nothing to stop gangs and people carrying knives. You know, like stopping cars that deliberately speed off when police attempt to stop and search them.
 
Correct me if I’m wrong on this one,But was it not Linford Christie who called Police Institutionally Racist for stopping his pal after he drove off fast from police on wrong side of road! Was it not the same Mr Christie in May 2010 drove on wrong side of the road fast seriously injuring a couple! He was fined £5,000 costs £1,000 Disqualivied from driving for 15 months!
 
I've struck a nerve there Lancs. I stick by what I said. Obviously the big majority of officers were decent, honest and brave back in those days. However there were plenty of wronguns and slackers. I was there too as a resident in inner London. I witnessed plenty of shabby incidents. When living in Catford it was a family "joke" to say "oh, look, another black driver stopped". I've noticed massive improvements over the past 20 years.

As you know I'm pro police and proud of my contact's chosen career. Standards and attitudes are way better now. I'd say the same about the Education profession that I've just left. Far fewer slackers now, better standards and the job more demanding than ever. I'm relieved to have left.

I'm saying all this as someone who is very pro police and law and order. However, I can see why others have a different view and have had a different experience. I am fully aware of the unfair criticism heaped on the police as my contact keeps me well informed from the police point of view.
 
Ps. It is often very frustrating for the police as when they get accused of wrongdoing they can't defend themselves and "video evidence" that is in the public domain is often a select, edited version of the full story.
 
Ps. It is often very frustrating for the police as when they get accused of wrongdoing they can't defend themselves and "video evidence" that is in the public domain is often a select, edited version of the full story.
This is the problem. Police have to play with a totally different set of rules that sees them lose in the eyes of those incapable of thinking.
 
I was going to post the link to the original Sky news report but, unfortunately, the story has been taken down leaving just an interview with Ms Williams. It reported a police account of why the car was stopped, an account supported by BWV, hence a decision of "no further action" by professional standards.
I have to say, the stop looks text book to me. Two people refusing to leave a vehicle to be searched in an area where knife crime is rife, after appearing to make an attempt to evade police by car, justifies removing them by force and handcuffing to prevent further escape attempts.
It's all justified under PACE (sections 1 & 117). As Lancs says, absolute non story.
BTW, I was interested to see the former head of the CPS voice his concern over a totally legal stop, search and use of force powers 🤔
I also had a chuckle at Chrissie Hynde (local resident and witness to the incident) who complained that the police are doing nothing to stop gangs and people carrying knives. You know, like stopping cars that deliberately speed off when police attempt to stop and search them.
Nobby, i fear youre misunderstanding my point here. It does look textbook, IF the person was indeed driving on the wrong side of the road and if they indeed sped off when asked to pull over. However ive not seen any proof of either of these two events. ive just seen the officers word, and what ive also seen is the athlete refuting either of these events happened quite strongly from the start. Its that disagreement which has caused the fallout.

Wouldnt be the first time the police invented a reason to pull a car, and were then somehow surprised when hey got a hostile response from the people they illegally stopped.

Likewise, i dont believe that version of events to be true either. I just say its a possibility that until i see evidence, or an article of someone expressly corrobirating that that happened.

if theres some evidence to show one way or anothee, thats exactly what i was asking for.
 
Thing about the news item on the BBC 6pm news is that the full circumstances had been published this morning and were highlighted by the Met on their website. Up to seven officers had imagery on their respective body cameras so were able to piece together the whole event with clarity - self protection by video ! Had the BBC put the two and two together they would clearly have identified the story for what it is, a non-story and certainly not worthy of National, high-profile reporting. BBC and the Met Media Services Dept are in daily contact yet the BBC still decided to show, in isolation, the images taken by the car`s occupant/s. Mischievous by the BBC IMO, they had a chance to tell the full tale but chose not to. As you say, Linford Christie`s input was factor. But, he clearly jumped in without knowing the circumstances, realising that anything he says will get reported. I`m sticking to my claim of Lazy reporting on this one, Jogills.

OK you have more information than I was aware of regarding the sequence of events. I'd accept lazy reporting at worst because I don't see any malice. I have wondered from the start of the pandemic how effective editorial control can be with reporters working semi independently in the field and from home. The footage from amateurs is currently of exactly the same technical quality of that of professionals, which muddies perception still further.

I'm in the same place as AK in that I don't feel that I have seen, or heard enough myself to be absolutely certain. In an ideal world we might only learn of these events and many others once they had been resolved. I'm not arguing for secrecy but it's absurd that we all feel bound to have an opinion on everything in real time. It doesn't make for mutual understanding.
 
What i believe you posted was: one version of events that the police were claiming, but possibly not the actual version of events. Thats what i was asking for proof of or more information on really. Is there any more specific detail in an article here? Certainly the quotes i saw from the athlete, she didnt just 'conveniently' miss out bits as you suggest, but she vehemently denied some of these specific accusations of her driving.

EDIT: Heres a quote from an article i just saw supporting this..."However, Williams - who says she has been left "really shaken" by the incident - insists "at no point did we drive on the wrong side of the road or speed off".

I mean, absolutely, if it happened as you say then it seems absolutely valid reason to be stopped and searched. But i cant find anything other than the police statement that says this was the version of events as opposed to the athletes version, where as i say, she specifically denies some of these accusations.

I also thought the investigation had reviewed the behaviour of the police officers while they were arresting them, rather than in regards to whether there was true justification for them to stop them.

But that was just one article i saw, and i couldn't tell you what it was. Nor am i silly enough to trust one article, hence my question. I try to keep an open mind and base my opinion of right or wrong on facts rather than trusting one viewpoint or another, which undoubtedly always have a reason to tell the version of the truth that suits them the most (shall we say).


I`m going on the account of six or seven police officers backed up by their camera evidence which has been examined by the Met`s Professional Standards Dept (PSD), twice, I believe. Knowing how absolutely thorough the PSD is I have no doubt that the incident was carried out right and properly. But, as you say, having an open mind about all things is never a bad policy. As far as i`m concerned it remains a non story.
 
I`m going on the account of six or seven police officers backed up by their camera evidence which has been examined by the Met`s Professional Standards Dept (PSD), twice, I believe. Knowing how absolutely thorough the PSD is I have no doubt that the incident was carried out right and properly. But, as you say, having an open mind about all things is never a bad policy. As far as i`m concerned it remains a non story.
Is there a publically available copy (online preferably?) of the official output of that investigation so i can see what they said specifically about the three allegations and proof of them:
1) driving on wrong side of road
2) taking off/speeding up when asked to stop
3) car smelling of weed

As i said before, from the newspaper reports, the press has been quite ambiguous or non-committal over what was actually reviewed by the PSD. In fact the only quotes ive seen from the output of these reviews are that they comment that the behaviour during the stop and search was fine.

As i said, its very plausible that they only reviewed the events AFTER the decision was made to stop and search and not reviewed whether the stop and search was right or not in itself in the first place. As ive already said, that has the most critical bearing on this case, rather than the actions of the police officers after that once they had made the decision to conduct the stop and search.
 
I've struck a nerve there Lancs. I stick by what I said. Obviously the big majority of officers were decent, honest and brave back in those days. However there were plenty of wronguns and slackers. I was there too as a resident in inner London. I witnessed plenty of shabby incidents. When living in Catford it was a family "joke" to say "oh, look, another black driver stopped". I've noticed massive improvements over the past 20 years.

As you know I'm pro police and proud of my contact's chosen career. Standards and attitudes are way better now. I'd say the same about the Education profession that I've just left. Far fewer slackers now, better standards and the job more demanding than ever. I'm relieved to have left.

I'm saying all this as someone who is very pro police and law and order. However, I can see why others have a different view and have had a different experience. I am fully aware of the unfair criticism heaped on the police as my contact keeps me well informed from the police point of view.


Thing is, 58, the thread of the article by Kevin Hurley that I published was as relevant to policing in the 70`s and 90s as it is today. The police service had just as many honourable and hard working officers in it back then as does today`s service and today`s service has just as many shirkers and slackers, as you call them, as did the 70s and 90`s.

I`m sorry, that`s why I get a tad touchy about your comments as some times, they come across, to me anyway, as generally sweeping in a derogatory sense, whenever you speak about policing in the recent past. I can understand that the (rightful) pride of having a (probably) young member of your family in the police might concentrate the mind more in terms of contemporary problems. I also accept that in all walks of life we learn lessons from the past. But, I think that , for some reason, I detect a general disdain for past generation policing that to me appears generally unfounded. If you were truly "there" i`d have expected to see knowledgeable critique expressed a bit more objectively. There will always be some bad eggs in the police, always were, always will be and it`s certainly right and proper to call them out. No-one, no-one, hates a crooked cop more than a cop does.

Policing has a sort of "family" complexion to it; the same challenges abound from one policing generation to the next. Officers support one another emotionally because of the shared experiences, often horrific, they go through - it`s been that way for many years. To start bringing politics into it, as if all coppers were Thatchers bully boys, is ridiculous, 58, and absolutely not true. You say that you were there, well if you were actually there, wearing the uniform and being on the front line, you would know that the gist of your commentary is unsound. When I say I was there, i mean, I was there, so my actual first hand experience, across the many echelons of law enforcement/policing affords me a long insight to what was occurring then and, as it happens, up to the very recent, pretty much contemporary, actually, moment in time.

I do sometimes worry about the direction that policing in the UK is headed. Some senior management in the police has lost the plot and become obsessed with political correctness - police are confused about what society expects of them. Society will eventually dictate how the profession moves forward, as it always does ( society will get the police force it deserves - an age old and true saying) and one of the concerns I have is that we are moving towards a French system of policing. An armed "regular" police force (Gendarmes) and a separate public order element (CRS). Policing by consent is at risk - because large and, it appears, growing numbers of citizens are routinely and overtly withdrawing their consent ! What do you do then, dismantle the police ? - that would lead to absolute chaos. Reform the police, how ? How do you shape a police service to the absolute satisfaction of all communities and all sections of society ? I worry that the government of the day might eventually be left with just one route - policing by force. Some might welcome that, bringing back the water cannons and bashing protesters might appeal to some. I would not.

I wish your family member all the very best in her career and hope that she stays safe and enjoys her work. The job provides officers with a seat in the front row of life - it`s an experience most will never have. If she is a young person then doing the job will accelerate her journey of life experiences and ensure that she "grows up" very quickly, probably ahead of her time - it`s that sort of environment. All the best to her.
 
Sorry lads but I've got my sceptical head on, but I'm sure that if the evidence against the car was so emphatic there would have been a leak of Police evidence by now. :(
 
Is there a publically available copy (online preferably?) of the official output of that investigation so i can see what they said specifically about the three allegations and proof of them:
1) driving on wrong side of road
2) taking off/speeding up when asked to stop
3) car smelling of weed

As i said before, from the newspaper reports, the press has been quite ambiguous or non-committal over what was actually reviewed by the PSD. In fact the only quotes ive seen from the output of these reviews are that they comment that the behaviour during the stop and search was fine.

As i said, its very plausible that they only reviewed the events AFTER the decision was made to stop and search and not reviewed whether the stop and search was right or not in itself in the first place. As ive already said, that has the most critical bearing on this case, rather than the actions of the police officers after that once they had made the decision to conduct the stop and search.


Sorry AK, as I said, it`s a non-story as far as i`m concerned. I`m sure that you`ll be able to keep abreast of what is/becomes publicly available and you can make your own mind up. Cheers.
 
Sorry AK, as I said, it`s a non-story as far as i`m concerned. I`m sure that you`ll be able to keep abreast of what is/becomes publicly available and you can make your own mind up. Cheers.
I understand you think its a non story. Youve said that about 5 times withoutanswering the questions being raised. I just wonder on what evidence you believe this to be the case. I'm interested to see the evidence you have seen so i too can come to the same conclusion. You are so sure, so i want to come to the same conclusion as yourself if its so clear. Seems a bit odd you seem to have some access to evidence or even just some article somewhere, but wont share it.

Ive googled and cant find any of the specifics proving any of the 3 things i mentioned, that might we point out that the athlete absolutely refutes.
 
I lived in the inner city during that time and the police were pretty shabby.
Made plenty of money out of doing Thatcher's dirty work though.
If you are going to insert a critical aside about "Thatcher", at least tell us what this "dirty work" was.
 
If you are going to insert a critical aside about "Thatcher", at least tell us what this "dirty work" was.

The "dirty work" that I think '58 is referring to is the military style policing that was used to crush opposition and rebellion against Thatcher's government and policies. It was evident on many, many occasions during the 1980s. The most famous examples are Orgreave and the Beanfield but as I said, there were many more less well-known examples.