Police officer accused of urinating in clothes shop fitting room

Jonny Ingbar said:
I get what you're saying but there's process that I think should be respected here, with an outcome decided by legally qualified decision makers, based on the evidence presented.

Some of us may disagree with it, but that's the way it is.
Click to expand...
I totally get what you are saying, but I have two questions for you.

Do qualified people not make mistakes, and secondly, how can someone be trusted in the future to tell the truth when they have already lied to their superiors?

It seems that the Cleveland Chief Constable Mark Webster tends to disagree with you.
 
Supposedly she was drunk (although off duty at the time). Not clever to go clothes shopping when drunk. And not clever to go on heavy drinking sessions when in the Police.

I head of a teacher who lost his job was urinating in side street after a evening session he was also verbally abusive when confronted by a police officer.

I imagine the women above is a young officer. If she apologises and pays all costs and a bit extra to the shop. A written warning seems to right punishment. Ity appears some guidnance/reminders need to be given out by Cleveland Police on behaviour off duty. Being a police officer is not like working in an office in the sense it carries some off duty responsibilities.
 
Redwurzel said:
Supposedly she was drunk (although off duty at the time). Not clever to go clothes shopping when drunk. And not clever to go on heavy drinking sessions when in the Police.

I head of a teacher who lost his job was urinating in side street after a evening session he was also verbally abusive when confronted by a police officer.

I imagine the women above is a young officer. If she apologises and pays all costs and a bit extra to the shop. A written warning seems to right punishment. Ity appears some guidnance/reminders need to be given out by Cleveland Police on behaviour off duty. Being a police officer is not like working in an office in the sense it carries some off duty responsibilities.
Click to expand...
The urinating in the shop isn't the issue for me, it's the fact that she lied about it, in the eyes of the panel, to her supervisor when confronted about it and then continued to do so under oath during the hearing.
 
Cleveland Police gets some bad press.

I bet none of you know that it is pretty much the best Force in the country on the forensic crime scene side, which was one of only two areas of the Force exempted from the failing, inadequate or in need of improvement verdict of the 2019 HMICFRS report, despite chronic under funding for years and botched attempted government interference via the Private Sector.

I happen to know that a recent UKAS inspection saw them the first and only Force in the country to have acquired and maintained all it's accreditation across all the areas currently accredited by UKAS ie Fingerprint Comparison, Marks Enhancement, Body Fluid Recovery, DNA Analysis, Digital Forensics, Toxicology, and Firearms Examination. Accreditation determines the competence of staff, the validity and suitability of methods, the appropriateness of equipment and facilities, and the ongoing assurance through internal quality control.

In fact it was remarked by the recent examiners that they had never audited a force with so few findings, all of which were so minor they were rectified within hours of the assessors leaving. The inspectors were so impressed they want to recommend every other Force in the country follow Cleveland Police's procedures, manuals and training. Not that they will, mind you.
 
Lefty said:
Cleveland Police gets some bad press.

I bet none of you know that it is pretty much the best Force in the country on the forensic crime scene side, which was one of only two areas of the Force exempted from the failing, inadequate or in need of improvement verdict of the 2019 HMICFRS report, despite chronic under funding for years and botched attempted government interference via the Private Sector.

I happen to know that a recent UKAS inspection saw them the first and only Force in the country to have acquired and maintained all it's accreditation across all the areas currently accredited by UKAS ie Fingerprint Comparison, Marks Enhancement, Body Fluid Recovery, DNA Analysis, Digital Forensics, Toxicology, and Firearms Examination. Accreditation determines the competence of staff, the validity and suitability of methods, the appropriateness of equipment and facilities, and the ongoing assurance through internal quality control.

In fact it was remarked by the recent examiners that they had never audited a force with so few findings, all of which were so minor they were rectified within hours of the assessors leaving. The inspectors were so impressed they want to recommend every other Force in the country follow Cleveland Police's procedures, manuals and training. Not that they will, mind you.
Click to expand...
Shhhh, you aren't allowed to say anything about Cleveland Police that is positive, didn't you know?
 
Lefty said:
Cleveland Police gets some bad press.

I bet none of you know that it is pretty much the best Force in the country on the forensic crime scene side, which was one of only two areas of the Force exempted from the failing, inadequate or in need of improvement verdict of the 2019 HMICFRS report, despite chronic under funding for years and botched attempted government interference via the Private Sector.

I happen to know that a recent UKAS inspection saw them the first and only Force in the country to have acquired and maintained all it's accreditation across all the areas currently accredited by UKAS ie Fingerprint Comparison, Marks Enhancement, Body Fluid Recovery, DNA Analysis, Digital Forensics, Toxicology, and Firearms Examination. Accreditation determines the competence of staff, the validity and suitability of methods, the appropriateness of equipment and facilities, and the ongoing assurance through internal quality control.

In fact it was remarked by the recent examiners that they had never audited a force with so few findings, all of which were so minor they were rectified within hours of the assessors leaving. The inspectors were so impressed they want to recommend every other Force in the country follow Cleveland Police's procedures, manuals and training. Not that they will, mind you.
Click to expand...
And that Teesside University have houses set up as crime scenes for students to learn in. Teesside Uni is a leading light in forensics.
 
It's not a mistake just because yi
Norman_Conquest said:
I totally get what you are saying, but I have two questions for you.

Do qualified people not make mistakes, and secondly, how can someone be trusted in the future to tell the truth when they have already lied to their superiors?

It seems that the Cleveland Chief Constable Mark Webster tends to disagree with you.
Click to expand...
U d
Norman_Conquest said:
I totally get what you are saying, but I have two questions for you.

Do qualified people not make mistakes, and secondly, how can someone be trusted in the future to tell the truth when they have already lied to their superiors?

It seems that the Cleveland Chief Constable Mark Webster tends to disagree with you.
Click to expand...
It's not a mistake simply because you disagree with the outcome though is it?

The finding doesn't automatically lead to a dismissal - that's what the legislation says, so on a point of law the finding isn't open to legal challenge.

The chief constable is posturing due to public opinion, he knows the threat of legal challenge is unlikely to have grounds.

I just think that any legal process should be respected and in this example Cleveland police don't ha e a right of appeal, its as simple as that.
 
Redwurzel said:
Supposedly she was drunk (although off duty at the time). Not clever to go clothes shopping when drunk. And not clever to go on heavy drinking sessions when in the Police.

I head of a teacher who lost his job was urinating in side street after a evening session he was also verbally abusive when confronted by a police officer.

I imagine the women above is a young officer. If she apologises and pays all costs and a bit extra to the shop. A written warning seems to right punishment. Ity appears some guidnance/reminders need to be given out by Cleveland Police on behaviour off duty. Being a police officer is not like working in an office in the sense it carries some off duty responsibilities.
Click to expand...
Sorry Red, but how can she ever be trusted when presenting evidence?
 
Jonny Ingbar said:
It's not a mistake just because yi
U d
It's not a mistake simply because you disagree with the outcome though is it?

The finding doesn't automatically lead to a dismissal - that's what the legislation says, so on a point of law the finding isn't open to legal challenge.

The chief constable is posturing due to public opinion, he knows the threat of legal challenge is unlikely to have grounds.

I just think that any legal process should be respected and in this example Cleveland police don't ha e a right of appeal, its as simple as that.
Click to expand...
What about the second part of the question, can she be trusted when presenting evidence?

Surely a decent barrister would rip her to shreds because she previously lied under oath.
 
And I know that this piece of work
Lefty said:
Cleveland Police gets some bad press.

I bet none of you know that it is pretty much the best Force in the country on the forensic crime scene side, which was one of only two areas of the Force exempted from the failing, inadequate or in need of improvement verdict of the 2019 HMICFRS report, despite chronic under funding for years and botched attempted government interference via the Private Sector.

I happen to know that a recent UKAS inspection saw them the first and only Force in the country to have acquired and maintained all it's accreditation across all the areas currently accredited by UKAS ie Fingerprint Comparison, Marks Enhancement, Body Fluid Recovery, DNA Analysis, Digital Forensics, Toxicology, and Firearms Examination. Accreditation determines the competence of staff, the validity and suitability of methods, the appropriateness of equipment and facilities, and the ongoing assurance through internal quality control.

In fact it was remarked by the recent examiners that they had never audited a force with so few findings, all of which were so minor they were rectified within hours of the assessors leaving. The inspectors were so impressed they want to recommend every other Force in the country follow Cleveland Police's procedures, manuals and training. Not that they will, mind you.
Click to expand...
This was a huge piece of work, with considerable investment, so it's good that it's being recognised as such, because not many (if any) police forces in the UK are in such a similarly healthy position.
 
Not currently but there are plenty of offic
Norman_Conquest said:
What about the second part of the question, can she be trusted when presenting evidence?

Surely a decent barrister would rip her to shreds because she previously lied under oath.
Click to expand...
Not currently but there are plenty of officers roles that aren't directly in the evidence chain.

The decision is sound and within the legal framework that governs the process.

Maybe the legislation needs reform (and im not sayingit does), but that's an entirely different point.
 
I'm sure the coverage in the media says she is still in her probationary period? If so I take it by using the phrase "considering legal options available to us" they really mean "we are thinking of a way to fail her probation and terminate her employment without is ending up at a tribunal"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top