The logic why Police will not get rid of all the wrong’uns

They are many reports in recent months where the UK police force would appear to be infiltrated with corrupt police officers, from serving police officers such as  Wayne Couzens, who raped and murdered Sarah Everard to the almost daily string of police officers caught in thefts, sexual assaults, child abuse, lies and deceit.

Why are the police so slow to root out this corruption?  One thought is that the police believe they need officers who have a criminal mindset and who are prepared to break the law to get the job done.

Why would a police officer, imprisoned for having 2,000 child abuse images on his computer, face a misconduct panel?  Any officer who commits a criminal offence while serving in the police should be automatically dismissed where a certain threshold is met, this should be, and I think the general consensus of the UK would have thought this would be the case.

The sad reality is, you do not have to be an upstanding member of the public to be a police officer, you can have a prior criminal record, and if you commit a crime and are convicted while serving as a police officer, you are not automatically dismissed, even though the job role is to fight crime.

I believe the answer lies in the upper echelons of the police force, those who are often judged on the overall performance and crime statistics of the entire force.

At this rank of policing, statistic count for force performance, and there is a fine balancing act over crime statistics and police conduct in achieving those statistics.

It is true that solving some crimes is difficult, no one said policing was an easy job.  Gathering evidence is laborious, even impossible, especially if evidence was never available or disappeared over time.

Then there are incidents where the police may be convinced they know who committed a crime, sometimes the evidence will not secure a conviction, often bringing down police statistics and creating frustration within a police force criticised over performance.

What if a police officer was giving evidence but simply, due to poor timing or other genuine reason, they did not witness itfirst hand (see or hear the offence), yet they believe were reliably told by another person (who may or may not be telling the truth) that something did happen. So long as the police officer had the means to see or hear something, even though they may not have witnessed it, it

What if evidence suddenly appeared

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*