Dish the Dirty Digger!

The Dirty Digger

When the history of UK Media comes to be written then the “Tale of the Dirty Digger” Rupert Murdoch will come to be writ large. This was no uneducated yokel who clawed his way up; rather he is the Oxford educated scion of a wealthy Australian Newspaper owner who more than anybody else has been singled handedly responsible for destroying the integrity of the media in Australia, Britain and the United States (of which, ever the opportunist, he became a citizen) whilst corrupting and vulgarising society. The corruption was through political patronage and endorsement, the vulgarising was through his trashy Tabloids and his corrupting of the News agenda with Fox News and the right wing Chav politics of the Sun and the News of the World or “News of the Screws” as it is known from its main fare, trashy exposes often with the help of illegal eavesdropping or subterfuge such as its notorious “False Sheik.”


The delightful Rebecca Brooks who like all News of the World editors knew nothing about phone hacking

So widespread illegality and criminality occurred seemingly untroubled by the long arm of the Law or indeed the laughable “voluntary” Press Complaints Council whose motto seems to be “Scum regulating the Scum” although it is careful to pay good money to have as its head a plausible “Lord Frontman.”

Indeed the original investigation into phone hacking was led by none other than our old friend “shy” Andy Hayman who is now on News International’s payroll, writing without any discernible hint of irony on “Policing Issues.” But now the years of rampage have come home to roost as pressure piles on News International;


Shy and sensitive Andy Hayman

Read about "shy" Andy;

http://daithaic.blogspot.com/2007/12/policemans-lot.html

Police warned Holly and Jessica families their phones may have been hacked by News of the World private eye

Car giant scraps adverts as Npower and Halifax 'consider' following suit

Scotland Yard contacted schoolgirls' parents in connection with hacking scandal, it has emerged


Rupert Murdoch's Long Island mansion - naturally any stalkers, paparazzi, hackers or prowlers here will be dealt with using the full force of the law. How dare they intrude on the Boss's privacy!

Revelation comes on day of claims murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler also had her phone tapped by the paper

Questions raised over whether it could have hampered police investigation into Milly's disappearance in 2002

Ed Miliband has led calls for former editor Rebekah Brooks to resign

Ms Brooks says she is 'appalled and shocked' over allegations Milly's voicemail was hacked

John Prescott has called on the Culture Secretary to block News Corp's proposed takeover of BSkyB

Shamed private investigator Glenn Mulcaire apologises to victims


The News of the Screws

This from anti-Murdoch Group 38 Degrees

How much lower can Rupert Murdoch's media empire sink? Today, one of his papers stands accused of hacking the phone of murdered teenager Milly Dowler, causing her family even more pain, and risking a police inquiry. [1]

Rupert Murdoch's empire is now under investigation by the police. [2] But at the same time, he’s getting ready to take even more control of our media. This week, Murdoch’s expecting to get the green light from David Cameron’s government for his takeover of BSkyB. [3]

If we work together, we can make sure this week doesn't end with Murdoch getting awarded even more power. Let's stand together for higher media standards and against Murdoch's latest power grab. Help break Murdoch's grip, sign the petition now:

https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/murdoch-deal-petition

The final government inquiry into Murdoch's power grab ends this Friday at midday. [4] We'll deliver a copy of the petition to the inquiry - demanding that the phone hacking allegations are taken into account and the deal is halted.


PR Dave and Andy Coulson

The government wants to approve Murdoch’s BSkyB takeover. They say that Murdoch promises to respect media independence, so there's nothing to fear from giving him even more control. They want us to trust Rupert Murdoch! [5] But how can we trust Murdoch when his paper stands accused of hacking into the phone of a murdered teenager?

We’ve got until noon on Friday to prove to the government that the public wants the brakes put on Murdoch’s power grab. Let's get over 100,000 signatures by then – add your name now:

https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/murdoch-deal-petition

Yesterday, Murdoch's empire thought this deal was in the bag. Our people-powered campaign had helped delay things - but they had just one hurdle left. The minister in charge, Jeremy Hunt, was clearly on Murdoch’s side. Murdoch's backing for the Conservatives at the election and his executives’ cosy dinners with David Cameron all seemed to be paying off.

But now, we have a real chance to stop this power grab. [6] Across the UK, people are shocked at how one of Rupert Murdoch’s papers is accused of heartlessly abusing a family facing one of the worst situations any of us can imagine. Let’s work together to make sure this is a turning point in the battle for higher media standards in Britain.

Please sign the petition now:

https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/murdoch-deal-petition

Thanks for being involved,

David, Hannah, Johnny, Becky, Cian, Marie and the 38 Degrees team

PS: Would you take a promise from Rupert Murdoch at face value? Help break Murdoch's grip, add your name to the petition now:

>https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/murdoch-deal-petition

NOTES:

[1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jul/04/milly-dowler-voicemail-hacked-news-of-world
[2] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8617299/News-of-the-World-executives-to-meet-police-over-Milly-Dowler-phone-hacking-claims.html
[3] http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/01a242ce-a2df-11e0-a9a4-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1REVIppSL
[4] http://www.culture.gov.uk/news/media_releases/8258.aspx
[5] http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jun/30/news-corp-bskyb-bis-jeremy-hunt-approval
[6] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14023233

A SCANDAL THAT JUST WON'T GO AWAY – The Diary of Shame




November 2005 The NoW publishes a story about Prince William's knee injury, prompting fears that his aides' phone voicemail messages are being intercepted. Complaints by three royal staff members spark a police inquiry.

August 2006 Detectives arrest the News of the World's royal editor Clive Goodman and private investigator Glenn Mulcaire.

January 2007 Goodman is jailed for four months and Mulcaire for six months after they admit intercepting voicemail messages on royal aides' phones, including some left by Prince William. News of the World editor Andy Coulson resigns from his post, saying he 'deeply regrets' what happened and takes 'ultimate responsibility' for it.

May 2007 The Press Complaints Commission says in a report that it is satisfied no-one else at the News of the World knew Goodman and Mulcaire were tapping phone messages.

July 9 2009 The Crown Prosecution Service announces an urgent review of material provided by the police in 2006.

July 21 2009 Mr Coulson tells MPs on the Culture, Media and Sport Committee things went 'badly wrong' under his editorship of the News of the World, but insists he knew nothing about alleged phone tapping by his journalists.

November 9 2009 The Press Complaints Commission says it has seen no new evidence to suggest anyone at the News of the World other than Goodman and Mulcaire hacked phone messages, or that the paper's executives knew what the pair were doing.

February 24 2010 A Culture, Media and Sport Committee report finds no evidence that Mr Coulson knew phone hacking was taking place at the News of the World, but says it is 'inconceivable' that no-one apart from Goodman was aware of it.


John "well I be buggered" Prescott

November 4 2010 Mr Coulson is interviewed as a witness by Metropolitan Police detectives investigating the phone tapping allegations. He is not cautioned or arrested.

December 10 2010 The Crown Prosecution Service says no further charges will be brought over the News of the World phone hacking scandal because witnesses refused to co-operate with police.

January 5 2011 News of the World suspends its news editor Ian Edmondson.

January 7 2011 Scotland Yard asks the News of the World for any new material they may have in relation to hacking.

January 26 2011 The Met Police launch a fresh investigation after receiving 'significant new information' about activities at the News of the World. Ian Edmondson, is sacked.

9 February 2011 The Met Police release a statement saying officers have identified more potential victims of hacking while reviewing files relating to the original Goodman and Mulcaire case.

18 February 2011 A judge rules that Glenn Mulcaire must provide information about whether other journalists at the NoW were involved in hacking.

5 April 2011 News of the World chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck and former news editor Ian Edmondson are arrested on suspicion of unlawfully intercepting voicemail messages. They are released on bail until September.

8 April 2011 News International announces it will offer an unreserved apology and admission of liability to those suing over alleged phone hacking.

10 April 2011 The News of the World apologises for intercepting voicemails between 2004 and 2006 and says its past behaviour was a 'matter of genuine regret'.

14 April 2011 News of the World journalist James Weatherup is arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to unlawfully intercept communications.

7 June 2011 At a brief hearing at London's High Court, News Group - the owner of the News of the World - formally apologises to Sienna Miller for hacking into several of her mobile phones. The actress, who does not attend, formally settles for £100,000 damages and legal costs.

22 June 2011 Football pundit Andy Gray accepts £20,000 in compensation from the News of the World owner News Group Newspapers, plus undisclosed costs, over voicemail interceptions.

27 June 2011 Police arrest Laura Elston, who covers royal stories for the Press Association news agency.

July 4 2011 Lawyers for the parents of Milly Dowler confirm Scotland Yard told them the murdered teenager's phone was hacked by an investigator for the News of The World.


The murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler

John Prescott has called on the Culture Secretary to block News Corp's proposed takeover of BSkyB

Read more:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2011182/Milly-Dowler-News-World-phone-hacking-Police-warned-Soham-families.html%23ixzz1RGdhyBfn

Bend it like Andy

You may remember the case of the Policeman who came over all shy? He was a former Chief Constable, a Deputy Commissioner of Scotland Yard responsible for discipline and anti-corruption and head of the anti – terrorist squad making life and death decisions (not necessarily a metaphor) when he suddenly become bashful, sensitive and upset. Yes, this sensitive soul was Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman of Scotland Yard who was responsible for the Metropolitan Police’s unit in charge of the fight against terror. In December 2007 he decided to retire immediately from his £180,000-a-year post, thereby avoiding a disciplinary inquiry or other action in relation to a number of matters. The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) examined Mr Hayman's conduct after the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell Tube station and later accused the Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner of misleading colleagues and the public. Mr Hayman, who has spearheaded the fight against Islamic extremism since 2005, has also been questioned over allegedly “inflated” expenses claims and trips abroad with Sergeant Heidi Tubby, his staff officer.

http://daithaic.blogspot.com/2007/12/policemans-lot.html

His decision to step down was another blow for Sir Ian Blair who recruited Mr Hayman after taking over as Metropolitan Police Commissioner in February 2005. Mr Hayman's former colleagues at the time rallied to his support, claiming he had been the victim of a 'dirty tricks campaign' at Scotland Yard. Ian Blair has since gone and Sir Paul Stephenson has taken over with a stated mission to regain squandered public trust and return Scotland Yard to the basics of policing. As such he is in the tradition of respected reforming commissioners such as Robert Mark and Paul Condon but it has to be asked if the stables need to be shovelled out with such frequency is the design wrong? Just how bad the stables still are can be garnered from this report in the Observer;

"Auditors who have examined the American Express accounts of 3,500 officers involved in countering terrorism and organised crime have reported almost one in 11 detectives to the Metropolitan Police's internal investigators. A senior officer appears to have spent £40,000 on his Amex card in one year, without authorisation. Items bought by others without permission include suits, women's clothing and fishing rods..."

"Sources have told the Observer that some detectives had fallen into the habit of withdrawing hundreds of pounds at a time from cashpoints. Other officers appear to have filled in blank receipts from restaurants to account for cash payments."



Hundreds of Metropolitan Police Officers have been investigated for fraud after widespread abuse of corporate credit cards was revealed. Indeed those who have cards withdrawn equates to 1 in 11 of all Scotland Yard’s plain clothes officers, so there is definitely something badly wrong with the Yardie’s culture of entitlement and basic honesty.

Now you would think Shy Andy would have stayed shy having failed to give an account of himself but no sireee, you would indeed be wrong. For in the greatest transformation since Ernest Saunders cast off incurable dementia Andy “I don’t want to give evidence” Hayman has triumphed over his shyness and then some! For one thing he has appeared in the columns of The Murdoch Times as a “security correspondent” giving his opinion on all and sundry to do with policing, Law and Order. Now those of us of Hibernian origin remember that throughout the Northern Ireland conflict the Sunday Times always had security correspondents who pedalled British Security Service disinformation and smears, all the time quoting unamed “Security Services”. Never mind most of their “splashes” were wrong, no retractions, apologies or corrections were ever forthcoming.


Community Policing

Well Shy Andy continues in this proud tradition of Murdoch Press Integrity, giving forth with his “expertise”. The Government crisis committee that deals with events from flu epidemics to terror attacks was condemned by him as a “nonsensical system.” He said the Cobra committee dragged people away from their real jobs when dealing with a crisis. Mr Hayman, who was head of counter terror operations during the 7/7 bombings in 2005, gave details of Cobra in his book The Terrorist Hunters. He was particularly critical of the shambolic operations of the committee, which he revealed meets in a fortified cellar beneath Whitehall. Senior officials who are dealing with the immediate aftermath of a major event are suddenly dragged into a meeting with politicians, he said. “There's a bomb attack and all hell breaks loose. Everyone scrambles — emergency services, police, intelligence agencies, Government departments — and rushes around trying to deal with it. But within an hour we're pulled off the job and summoned to Cobra.”



He says the meeting room is stuffy and often senior officials wander lost beneath Whitehall trying to find it. He adds: “Of course a meeting should be called to co-ordinate the response, and the role of senior people is to detach themselves from the detail and plan ahead. But in my experience, Cobra fails to do that. The first time I attended, I was in awe. There were more knights there than at King Arthur's round table.”

He said politicians are often plunged into meetings on issues they know little about. Speaking about the 7/7 attack he says: “Take Alistair Darling, who was then Transport Secretary. He was on my case all the time, telling me the Underground needed to be reopened. And I kept asking: Do you want me to secure the crime scenes and get the evidence to prosecute the terrorists, or do you want me to get the traffic moving?'”


7/7 attack on The Tube

Speaking in the Times (where else!) to publicise his book he said: “Sometimes the meetings worked but more often they didn't. People would jockey for position in front of influential ministers, squabbling over places at the table. At times Cobra appeared to be little more than a stage for those looking to impress.” Mr Hayman calls for Cobra to be replaced with a committee made up solely of operational officials.

Well now the publication of the book The Terrorist Hunters by Andy Hayman has been blocked by the Attorney General. Baroness Scotland stepped in at the last minute to obtain an injunction preventing The Terrorist Hunters from hitting the shelves today. The book focused on the struggle against Islamic terrorism in the aftermath of the 7 July 2005 attacks on the London Underground which killed 52 people.

http://daithaic.blogspot.com/2008/08/walktalk.html

It also looked at the murder of Russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko and gave a behind-the-scenes glimpse of top-level political and intelligence work. An advisory notice highlighting the injunction, granted by an unnamed High Court judge, was circulated to news-paper editors at 11.45 last night. Further details of the reasons behind the injunction cannot be published for legal reasons linked to continuing criminal proceedings.

Thousands of copies of the 372-page book were delivered to bookshops nationwide ahead of its publication today. Large sections of the book, co-written by former BBC home affairs correspondent Margaret Gilmore, were also serialised in The Times. Sources close to the publication said it was vetted by officials at the Cabinet Office, MI5 and MI6 but no copy was passed to Scotland Yard.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson has complained that he was not given a preview of its contents. He told a meeting of the Metropolitan Police Authority last week that he was reluctant to give the book more publicity. But Sir Paul said members of the force's watchdog might like to consider whether senior officers should be allowed to publish such books. He said: “I find it surprising as commissioner that I have no right on this occasion to have access to the book before it is published. It is troublesome and it does not help good conduct.”

One senior police insider said: “There is quite a lot of anger in the Met about the book's contents. No one else's memories of some of the events he describes are the same."

Anyway I leave the final word on Shy Andy to one of his former colleagues in the Blue Brotherhood who left this comment on an Evening Standard article;

“Oh Please! I am no supporter of the current status quo, but we really don't need any advice for Andy Hayman as part of his campaign to publicise his book. This light-weight individual was, by common agreement, one of the most ineffectual heads of counter-terrorism we have had in recent years. He left the post hurriedly with an enormous cloud over his head, so his comments should be taken with a shed full of salt.”

A Metropolitan Police Commissioner for London

Sir Ian Blair - Bring it on!

Britain's most senior policeman was forced out of office by a Conservative mayor of London yesterday, provoking a political crisis over control of the country's largest police force.

Boris Johnson was accused of carrying out a putsch against Sir Ian Blair, who was forced to resign after being told he no longer had the confidence of the Mayor. Furious Labour ministers privately accused Mr Johnson of turning the post – which is appointed by the Home Secretary and includes leading the nationwide fight against terrorism – into a "political football". They said that Sir Ian's resignation would usher in a new era of politicised police officers.

Mr Johnson assumed the chairmanship of the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) on Wednesday and immediately told Sir Ian he did not think he was the right man for the job.

So, in the spirit of recent “Vox Pop” competitions The Celtic Sage is launching “A Metropolitan Police Commissioner for London” competition where the public will vote for the fav non-PC candidate! Details are awaited but as these competitions are largely about appearances here are photos of some of the leading contenders so far! Hello, Hello, Hello!


The candidates so far








An American, maybe?


Maybe not?




MORE? See the PlodBlogs in the Blog sidebar

A Death in London

Jean Charles de Menezes


Jurors in the Jean Charles de Menezes inquest today stood in silence at the spot where the 27-year-old Brazilian was shot dead by police marksmen. The six-woman, five-man panel was retracing Mr de Menezes's final steps and went to Stockwell Tube station where the shooting took place.

They filed through the ticket hall, down the escalator and onto platform two where Mr de Menezes had planned to take a northbound Northern line train. The jurors barely exchanged a word and coroner Sir Michael Wright did not speak throughout the 10-minute visit. The silence was only broken when a train full of passengers thundered through the station without stopping at the platform.

While Northern line trains were not stopping at the station, the Victoria line continued to operate as normal. On their way in and out of the station a court official pointed out the points the jurors were passing on their printed itinerary. The second day of the inquest into the death of the electrician on 22 July 2005 was set aside for a tour of key locations in the ill-fated police operation.

A convoy of coaches left the Oval cricket ground where the hearings are taking place with a police escort. The coroner travelled with the jury in the front coach, followed by legal teams travelling with the de Menezes family in the second and a media bus bringing up the rear. The visit to Stockwell was scheduled for an off-peak time on the 23rd December 2008 to minimise disruption for commuters.

In his opening yesterday, the coroner told of the confusion which existed before two firearms officers shot Mr de Menezes after mistaking him for failed suicide bomber Hussain Osman who had been on the run since attempting to detonate his bomb on the Tube the day before. Two weeks earlier, British-born al Qaeda bombers had succeeded in blowing up three Tube trains and a bus on a day of carnage in the capital.

Jurors have been told how firearm officers made a split second decision to kill the suspect. Sir Michael told the court that they had been convinced Mr de Menezes was Osman who was carrying out a second suicide bomb attack and could only be stopped by an "instant kill".

The coroner emphasised Mr de Menezes was entirely innocent.


Jurors at Stockwell Tube


----------------------------------------------------------------


From DaithaiC 16th October 2007


The Death of Jean Charles de Menezes

Jean Charles de Menezes was shot dead by Metropolitan Police firearms officers at Stockwell Tube station, London, on July 22nd. 2005. Bizarrely the Met(as the Metropolitan Police or Scotland Yard are commonly known) is being prosecuted under English Law not for Murder or Manslaughter but under Health and Safety legislation for failing to protect the health of Jean Charles de Menezes and members of the public who were exposed to danger in the operation. Indeed.

The details revealed so far in court are of a 27 year old electrician peacefully going to work unaware he was being trailed, not being intercepted as a possible suspect, getting on and off two buses, wearing jeans and a T-shirt and a light jacket with no baggage or possibility of concealing anything on his person, going routinely through station barriers and pausing to pick up a free newspaper, taking his seat on a tube train.



There he was held without challenge by a police officer who immobilised him by holding his arms around him in a vice like grip whilst his two colleagues fired 7 special "124 grain" dum-dum style bullets into his head at point blank range. The details of this killing have appalled and dismayed the public in equal measure and common sense would suggest these feelings will not be addressed by a prosecution under "Health and Safety" legislation - this being somewhat beyond satire. I think we can take it as read that if you kill somebody wrongly you have not protected their "Health and Safety."

Scotland Yard have real issues to answer about the apparent ineptness of the operation and about the large amount of uncorrected disinformation disseminated afterwards from the Commissioner downwards that this innocent persons' killing was "related to the ongoing terrorist situation", that he behaved suspiciously, ran away from officers, vaulted over ticket barriers and was wearing "bulky clothing". As none of this was true, where did it come from?

Hindsight is a great teacher, it is always a pity we don't have it beforehand, but there is another side to this sad story. Fifteen days previously on the 7th July 2005 4 suicide bombers had detonated 3 bombs on the Tube and one on a London bus. They killed 52 people (and themselves) in the biggest mass murder in peacetime Britain. The roll call of the dead is heart rending encompassing a typical cross section of Londoner's going about their day, young and old from every continent, colour and religious persuasion including a 19 year old Muslim girl on the threshold of her life. Of the 4 "brave" martyrs one was a 19 year old Jamaican Muslim convert who lived near me in Aylesbury and who took 26 lives on a Piccadilly Line train between Russell Square and King's Cross. What did a 19 year old know about life and what sort of crypto fascism justifies this cruel obscenity towards people you do not know but look in the eye before killing and maiming them? Maimed indeed for as well as the dead there were over 300 injured, some who lost limbs and eyes and some who will never live independent lives again.



I was in London that day and for a number of days afterwards spent afternoons and evenings helping people cope with the transport disruption. Two things were palpable. one was the great determination that London would not be brought to its knees by what happened, there was the quiet unseen courage of the Tube and Bus drivers who climbed into cabs at dawn the next morning and in their own way said "let's Roll!". The sense of determination was shared by the public who displayed stoic courage by insisting on going about their everyday business and not being terrorised even if it meant walking halfway across London to work.

Nerves were of course there under the surface but they had recovered somewhat when exactly 2 weeks later on the 21st July 2005 there was almost a carbon copy attempt of 4 suicide bomb attacks on the transport system in London by fanatics equally determined to destroy their fellow unknown human beings. This second attempt nearly succeeded and only failed because they had made a small error in the formulation of the homemade but deadly explosives they attempted to detonate. This second attempt was a great shock to the system, to the morale of Londoner's and no doubt to the security services who felt they had bottomed out all the leads and had stabilised the situation.

Now along with all of London they were looking into the abyss and not knowing what they were looking at or where the next threat would come from. What is happening and how many more are out there? - was the general public feeling. It was Jean Charles de Menezes great misfortune that he lived in a block of flats which was also the address of Hussain Osman, one of the failed suicide bombers from the day before and he was not entirely dissimilar in appearance given the limited identification information the police had to go on.

No doubt these court proceedings and further inevitable investigations will draw their own conclusions and I'm not attempting to anticipate them, but I make two observations of my own.

One is that society as a whole is not pacifist. We expect that the welfare of all is protected and logically that means we assent to people killing on our behalf. So we agree an Army is maintained and we expect it to kill and its troops to accept the possibility they will also be killed in combat. If an embassy is besieged, if a plane is hijacked or if a deranged gunman walks down the street killing at will we expect somebody to deal with the threat on our behalf. And if a suicide bomber is apprehended before he can blow us up we expect they will be killed. On the morning of the 22nd July 2005, the Met, a civilian police force had called in all the help it could get from the Defence and Security services and was trying to cover an impossible number of bases not knowing where the next threat was or where it would come from. Wherever fault lays in this sorry story it does lay with the three armed officers acting under orders who entered a Tube train to stop what they thought was Hussain Osman detonating a bomb.

The second point is who those of us who live and work in London felt that morning. Shamefully, I can remember my reaction was "Good on them, they got one!" and I can tell you in feeling that I was in a majority of, well, everybody. For at that stage, below the surface, there was a palpable sense of fear about town. And that is the point of the sheer obscenity and ruthless cruelty the suicide bomber. It desensitises all of us and for the sake of our protection makes us accept in our heart that which we would not normally accept in our head.

That desensitivity is something we all must fight against because otherwise the bomber has won and that must and will never happen. In this case it means we must, however difficult it may seem, try to do two things. Respect the memory of Jean Charles de Menezes and the grief of his family and respect the courage of the Police Officers who, out of a profound sense of public duty, did the unthinkable on all our behalves.

See also;

http://daithaic.blogspot.com/2007/12/policemans-lot.html

Fair Coppers?

Jan Berry - Blindin' Diamond Geezer?


Jacqui Smith - Right Bad Egg?

Regular Blogistas will know I’m not the current Home Secretary’s biggest fan but even I was driven to sympathise with her on the churlish Section House behaviour she received from the Coppers Protection League otherwise known as the Police Federation. Here was the snide introduction by the outgoing Secretary of the Federation, Jan Berry, who represents those blameless souls, the Constables of the United Kingdom who stay awake at night thinking of nothing else other than our well being and safety:

“At my first conference, I introduced the opportunity to ask questions of the Home Secretary. Although some Home Secretaries have subsequently regretted it – the session has been an important and healthy exchange of views. Home Secretary - I admire your courage. You didn’t have to come here today and I know conference will treat your office with the respect it warrants. I am sure when your Private Secretary reminded you of today’s event you felt like reaching for the nearest stab proof vest - and perhaps slipping into old habits and lighting up to calm your nerves…”

Now this is from the lady who is leader of the Police Federation, the organisation that represents those blameless souls, the rank and file police officers. Perhaps Jan Berry could tell us why it is that, no matter what outrages are committed against members of the public be it dying in police custody whilst officers make monkey noises or some lesser outrage her members are rarely found guilty of anything or disciplined. I would genuinely like to know, I have made no pre judgements, but it certainly raises the possibility that there is one law for the constabulary, and one for everyone else.

It may well be so that the police are overwhelmed by paperwork, although a recent documentary featuring undercover filming of the Leicestershire police force showed junior officers (presumably members of Ms Berry's organisation) wasting their own time, and using paperwork as an excuse to stay in the station rather than going out dealing with incidents. This kind of thing certainly suggests that some police officers think they are a law unto themselves. What is more worrying is that they are confident that the culture of the organisation will protect them. None of this, I am afraid, inspires confidence in the public or politicians. Ms Berry may be too young to remember why the police are deluged by paperwork and general bureaucracy. It stems from the realisation which dawned some thirty to forty years ago that some police officers were routinely corrupt, abused their powers and made up statements and other evidence. Indeed many of these incidents which led to PACE (Police and Criminal Evidence Act) happened to involve Irish Terrorist defendants. The bent coppering which led to PACE had two effects, the innocent were imprisoned whilst the guilty were not and the “intelligence” leads which the police had were useless, making life more dangerous for all of us.

Community Copper

Should Ms Jan Berry or anyone else suggest ways in which these tendencies can be monitored and controlled without resort to massive paperwork and bureaucracy, then they should share their ideas as widely as possible. But it is within living memory that a Lord Justice of Appeal, Lord Denning, openly said it was better to send (Irish) defendants to jail than “open up the appalling vista” that the Police routinely fabricated evidence. Well the appalling vista was well and truly opened up and judging by conviction rates the Police are not coping too well with having to tell the truth.

Consider the appalling background to Crime and Policing in the UK set out by the pressure group “Police Reform” which Jacqui Smith and any Home Secretary would have to deal with;

“Crime is high by international and historical standards. The Government’s claims to have reduced crime are not borne out by reality. Substantially increased spending on the police has not been matched by corresponding reductions in crime, indicating that productivity has fallen and the public have received poor value for money. The fight against crime is a challenge for the whole criminal justice system and for society as a whole. But effective Policing has a vital role to play.”


A Patch - historic photo

“Crime today is almost ten times its level per 100,000 of the population than in 1950. People in England and Wales are the most likely to be victims of crime of any developed country, except only for Australia. The UK is the most burgled country in the European Union, with the highest levels of assault crime. The Government claims that crime measured by the British Crime Survey has fallen, yet the British Crime Survey massively underestimates crime. It covers only half of recorded crime and ignores murder, rape, fraud, crimes against under-16s, commercial crime including shoplifting, and crime where there is no direct victim such as drugs dealing. Estimates suggest the true figure of crime in England and Wales is roughly three times the level indicated by the British Crime Survey. Since 1997-98 total recorded crime has increased from 4.5 million to over 5.5 million crimes a year, an increase of approximately 22 per cent. The Government claims that changes in the way crime is recorded have caused this, but steep increases in crimes such as robbery and violence against the person cannot be explained by changes in the counting rules. Britain now spends more on law and order as a proportion of GDP than any other OECD country, nearly two-thirds of which goes to the police, costing each household in England and Wales £550 a year.”

It is not just that we spend so much on policing but we get so little for it due to the restrictive “Spanish Practices” of the Police Federation, although the Spanish will complain that they have moved on.

Richard Barnbrook BNP London Leader supporting Fair Coppers - 23rd January 2008

As police stations have closed and foot patrol has given way to modern policing methods, the police have become increasingly alienated from the public. The way to rebuild public confidence and tackle crime is to have police officers on the streets. But the reintroduction of community policing has been inadequate. Record numbers of police have not been reflected in officers on the beat, and key Government programmes such as promised Police Community Support Officers and the national non-emergency number have been scaled back.

It's a stressful job, innit?

What Jan Berry’s members have represented is the maintenance of restrictive practices and an inability to embrace change; a change the public clearly demands. Here are some of the restrictive practices the Federation maintains.

1. Rostered rest days; Police have to be given the days they are not working 9 months in advance. If they are then required on any of those days they receive 2 days off in lieu PLUS overtime. Last year the 127,000 police officers in the UK earned half a billon pounds overtime, that’s an average of over £4,000 each. Compare this to the £250 a head they claim they have lost under the staged wage award which was the reason the barracked Jacqui Smith at their conference.

2. Operational Feeding; Judging by the beefy rows of well upholstered police officers facing the Home Secretary at the Conference this policy is conspicuously successful. If they are on an “Op” away from their station “Nick” for over 4 hours they have to be fed a “substantial hot meal”, over 7 hours two hot meals. Of course the time they spend getting to the trough to consume their swill and the time spent consuming their ethnically inclusive “full English” is “operational time” charged to overtime. So at moments of great danger to the Nation TV crews are treated to the inspiring site of the Metropolitan Commissioner walking between long tables of Police Federation members consuming their entitlement. No army rations for Britain’s finest!

A Shout - great for overtime

3. 30 year pension window. Like the armed forces the Police have a hugely generous, publicly funded (that is to say unfunded!), final salary pension. Unlike the armed forces the Police Pension is hard to justify. Of course many don’t hang around to collect it for particular laxity is shown to “medical retirement” where they can retire early on “medical grounds” get their entitlement plus a “gift” of an extra 10 years. I personally know of one 42 year old inspector who had done 20 years (20 + 10 = 30!), took medical retirement for whiplash (sitting in his stationary car in a car park) and is running a security company despite his “reduced” health.

4. Archaic Disciplinary Procedures: At any one time 1 in 15 Police Officers are subject to criminal or disciplinary investigation or proceedings. I’ll give you the number, that’s over 19,000 officers who can’t be deployed effectively because their use is restricted. The proceedings are long winded and arcane and would take a book to outline but suffice to say the police don’t make co-operative subjects and are advised by the Federation to say nothing, agree nothing and sign nothing and contact the Federation’s solicitors for this restrictive cartel will defend it’s members good or bad. Contrast their advice to their members with how they would want the public to co-operate with Police “enquiries.” Even then they can bring any disciplinary enquiry to a shuddering halt merely by resigning. This “right” has been exercised twice up to Chief constable level in the past months (http://daithaic.blogspot.com/search/label/andy%20Hayman )

A Nick - Only one in 8 of those left are 24/7

5. Spend, spend, spend! We can take it as a given that the police are not very good at protecting us for the £550 each household it costs all of us but they are not very good at using the money when they are given it. Police Committee’s are an exercise in non-accountability where they exist and most forces don’t have qualified accountants in charge of their finances, as different criteria must have been used for recruitment in the past. Take the delicious fraud of “Lord Williams” as he styled himself in the Scottish village and estate he bought. He had a Scottish connection alright for he was Assistant Finance Director of Scotland Yard and he purloined £12.6 m from a “secret account” which was maintained to develop (wait for it!) a remote surveillance drone for the police. Or then recently Scotland Yard cancelled 1,450 credit cards which were being abused; I’ll give you the number again that is one third of the total credit cards issued or to put it another way, 5.6% of Metropolitan Police Officers could not account properly for their expenses. Hello! Hello! Hello!

6. I could go on, but one final point. The Police Federation has by agreement, officers working for it full time on the payroll of every force in the country paid for out of police budgets, over 100 police officers at last count. These Police Officers (such as Jan Berry) are, of course, unavailable for policing.Once again I'll give you the number, that's a direct subsidy from Public Funds of over £5 m for the Police Federation.

So I hope Jan Berry enjoyed her swan song and her cheap shots at Jacqui Smith but this should not give her false confidence that the Public are happy to keep paying premium rates for this increasingly slapstick and dated Police Pantomime.

A Policeman's Lot?

Shy Andy

If you have the misfortune to be arrested by the police in England you will be read the following statement:

“You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."

The implication is clear, that an innocent person wants to proclaim their innocence and speak in their own defence. Indeed under the same Act (Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994) a judge in their charge to a jury may instruct them to draw an unfavourable inference from a defendant’s refusal to testify or their refusal to make a statement to the police.

Consider then the contrast in the case of Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman of Scotland Yard responsible for the Metropolitan Police’s unit in charge of the fight against terror, who has decided to retire immediately as the £180,000-a-year post, thereby avoiding a disciplinary inquiry or other action in relation to a number of matters. The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) examined Mr Hayman's conduct after the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell Tube station and later accused the Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner of misleading colleagues and the public. Mr Hayman, who has spearheaded the fight against Islamic extremism since 2005, has also been questioned over allegedly “inflated” expenses claims and trips abroad with Sergeant Heidi Tubby, his staff officer.

His decision to step down is yet another blow for Sir Ian Blair who recruited Mr Hayman after taking over as Metropolitan Police Commissioner in February 2005. Mr Hayman's former colleagues have rallied to his support, claiming he had been the victim of a 'dirty tricks campaign' at Scotland Yard.

This is where the Yardies live - A Male Gang obsessed with guns and "Respect"

Channel 4 News claimed Mr Hayman was in very close contact with the complaints commission official, who worked for the watchdog's communications department. The pair's exchanges came when the commission was drafting its report into how the Met handled the aftermath of the shooting of Mr de Menezes in South London in July 2005. Channel 4 alleged the “communications risked compromising the integrity and authority of the IPCC inquiry”. The female official at the centre of a row which led the Met's anti-terror chief to quit is named today as 36-year-old Nicki Redmond. She received hundreds of calls and texts from Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman while on the staff of the Independent Police Complaints Commission investigating the Stockwell shooting. After leaving the commission, Ms Redmond was at the centre of a probe into alleged "inappropriate contact". Ms Redmond worked for the Independent Police Complaints Commission while it was compiling its damning report into the death of Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell Tube station.


Andy Hayman with "friend" Nikki Redmond

The UK's former top anti-terror officer is to be given "advice" after breaking the police code of conduct following the Jean Charles de Menezes shooting. A report said Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman "misled" the public. Now the Independent Police Complaints Commission has ruled he should not face disciplinary proceedings but should be advised about future conduct.

In a statement, the IPCC said: "On 6 November, the MPA recommended that Mr Hayman receive advice because he had broken Code 5 of the Police Code of Conduct that says officers should be conscientious and diligent in the performance of their duties.

"After taking legal advice, the three IPCC Commissioners, who oversaw the investigation, have decided to accept the MPA's recommendation." The IPCC also said it would pursue the MPA's recommendation that it undertake an "in depth" review of the lessons to be learnt from Mr de Menezes's death.

Mr Hayman, a 48-year-old married father of two, has been caught up in two internal investigations this year. The first was sparked after complaints that information about a series of anti-terror raids in Birmingham last February was leaked to the media in advance. Mr Hayman's telephone records for the months before and after the raids were scrutinised and he was cleared of any blame. Investigators did, however, find details of the hundreds of “unexplained” calls between Mr Hayman and the complaints commission official. She has now left the police watchdog and works for the Association of Chief Police Officers.

In a separate inquiry, Yard auditors raised concerns over the £15,000 spent by Mr Hayman on drinks, restaurants, hotels and foreign travel. He strenuously denied the expenses allegations and vowed to clear his name when details of the financial probe emerged last month. Mr Hayman vigorously rejected the claims but, after a reported fiery meeting with Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair decided to take early retirement. He issued a statement saying the “unfounded allegations” had taken their toll. The former Norfolk chief constable will spend the next four months on paid leave before officially retiring in April. By then he will have served 30 years in the police and be entitled to a full pension.

In a statement, Mr Hayman said the time was right to leave the high-profile job after a string of hurtful accusations. “This role requires total commitment in both time and effort and has a considerable impact on your personal life, your family and friends,” he added.


Sgt Heidi Tubby

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said: 'Andy Hayman has been at the forefront of the police's work to protect our country from the terrorist threat. “I am very grateful for his immense contribution to counterterrorism and to British policing.” Mr Hayman was awarded a CBE last year for his outstanding work after the London bombings of July 2005 and for his role in rounding up the failed July 21 gang. He is said to have impressed Tony Blair and leading Government figures with his calm demeanour and factual briefings to the Cobra emergency security committee that month.

Last year he made a humiliating apology to two brothers arrested and later released after a high-profile anti-terror raid on their house in Forest Gate, East London. One of the men was shot during the operation which involved a search for a “chemical device”. No such device was found.

In December last year, Hayman was found to have been in command of an "unlawful" investigation into one of his own colleagues, Ali Dizaei, who was then a Met police superintendent. Hayman was in overall command of an operation that included tapping Dizaei's phones, something the investigatory powers tribunal declared unlawful. The investigation took four years and cost £4m, but ended with Dizaei's acquittal on corruption charges at the Old Bailey. The Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Ian Blair admitting it had caused "considerable damage" to relations between the force and its black officers.


Ali Dizaei

He was instrumental in government attempts to extend the period for which terror suspects can be held without charge to 90 days. MPs were unconvinced by the proposal, and Tony Blair's government suffered its first Commons defeat over the issue in November 2005.

So who is this shrinking violet who is resigning because he finds the “unfounded accusations” hurtful. Well as the former Chief Constable of Norfolk and Head of the Anti-Terrorist squad he probably doesn’t meet the normal profile of a sensitive soul. Mr Hayman joined Essex Police in 1978 where he served as a uniformed officer and in the Criminal Investigation Department (CID). In November 1998 Mr Hayman was appointed Commander in the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and given responsibility for drugs, crime and complaints investigations. In this role he commanded Operation Trident an investigation into drug-related murders in the capital. In September 1999 he was appointed Director of the Anti-Corruption and Complaints Investigation Department, which became the Directorate of Professional Standards, responsible for discipline and anti-corruption.

From April 2001 to December 2002 he was Deputy Assistant Commissioner, retaining responsibility for professional standards and assuming extra responsibilities as deputy to the Deputy Commissioner.

So as a former Chief Constable, Commissioner responsible for discipline and anti-corruption and head of the anti – terrorist squad making life and death decisions (not necessarily a metaphor) why has he suddenly become bashful, sensitive and upset? The assumption of the Law in England is that innocence seeks to proclaim itself and be heard but Andy Hayman has made a decision to resign, to not square up to the allegations made and to not answer them. Is this the behaviour and example expected from a senior police office honoured with a CBE and the Queen’s Police Medal, paid generously over 30 years from the public purse and expected to be held accountable to that same public for his actions.

Indeed is this the same silence which would draw an “unfavourable inference” if you or I were being questioned by Andy Hayman’s erstwhile colleagues or appeared in court on the basis of evidence presented by them?

The Death of Jean Charles de Menezes

Jean Charles de Menezes was shot dead by Metropolitan Police firearms officers at Stockwell Tube station, London, on July 22nd. 2005. Bizarrely the Met(as the Metropolitan Police or Scotland Yard are commonly known) is being prosecuted under English Law not for Murder or Manslaughter but under Health and Safety legislation for failing to protect the health of Jean Charles de Menezes and members of the public who were exposed to danger in the operation. Indeed.

The details revealed so far in court are of a 27 year old electrician peacefully going to work unaware he was being trailed, not being intercepted as a possible suspect, getting on and off two buses, wearing jeans and a T-shirt and a light jacket with no baggage or possibility of concealing anything on his person, going routinely through station barriers and pausing to pick up a free newspaper, taking his seat on a tube train.

There he was held without challenge by a police officer who immobilised him by holding his arms around him in a vice like grip whilst his two colleagues fired 7 special "124 grain" dum-dum style bullets into his head at point blank range. The details of this killing have appalled and dismayed the public in equal measure and common sense would suggest these feelings will not be addressed by a prosecution under "Health and Safety" legislation - this being somewhat beyond satire. I think we can take it as read that if you kill somebody wrongly you have not protected their "Health and Safety."

Scotland Yard have real issues to answer about the apparent ineptness of the operation and about the large amount of uncorrected disinformation disseminated afterwards from the Commissioner downwards that this innocent persons' killing was "related to the ongoing terrorist situation", that he behaved suspiciously, ran away from officers, vaulted over ticket barriers and was wearing "bulky clothing". As none of this was true, where did it come from?

Hindsight is a great teacher, it is always a pity we don't have it beforehand, but there is another side to this sad story. Fifteen days previously on the 7th July 2005 4 suicide bombers had detonated 3 bombs on the Tube and one on a London bus. They killed 52 people (and themselves) in the biggest mass murder in peacetime Britain. The roll call of the dead is heart rending encompassing a typical cross section of Londoner's going about their day, young and old from every continent, colour and religious persuasion including a 19 year old Muslim girl on the threshold of her life. Of the 4 "brave" martyrs one was a 19 year old Jamaican Muslim convert who lived near me in Aylesbury and who took 26 lives on a Piccadilly Line train between Russell Square and King's Cross. What did a 19 year old know about life and what sort of crypto fascism justifies this cruel obscenity towards people you do not know but look in the eye before killing and maiming them? Maimed indeed for as well as the dead there were over 300 injured, some who lost limbs and eyes and some who will never live independent lives again.

I was in London that day and for a number of days afterwards spent afternoons and evenings helping people cope with the transport disruption. Two things were palpable. one was the great determination that London would not be brought to its knees by what happened, there was the quiet unseen courage of the Tube and Bus drivers who climbed into cabs at dawn the next morning and in their own way said "let's Roll!". The sense of determination was shared by the public who displayed stoic courage by insisting on going about their everyday business and not being terrorised even if it meant walking halfway across London to work.

Nerves were of course there under the surface but they had recovered somewhat when exactly 2 weeks later on the 21st July 2005 there was almost a carbon copy attempt of 4 suicide bomb attacks on the transport system in London by fanatics equally determined to destroy their fellow unknown human beings. This second attempt nearly succeeded and only failed because they had made a small error in the formulation of the homemade but deadly explosives they attempted to detonate. This second attempt was a great shock to the system, to the morale of Londoner's and no doubt to the security services who felt they had bottomed out all the leads and had stabilised the situation.

Now along with all of London they were looking into the abyss and not knowing what they were looking at or where the next threat would come from. What is happening and how many more are out there? - was the general public feeling. It was Jean Charles de Menezes great misfortune that he lived in a block of flats which was also the address of Hussain Osman, one of the failed suicide bombers from the day before and he was not entirely dissimilar in appearance given the limited identification information the police had to go on.

No doubt these court proceedings and further inevitable investigations will draw their own conclusions and I'm not attempting to anticipate them, but I make two observations of my own.

One is that society as a whole is not pacifist. We expect that the welfare of all is protected and logically that means we assent to people killing on our behalf. So we agree an Army is maintained and we expect it to kill and its troops to accept the possibility they will also be killed in combat. If an embassy is besieged, if a plane is hijacked or if a deranged gunman walks down the street killing at will we expect somebody to deal with the threat on our behalf. And if a suicide bomber is apprehended before he can blow us up we expect they will be killed. On the morning of the 22nd July 2005, the Met, a civilian police force had called in all the help it could get from the Defence and Security services and was trying to cover an impossible number of bases not knowing where the next threat was or where it would come from. Wherever fault lays in this sorry story it does lay with the three armed officers acting under orders who entered a Tube train to stop what they thought was Hussain Osman detonating a bomb.

The second point is who those of us who live and work in London felt that morning. Shamefully, I can remember my reaction was "Good on them, they got one!" and I can tell you in feeling that I was in a majority of, well, everybody. For at that stage, below the surface, there was a palpable sense of fear about town. And that is the point of the sheer obscenity and ruthless cruelty the suicide bomber. It desensitises all of us and for the sake of our protection makes us accept in our heart that which we would not normally accept in our head.

That desensitivity is something we all must fight against because otherwise the bomber has won and that must and will never happen. In this case it means we must, however difficult it may seem, try to do two things. Respect the memory of Jean Charles de Menezes and the grief of his family and respect the courage of the Police Officers who, out of a profound sense of public duty, did the unthinkable on all our behalves.