Andrew Mitchell MP

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plebgate
Criminal Conviction of PC Keith Wallis[edit]

On 10 January 2014, Police Constable Keith Wallis pleaded guilty at the Central Criminal Court, the Old Bailey, to a charge of misconduct in a public office relating to the email he had sent to John Randall MP.

This prompted the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe to issue a public apology to Andrew Mitchell:
"The evidence against PC Wallis was such that he pleaded guilty. To lie about witnessing something and provide a false account falls way below the standards that I and his colleagues expect of officers. His actions have also negatively impacted upon public trust and confidence in the integrity of police officers. I would also like to apologise to Mr Mitchell that a Met officer clearly lied about seeing him behaving in a certain manner. I will be writing to him offering to meet and apologise in person. I expect my officers to serve the public without fear or favour. Where officers break the law they must expect to be held to account and answer for what they have done."[41]
On 6 February 2014, Wallis was sentenced to twelve months imprisonment.[42]

Seven findings of police misconduct[edit]

Seven police officers were found to have misconducted themselves in this affair, one criminally, three at the level of gross misconduct and three more as misconduct but not gross misconduct requiring dismissal from the service. Specifically:
on 26 February 2014 Keith Wallis was dismissed for his criminal conduct this matter and undisclosed business interests;
on 26 February 2014 James Glanville was also dismissed for gross misconduct in data handling [43]
on 30 April 2014 PC Gillian Weatherley was also dismissed for "gross misconduct" by the Metropolitan Police over leaks to the press.[44]
on 21 May 2014 Susan Johnson was dismissed for gross misconduct "in relation to honesty and integrity; confidentiality; discreditable conduct and challenging and reporting improper conduct"[45]
on 23 May an allegation against PC James Addison was found "not proven".[46]
Three further officers were found guilty of lower level misconduct.

Federation Officers[edit]

The IPCC investigation to the three Federation Officers: Chris Jones, Stuart Hinton and Ken MacKaill was on hold for much of 2014, pending a judicial review.[47] However, on 3 November 2014, this application was unsuccessful, with the three forces' investigations branded by the Administrative court "a car crash" and so legally flawed that they were "invalid and of no effect".[48]

Two of these officers were also accused of lying to Parliament in their evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee in the account they gave of their disciplinary record (stating they had no record when in fact they did), and were recalled by the committee to justify this.[49] They subsequently apologised.

These officers: Chris Jones, Stuart Hinton and Ken MacKaill are now subject to IPCC investigation, for alleged issues of honesty and integrity. This is an independent investigation, under the direct management of the IPCC itself.

[thirdcrank]

N A

That's all grim, even without the emphasis, but it doesn't affect what I was trying to say in my last post.

Among all the media analysis after the key defamation ruling went against Andrew Mitchell, I read something (almost certainly in the Daily Torygraph) which referred to the stuff you have now posted and suggested that his closest friends and advisers urged him to "quit while he was still ahead" (I'm pretty sure that that bit's verbatim) but he was convinced that the ruling would inevitably go in his favour. No matter how many other liars there may be - and yet another was in the headlines yesterday - PC Rowland was successful in his action and was awarded substantial damages with several times that sum in costs.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
Yeh, good if you can get.

Is it all about name calling? If so is claiming damages for officers that high on the list.
I think it was more a case of infighting in the club

Who do police officers answer to today?
Who is in charge of them?

[TonyR]

PC Rowland was successful in his action and was awarded substantial damages with several times that sum in costs.

But only because the judge characterised him as too thick to have made it up.

‘not the sort of man who would have the wit, imagination or inclination to invent on the spur of the moment an account of what a senior politician had said to him in a temper’.

Not sure I'd want to win on that basis.

But then the judge also found he did make stuff up about witness reactions.......understandably!

Embellishment of a true account by a police officer on the defensive is, of course, not acceptable, but it is understandable if done for that purpose.’

[Si]

Today he came and shook hands with us and told us what a good job we were doing. I noticed that after he left each area there were whispered conversations in which the word 'pleb' figured consistently. He was re-elected, but then what else would you expect in ROYAL Sutton Coldfield.

[Lance Dopestrong]

PC Rowland was successful in his action and was awarded substantial damages with several times that sum in costs.

But only because the judge characterised him as too thick to have made it up.

That's rich coming from someone so thick, so disconnected from the real world that the only way they could earn a living is as a judge.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
More Police misconduct -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33854227

"On Monday, Carl Gumsley, IPCC commissioner, directed Warwickshire Police to hold a misconduct hearing for Det Sgt Hinton.

This was after the force declined to follow Mr Gumsley's earlier recommendation that there was a case to answer.

West Mercia Police decided, in line with Mr Gumsley's opinion, that Insp Mackaill has a case to answer for gross misconduct."

It does beg the question why the judge took sides when he said what he did. (below)
When the three ranking police officers cant even report accurately the contents of a meeting to the media, on this two are facing the sack


"Libel case
In 2014, a High Court judge rejected a libel case brought by Mr Mitchell against the Sun newspaper, concluding that "on the balance of probabilities" he had called a police officer a "pleb"."