Jump to content
Account Notice
  • To post a recruitment query in the "Recruitment Areas" or in the "Force Specific Areas" you will require a Recruitment Pass or a Membership Package. Click HERE to read more.
  • Your Account Is Currently Limited

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'cps'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • News
    • UK Policing News
    • Police Oracle Features
    • Real World News
    • Foreign Policing News
  • General Policing
    • General Policing Discussions
    • Police Officer & Special Constable Recruitment
    • Specific Interest
    • Force Specific Communities
    • Clips
    • TV Programmes
    • Scenario City
    • Resource Centre
    • Tackleberry
  • Verified Members
  • Premium Members
  • Off Duty
  • Police Community Forum Help & Support
  • Topics
  • Topics
  • Topics
  • Topics
  • Topics
  • Marketplace's Kit
  • Marketplace's Computing
  • Marketplace's Electronics
  • Marketplace's DVD CD Books
  • Marketplace's Collectables
  • Marketplace's Car Parts & Vehicles
  • Marketplace's General Buy & Sell
  • Help Me!'s Health & Wellbeing
  • Help Me!'s Pet Corner
  • Help Me!'s DIY
  • Help Me!'s Vehicles Travel & Transport
  • Help Me!'s Consumer Electronics
  • Help Me!'s Computer Software
  • Help Me!'s General Help

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Product Groups

  • Membership Plans
  • Site Access Services
  • Forum Services

Categories

  • General Public Downloads
    • Specials Impact Magazine
    • Volunteering Matters Magazine
    • Police Community Artwork
  • Resource Library
    • Forms
    • Guides
    • Useful Information
    • Userbar Library

Categories

  • Special Constables
    • Recruitment
  • Police Officer
    • Recruitment
  • Competency Framework
  • Policing Professional Framework (PPF)

Calendars

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Found 9 results

  1. Gross misconduct ruling but officer 'clearly provoked' by violent man, hearing told. Date - 2nd July 2019 By - Nick Hudson - Police Oracle 3 Comments An officer who was injured when a “violent” detainee kicked him in the groin retaliated by punching the restrained man twice in the face, a disciplinary panel heard. The blows were exchanged while PC Gary Hamilton was helping to escort the handcuffed man who had been arrested and was on his way to the custody suite at Charing Cross police station in London. The detainee, who was being restrained by four officers when he lashed out, sustained a cut to the face and a bloody nose as a result of PC Hamilton’s punches. The officer required medical treatment. Following the November 2017 incident, an investigation by the Independent Office for Police Conduct – which ended in August last year – concluded the Met officer had a case to answer for gross misconduct over the "unjustified" level of force he used. A file was passed to the Crown Prosecution Service who decided to take no further action but the Met agreed PC Hamilton should face a misconduct hearing. The panel decided that all allegations that the officer breached standards of professional behaviour in respect of discreditable conduct, use of force and authority, respect and courtesy were proven. But taking into consideration mitigating factors including “clear provocation” affecting the officer’s judgment, the panel gave PC Hamilton a final written warning for his gross misconduct actions. IOPC regional director Sal Naseem said: “The man had previously been behaving in a violent manner and so a number of officers were in attendance and escorting him to the cell. “The man aimed a kick at PC Hamilton and in response PC Hamilton struck him twice in the face. “We concluded PC Hamilton struck the man in a situation where it could be deemed as unnecessary as he had been secured by four other officers. “The independent panel has agreed this was a serious breach of professional standards and issued PC Hamilton with a final written warning.” View On Police Oracle
  2. Five police officers will not face prosecution after the death of a mentally ill man in custody, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has ruled. Sean Rigg's family said it was "shameful" the CPS had upheld its decision from 2016. The musician, 40, died from a heart attack at Brixton police station in south London in 2008. In 2012 an inquest jury found that police used "unsuitable" force after arresting Mr Rigg. The CPS chose not to authorise charges against any of the officers last year because the evidential threshold was not met. A review began at the request of Mr Rigg's family. Crushed hopes Mr Rigg's sister, Marcia Rigg, said in a family statement: "It is shameful that the CPS should yet again find there is insufficient evidence. "After years of vigorous campaigning to highlight the flaws in this wretched and unfair judicial system, there is no justice in the UK for families like mine. "Any hope has been crushed." In the weeks before his death Mr Rigg, who had paranoid schizophrenia, had not taken his medication. He was held down for eight minutes in the "prone position" after his arrest in Balham for attacking passers-by and officers in August 2008. He fell ill in a police van and died in custody. The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and Met Police are still liaising over whether any officer has a misconduct case to answer. Daniel Machover, the family solicitor, said: "As the police continue to pose a danger to those suffering from mental ill health, it is saddening that the CPS has failed to bring charges that would help to bring about change and accountability." A CPS spokesperson said: "A full review of the evidence, including new material provided by the IPCC, was undertaken by a specialist CPS prosecutor who was not involved in the original decision. "The review has now concluded and has upheld the original decision not to authorise charges in relation to the death of Mr Rigg, on the basis that the evidential test in the code for crown prosecutors is not met." The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) said in a statement: "The MPS has been notified by the Crown Prosecution Service that the decision not to prosecute any police officer in connection with the death of Sean Rigg has been reviewed and upheld. "The MPS has responded to the IPCC about its findings in relation to whether any officer involved has a case to answer for either misconduct or gross misconduct. We await the IPCC's further response and continue to liaise in line with the regulations that govern police conduct matters. "We will do all we can to progress matters as quickly as possible. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-42254576
  3. This is a great programme, it's really interesting to see how the CPS operates. Episode 1 - The Charge - http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b071gvs3 Episode 2 - The Proof - http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0726h15/the-prosecutors-real-crime-and-punishment-2-the-proof Episode 3 - The Trial - http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b072wyvj
  4. ‘I blocked a bailiff – and paid the price’When Ronald Grant became involved in a brawl with a JBW ‘enforcement agent’ he was arrested and lost his job. He was later completely vindicated by the Crown Prosecution Service http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/aug/15/bailiff-rights-dispute-jbw-police-enforcement
  5. Cameron Hassan, 25, of Llanelli, kicked his brother in the face, daubed his police cell in excrement and spat in the face of an officer A decision by the CPS has come under fire by a judge at Swansea Crown Court A judge is demanding answers from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) after he said he could not give a violent thug a proper prison sentence. Swansea Crown Court heard that Cameron Hassan, of Llanelli, rendered his brother Daniel unconscious after kicking him full in the face. The victim suffered injuries including a large lump to the back of his head as well as swelling to his mouth. Daubed police cell in excrementThe 25-year-old defendant showed no signs of calming down even after his arrest - and later daubed his police cell in excrement before spitting in the face of an officer. Hassan appeared via video link from Swansea Prison to plead guilty to assault by beating, causing criminal damage and assaulting a police officer However, Judge Paul Thomas said he was found it “incomprehensible” that the CPS did not charge the defendant with the more serious Actual Bodily Harm (ABH) - an offence which carries a maximum five-year prison term - rather than Assault by Beating. Judge Thomas said the maximum sentence he was able to give, following a guilty plea, for the latter charge was just six months in prison. However, given that Hassan had already been on remand for a lengthy amount of time, the court heard the defendant would be “immediately or imminently released” in the event of any new jail term. 'Extremely frustrated'Judge Thomas said: “I have to find myself extremely frustrated the way events have unfolded. “The question is, what can the court do to punish this individual and more importantly protect members of the public? “The decision to charge you with the smaller offence rather than ABH means I cannot give you the prison sentence which you deserve.” Judge Thomas said that the best he could do was to to jail the defendant for 21 months, suspended for one year, as well as making him the subject of a curfew and supervision order. Addressing the defendant, he said: “If you come back to court in that time I will make sure I am able to pass the kind of sentence I wish I was able to do today.” And following the conclusion of the case, the judge added: “I wish to have a full written explanation from the CPS... their decision in this case has been frankly incomprehensible.” http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/judge-blasts-crown-prosecution-service-9608291
  6. One of the UK’s most senior police officers has called for a review of why UK authorities were forced to free a Manchester terrorist in 2009 due to lack of evidence, when US prosecutors managed to convict the same man on Wednesday.   Greater Manchester’s chief constable, Sir Peter Fahy, has said Abid Naseer, who was arrested six years ago amid fears that he was planning to bomb the city’s Arndale shopping centre, should have been put on trial in the UK.   However, Fahy explained his force’s inability to collect sufficient evidence against Naseer by saying the need to protect the public had taken priority.   Pakistani-born Abid Naseer, 28, was the head of a UK-based cell of young al-Qaida recruits under orders to infiltrate and attack western society.   Before his arrest he was believed to have been planning operations on multiple transatlantic targets including the New York subway, in an event that would rival 9/11.   However, after UK police found no explosives, the men were released without charge. Naseer was only rearrested in July 2010 at the request of US prosecutors. After a series of court challenges he was extradited to New York in 2013.   During his trial, in which Naseer acted as his own lawyer, prosecutors presented evidence linking him with declassified documents seized in Osama bin Laden’s compound in during the US Navy Seal raid in 2011 in which the al-Qaida leader died. On Wednesday he was convicted by a jury.   Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Fahy agreed that Naseer should have been brought to trial in the UK. “We did absolutely think he should have been prosecuted here and called for a review into the circumstances. We put evidence in front of the Crown Prosecution Service, but at the end of the day we have an independent [charging] system in this country and that is their decision.   “I had to be driven at the time by the need to protect the people of Greater Manchester. The difficulty we had was because we were very concerned about the nature of the threat that was being run and governed by a foreign terrorist organisation, and because we were unsure at the time about exactly what was going to happen, we had to intervene early to disrupt the plot.   “That obviously meant we didn’t have all the evidence we might have had later in the investigation.”   Fahy said: “We are obviously pleased now that a conviction has arisen, but the case does need to be reviewed.   “There was a robust debate at the time [with the CPS] and we put in a lot of challenges. But you have also got to take into account that the Americans have been able to draw together further evidence since our investigation, including the evidence from Bin Laden’s house.   Tony Lloyd, the elected police and crime commissioner for Greater Manchester, said he would be raising the issue with the home secretary.   “The reality is that, had the Americans not acted, a dangerous man who was intent on causing death and destruction here in Greater Manchester could potentially still be walking our streets,” Lloyd said. “This is deeply worrying and I will be raising this issue with the home secretary because we need real assurances that whatever went wrong here is never repeated.   “The work by police and security services in this case has been tremendous. This investigation ensured that potentially hundreds of people were not killed on the streets of Greater Manchester. I have no doubt that lives were saved.   “But we should not have had to wait for the Americans to step in to extradite Abid Naseer. The public will want to know why he wasn’t brought to trial here.” Fahy denied that police were forced to arrest Naseer and his alleged accomplices earlier than intended, after former Metropolitan police assistant commissioner Bob Quick inadvertently exposed documents on the case outside 10 Downing Street. The sensitive operational documents were captured by press photographers and the mistake cost Quick his job.   At the time, it was believed that the raids on Naseer and other alleged conspirators, which were carried out in broad daylight, were conducted far ahead of schedule after Quick’s blunder.   “That obviously did happen, but that [document] actually said that we were planning to make those arrests because of the fact that we had to protect the people of Greater Manchester,” Fahy added.   Naseer grew up in Peshawar, Pakistan, in a wealthy, middle-class family, his father working as a government contractor and property developer. He came to the UK in 2006 aged 19 on a student visa, he said to improve his English language and study computer science at a college in Manchester. He lived in the Cheetham Hill area of the city, which has a large Pakistani population.   The CPS defended its decision in 2009 not to charge him. “The evidence in our possession in relation to Abid Naseer which would have been admissible in a criminal court was very limited,” said a spokeswoman. “Crucially, there was no evidence of training, research or the purchasing of explosives.   “We had no evidence of an agreement between Abid Naseer and others which would have supported a charge of conspiracy in this country. The evidence used by the US authorities to extradite a suspect does not need to meet the same tests as set out in the code for crown prosecutors.”   During the trial at Brooklyn federal court, MI5 agents testified wearing disguises. Most of the case hinged on email exchanges in 2009 between Naseer and a person described by prosecutors as an al-Qaida handler who was directing plots to attack civilians in Manchester, New York City and Copenhagen. Naseer faces a lifetime in prison.   View the full article
  7. http://www.courier.co.uk/Investigation-dropped-Kent-Police-Crime/story-26077091-detail/story.html
  8. source I think there is far more to this than the daily mail or this guy are making out. You don't get arrested for pomping your horn once then calmly talking to the officer when challenged. Also nice sensationalist headline, when you are arrested you tend to be "thrown" in a cell, you also have your dna and finger prints taken as standard. If these officers are looking for a missing child then they're going to let a lot slide so not to be doverted from the search. Also since when did cctv always show "threatening and abusive behaviour" unless it was perfect quality and you had a lip reading expert it means very little. Just seems the cps couldn't be bothered.

About us

Police Community was originally founded in 2014 by two serving Police Officers.

In 2016 it was incorporated as a limited company called RAW Digital Media Limited and then purchased 3 other forums; Police Specials, UK Police Online and Police UK to form the largest policing discussion forum network in the UK. In 2019 the decision was taken to merge all four forums into this main form of www.police.community

Get in touch

Twitter

Facebook

    Meet The Team

  • Chief Bakes
    Chief Bakes Management
  • Chief Rat
    Chief Rat Management
  • Chief Cheetah
    Chief Cheetah Management
  • Rocket
    Rocket Global Moderators
  • David
    David Global Moderators
  • Fedster
    Fedster Global Moderators
  • Devil
    Devil Global Moderators
  • MindTheGap
    MindTheGap Global Moderators
  • blakey
    blakey Global Moderators
  • Techie1
    Techie1 Global Moderators
  • Sir Penguin
    Sir Penguin Global Moderators
  • PCW
    PCW Global Moderators
  • Hoofing
    Hoofing Global Moderators
  • XA84
    XA84 Global Moderators
  • Remmy
    Remmy Global Moderators
  • job_done
    job_done Global Moderators
  • Sapor62
    Sapor62 Global Moderators
×
×
  • Create New...