Met police firearms

[Fedster + 1,307]

The pair opted for a hot beverage rather than attending an incident.

(Twitter- @Cllr_Mark_Brunt)

Two officers have been dismissed after going out of their way to avoid attending response callouts on numerous occasions.

In January this year, Thames Valley Police Constables Robert Ashcroft and Ataul Ahmad were alerted to a report of a man armed with a knife outside a house in Slough.

The incident was graded as requiring an immediate police response. Both PC Ahmad and PC Ashcroft were on duty in a marked police vehicle but failed to attend the incident and deliberately went to a different location instead.

The second occasion occurred the following day, when both PC Ashcroft and PC Ahmad were on duty in a marked police van and TVP received a report of a group of men hare coursing in the Langley area.

Both officers were in a position to attend the incident and indicated they would do so.

Prior to attending the incident both officers delayed attending the scene by popping into a petrol station to get coffee.

On a third occasion in March, both PC Ahmad and PC Ashcroft were in a position to attend a report of an assault of a man in Langley. Both officers failed to attend the incident.

At a misconduct hearing this week it was found that both PC Ashcroft and PC Ahmad’s actions amounted to gross misconduct. They were dismissed.

Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Ward, Head of Professional Standards said: “For the public to have confidence in the police, we expect the highest of standards from all of our officers and their commitment to serving the public. Thames Valley Police is committed to investigating any behaviour which does not adhere to the values and standards set within the force.

“PC Ashcroft and PC Ahmad failed to adhere to these standards of behaviour and there is no place in our force for those who behave in the manner they did.”

View On Police Oracle

[Mac7 808]

I’ve worked with a few incidents dodgers in the past and “captain backups.” Used to drive me insane. It wasn’t quite on this scale but you have to wonder why the likes of these officers joined in the first place. The right decision I think.

[obsidian_eclipse + 1,202]

I can think of a few officers like that but they soon moved on elsewhere, either out the job or something less critical.

[Zulu 22 + 4,576]

P45 is the best remedy for the officers.

[Mac7 808]

I can think of a few officers like that but they soon moved on elsewhere, either out the job or something less critical.

They shouldn’t be moved they should be dealt with by supervision.

[MerseyLLB 8,426]

There is often more to stories like this and it often boils down to ineffective leadership.

There really isn't alot of information here to make such sweeping comments of castigation.

Who's to say that in fact these two aren't the workhorses of the team? Who's to say the shirkers are in fact other members of the section and these two said 'we've been to 5 CADs already - someone else can bloody turn out'.

Of course they might in fact be workshy tools who spend their shifts together up to no good.

A panel has decided for one reason or another that the conduct amounted to gross misconduct. I struggle to see how this wasn't dealt with under UPP in relation to the two CADs they didn't deploy to.

However, I do take issue with the harecoursong example. Assuming it wasn't an immediate call, I can't see how they miscondcuted themselves picking up a brew...unless they picked up a brew and went and sat in the cafe to chill and drink it. I've been on my 3rd or 4th job of the day and told control I would attend but I needed a comfort break first whereby I will have a well needed wee break, a mouthful of coffee and a cigarette whilst reviewing the CAD. As long as it's not an immediate I cannot see how that is wrong? Unless you work in Sandford there will ALWAYS be calls on the box...if we always attended every single call as soon as we finished the last we would never complete crime enquiries, eat, rest or use the toilet. This is part of the issue with policing currently. You can eat me around for 12-14 hours with no break non stop, but only for so long before the cumulative fatigue starts to have a profound effect.

Edited December 28, 2017 by MerseyLLB

[Hyphen + 693]

I have to say I was a bit mixed on the article. There is absolutely no information in the article to give any sort of context.

I must say I find it hard to excuse the example of the knife call. It sounds very odd, however I would suspect there is more to it. We haven’t really heard the explanation of the officers. 

Regarding the hare coursing incident I haven’t heard anything so silly. It was a grade 2. They stopped for a cuppa, so what? How often do we get allocated to a grade 2 even though we are finishing off some paperwork or sorting the previous job. It’s the usual thing where if it suits supervision/control room then it’s fine. Even though stopping for a cuppa for 5 minutes still means I’d get to the grade 2 quicker than waiting 20 minutes to finish off a dv report then setting off.

Youre right @MerseyLLB, yet again it’s a symptom of the awful state of policing. The vast majority of shifts I don’t get any sort of break. So what if I pick up a cuppa to go to the next job with? I did an early turn just the other day, 14 hours, no refreshments, no time to sit down and have a break. Most of us have also been there where it seems that you’re the only one on duty as no one else is picking up jobs or crimes etc.

Again the third one is just too vague to even pass comment on. There could be a million reasons. 

I do find it strange that people are so quick to judge these officers without knowing the full story.

If they have been lazy and ultimately not bothered to do their jobs then I am glad they’re gone. However, I am not naiive and know that as usual there would likely be more to this. 

[BlueBob + 692]

Assuming the first incident came to notice early on, you have to wonder at the immediate and upper management team's actions or inactions. 

[Pavillion 43]

11 hours ago, MerseyLLB said:

There really isn't alot of information here to make such sweeping comments of castigation.

I am not sure what else you need, do you not trust the police to investigate its own employees and come to the correct decision? Are you suggesting they ignored any mitigating circumstances that might have applied in order to be rid of two capable hardworking officers? The statement below is as clear as one can be in regards to their behavior.

 

21 hours ago, Fedster said:

At a misconduct hearing this week it was found that both PC Ashcroft and PC Ahmad’s actions amounted to gross misconduct. They were dismissed.

Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Ward, Head of Professional Standards said: “For the public to have confidence in the police, we expect the highest of standards from all of our officers and their commitment to serving the public. Thames Valley Police is committed to investigating any behaviour which does not adhere to the values and standards set within the force.

“PC Ashcroft and PC Ahmad failed to adhere to these standards of behaviour and there is no place in our force for those who behave in the manner they did.”

[Remmy + 1,401]

7 minutes ago, Pavillion said:

I am not sure what else you need, do you not trust the police to investigate its own employees and come to the correct decision? Are you suggesting they ignored any mitigating circumstances that might have applied in order to be rid of two capable hardworking officers? The statement below is as clear as one can be in regards to their behavior.

 

Either you have very limited experience of disciplinary investigations, or you are just trying to generate a lively discussion or you are very naive....not sure which 

It may be that they have reached the correct decision but just as likely what MerseyLBB suggested is true.

[HazRat 762]

It is a shame that when these are reported that a lot of the build up is left out. I can’t think for one minute that supervision weren’t aware and that steps had been taken to deal with their working practices.

[Member of Public + 206]

12 hours ago, Hyphen said:

I did an early turn just the other day, 14 hours, no refreshments, no time to sit down and have a break.

Nothing to eat whatsoever for 14 hours? I don't know how officers keep going in those situations, I'd get a cracking headache going all that time without food. 

The thing is I very rarely hear examples like that being spoken about in the press, and on the odd occasion I do its usually a front line beat bobby speaking out (often anonymously) about the state of things, I'm not sure if I've ever read of a senior officers citing such examples. If it wasn't for reading comments by officers on this forum over the past few years I (as a member of public) would probably be completely unaware of these situations but it would appear that in reality they're common.

Most of the public are (through no fault of their own) ignorant to the full extent of the consequences of the cuts, and sadly they judge officers like the ones in this article on that basis.

[Sceptre + 2,701]

13 hours ago, Hyphen said:

I did an early turn just the other day, 14 hours, no refreshments, no time to sit down and have a break.

Where were your supervision during all that?

[Mac7 808]

I would say it’s common place for me not to have a proper break during my duty period. I eat and drink as an when I can. I cannot remember the last time I had a proper meal break and I do a specialist role.

A lot of the comments on here are interesting reading especially the ones from MerseyLLB. Whilst I don’t disagree that there is more to this than reported, I do disagree that they were the work horse of the shift or the comment “we’ve been to 5 jobs, someone else can go.” Knowing how hard it is to dismiss officers via UPP i would suggest the examples in this article are the tip of the iceberg. I may have privately thought that I’ve been to loads of incidents, it’s someone else’s turn, I would never wait for others to shout up, or take my time getting somewhere. If people need us, the public expect us to turn out. If others have this attitude I suggest you reconsider it. I’ve always had a strong sense of public duty.

I’ve often said in private that it is very easy to be lazy and hide in this job. I’ve worked on shifts when we have carried others and it isn’t a nice situation to be in. Supervisors should grip such people but it always seek easy to pass them onto someone else.

[Zulu 22 + 4,576]

I agree that, unfortunately, shirking officers do exist.  Yes supervision do deserve much criticism  here but, remember that it is often fairly easy to identify such officers, it is another thing having the evidence to prove it.  It was always that the other members of the group/shift knew who these officers were and it was not unheard of for the others to sort them out.  From all reports of the officers on the topic they got everything that they deserved. 

As to others saying that they have to forego their refreshments and breaks then they should speak to their supervision who are failing them.