Port of Tilbury-Police Constable

[Fedster + 1,307]

A Greater Manchester Police officer is suspected of emblazoning a colleague's belongings with a swastika.

Date - 20th July 2020
By - Chloe Livadeas

The force said it has sparked an "internal investigation" after the "disgraceful and disgusting act", which has been declared a hate crime.

Detectives and professional standards are treating the incident "incredibly seriously" after the unnamed officer began their shift yesterday (19 July) to find the symbol etched onto their items.

Assistant Chief Constable Mabs Hussain said: "I can wholeheartedly say that we are appalled that one of our employees felt that this behaviour was acceptable.

"A colleague has been subjected to a hate crime and there is no place for behaviour like this in GMP or policing nationally, and it's being treated incredibly seriously.

"We serve one of the most culturally diverse areas in the United Kingdom and we're incredibly proud to have a diverse workforce to serve and represent our communities.

"It is absolutely unacceptable that an officer has been faced with such an atrocity during their shift and we're urging any officers or staff with any information to report it."

View On Police Oracle

[Zulu 22 + 4,575]

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/dna-could-nail-gmp-vandal-18630485

In the latest report some clarification occurs. It apparently was a Swastika put onto someone's Locker.  It does not say how it was put on, spray paint, scratched, marker pen or what.  It says that the Locker has been tested and samples sent off for DNA testing, which seems a little over the top. If the Locker room at Pendleton is like other locker rooms then there will be dozens of samples of DNA on the locker.

Of course the full story has not been relayed and, I would wonder why this incident was made public to the press. To me it should have been an internal investigation, dealt with and then it could become public. 

There is nothing available in the report to identify the sex, race, etc of the officer targeted and, it would appear that, at the moment their is no suspect, perhaps, other than those who had legitimate access to the locker room during the time. As the GMP have declared it a "Hate" crime you are left to speculate any details.

This type of thing should never happen but, does it achieve anything airing the dirty washing in public, on details left to speculation and conjecture.

[Reasonable Man + 1,231]

21 minutes ago, Zulu 22 said:

 This type of thing should never happen but, does it achieve anything airing the dirty washing in public, on details left to speculation and conjecture.

Compliance with the Principles of Policing in the Code of Ethics. 

[Zulu 22 + 4,575]

37 minutes ago, Reasonable Man said:

Compliance with the Principles of Policing in the Code of Ethics. 

While the Code of Ethics sets out the standards of behaviour and conduct it does not say, or imply that conduct such as this, while being investigated should be made public. There is no need to publicise internal investigations of alleged misconduct.

There is no doubt that the reported conduct alleged is contrary to the Code of Ethics. I merely posed the question "does it achieve anything airing the dirty washing in public, on details left to speculation and conjecture?"

[Reasonable Man + 1,231]

7 minutes ago, Zulu 22 said:

While the Code of Ethics sets out the standards of behaviour and conduct it does not say, or imply that conduct such as this, while being investigated should be made public. There is no need to publicise internal investigations of alleged misconduct.

There is no doubt that the reported conduct alleged is contrary to the Code of Ethics. I merely posed the question "does it achieve anything airing the dirty washing in public, on details left to speculation and conjecture?"

The ‘airing the dirty washing and in public’ is an example of the policing principle of ‘openness’. Chief Officers have a responsibility to promote openness and transparency within policing and to the public. Hence being open about alleged transgressions being investigated. 

Edited July 21, 2020 by Reasonable Man

[Zulu 22 + 4,575]

6 hours ago, Reasonable Man said:

The ‘airing the dirty washing and in public’ is an example of the policing principle of ‘openness’. Chief Officers have a responsibility to promote openness and transparency within policing and to the public. Hence being open about alleged transgressions being investigated. 

 I see it far differently from you. I do not, for one moment, believe that the Codes were meant for reporting of internal discipline investigations. Officer late for duty, officer absent, Officer disobeying an order, etc, etc. 

[Reasonable Man + 1,231]

1 hour ago, Zulu 22 said:

 I see it far differently from you. I do not, for one moment, believe that the Codes were meant for reporting of internal discipline investigations. Officer late for duty, officer absent, Officer disobeying an order, etc, etc. 

Maybe you do, but as you are Not a police officer or employed by the police then how you see it is neither here nor there.

 

[Zulu 22 + 4,575]

45 minutes ago, Reasonable Man said:

Maybe you do, but as you are Not a police officer or employed by the police then how you see it is neither here nor there.

 

Like you I am retired, and like you, I am entitled to an opinion. Officers are also entitled to a bit of privacy and nobody is guilty of any offence until admitted or convicted.

[Reasonable Man + 1,231]

9 minutes ago, Zulu 22 said:

Like you I am retired, and like you, I am entitled to an opinion. Officers are also entitled to a bit of privacy and nobody is guilty of any offence until admitted or convicted.

Like you I retired as an officer. Unlike you I work for the police. Unlike you I have to know and abide by the Code of Ethics and not just have an opinion about them. 

[Zulu 22 + 4,575]

The   Code of Ethics does not mean that every incident within Policing has to be made public. Officers have as much right to privacy as everyone. Police Officer's also have Human Rights. Perhaps every time an Officer felt unwell at work it should be made public. Sadly we will not agree over this. Suffice it to say that if a Swastika was found transfixed to  Locker it should be condemned.  As for the locker being checked for DNA, I would not be surprised if traces were found for a high number of officers.It would be like checking the rest rooms for DNA traces.

[Reasonable Man + 1,231]

21 minutes ago, Zulu 22 said:

The   Code of Ethics does not mean that every incident within Policing has to be made public. Officers have as much right to privacy as everyone. Police Officer's also have Human Rights. Perhaps every time an Officer felt unwell at work it should be made public. Sadly we will not agree over this. Suffice it to say that if a Swastika was found transfixed to  Locker it should be condemned.  As for the locker being checked for DNA, I would not be surprised if traces were found for a high number of officers.It would be like checking the rest rooms for DNA traces.

Indeed not every incident, but those with a public interest element to them have to. It’s a decision for Chief Officers, who have to comply with their responsibilities. 

I’m not sad that you disagree with me. As a member of the public you are entitled to your opinion of how the police should deal with such things. As a member of a police force I have explained how these things work. You can shoot the messenger but that doesn’t make you right.  

[Zulu 22 + 4,575]

34 minutes ago, Reasonable Man said:

Indeed not every incident, but those with a public interest element to them have to. It’s a decision for Chief Officers, who have to comply with their responsibilities. 

I’m not sad that you disagree with me. As a member of the public you are entitled to your opinion of how the police should deal with such things. As a member of a police force I have explained how these things work. You can shoot the messenger but that doesn’t make you right.  

Take the blinkers off. It is a different world out there when the public talk freely to you. They do not want to know about the inside back stabbing. They would rather see officers they can speak to.

[Reasonable Man + 1,231]

24 minutes ago, Zulu 22 said:

Take the blinkers off. It is a different world out there when the public talk freely to you. They do not want to know about the inside back stabbing. They would rather see officers they can speak to.

Still shooting the messenger. I’ve not once said I agree with it, I’ve just explained why it is done. 

[Jacob212 17]

5 hours ago, Reasonable Man said:

Maybe you do, but as you are Not a police officer or employed by the police then how you see it is neither here nor there.

 

Thank the lord Jesus he's not a police officer anymore, things have changed a lot since his day mostly for the better, and of course this should be made public, its people like zulu22 that wants to sweep this sort of stuff under the carpet helps justify claims of institutional racism.

[Ether + 1,401]

5 hours ago, PcJacob said:

Thank the lord Jesus he's not a police officer anymore, things have changed a lot since his day mostly for the better, and of course this should be made public, its people like zulu22 that wants to sweep this sort of stuff under the carpet helps justify claims of institutional racism.

Thank god you aren’t now or ever have been a police officer with your attitude. It’s people like you passing criticism with absolutely no understanding of the stress and strain of a role where you have fractions of a second to respond, whilst people like you sit safely at home. (Still avoiding questions) 

 

There is no institutional anything in the Police,  no great cover up or big plan. Just people doing the best they can in difficult circumstances, who occasionally make mistakes. 

Edited July 22, 2020 by Ether