On 19th August I read that ‘a man was arrested when he photographed a police van outside a fish and chip shop after he had seen it reversing the wrong way along a one-way street’. Apparently an officer came running from the shop and battered the camera from the man’s hand on to the floor and arrested him for three crimes, none of which he had committed. After the incident ‘the officer faced a disciplinary inquiry and was made to apologise in person to Mr Carter but still held on to his job’; and the deputy chief constable also wrote to the man, apologising for the officer's 'totally unacceptable' behaviour.
Today I read ‘that two policemen have been sacked and a third told to resign for assaulting and threatening a 16-year-old boy and then trying to cover up their actions’.
What’s with this ‘unacceptable behaviour 'and 'made to apologise'? And what on earth do they mean ‘sacked and told to resign’? In any just society police officers are held to higher standard of accountability than the rest of us plebs. In both cases there were attempts to pervert the course of justice which would have brought prosecution and automatic imprisonment for those found guilty. But what do I know?
No comments:
Post a Comment