View Poll Results: Should he stay, or should he go? (with apologies to Joe Strummer)
Stay
19
76.00%
Go
6
24.00%
Voters: 25. You may not vote on this poll
David Westwood: Stay or Go?
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
David Westwood: Stay or Go?
So, after a tantrum, some foot stamping & some tampering with the law, the petulant, childish head of the Stasi has got his own spiteful way
My interpretation of the Bichard report was that the Home Office came in for a hell of a lot more criticism than Humberside Police, but the Blind C*nt and his News International poodles have conveniently omitted to publicise that portion of the report. Purely the fact that Blunkett wants him out is enough for me to back him
My interpretation of the Bichard report was that the Home Office came in for a hell of a lot more criticism than Humberside Police, but the Blind C*nt and his News International poodles have conveniently omitted to publicise that portion of the report. Purely the fact that Blunkett wants him out is enough for me to back him
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The biosphere
Posts: 7,824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am inclined to agree, although in actual fact in the the "Failings" section of the summary the Home Office escapes with:-
Any leader worth their salt would be accepting responsibility, and ultimately the buck should stop with Blunkett, but typically he has his fall-guy and has forever comitted himself as a coward in the eyes of all that CAN see!
p.s. report d/l here
51 I believe that PITO, ACPO and the Home Office must share responsibility
for the fact that there is still no national intelligence IT system, nor even a
system which flags up to police forces that there is intelligence held on an
individual by another police force. The failure here contrasts sharply with the
progress made in Scotland.
52 The Home Office should take the lead more effectively than it has during
the past decade, to deliver these priorities. Ultimately, they should be
priorities for the government as a whole and not just one department.
for the fact that there is still no national intelligence IT system, nor even a
system which flags up to police forces that there is intelligence held on an
individual by another police force. The failure here contrasts sharply with the
progress made in Scotland.
52 The Home Office should take the lead more effectively than it has during
the past decade, to deliver these priorities. Ultimately, they should be
priorities for the government as a whole and not just one department.
p.s. report d/l here
#5
I haven't been following all this too closely, but am I right in thinking that Cambridgeshire Police never actually asked Humberside Police for a check on Huntley, so the whole thing is rather academic as far as prevention of the Soham murders is concerned?
If I am correct, where are the calls for the resignation of the Chief Constable of Cambridgeshire, as this would seem to be the first link in the chain to have failed?
Pete The Biker
If I am correct, where are the calls for the resignation of the Chief Constable of Cambridgeshire, as this would seem to be the first link in the chain to have failed?
Pete The Biker
#6
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Pete The Biker
I haven't been following all this too closely, but am I right in thinking that Cambridgeshire Police never actually asked Humberside Police for a check on Huntley, so the whole thing is rather academic as far as prevention of the Soham murders is concerned?
If I am correct, where are the calls for the resignation of the Chief Constable of Cambridgeshire, as this would seem to be the first link in the chain to have failed?
Pete The Biker
If I am correct, where are the calls for the resignation of the Chief Constable of Cambridgeshire, as this would seem to be the first link in the chain to have failed?
Pete The Biker
Also Humberside Police were only following then current HO guidelines, remember Huntley had never even been CHARGED, let alone prosecuted & convicted. Therefore prior to Blunkett's attempts to remove the pesky 'innocent until proven guilty' clause, they had no reason to retain that information anyway.
When our Police Service was originally created, it was deliberately kept free from central/political control for the reason that politicians by nature are weak and corruptible. Blunketts current actions are only proving how correct our forefathers were
Trending Topics
#8
Blunkett couldn't just leave it alone could he. He's ruined a man's career for the sake of what??? Make's me mad the way these politicians act like god. Can't we just face that the guy slipped through the net. No one can predict the mind of these sickos. Only after the tragedy do we learn.
#9
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
I said ten years ago that I believed Blunkett to be potentially a very dangerous man, after he was singled out by Roy Hattersley - the man mainly responsible for crippling this country's education system - as being a rising star of the future. I was accused by my then work colleagues (in a closed union shop) of being a bigot (probably true, as I believe in the mass internment of chavs, pikeys and criminals) and of discrimination against the disabled
Unfortunately the Sun & Times buyers of this country have given him ample opportunity to prove me right
Unfortunately the Sun & Times buyers of this country have given him ample opportunity to prove me right
#10
Originally Posted by CrisPDuk
From what I can remember (although I could be mistaken), Cambridgeshire never requested the information because the school authorities never asked Cambridgeshire police.
Also Humberside Police were only following then current HO guidelines, remember Huntley had never even been CHARGED, let alone prosecuted & convicted. Therefore prior to Blunkett's attempts to remove the pesky 'innocent until proven guilty' clause, they had no reason to retain that information anyway.
When our Police Service was originally created, it was deliberately kept free from central/political control for the reason that politicians by nature are weak and corruptible. Blunketts current actions are only proving how correct our forefathers were
Also Humberside Police were only following then current HO guidelines, remember Huntley had never even been CHARGED, let alone prosecuted & convicted. Therefore prior to Blunkett's attempts to remove the pesky 'innocent until proven guilty' clause, they had no reason to retain that information anyway.
When our Police Service was originally created, it was deliberately kept free from central/political control for the reason that politicians by nature are weak and corruptible. Blunketts current actions are only proving how correct our forefathers were
Nathan..
#11
not being in Pommie-land I assumed from the thread heading that this was another poll about kicking some-one out of the Big Brother house.
My bad
Seems from (subsequently) reading the judicial report that unless a person has a criminal conviction there are no clear guidelines about what should / what should not be kept about persons who are 'of interest' (the current term) to the police.
And there also seems a deliberate policy to keep regional police forces separate (as became evident in the '80's when some-one from the Devonshire constabulary was called to investigate alleged corruption in the Met)
In summary, intelligence on persons is flawed if there are no formal convictions and if the person moves to a new district there is little chance of discovery through 'local' knowledge.
Why does that make the Humberside Chief Constable culpable?
My bad
Seems from (subsequently) reading the judicial report that unless a person has a criminal conviction there are no clear guidelines about what should / what should not be kept about persons who are 'of interest' (the current term) to the police.
And there also seems a deliberate policy to keep regional police forces separate (as became evident in the '80's when some-one from the Devonshire constabulary was called to investigate alleged corruption in the Met)
In summary, intelligence on persons is flawed if there are no formal convictions and if the person moves to a new district there is little chance of discovery through 'local' knowledge.
Why does that make the Humberside Chief Constable culpable?
#13
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Another use for speed cameras, instant crime figures imrpovement: camera catches 90 people speeding plus police not investigating 10 burglaries still equals a 90% success rate on a government statistics report
#14
What's it got to do with YOU lot?
He's MY Chief Constable, I live in Hull, less than 3 miles from John Prescott. How many of YOU do? So who cares what your opinion of the situation is? :P
I have to put up with the crime that Humberside (which doesn't actually exist any more and hasn't for a number of years - it's back to East Yorks now btw) Police can't/won't solve and don't attend the scenes of...I have to put up with their Scamera partnerships and crazy non-enforcement of traffic laws when applied to the asylum seekers (thank you Max Gold for buying lots of property in Hull and housing 500 single male Kosovans away from your mates in London) that live here and drive around un-taxed and un-insured, run illegal taxis every night, smash up local bars every week (yes I have first hand witnessed all this and it is never reported in the Hull Daily Mail after an agreement with Humberside Police not to report it)........
But I think he should stay and sort it out. And sod David Bucket!
Actually of course your opinions are at least as valid as mine, everyone in the UK has to put up with this farcial PC brigade world we now live in.
Thanks for backing Mr. Westwood
He's MY Chief Constable, I live in Hull, less than 3 miles from John Prescott. How many of YOU do? So who cares what your opinion of the situation is? :P
I have to put up with the crime that Humberside (which doesn't actually exist any more and hasn't for a number of years - it's back to East Yorks now btw) Police can't/won't solve and don't attend the scenes of...I have to put up with their Scamera partnerships and crazy non-enforcement of traffic laws when applied to the asylum seekers (thank you Max Gold for buying lots of property in Hull and housing 500 single male Kosovans away from your mates in London) that live here and drive around un-taxed and un-insured, run illegal taxis every night, smash up local bars every week (yes I have first hand witnessed all this and it is never reported in the Hull Daily Mail after an agreement with Humberside Police not to report it)........
But I think he should stay and sort it out. And sod David Bucket!
Actually of course your opinions are at least as valid as mine, everyone in the UK has to put up with this farcial PC brigade world we now live in.
Thanks for backing Mr. Westwood
#15
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
I have to put up with their Scamera partnerships and crazy non-enforcement of traffic laws when applied to the asylum seekers (thank you Max Gold for buying lots of property in Hull and housing 500 single male Kosovans away from your mates in London) that live here and drive around un-taxed and un-insured, run illegal taxis every night, smash up local bars every week (yes I have first hand witnessed all this and it is never reported in the Hull Daily Mail after an agreement with Humberside Police not to report it)........
I wonder if they would invite my lads or me to coffee and biscuits if they went to sort out some Iraquis for messing with white girls? which was what the Bangladeshis objected to?
Humberside Police? Wouldn't pay 'em in washers, but have no choice as the precept is mahoosive
Alcazar
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
TylerD529
Lighting and Other Electrical
5
20 September 2015 12:10 PM