Black and White Justice.
Oh dear. Click the link for a bit of an error by this country's great Criminal Justice System.
Thank goodness for CCTV!
I can only imagine that this error was caused by the Self-classification system for ethnic groups. This basically means that when an officer stops somebody, he/she is not supposed to inflict on that person his own perception of what their skin colour is, but to ask them to self-define. After all, it is racist to say that someone looks Asian when they might consider themselves to be White-Irish.
The felon initially stopped by police in the above story (who was white), probably identified himself as Black, which was then recorded as fact somewhere in the paperwork. Under the recommendations of the Stephen Lawrence enquiry, police officers have to accept the self-classification no matter how strongly they suspect the person to be ARSING AROUND.
Thank goodness for CCTV!
I can only imagine that this error was caused by the Self-classification system for ethnic groups. This basically means that when an officer stops somebody, he/she is not supposed to inflict on that person his own perception of what their skin colour is, but to ask them to self-define. After all, it is racist to say that someone looks Asian when they might consider themselves to be White-Irish.
The felon initially stopped by police in the above story (who was white), probably identified himself as Black, which was then recorded as fact somewhere in the paperwork. Under the recommendations of the Stephen Lawrence enquiry, police officers have to accept the self-classification no matter how strongly they suspect the person to be ARSING AROUND.
The Enquiry made stopping and searching people a hairy business for white middle class police officers. Whereas before we could just stop people who matched the description given for an offender, for example a theft committed by "a young white male", we now have to ensure that the person we are stopping really is white by asking him.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright of PC Bloggs.
posted by PC Bloggs at 07:22
17 Comments:
According to the report :
A Surrey Police spokesman said:
"...The officer was not in court because the nature of the offence did not require him to be."
Who on earth made that decision? Crown Prosecution Service, the Magistrates, or the Police?
Is it a standing instruction, or something decided on a cease by case basis?
06 November, 2006 09:40
Interesting stuff.
I have to say it....political correctness has gone mad! It's been coming for years, the slow onset of forbidden words etc. Now were told not to use the word "yobs" (although The Met have said it can be used by officers, but in certain circumstances but not in official written documents). The reason? It'll more than likely upset yobs. Well, in that case perhaps we should stop locking them up, maybe we should not speak to them at all. There's even a chance that simply being on the same street in uniform might upset these boys.
Lets all just stay in the nick with a nice pot of tea and some cake....we wouldn't want to be seen to be upsetting anyone now, would we?
06 November, 2006 10:48
What about michael jackson
06 November, 2006 11:21
Now Dogberry, you know perfectly well that not so long ago we all used to stay in the nick with a nice pot of tea and some cake, but that was when you a proper organizational structure viz. Divisions and sub divisions, proper layers of supervision, bags of constables walking beats, and a generally compliant British public. The criminal classes and the remainder of society knew their respective places, (and many were handily located in geographically specific areas e.g. norf a da woatah and sarf a da woatah (in lunnun vat is) and it was all underlined by the various players in the criminal justice system, so that when PC 'so and so' said 'chummy' had admitted stealing the old lady's purse, chummy's courtroom protestations (had he dared make any, as he and the officer would have had a little chat prior like) would have been 'pooh-poohed'. YES! Pooh-poohed. and he'd have been sent down, or fined, or even sent down to be searched if he claimed not to have any money. There was a court inspector who ensured that the right police witnesses were there, and woe betide you if you weren't (plus it was a nice little earner on a late turn or RD or even an ARD!) and the natural order was maintained. But then it all started to get a bit too complicated, and now even Prezz Bliar has no idea who's who in the country. The poor old Governor of the Bank of England can't take proper decisons because it has all got so confusing. And then lawyers weren't satisfied and something called civil rights came along which was guaranteed to make more money for this parasitic profession and...and then something called the CPS and PACE and the consequent growth in sheer stupid bureacracy, plus ...........well, you can fill in the rest yourselves.
Did anyone read the article by Felix Dennis in yesterdays Telegraph? No? Well paste this into your browser:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/11/05/do0502.xml
Says it all, and this from one of the infamous 'OZ' defendants (1971).
Be lucky!
06 November, 2006 12:40
I think you are forgetting that the officer submitting the form also has to supply their own view of the subject's ethnicity on the HORT/1: in this case they wouldn't have tallied so the CPS should have spotted that at least from the paperwork.
06 November, 2006 12:44
OK, I'll ID myself - sod it, I'm not a frequent commenter and I stand by things I say anyway.
I am said 'Surrey Police spokesman'. As usual, the comment I gave was vastly cut by the paper.
To answer old man's question, the officer was not summoned to court by CPS until the final appeal hearing, which is when the mistaken identity was noticed.
Furthermore, the defendent did not turn up at the first two court hearings and was convicted in his absence. Had he turned up when required (or made legal representations back then), his 'year of hell clearing his name' wouldn't have happened.
To answer your second question, officers are seldom summoned to court for Fixed Penalty Notice offences.
I do enjoy reading your blog, PC Bloggs. Please keep up the good work...
06 November, 2006 14:49
I was recently at court, with other Police Officers, but all the officers involved had not been called.
When we asked the CPS why this was, the reply was that this was down to the defence to choose which Police Officer they wanted as witnesses. So they called the ones who knew least about the case! Surely there's something wrong there.
06 November, 2006 16:51
Maybe the problem is that half the time the prosecutor doesn't read the file until the day of the court by which time it is too late!
06 November, 2006 18:07
I think that's the sound of a nail being hit on the hit, PC Bloggs.
07 November, 2006 00:10
'pressofficer'
aka
'Surrey Police spokesman'
This case was of a disputed Fixed Penalty Notice; the defendant had clearly disputed that Notice, and so ALL prosecution witnesses should have been made available to the Court at the first hearing.
That did not happen.
That was wrong and disrespectful to the Magistrates (who, rather incompetently, seem not to have known otherwise).
When the defendant attended Court, the Magistrates gave more weight to prosecution written statements than to the in-person defence denials.
Without me saying whether the Magistrates’ decision was right or wrong (the Appeal Judge's decision must be the indicator of that) it is a very basic part of common law that at trial best evidence must always be available.
In this case, it was not.
To delay the issuing officer's attendance at court until the "final appeal hearing" (when the mistaken identity was "noticed") smacks of either total and absolute disrespect for due process, or total and absolute incompetence.
[For exactly whose disrespect and whose incompetence, please see my original post]
If neither disrespect nor incompetence applies, then the only other conclusions can be:
Corruption or Racial Harassment.
But let's see what the Judge has to say when the report he demanded (within three weeks) arrives with him.
07 November, 2006 10:55
Old Man
Rush to judgement?
Not really.
"...let's see what the Judge has to say when the report he demanded (within three weeks) arrives with him."
Honest Uncle
07 November, 2006 11:20
To:
Anonymous @ 06 November, 2006 12:40
You naughty person.
(You are hitting more nails on their heads than is PC Bloggs herself.)
07 November, 2006 11:24
and they pay civil servants to come up with this tripe ? You wonder where all the extra taxes we pay Gordon Brown are going
08 November, 2006 06:15
Old Man said:
"When the defendant attended Court, the Magistrates gave more weight to prosecution written statements than to the in-person defence denials."
Read the story, know the case. The defendant didn't attend the earlier court hearings and was convicted in absence. There were no 'in-person defence denials'.
Not defending the CPS choice not to call officers to court (but would you want tens of officers a day in each force taken off active duty to attend all minor hearings?), but maybe if the guy had actually turned up to court the mistake would have been realised much sooner.
Wozza, yes they do pay us to 'come up with this tripe'. Maybe I should start a blog so you can see the amount of times where direct press involvement actually catches criminals (you'd be surprised how successful a good media appeal can be).
On the other hand you'd probably be equally as annoyed as I am with the amount of stats-based nonsense we also have to deal with.
08 November, 2006 19:43
成人電影,情色,本土自拍, 一夜情, 辣妹視訊, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊, 視訊美女, 美女視訊, 視訊交友, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, 情人視訊網影音視訊聊天室, 視訊交友90739, 成人影片, 成人交友, 本土自拍, 免費A片下載, 性愛,
成人交友, 嘟嘟成人網, 成人電影, 成人, 成人貼圖, 成人小說, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人遊戲, 微風成人, 愛情公寓, 情色, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 做愛, 色情聊天室, 美女交友,
嘟嘟成人網, 成人貼圖, 成人電影, A片, 豆豆聊天室, 聊天室, UT聊天室, 尋夢園聊天室, 男同志聊天室, UT男同志聊天室, 聊天室尋夢園, 080聊天室, 080苗栗人聊天室, 6K聊天室, 女同志聊天室, 小高聊天室, 情色論壇, 色情網站, 成人網站, 成人論壇, 免費A片, 上班族聊天室, 成人聊天室, 成人小說, 微風成人區, 色美媚部落格, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人論壇, 情色聊天室, 寄情築園小遊戲, AV女優,成人電影,情色,本土自拍, A片下載, 日本A片, 麗的色遊戲, 色色網, ,嘟嘟情人色網, 色情網站, 成人網站, 正妹牆, 正妹百人斬, aio,伊莉, 伊莉討論區, 成人遊戲, 成人影城,
ut聊天室, 免費A片, AV女優, 美女視訊, 情色交友, 免費AV, 色情網站, 辣妹視訊, 美女交友, 色情影片 成人影片, 成人網站, A片,H漫, 18成人, 成人圖片, 成人漫畫, 情色網, 日本A片,
愛情公寓, 情色, 舊情人, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 情色交友, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 色情遊戲, 情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 色情a片, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 寄情築園小遊戲, 色情遊戲情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 言情小說, 愛情小說, 色情A片, 情色論壇, 色情影片, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊美女, 視訊交友, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, a片下載, aV, av片, A漫, av dvd, av成人網, 聊天室, 成人論壇, 本土自拍, 自拍, A片,成人電影,情色,本土自拍,
03 April, 2009 19:00
免費A片, 本土自拍, AV女優, 美女視訊, 情色交友, 免費AV, 色情網站, 辣妹視訊, 美女交友, 色情影片, 成人影片, 成人網站, A片,H漫, 18成人, 成人圖片, 成人漫畫, 情色網, 日本A片, 免費A片下載, 性愛, 成人交友, 嘟嘟成人網, 成人電影, 成人, 成人貼圖, 成人小說, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人遊戲, 微風成人, 愛情公寓, 情色, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 做愛, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 寄情築園小遊戲, 色情遊戲, 情色視訊,
情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 言情小說, 愛情小說, 色情A片, 情色論壇, 色情影片, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊美女, 視訊交友, ut聊天室, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, a片下載, av片, A漫, av dvd, av成人網, 聊天室, 成人論壇, 本土自拍, 自拍, A片, 愛情公寓, 情色, 舊情人, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 情色交友, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 色情遊戲, 情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 色情a片, 一夜情, 辣妹視訊, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊, 視訊美女, 美女視訊, 視訊交友, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, 情人視訊網, 影音視訊聊天室, 視訊交友90739, 成人影片, 成人交友,
15 April, 2009 03:16
爆爆爽a片免費看, 天堂私服論壇, 情色電影下載, 成人短片, 麗的線上情色小遊戲, 情色動畫免費下載, 日本女優, 小說論壇, 777成人區, showlive影音聊天網, 聊天室尋夢園, 義大利女星寫真集, 韓國a片, 熟女人妻援交, 0204成人, 性感內衣模特兒, 影片, 情色卡通, 85cc免費影城85cc, 本土自拍照片, 成人漫畫區, 18禁, 情人節阿性, 做愛的漫畫圖片, 情色電影分享區, 做愛ㄉ影片, 丁字褲美女寫真, 色美眉, 自拍俱樂部首頁, 日本偷自拍圖片, 色情做愛影片, 情色貼圖區, 八國聯軍情色網, 免費線上a片, 淫蕩女孩自拍, 美國a片, 都都成人站, 色情自拍, 本土自拍照片, 熊貓貼圖區, 色情影片, 5278影片網, 脫星寫真圖片, 粉喵聊天室, 金瓶梅18, sex888影片分享區, 1007視訊, 雙贏論壇,
免費成人影音, 彩虹自拍, 小魔女貼影片, 自拍裸體寫真, 禿頭俱樂部, 環球av影音城, 學生色情聊天室, 視訊美女, 辣妹情色圖, 性感卡通美女圖片, 影音, 情色照片 做愛, hilive tv , 忘年之交聊天室, 制服美女, 性感辣妹, ut 女同聊天室, 淫蕩自拍, 處女貼圖貼片區, 聊天ukiss tw, 亞亞成人館, 777成人, 秋瓷炫裸體寫真, 淫蕩天使貼圖, 十八禁成人影音, 禁地論壇, 洪爺淫蕩自拍, 秘書自拍圖片,
aaaa片, 免費聊天, 咆哮小老鼠影片分享區, 金瓶梅影片, av女優王國, 78論壇, 女同聊天室, 熟女貼圖, 1069壞朋友論壇gay, 淫蕩少女總部, 日本情色派, 平水相逢, 黑澀會美眉無名, 網路小說免費看, 999東洋成人, 免費視訊聊天, 情色電影分享區, 9k躺伯虎聊天室, 傑克論壇, 日本女星杉本彩寫真, 自拍電影免費下載, a片論壇, 情色短片試看, 素人自拍寫真,
15 April, 2009 11:12
Post a Comment
<< Home