She won't get any special treatment...
Like many of us, my heart sang a little song at the news of Harriet Harman's sidelong crash into a parked vehicle, whilst on her mobile phone. There are few enough truly joyous stories in the news these days and this must surely be one of them.
Scotland Yard sources say she will receive "no special treatment", which means we can expect the following:
Scotland Yard sources say she will receive "no special treatment", which means we can expect the following:
- A crime report to be created for something vaguely relevant and notifiable, perhaps criminal damage.
- Her inconvenient arrest at 5am.
- Her detention in custody for 7-8hours.
- DNA, photograph and fingerprints to be taken and kept forever.
- Harman to be banned from driving for about a year.
- Her immediate resignation in shame.
The incident happened back in July and we're still waiting for even one of the above, but I'm sure she'll be hauled into the nick any day now.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Diary of an On-Call Girl' is available in some bookstores and online.
posted by PC Bloggs at 12:11
39 Comments:
Apparently Baroness Scotland is advising her!!
06 October, 2009 15:58
I think its more likely JACK will happen...
Since Ms Harm-man is so far up the slope
of Mount Olympus- from there us mortals
must look very small and nothing like...
Really says it all about this GOV and the
people in it...
06 October, 2009 16:48
Made off from the scene?. Probably to avoid the breatheliser.
The rumour starts here.
PC A HUNN
06 October, 2009 18:21
There are only two reasons to make off from the scene of an accident:
1. Breathless arrogance
2. To hide an offence
Those offences are usually:
No Insurance (unlikely) Drink Driving (unlikely) No Licence (unlikely) or speaking on a mobile phone.
06 October, 2009 18:26
Nice one Bloggsy
VS
06 October, 2009 19:24
Slap on the wrist I bet.
06 October, 2009 20:07
Now watch out for the witch hunt to expose PC Ellie Bloggs and ruin her career
CFM
06 October, 2009 20:44
i am sure she will be treated the same, cough cough. Just like all mps are treated. And just like the former Boris aid has been treated, sentanced today to 12month suspended, 1000 in costs and curfew. All for £157 of expenses claimed incorrectly.........
sorry for poor grammer, 16 hr shift and 5th in a six shift run
06 October, 2009 21:07
The questions are:
Why is she not treated the same?
Why did the officer that this was reported to not follow standard procedure? (whatever that is)
Is this corruption?
AS a MOP I am curios to hear the answers to the following questions. The reason that she has not resigned to date is that like many MPs who are prima facie guilty of crimes is that she is a completely shameless product of a corrupt administration and therefore needs other agencies of state to step in and due their duty. A sad state of affairs but it would seem to true.
Joseph K.
06 October, 2009 22:27
That should have been preceding questions D’oh!
Joseph K.
07 October, 2009 00:33
Decided that holding my breath waiting for a result on this one would end in my demise.
I reckon it will be either, insufficient evidence, paperwork lost or not in public interest. Can anyone provide any other get away with this excuses?
07 October, 2009 17:41
Out of interest, (and rather tangentally) what would happen if I was arrested for something and refused to give DNA or prints? I'm not planning on getting arrested of course (or in fact committing a crime), but theoretically if I was, what is the procedure?
07 October, 2009 23:31
Joseph K, at what point anywhere is it suggested that any police officer hasn't followed any normal procedure? For your info, a fail to stop RTA would be a traffic report to be processed by the traffic admin unit. If it was reported to an officer at the scene who could stop and detain the driver, if it turned out to be a cabinet MP then they would get in some very serious shit for arresting them as their identity could be established easily. At most they would expect an interview under caution at scene and then be summonsed for any offences disclosed.
Roy, the authority to take fingerprints, photograph and dna when arrested for a recordable offence (pretty much everything apart from some minor road traffic offences) comes with the authority to take them by force if not given freely. You don't want that, it's very painful if you fight it.
08 October, 2009 00:12
Apparently Baroness Scotland is advising her!!- and Lord Ahmed.
08 October, 2009 00:31
I was at training school with her nephew...
Nice chap as I recall, and far enough away to not be OIC for this one.
I'd be happy to sign the Narey file through if this is as it seems... Then again, who cares about points on your licence when you have a chauffeur. And the fine? Claim it back as expenses...
08 October, 2009 01:10
PCDC COPPER BOTTOM - "I think its more likely JACK will happen". Eh?
This GOV? WHERE TO START!!!
Sharron Shoesmith WAS made the 'official' scapegoat in the baby Peter case. Unfair to blame her personally for the failings of workers in direct contact with the family. Nor should she be blamed for the 'unwritten policy' of underhanded government manipulation and intereference in Social Services ethos. 'Someone in government actually WANTED a few 'bad cases' of parental child abuse, to 'justify' a further 'tightening' of an already oppressive child protection system. The 'plot' was to allow some bad cases to create bad publicity, to 'justify' the childrens database 'Contact Point'. Intelligence foretold that this database would place children IN GREATER DANGER FROM PREDATORS.
It was ED BALLS head that should have rolled. Still should roll, as he has ignored proven to be accurate Intelligence warnings, to AVOID the introduction of storing all our personally details on computer databases. So what does he do? He insists on creating a childrens database, Contact Point, a paedophile's dream come true, a 'browsing' register.
And guess what folks.....politicians and celebrity kids details will NOT be on the database. NO childs personal details should be made available on a database that can be accessed by too many state employees. It is a DANGER TO CHILDREN, and it must be stopped.
08 October, 2009 01:14
"but I'm sure she'll be hauled into the nick any day now."
Yeah, right. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting.
08 October, 2009 02:31
Metcountymounty: Thanks for the information, I have allways wondered what happens.
08 October, 2009 08:48
MCM Thank you for the information, the questions I asked where exactly that. If you assure me that if I failed to stop and give my details I would be interviewed two months after the event at a time convenient for me, without being arrested I will believe you. In you reply to Roy, you state that an arrest will be made and DNA taken in all but the most minor traffic offences, is failure to stop an provide details one of these, or is it serious enough to warrant an arrest for a MOP?
Joseph K.
08 October, 2009 11:49
Joseph K, you're confusing the reasons for arrest with the authority to take DNA, prints and photogs. Under the new socpa legislation (which is the same as the old s.25 pace) a police officer can arrest any person for any offence - from littering up to murder - if their identity cannot be established, they have no address for summons, that to not do so would mean the loss of the suspect or evidence etc. The authority to take prints and DNA is for virtually all criminal offences and most serious traffic offences such as drink driving, death by dangerous/due care, disqual etc. Failing to stop at an accident wouldn't be included but if the evidence suggests the driving was dangerous (and the allegation that she had the crash as a result of being on the phone probably would satisfy that) then if they were arrested for any of the above socpa reasons then they would be subject to the prints and DNA authority.
08 October, 2009 15:27
MCM - great up to a point. No way, I'm afraid, wouild having a minor touch whilst on the mob constitute "Dangerous". If she wipes out a bus queue at 60mph then OK.
P.S. - Are you on the Group?
08 October, 2009 18:14
R/T, I've seen cps authorise a charge for dangerous for an rta at a junction, tboned into another car, minor damage but driver was on the phone. No idea what happened at court though. Re the group, thought about it being not a million miles from apex but the statics would do my head in!
08 October, 2009 18:41
MCM care to comment on this in the light of your last post.
http://hogday-afternoon.blogspot.com/
09 October, 2009 12:06
Sounds like box ticking and arrest figures to me, if they were willing to pay I would have got them to do so and no crimed the result on the crime report. Actually a very good example of how the target culture and removing descretion (or not actually teaching it in the first place) destroys people views who would normally help us, the main theme in fact of nearly all Police blogs. Unless they get charged they won't have criminal records and 3&4 hours in custody is quick but still no excuse for it. For every one of those jobs it wipes out the hundreds or even thousands you never hear about where we actually do it properly but that's not news or something to complain to friends about is it?
09 October, 2009 14:47
This comment has been removed by the author.
09 October, 2009 14:47
MCM I could not agree more, I was just wondering if the treatment would have been the same for a cabinet minister. Which nicely links back to the theme of this post.
Joseph K.
09 October, 2009 15:38
LET US HAVE BLOGGS *OUTED* AND BOOTED OUT.
IT WILL BE A LONG HAUL CLEANING OUT UK POLICE AND WE MAY NEVER BE FINISHED BUT THE JOB STARTS WITH A SHOVELFUL OF THE NEAREST TRASH.
10 October, 2009 10:19
detox= liberty = moron...
10 October, 2009 12:50
I believe that Insp Detox is a Chief Constable. Towing the party line, believes shouting the loudest makes your ideas the best and talking utter shite.
PC A HUNN
10 October, 2009 13:15
Maybe Harman's stab-vest meant she couldn't turn her head? :)
10 October, 2009 21:52
Joseph K, whoa, a namesake...
The entry above is scant on detail. Is it the case that Harman failed to stop to exchange details? Assuming there was a colision with another vehicle? I don't think MPs get special dispensation there any more than anyone else.
Joe K
11 October, 2009 14:39
I suspect that 'Insp Detox' is NOT a police officer at all. NO, I suspect that s/he is one of Nulabs spin machine. Their job is to peddle lies and smears against good people who are brave enough to speak out about bad situations, bad people and wrong doing.
The 'Trash" is mostly in Westminster, screwing up this country, and the police force.
But within all walks of life and professions, the minority 'bad apples' spoil the whole barrel.
There may be some 'trash' in the force, but Bloggsy aint one of them.
'Outed and Booted Out'? For what exactly? Surely not for telling it like it is? Only a political spinner would suggest that sort of action - out of sour grapes and petty minded revenge. So typical of NuLabour. BOOT THEM OUT!
12 October, 2009 00:07
Do not deed the trolls... lol
12 October, 2009 06:59
Having seen all the details (and the link) now, it is pretty obvious that Harman is *not* getting the treatment any Joe Shmo would get for leaving the scene of a crash without leaving details. I'd guess she's payed for all the damage, though, so maybe this isn't regarded as as a high priority for a busy police force.
12 October, 2009 10:02
more likely that gaffer A is on the golf course with House of Commons liason E and says....
'Nice shot George... now, about this bump Harry was involved in... very minor, nobody hurt, leave it with you ok?'
'of course Archie... oh good shot!'
etc...
12 October, 2009 18:53
It was rather interesting for me to read that blog. Thanks for it. I like such themes and everything that is connected to them. I would like to read more on that blog soon.
21 November, 2009 06:25
Keep posting stuff like this i really like it.
05 January, 2010 10:03
Interesting story you got here. I'd like to read something more concerning this matter. Thanx for sharing this info.
Joan Stepsen
Pharma technology
14 January, 2010 11:44
Don't stop posting such articles. I love to read blogs like that. Just add more pics :)
22 January, 2010 23:23
Post a Comment
<< Home