This is the official blog of ex-Sgt Ellie Bloggs. I was a real live police constable then sergeant for twelve years, on the real live front line of England. I'm now a real live non-police person. All the facts I recount are true, and are not secrets. If they don't want me blogging about it, they shouldn't do it. PS If you don't pay tax, you don't (or didn't) pay my salary.

(All proceeds from Google Ads will be donated to the Police Roll of Honour Trust)

Sunday, May 15, 2011

None of Our Business

Breaking News - 18th May: "Wife says she took penalty points for husband." 
Is it just me, or is anyone else unimpressed at the ex-Mrs Huhne's announcement that she will testify in court that she did not commit the speeding offence in 2003?  She may well have done so, she may well have taped the minister making some kind of admission to it.  But if so, then he did not put pressure on a parliamentary aide, or abuse his position in some way, but approached his wife - who probably knew if would be her driving him around if he were banned - and they both agreed to the deception.  In which case, I expect to hear any day now of Vicky Pryce's arrest for conspiring to pervert the course of justice, as a co-suspect with her ex-husband.  As the officer taking her statement of confession, that would give me the greatest satisfaction as she signed on the dotted line.

I'm no fan of Chris Huhne.  In fact, I wouldn't know him if he came into Blandmore Police Station to report that his car had been stolen and someone else had been speeding in it without paying the congestion charge.

But I must say I am squarely on Mr Huhne's side when I read that Essex Police are considering investigating a claim that he asked someone else to take a speeding fine for him in 2003.  It appears that a "complaint" by a Labour MP has prompted this, despite the fact that Chris Huhne was banned from driving in 2003 as a result of "totting up", and therefore any such attempt by him to avoid said ban can be concluded a wholesome failure.

The last couple of weeks have seen a few police investigations dredged up from the slurry to be pored over under public scrutiny.  The Met are now going to try and find Madeleine McCann, and the CPS is considering - yet again - whether to prosecute PC Simon Harwood.

It's not that I want MPs to get away with perverting the course of justice, nor any officer to evade his comeuppance if he has abused his authority.  And anyone who doesn't want to find Maddie must have a heart of stone.  But I do question whether the police or Criminal Justice System should really function on the basis that if someone makes enough song and dance about something, it should immediately take centre stage and suck in a load of resources.

To my knowledge, David Cameron has not asked the police to launch a massive review into the disappearance of ten-year-old Iasmine Rostas, who went missing from her home in Barking in 2009.  She is just one of dozens of children who have never been found and are suspected to have come to harm.  Very few of them are blond, blue-eyed and the offspring of doctors, but they are all vulnerable young kids who have met uncertain fates.  Why should poor Madeleine be any different?  (Unless you count the political coup that would be achieved should she be found as a result.)

It is also a tenet of British justice that the system should be, above all, fair to those it seeks to try.  I have seen case after case dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service because of factors such as: 
  • The suspect was kept on bail for an extended period, because of police indecision or slow forensic examinations.
  • It was intimated to the suspect that he was eligible for a caution, but following admissions he was charged.
  • The case had been discontinued previously.
In many of these cases the suspect is almost certainly guilty, but the police must be held to account for slow or unfair processes: in other words, it's not right to mess people around.  Yet PC Simon Harwood still remains unclear about whether he will be prosecuted, despite the most public of decisions by the CPS that the case had been dropped.  In the world of ordinary people, and that of career criminals, once that decision is made the only thing that can reverse it is fresh evidence that was not available before nor known about. 

On occasion, vigorous campaigning by activists can bring to light an injustice or controversy that rightly deserves scrutiny.  Vigorous campaigning by jilted spouses or- dare I say it- grief-stricken relatives- is no basis for a police investigation.  Let alone a random complaint by an MP trying to oust a political rival.

The police and CJS in this country could not be subjected to more scrutiny.  They should trust in that scrutiny and stick to their guns when their processes are challenged.  With the greatest of respect, Essex Police need to tell MP Simon Danczuk, "Thanks for taking an interest, now sod off."  

In fact, if that phrase was used more often, up and down the country, when MPs and local Councillors decide to intervene in investigations that have nothing to do with them, we might achieve 20% budget cuts without any other action at all.

'Diary of an On-Call Girl' is available in some bookstores and online.


Blogger swanseajock said...

Here blinking here to all that is said in this piece. If there were mre management who would actually say "Sod off, this is not a police matter" we would all be in a better place.

16 May, 2011 10:32

Anonymous uniform said...

I say give all these cases to Ali Dizzy , he will be out soon with a bit of time on his hands

16 May, 2011 14:29

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ali D was innocent all along and was wrongly convicted on false evidence. The press decided that he was "guilty" before there was even a court case.

The McCanns ARE innocent of any of the accusations made against them about the abduction of Madeleine.
However, the press soon turned on them, after they had hounded and accused another innocent man, who had been HELPING the Portuguese cops as an interpreter. Poor guy.

The press decided that he was probably "guilty" too, as they dragged up every negative, irrelevant perceived "flaw" about him and his character that they could find, or make up.

He too was proven to be innocent.

Poor old Chris Huhne too. They were bound to go for him, because he did at one time, (before the Tories got their own arrogant way) strongly oppose any new build of nuclear reactor power stations.

Then Huhne appeared to cave in to the mistaken Tory policy on the so called "need" for more nuke power plants. The UK (and the rest of the world) "needs" nuke power stations like a hole in the head.

Some enterprising souls have designed a wave power generator, like a wind turbine, but under the sea, that they will be testing out shortly, with a view to creating more of them. Hallelujah!.......

THAT was the good news folks!

And the bad news, (but we know this already) is that there are some politicians still, who will lie and deceive the public about VERY serious matters....and they appear to get away with it. People like Chris Huhne, who stuck up for what IS right and in the best interests of the people and the UK, regarding a policy of NO to NUKES, become the targets of the dirty tricks brigade, who smear anyone who challenges the status quo and corrupt vested interests.

The other bad news is that Chris Hihne is unlucky enough to have left a vindictive ex wife for a more attractive woman. His ex was never going to allow him to get away with doing that publicly, without having some sort of public revenge.

It all sounds like a carefully planned stitch up to me.

17 May, 2011 03:26

Anonymous Retired Sgt said...

The doctor will see you now

17 May, 2011 17:10

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Retired Sgt....And since when has stating ones truth and insights on a blog been an illness?

Perhaps it is yourself who needs to see a doctor, to enquire if there have been any advances in medical science which could cure your ignorance and expand your closed mind.

18 May, 2011 02:33

Anonymous shijuro said...

Good post Ellie...

The government should but out of legal matters unless it directly affects them... oh hang does...

Thats the issue though eh? If enough people or the right people, campaign loudly enough some enterprising MP will take up the cause-for right of course, not career, no sir...

Hence the McCanns...

As to PC Harwood, he is quite simply boned. CPS will pursue him to the end of time... their paymasters will have seen to that...

At the very least he will be sacked and loose pension etc...

Anything else is political/career suicide...

(p.s. sorry about the troll, he can't get on my blog and knows I read yours, so he follows me around like a love-sick puppy... lol)

18 May, 2011 09:48

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wasn't it Madeleine's aunty who via the media, insisted that the then P.M (Brown) get involved in Madeleine's case? It all went down hill from that day onwards. She probably had the highest and best of intentions in wanting as much help and support to find Madeleine and probably didn't realise just how much the government can and do screw things up, including police matters. Brown certainly did that!

Once he got involved, it was bound to go haywire, like a lot of other things the previous government had their hands in. The true extent of Labour's meddling, interferences and deceptions has not ALL been told yet.

Maybe the Met will shortly spill the beans, "without fear or favour" about who interfered in Madeleine's case.

19 May, 2011 06:30

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Come on Bloggsy, you should know one can't conspire with one's spouse. And she's claiming duress. Someone's had legal advice before making that "confession"...

19 May, 2011 16:41


Post a Comment

<< Home


View My Stats
eXTReMe Tracker