[Closed] Plebgate, the rulers strike back!

No good deed goes unpunished.

You can shoot darker coloured people repeatedly in the head. That's fine. We don't mind that. But don't you be bloody questioning your betters, you bloody peasant!!

Hopefully alongside this case, the investigation into the "false information" in the log-book will also remind us of what Andrew Mitchell does actually think of us normal voters/taxpayers. You'd have thought they would have just moved the 'offending' officer sideways and tried to bury the whole embarrasing thing. 😈

I guess you lot know much more about this than anyone else, perhaps you should write into the BBC cos they seem to know less than you.

You'd have thought they would have just moved the 'offending' officer sideways and tried to bury the whole embarrasing thing.

Quite. But the thing with this lot of Tories is that they're so inherently nasty and spiteful, particularly Call-me-Dave, that the desire for vengeance over-rides everything. Even if its completely counter productive.

For a start, its thrown the whole thing back into the spotlight, but I suspect there's further elements to this, that are lying in wait to bite them on the arse. They're really not remotely as bright as they smugly think they are

Hang on so senior politician says "the police are lying" in the national media, no problems, but when a policeman says "no we're not, look" that'll get you arrested. hmmmmm. Disciplinary possibly but arrested?

edit or has he been arrested for a shedload of leaks and plebgate is just one of them?

They're really not remotely as bright as they smugly think they are

Ironing 🙂

Disgusting. Didn't this shower of ****s that call themselves a government learn anything from the fictional inquiry on leaking in The Thick Of It?

I guess you lot know much more about this than anyone else, perhaps you should write into the BBC cos they seem to know less than you.

WTF are you on about?

Regardless of the case, a source (possibly the officer) has seemingly leaked an official police report to the press....very naughty, every serving officer knows this isn't to be done.

David Mellors comments in the Guardian are priceless

[i]The former Tory minister David Mellor said it was good news that the police finally seemed to be taking leaks to the media seriously. "What happened in the Mitchell case was a serious breach of duty with not only the full details of police reports being leaked, but the actual documents being handed over to newspapers," he said.

"This was disgraceful. The question has to be asked, what took them so long?"[/i]

After everything that's come out with the Leveson Inquiry, there's a certain irony (clearly lost on them) to Tory MP's getting on their high horses and pontificating about collusion between the police and the press

You really couldn't make it up 🙄

WTF are you on about?

Perhaps molly is on about the fact that Andrew Mitchell has steadfastly refused to admit that he used the term attributed to him and perhaps, just perhaps he has told the truth.

IMHO the way he remonstrated / behaved with the plods on the gate was enough for him to go, irrespective of what he actually called them.

Regardless of the case, a source (possibly the officer) has seemingly leaked an official police report to the press....very naughty, every serving officer knows this isn't to be done.

Yes and there have been many serious cases ignored and left uninvestigated, however embarrass a politician and reveal his lies (whistleblowing by most peoples definition) then don't expect to be overlooked in the same manner.

Forget this case in particular....and I know that will be hard for the class warriors on here.
I 'could' release to the press radio conversations, reports and emails about what happens in the ambulance and some of the shocking (life threatening) decisions that are made....I don't however because although the issues would at last be in the public domain and backed by evidence I would find myself out on my ear as neither my employer or by professional registering body would consider this appropriate behaviour and its a massive breach of confidentiality.

I suspect this is the real issue here but the usual suspects will scream 'tory conspiracy' of course.

Perhaps molly is on about the fact that Andrew Mitchell has steadfastly refused to admit that he used the term attributed to him and perhaps, just perhaps he has told the truth.

The word of a policeman is usually considered adequate evidence to convict somebody.

Regardless of the case, a source (possibly the officer) has seemingly leaked an official police report to the press....very naughty, every serving officer knows this isn't to be done.

True, but there are many, many more leaks of official docs by politicians on all sides. Leaking was actually part of David Cameron's policy making process in the early stages of the coalition.

Weren't many arrests that I can remember though.

[quote=chakaping ]
The word of a policeman is usually considered adequate evidence to convict somebody.
And we know that's always a guaranteed success....

And we know that's always a guaranteed success...

Well, glib point-scoring aside, it does tend to work quite well most of the time.

The issue here, for me, is the blatant bloody hypocrisy of it. The Tories, as Levenson has repeatedly shown, have been more than happy to collude with the nice, cosy relationship between the police and the press (owned, lest we forget, by their fellow 'kitchen supper' guests). Mainly as these leaks generally tend to suit their right-of-centre agenda's.

So its a bit bloody rich to now start moralising about it when, for the very first time, the same cosy relationship delivers up something you don't like.

They've been more than happy to use these avenues for years! Therefore, when you've been happy to do so, you can't then say you're horrified that such things occur, and expect not to be laughed at.

[i]But the thing with this lot of Tories is that they're so inherently nasty and spiteful, particularly Call-me-Dave, that the desire for vengeance over-rides everything. Even if its completely counter productive.[/i]

Nothing to do with them been 'Tories', its the Politico-Classes, and they ain't limited to politics - you'll meet them in all walks of life, usually they're management...

druidh - Member

chakaping »
The word of a policeman is usually considered adequate evidence to convict somebody.

And we know that's always a guaranteed success....

More importantly, it's guff. In Scotland at least you need corroboration, and coppers' evidence is challenged daily in the courts.

If the arrested officer was selling info from police computer systems for personal gain, then that is probably not a good thing.

If he/she was just revealing The Truth to the Nation out of a sense of public duty, then that is a good thing.

Either way "arresting anyone for telling/conveying the truth to the public" has got to be a morally questionable act in itself. But then the Met currently has Hogan-Howe in charge and he is a government attack dog.

The way I view it, they are putting in a lot of effort in trying to ensure that the next Mr Mitchell is allowed to behave like a complete shit with impunity, and that is not a good thing.
I also believe that is the undeclared aim of MacAlpine's legal campaign against anyone who mentioned his name in an attempt to bring clarity to the recent foggy mess of a public sex scandal. Setting aside the fact that MacAlpine seems to be innocent of a matter that is now never going to be properly investigated, I believe his current legal moves are going to ensure that there is less danger of the ruling classes being confronted with their sins in the future.

The public good is not being served.

Didn't we just have a big report into press standards, which covered, amongst other things, the totally unacceptable practice of police officers illegally leaking information to the press, often in return for money.

Leve.. Levershon or something, I seem to recall it being called...

Zulu- yes indeed.
What will be interesting is whether the prosecution offending/leaking officer (and whether he/she was paid by the press), or what Mitchell [b]really[/b] said/did ultimately makes the most headlines and is remembered in 5 years time. 😆

The word of a policeman is usually considered adequate evidence to convict somebody.

I thought that 2 coppers had written the same thing in their notes about Mitchells outburst. And I'm not having it that they could have discussed it first, to get it straight. As that would be wrong, and I'm sure the police would never dream of doing such a thing 😆

Having said that; Mitchell's repeated assertion that he 'did not use the words attributed to me'. And his refusal to expand on that, sounds a bit like Bill Clintons "I did not have relations with that woman" comment. ie: a right load of old bollox

I was listening to the recurrent waffle about this on the way in to work this morning and couldn't help but think it sort of had to happen, post Leveson report, with complaints about Police and Press being a bit cozy and what not...

Rozzers just shouldn't be leaking any documents right? Irrespective of motive, or set against the behaviour of a ****ty politician, it's a fundamental cornerstone of policing; the leaking of documents will compromise cases and convictions, and hence should not happen and is a serious issue.

I don't doubt that Andrew Mitchell is a lying scumbag but reading between the lines this was a relatively minor altercation that has massively overun it's course and scope.

TBH this could have been allowed to slide by now it was three months ago, Mitchell's in the dog house and the story had slipped out of peoples minds for the most part, I certainly doubt anyone was particularly fixated on who leaked the information.

I find it interesting that the follow up has been handled quite so publicly (by the Met?) and that Ministers have seen fit to comment at all, I'm not actually all that sure the Tory's are that complicit in this officer's public shoeing, had they been properly briefed they'd all be saying.

[I]"It would be inappropriate for me to comment on an ongoing investigation"[/I]

Or words to that effect...

As it is it has the net, negative effect of appearing as though a bunch of Tories are gloating having gotten a plod scalp as revenge for one of their own...

Everyone's a loser in this particular game it seems.

I haven't read all the above.

There should be questions about the need for and the correctness of the arrest, which may include mention of [i]Richardson v Chief Constable of West Midlands [2011] EWHC 773 (QB)[/i] and the policeman prolly has a answer in public interest.

Meanwhile some of us plebs, who make up the public, are very interested in the doings of our betters.

And it will get very interesting if the Sun and the DT, who used the info, have the guts to get involved.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20764044

something's a bit fishy here - now one of the original officers who claimed to have witnessed the altercation is being investigated...

Didn't we just have a big report into press standards, which covered, amongst other things, the totally unacceptable practice of police officers illegally leaking information to the press, often in return for money.

Leve.. Levershon or something, I seem to recall it being called...

"MP called a policeman a PLEB!!"
erm... so what?

"Policeman LEAKED the report that an MP called a policeman a PLEB!"
OK, well that's fairly naughty, but again, if it hadn't've been blown out of all proportion first time around, this probably wouldn't have been picked up.

I mean seriously, it's like two bullies fighting in the playground. Neither of them particularly represents me, and I really don't like either of them, but it's quite funny to watch.

I mean seriously, it's like two bullies fighting in the playground. Neither of them particularly represents me, and I really don't like either of them, but it's quite funny to watch.

CH4 news apparently have the CCTV footage and will show it tonight. Silent though so no smoking gun, but this story is looking more and more like a political stitch up on Mitchell.

nicko74 - Member

Well quite. But (in spite of pursuing the most unfortunate and embarrasing possible example of leaked police reports in recent years) the whole thing's (being touted by the government as) a storm in a teacup.

"[s]MP[/s] chief whip of governing political party narrowly avoided arrest for a public order offence, using language unrepeatable on this public forum barring the word [s]called a policeman a[/s] PLEB!!"
erm... so what?

"Chief whip publicly denied the above; Policeman LEAKED the report [s]that an MP called a policeman a PLEB![/s] detailing the circumstances of chief whip's near arrest"

OK, well that's fairly naughty, but again, if [s]it hadn't've been blown out of all proportion[/s] the chief whip of the governing political party hadn't tried to lie his way out of it the first time around, this probably wouldn't have been picked up.

There, fixed it for you. 😀

Interesting...

"Exclusive: Dispatches and Channel 4 News reveal CCTV footage of the exchange between Andrew Mitchell and police officers that raises questions about the account in police logs leaked to the media."

On the BBC News earlier it seems as though the officer who 'overheard' the exchange wasn't even there!
If that's the case, then all the newspapers and politicians whining about it was unacceptable that a whistleblower was being victimised for performing a public good might all be wearing an omelette facial... 😀

[quote=CountZero said]On the BBC News earlier it seems as though the officer who 'overheard' the exchange wasn't even there!
If that's the case, then all the newspapers, politicians and STW class warriors whining about it was unacceptable that a whistleblower was being victimised for performing a public good might all be wearing an omelette facial...

FTFY 🙂

Ooh, watching the video on C4 now!

its really not looking good for plod is it?

A political stitch up on the massive cock Mitchell?

Frankly, my heart bleeds.

Zulu-Eleven - Member
Ooh, watching the video on C4 now!

its really not looking good for plod is it?

No, not at all and watching that video of him leaving he didn't appear to be ranting in the way I might have if they'd made me walk around and I was something to do with the cabinet, I'd have demanded they be shot at the very least. Coppers, I hate every last one of them.

Doesn't look good for the police or their federation whose denial of Mitchell coming clean at their meeting is laughable in light of recording.

Has Ed Milliband called for a judge led inquiry yet?

😉

I bet the CCTV footage now been shown was actually re-shot recently with actors in place of the policemen.

After all, if they can fake the moon landings then this should be a dawdle.

Difficult one this for right wingers. Not sure whether to masturbate or flagellate.

[quote=deadlydarcy ]Difficult one this for right wingers. Not sure whether to masturbate or flagellate.
As if the two were mutually exclusive

Either way you look at it, I'd be annoyed if I'd had a barney with someone at work and got, in effect sacked, because his mate backed him up as a witness even though he wasn't there.

I cant believe it.
The police lying and making up stories to back up their lies.
leaking false information to the press with more lies and false witnesses the police chiefs critising MPs, allegedly with their own agenda, its surely not happening in the UK
oh wait a minute, why am I surprised this is how the police operate day to day
no wonder they have no respect from anyone anymore

I bet the CCTV footage now been shown was actually re-shot recently with actors in place of the policemen.

After all, if they can fake the moon landings then this should be a dawdle.

or some members of the police lied in order to fuel their own political agenda as the CCTV looks most unlike their account.

Not quite sure i can go as far as feel sorry for a Tory though but it looks like he has been wronged and seriously so by the plod.

never mind it being against a Tory, this is the police force looking to get MP's sacked to suit their own political agenda, all the idiots who were involved in this including the federation berks who lied about the constituency meeting should be jailed.

This does kind of make the issue of whether the word "pleb" was used insignificant, as the police now seem to be fabricating witness statements against politicians.

I saw a different angle on the Despatches prog. Journalists artistic/creative licence and reporting yet again.

this is the police force looking to get MP's sacked to suit their own political agenda

It does rather look like it. The police should have no political agenda, IMO.

G4S shares are looking tike a hot tip for the mornings trading 😀

I look fwd to you being as impartial on a lefty bashing thread Cpt oh sod it I will aim high and go for wendyball 😉

[img] [/img]

Who would believe it the police federation and the met more dishonest than a Tory MP .

Why didn't Mitchell own up to what he said in the first place?

The Tories and the met not getting on is surely a good thing.

Mr Mitchell said he would never use the words which he was accused of using

Well I never found that too hard to believe. He's just to oiky to know the proper meaning of the word 😉

It makes you wonder why the Met didn't quickly state the copy of the alleged police log was false, and that the alleged witness statement differed from the actual log/ officer statements

I think this is going to hit quite a few in the Met

The Fed etc are not looking good either, and some people in his own party are probably ducking for cover as well

It does rather look like it. The police should have no political agenda,

I agree, sadly the tories dont..

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/police/police-crime-commissioners/

Lying dishonest police officers in collusion with a dishonest press. The police got away with in Leveson and they think the can carry on leaking info. This time for there own agenda at least rather than money. Either way it shows a level of dishonesty that is condoned within the met (and other forces) at senior level, why should the gate jockeys at number 10 be different. All they had to do was open the gate for the tory bloke on a bike, whats so difficult about that? Were they anti tory or anti bike? What stupid mess.

The Eton Mess always look for scapegoats when in trouble.Were all just gags to them.

Sorry FAGS that is

deadlydarcy - Member
Difficult one this for right wingers. Not sure whether to masturbate or flagellate.

Posted 11 hours ago # Report-Post

Knock yourself out DD,it's xmas,go for both.

PS; How 'bout them Munstermen? 😉

This is what I don't understand. The press officer taped the meeting with the Police Federation reps. The Fed rep admitted to Despatches that one element was talked about in the meeting (agreed) but then the Despatches reporter didn't give the whole context/or rest of the interview and selectively added himself (not a recording) more information to give the impression that it was also said by the federation at the meeting.

The CCTV clearly shows 3-4 blurred out members of the public at the top of the picture at the edge of the security gate but Despatches kept on saying 'there aren't crowds of people around the gate'. No but there was a group with 1-2 people walking past.

Too many inconsistencies and finally who do I trust? A Politicians word or a Police officers? We all know the former are known for truth.

Knock yourself out DD,it's xmas,go for both.

Oh don't you worry, it's a regular activity for me.

welcome to fatherhood DD 😉

but then the Despatches reporter then added a falsehood to put a negative spin to the determinant of the Police Federation

did you watch the same program?

police fed in the meeting "thank you for your candor"

police fed to press outside "he refused to confirm what he said"

police fed when confronted with the tape, no answer

refresh your memory here

http://order-order.com/2012/12/19/mitchell-cctv-cop-conspiracy/

Catholicism ensured both activities featured regularly for years Stoner. 😛

Interesting that Binners and Co from earlier in the thread have all gone quiet?? 😳

The CCTV clearly shows 3-4 blurred out members of the public at the top of the picture at the edge of the security gate but Despatches kept on saying 'there aren't crowds of people around the gate'. No but there was a group with 1-2 people walking past.

I think this was pointed to show that both the police statement and witness statement were inconsistent in exactly the same way, as they both mentioned a "crowd of people".

Heres the Channel 4 report.

http://www.channel4.com/news/andrew-mitchell-plebgate-police-cctv-downing-street

Coppers stitching up a cabinet minister because they arent happy with changes to police pay and conditions. Lets have the buggers in court.

Good work by Michael Crick on that one.

Andrew Mitchell may be an a-hole, but no excuse for the police making stuff up to oust him.

There seems to be very little concern hereabouts that a breach has opened in the body politic of the nation.

We are now living in a country where a police conspiracy has been uncovered against the government of the day.

Is nobody else worried about this, or is it just me?

a police conspiracy has been uncovered against the government of the day.

Id class it more as a spiteful shit-stir by the policeman's union that has backfired on them. Its not "The Police", it's not even "The Met", it's a Union having a pot shot at a government they dont like.

Not really of "coup" proportions though.

Something amiss here.

Is there not the possibility that "the police officer" witness and "member of the public" witness are, in fact, one and the same?

Which would indicate that it was actually an undercover officer, and that he/she has strangely been represented as being a witness in both camps.

So, Police keen to protect
a)the identity of an undercover operative and
b)the fact that they have undercover cops looking like the public milling around Number 10 and beyond?

Just a thought.

It would be interesting to hear what the 'nephew', should they exist in real life, has to say.

Id class it more as a spiteful shit-stir by the policeman's union

Not sure how much they were involved in this initially and they may well have bene hoodwinked by those there

Was there any actual proof that the CCTV was from that actual day?
Was it not provided by the govt?

Probably just being a bit conspiracist now but it would be funny of both were fake

[quote=Junkyard ]
Was there any actual proof that the CCTV was from that actual day?
Was it not provided by the govt?
Probably just being a bit conspiracist now but it would be funny of both were fake
When I made that comment earlier in the thread I was actually joking.....

It's an interesting one this. Politicians (the party in power at least) always fiercely defend the police, almost without question!

Now that one of their own has now found themselves on the receiving end of a somewhat liberal interpretation of 'the facts' from a police source, I wonder if it'll lead to them being a bit more stringent about 'evidence' put before them, and the constant police demands for more powers?

It's ironic that this is coming out on the same day that the Hillsborough inquests could be quashed

i know you were but i think i may be going all kaeasae on this 😯

Scurries of to You Tube

Now that one of their own has now found themselves on the receiving end of a somewhat liberal interpretation of 'the facts' from a police source, I wonder if it'll lead to them being a bit more stringent about 'evidence' put before them, and the constant police demands for more powers?

i really, really doubt it

just wait till g4s take over diplomatic protection duties, even the torries would be hesitant about that?