[Closed] Tory MP calls police plebs

I only repeat what the BBC was saying on its website at lunchtime

Pleb? Right up there with plonker and eejit in the dictionary of devastating insults. Poor copper must be traumatised. I bet his little hand was shaking as he jotted it down in his pocket book.

Government chief whip is an aggressive prat shocker. I thought that was pretty much the core skillset for chief whip?

Frankly he's is an amateur

[img] [/img]

Actually... in an interview recently, Ammando Illucinelli said he found it deeply worrying how the whips and enforcers at Westminster all professed admiration for Malcolm Tucker and a desire to be like him. Seemingly blind to the whole point being that he's a loathsome and twisted caricature

totalshell - Member

well its a good job theres nothing more important for the govt to worry about than if a copper was or was nt called a pleb.

for what its worth the mitchell guy should front up and saty yes i did call him a pleb [s]he[/s] I was being an rse

Ammando Illucinelli

Who?

That's not even close Binners, I'm sending Tucker round to sort you out.

"Pleb" isn't the greatest insult in the world, says something about the Tory mindset though. To be honest its the snivelling, grugding, half arsed apology that rankles rather than the insult. If he had just came clean and said sorry the whole thing would have blown over.

martinhutch - Member

Pleb? Right up there with plonker and eejit in the dictionary of devastating insults. Poor copper must be traumatised. I bet his little hand was shaking as he jotted it down in his pocket book.

the 2 coppers only notified their superiors because mitchels parting words were 'you havent heard the last of this'

of course they made the mistake of believing what he said, that he would actually follow up on it, when they should of realised that as a 3rd generation etonian politician that the honesty gene had long been selected out of his DNA

Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools the way to dusty death.
Out,out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more; it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Abusing someone with the word pleb is very poor as drawing attention (allegedly) to someone's background is pretty rude and unnecessary. Bit like abusing someone as an Old Etonion Toff!!!

But AM is learning the risk/reward profiles of the different responses to being caught short.

1. Man up, admit your mistake, take the flak - embarrassing but if successful you can normally move on
2. Deny your mistake, cover up/lie - high risk, but can be successful. But if not, consequences are far more severe than option 1.

Funny how so many MPs choose option 1 which just goes to prove that if you fail to learn the lessons of history you are likely to repeat them!!

Bit like abusing someone as an Old Etonion Toff!!

Saying this lets you know what kind of person you are talking about. Calling folk posh toffs from the bulligdon club does indeed paint a picture of their likely social values/beliefs etc.
In much the same way we could say a stella drinking , jeremey kyle watching, benefit recieving layabout and again it paints a picture

The problem with plebs* is it says something about you and not about them

They choose 2 because we wont forgive them of 1 so in some respects t is out fault as an electorate.

* of curse allthe insults are "judgemental" but WhoTF calls someone a pleb and a copper at that 😯 - a stuck up pompous arse that is who.

Tend to agree with the final statement JY but not the mangled logic of the rest of the argument. You either condone people insulting others on the basis of their background/class or you do not. You seem to be happy (I assume) to abuse people for being members of the aristocratic classes but object to someone else making reference to members of the non-aristocratic classes (the meaning of pleb or plebeian). Seems like a slight wiff of double standards to me?

Anyway as Boris indicated and other highlighted on page 1, there is a Tory policy for those who abuse policeman. So let's see if there are double standards all round. Seems so at the moment.

JY but not the mangled logic of the rest of the argument.

You either condone people insulting others on the basis of their background/class or you do not.

You seem to be happy (I assume) to abuse people for being members of the aristocratic classes

but object to someone else making reference to members of the non-aristocratic classes (the meaning of pleb or plebeian).

I think pleb is much more of an insult for the reasons I gave. You can disagree or not that is your choice.

Seems like a slight wiff of double standards to me?

you want to check out the Vince cable thread for that 😉
I can see why you think that but hey i can live with that.

I am not insulting you (and I agree with the concluding line), I am saying that in this case I believe [i]your logic[/i] is mangled. Two forms of categorisation and possible terms of abuse - toffs and plebs - refer to members and non-members of the aristocratic classes. I fail to see the difference between using either as a means of abuse - so yes we will have to agree to disagree! I can easily see a toff hiding behind the same defence - neither abusive, inaccurate just blunt - and not accepting that either 😉

Happy to have any double standards re VC pointed out on that thread - I actually thought it was a pretty good political speech, if light on detail on what I was interested to see as a new headline LD policy - the business bank.

Loving the double standards on here.

Remove the fact that the accused is a Tory Cabinet Minister and replace with ordinary STW frequenting cyclist going about their business and whose route is obstructed by a jobsworth. Posts angry RANT on STW with expletives, use of words like 'pleb', and generally totally p155ed off that some lazy twonk has unneccessarily caused them to get off their bicycle because they're too lazy to carry out their job...

Would get at least a 9/10, possibly even a 10/10 8)

(So, how exactly did the story get into the press and how exactly did The Sun get copies of the official police report and statements?)

Surely it would immediately attract a 'first world problems' tag? 😉

if someone came on here and said a policeman had made him use a gate 1 meter to his right,
and that hed proceeded to swear and insult the copper and said he was going to take it to their superiors hed get a lot of flack,
especially if it was the day after 2 wpcs were shot in manchester.
and if he then lied about it in the national press saying he didnt swear, but then admit he did etc etc

Long and short of this is that he is someone who loses control easily and then seemingly lies (or plays politician's semantics ala Paxman v Howard). Either isn't great but together he should be out of a job. Boris would have owned up, said he was an arse and been recognised as a bit of a lad/normal geezer. Honesty's the best policy cos my Mum said so and I've seen nothing thus far to disprove it.

CMD needs to get some decent PR. Oh and some decent policies too!

It's so funny this thread.
the double standards bull sh1t spouted by you lot is hilarious, you just hate everybody and bounce from one week to the next hating whoever the press gets you to loath.
Its been the police for brutality in the riots, then police for killing allegedly Ian Tomlinson, then the police for covering up hillsborough, why dont you just accept that you are being played by the media.

Remove the fact that the accused is a Tory Cabinet Minister and replace with ordinary.......

And you don't have a story. Why ffs, is that so difficult to understand ?

It is [i]precisely[/i] the fact that he is a Government Chief Whip which makes this incident newsworthy.

Chief Whip of a party who's senior politicians have gone on record demanding that anyone who swears at a police officer be arrested.

Chief Whip of a party which repeatedly denies representing the social elite, or of being out of touch with ordinary people, or of treating them with contempt and arrogance.

A public school educated senior Tory publicly dismissing someone as a "pleb" is quite rightly newsworthy, although for very obvious reasons I'm sure Tories would prefer to think that it wasn't.

Of course the contempt and arrogance isn't news, just this latest piece of evidence is. People were warned last election what to expect

...which might go some way in explaining their failure to win.

Sancho - Member

It's so funny this thread.
the double standards bull sh1t spouted by you lot is hilarious, you just hate everybody and bounce from one week to the next hating whoever the press gets you to loath.
Its been the police for brutality in the riots, then police for killing allegedly Ian Tomlinson, then the police for covering up hillsborough, why dont you just accept that you are being played by the media.

nah ive been loathing the tory party for some time, granted i didnt know this guy existed a week ago, but i enjoy watching him drag camerons party further down into the swamp

It's only a story though Ernie because certain media have stirred it up and the baton has been enthusiastically taken up by those seeking political gain.
Fact: there was an altercation.
Fact: Mitchell has made a personal apology to the police officer involved.
Fact: That officer has accepted the apology and advised the Chief Commissioner of the Met Police that he does not wish to take it further.
Fact: The Chief has stated that they are not taking the matter further.
Fact: Mitchell has apologised to Cameron etc.
Fact: that apology has been accepted.
What may or may not have been said will only be known by those present; whichever side you choose to believe cannot be proven by fact. One or both parties may be lying, either partly or entirely.

It's a storm in a tea cup (unless political gain is being pursued).
e.g. Labour have called for an inquiry. How much will that cost? £10,000? £100,000? Why? What a total waste of time and money!

It's a storm in a tea cup (unless political gain is being pursued).

but it is political; the police federation are using it to gain support for the police as the government is trying to weaken their pay and conditions and ultimately sell it off, while mitchells old etonian chums are countering this by releasing their own anonymous quotes to the right wing press, and murdoch gets to stick one in the eye of the torries after they let levenson destroy notw

It's only a story though Ernie because certain media have stirred it up

So when was the last story in the news which didn't come via the media ?

The media have given this story prominence because presumably they believe the public would be interested. And quite right too, it is a perfectly fair assumption - if a very senior Tory politician launches into a foul-mouthed rant in the street at a copper, dismissing him as a "pleb", then I want to know about, and I want to know what is going to be done about it.

I suspect many people share a simular interest in this matter, although as I have already suggested I don't expect many members of the Tory Party do.

The media have given this story prominence because presumably they believe the public would be interested.

Which respected branch of the media broke the story?

The Sun wasn't it?

Yep, they've got quite a history of giving stories prominence because they're in the public interest, haven't they...

For what its worth, wasn't plod in the wrong for trying to make a vehicle go through a pedestrian gate, because he couldn't be bothered opening the correct one?

For what its worth, wasn't plod in the wrong for trying to make a vehicle go through a pedestrian gate, because he couldn't be bothered opening the correct one?

Z-11

I think it was Mitchell's humungous ego that wouldn't fit through the side gate don't you! Pedestrians wheel their bikes through this gate. The S06 Protection Officers aren't allowed to open the main gate unnecessarily as each time they're open, security is compromised.

Perspective please. So AM behaves like an ar$e. He's embarrassed and put through the mill. His party is embarrassed and correctly mocked for double standards. But c'mon...the public or national interest. What a crock. It's a moment of political mischief and nothing more. Two people really seem to have taken the correct response to whole stupid incident. The policeman involved and, for a change, the Business Secretary*. Make the guy squirm correctly for his stupidity and pomposity, make a joke and move on. The media has headlines to sell. The rest of us have lives to lead. Perspective please.

* not normally a Cable fan 😉 but that was a bloody good line/joke and well delivered!

Deluded

Why? in case of the hordes of potential suicide bombers waiting to flood through the gate every time its opened? 🙄

man on bike = vehicle

[img] [/img]

It's a moment of political mischief and nothing more

...it's hardly Cameron saying "calm down dear" at the despatch box is it? [s]Plebs[/s] normal non-"don't you know who I am?" people have been arrested and cautioned for being less offensive than that to police officers. (and why not? ...as the Conservative Party line that I am sure AM is well aware of reminds us...)

I think the public have a right to be reminded that this is what some politicians of all parties think of those who (sometimes) vote for them and whose taxes pay their wages.

I am sure AM is not above making an example of or arranging the scapegoating a unfortunate and blundering MP in his role as whip. Is it that wrong that it should also be the case for him?

What?

You don't consider Downing Street a target from a whole host of different groups, be they terrorist, domestic extremism or otherwise?

Anyway, I've had enough of 'Plebgate' 😀 - off to work a set of nights.

Zulu-Eleven - Member

Why? in case of the hordes of potential suicide bombers waiting to flood through the gate every time its opened?

Oh the irony !!! 😀

It was your beloved Margret Thatcher who put the gates in Downing Street. Yes that's right, before Margret Thatcher became PM anyone could drive, cycle, or walk, past Number 10. But she became convinced, unsurprisingly, that people wanted to kill her, so she had those huge gates installed.

Yup, I blame Thatcher for this whole sorry story 🙂

How bizarre that on a 'cyclists' forum a fellow cyclist is berated for confronting some jobsworth copper too bone idle to do his job properly.
Slag him off for being a tory by all means but not for doing what many of us would commend if it was anyone else.

on a 'cyclists' forum a fellow cyclist is berated

He's a government chief whip who happens to sometimes ride a bike. I don't consider him to be a "fellow" cyclist, anymore than I consider him to be a "fellow" motorist when he's driving his car.

before Margret Thatcher became PM anyone could drive, cycle, or walk, past Number 10

There has been a barrier at the Whitehall entrance to Downing street since 1973, preventing anyone from driving down the street.

check Hansard!

Prior to that - here's a photo from 1922:

[img] [/img]

Ernie Fail!

as if anyone cares

The first barriers in Downing Street were erected at the St. James's Park end of the street for the unveiling of the Cenotaph on 11 November 1920. They were a public safety measure intended to prevent the crowds in Whitehall becoming too dense.[11]

With the movement for Irish independence increasing in violence, it was decided that these barriers would be retained, and raised and strengthened. In addition, on 26 November 1920 construction commenced on a substantial wooden barricade, 8 feet (2.4 m) high, were erected at the end of the street. These were described as being of a "substantial character" mounted into proper foundations. Vehicle gates were included in the barrier.[11][12] The barriers were taken down in 1922 with the creation of the Irish Free State, but vehicle access has been curtailed since 1973 when metal barriers were placed across the entrance to the street.[13]

In 1974, the Metropolitan Police proposed erecting a semi-permanent barrier between the pavement and carriageway on the Foreign Office side of the street, to keep pedestrians off the main part of the street. The proposal came with assurances that tourists would still be permitted to take photographs at the door of Number 10. However then Prime Minister, Harold Wilson rejected the proposal, feeling that it would appear to be an unacceptable restriction of the freedom of the public. Wilson's private secretary wrote "I much regret this further erosion of the Englishman's right to wander at will in Downing Street."[14]

In 1982 access was more fully restricted with railings and a demountable gate. This was replaced by the current black steel gates in 1989.[15] The increase in security was again due to an increase in violence, particularly by the IRA.

What a twunt Mitchell is.

"I did not say the words atributed to me". Meaning (if you are dissembling like he is) "the exact quote is not 100%, word for word correct".

This is really 'clever' as it is probably not a direct lie. With arrogant and cynical dross like him, you really have to go for yes/no answers - anything that leaves any room for interpretation (no matter how pedantic) will be seized upon and used to evade the truth. It would be funny if politicians didn't actually think this was clever.

Cameron et al want to distance themselves from this because it adds to the perception that they are an arrogant little cliquel, who have no life experience and no concept of how the other half might live. But hang on, that's exactly what they are! They are actually way out of line with the solid and valid tenets of conservatism (self-reliance, financial caution, family values). They are a little club, in hock to their mates from Bullingdon or school who are currently working in the city. As in the days of the MacMillan government, their narrowness is both a real weakness and an easy target for others.

I have met a lot of public-school types (I also went to a private school) and the VAST majority are just ordinary people whose parents decided to pay for their education. There was a significant minority who I once summed up as 'having no concept of other people'. Meaning that they moved in narrow little circles, shunned anyone who they felt beneath them and generally acted in a disgustingly arrogant way. A lot of them out of sheer social maladjustedness.

Who the bloody hell am I going to vote for with these three bunches of tossers knocking about?

cheekyboy - Member
How bizarre that on a 'cyclists' forum a fellow cyclist is berated for confronting some jobsworth copper too bone idle to do his job properly.
Slag him off for being a tory by all means but not for doing what many of us would commend if it was anyone else.

I'd have the bastards job.

cheekyboy - Member
How bizarre that on a 'cyclists' forum a fellow cyclist is berated for confronting some jobsworth copper too bone idle to do his job properly.

or was it just massive ego of the 'cyclist' who demanded the double gates opened for him rather than having to walk through the regular gate a whole metre to his right

or was it just massive ego of the 'cyclist' who demanded the double gates opened for him rather than having to walk through the regular gate a whole metre to his right

POSTED 2 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST

I forgot to register to vote so technically I shouldn't even be reading this.

plebian

You're missing an "e", you uneducated oaf.

deadlydarcy - Member
plebian
You're missing an "e", you uneducated oaf.

POSTED 1 MINUTE AGO # REPORT-POST

Chears !

E's are good!

Prior to that - here's a photo from 1922:

Ernie Fail!

Well that clearly is not the present gates - as Junkyard's post shows, those were taken down in 1922. The present gates were put there by Thatcher as she believed too many people wanted to kill her, although you now appear to ridicule the role of the gates.

As I said, I blame Thatcher for plebgate. She's clearly the root cause of the problem.

the way jy's post read, anyone let alone the chief whip of the government could have ridden a bicycle past number 10 before the black gates were put up.

Cycling plebs would have to have a cap on at a jaunty angle and be whistling out of tune though.

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/9564006/In-full-Police-log-detailing-Andrew-Mitchells-pleb-rant.html ]Latest news![/url]

shirley its gategate not plebgate ?

I vote for Whipgate or Thrashergate.

shirley its gategate not plebgate ?

No, the issue in this scandal is that a government chief whip is alleged to have referred to police officers as "plebs", and his general ranting, the existence of the gates is not in itself scandalous.

And please don't call me shirley.

Make the guy squirm correctly for his stupidity and pomposity, make a joke and move on. The media has headlines to sell. The rest of us have lives to lead. Perspective please.

Showing your political bias again there I think. As above, name me another (especially as a high profile senior 'public servant') job where you can get away with swearing and shouting abuse at a police officer in public, making a mealy-mouthed apology then changing your story about it, and expect not to get sacked?

If he wasn't a powerful person he would most likely have been arrested.

Whilst on duty at tonight (Wed 19th Sept) on a 1400-2200 hrs between the hours of 1800-2000 I had to deal with a man claiming to be the chief whip and who I later confirmed to be such and a Mr Andrew MITCHELL.
Mr Mitchell was speaking to PC ** demanding exit through the main vehicle gate into Whitehall. PC ***** explained to Mr MITCHELL that the policy was for pedal cycles to use the side pedestrian exit. Mr MITCHELL refused, stating he was the chief whip and he always used the main gates.
I explained to Mr MITCHELL that the policy was to use the side pedestrian gates and that I was happy to open those for him, but that no officer present would be opening the main gates as this was the policy we were directed to follow.
Mr MITCHELL refused. Repeatedly reiterating he was the chief whip. My exact explanation to Mr MITCHELL was "I am more than happy to open the side pedestrian gate for you Sir, but it is policy that we are not to allow cycles through the main vehicle entrance".
After several refusals Mr MITCHELL got off his bike and walked to the pedestrian gate with me after I again offered to open that for him.

There were several members of public present as is the norm opposite the pedestrian gate and as we neared it, Mr MITCHELL said: "Best you learn your f------ place...you don’t run this f------ government...You’re f------ plebs." The members of public looked visibly shocked and I was somewhat taken aback by the language used and the view expressed by a senior government official. I can not say if this statement was aimed at me individually, or the officers present or the police service as a whole.
I warned Mr MITCHELL that he should not swear, and if he continued to do so I would have no option but to arrest him under the Public Order Act, saying "Please don’t swear at me Sir. If you continue to I will have no option but to arrest you under the public order act".
Mr MITCHELL was then silent and left saying "you haven’t heard the last of this" as he cycled off.
I forward this to you as all officers were extremely polite to Mr MITCHELL, but such behaviour and verbal expressions could lead to the unfortunate situation of officers being left no option but to exercise their powers.
I write this for your information as Mr Mitchell’s last comments would appear to indicate that he is unhappy with my actions.
I have recorded this fully in my pocket book.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/9564006/In-full-Police-log-detailing-Andrew-Mitchells-pleb-rant.html

Love it, I wish I could call a copper like that a pleb, there have been plenty of coppers Id happily call a pleb or worse, the one who wrote a completely false account of my accident with a car, I have already called a moron to his commanding officer and am now having to write a letter of complaint asking for him to be disciplined, before having to take the insurance company to court to settle my insurance claim purely because a useless copper cant write up an incident report accurately.

the guy shouldn't lose his job, he should just serve 12 weeks probation in McDonalds in Dagenham or somewhere. Learn how life truly is. Probably won't even get a gold star for customer service. dickhead.

Oh joy Millipede et al are now demanding a full Parliamentary Enquiry - R4 news bulletin - FFS he is politician and therefore an odious ****wit, the world and all the electorate can see this through his actions, but in a time when the country is brassic do we really need to spend money proving it? CMD's inaction speaks volumes but is anyone really surprised.

Having read the Telegraph report I can only surmise that he was being an arrogant knobber who was hiding behind the job title and did nothing that could be interpreted as diffusing the situation and only function in a way that is an abuse of power and serves to widen the class gap.
Mitchell was being quite arsey too.
Questions here,for me, are where is the policy of using the side gate published?
Can Mitchell demonstrate that he had habitually used the main gate without issue?
Was the officer acting in the interest of everyone?
Exactly which crime was prevented from occuring?
I call jobsworth who thought he could abuse his power and get one back. As can be seen here, Mitchell and his ilk have very few fans on leftwingtrackworld.

rogerthecat - Member

Oh joy Millipede et al are now demanding a full Parliamentary Enquiry

Have you got a link which reports that Miliband is demanding a "full Parliamentary Enquiry" ? I can't find any news provider which is carrying that story.

Certainly the Police Federation has been leading the calls for an inquiry into the behaviour of the Chief Whip, which Labour has supported, and there has a request to the parliamentary commissioner for standards to investigate whether Mitchall broke the MP's code of conduct. But I can't see any references to Miliband calling for a "full Parliamentary Enquiry"

CMD's inaction speaks volumes but is anyone really surprised.

What "inaction" ? Do you think Cameron should have sacked Mitchell ? Without any sort of investigation? It is normal to investigate things before sacking people.

Mitchell and his ilk have very few fans on leftwingtrackworld.

And there it is again.........the claim that the mounting criticism of the Chief Whip's behaviour is all just an anti-Tory left-wing plot.

Mitchell's foul-mouthed rant has been given very extensive coverage, including front page coverage, by the Sun, the Daily Express, the Daily Mail, the Daily Telegraph, and the Times. All five newspapers are right-wing and support the Tory Party. Indeed all five newspapers urged their readers to vote Tory last election, and will undoubtedly urge their readers to vote Tory next election. The Tory supporting Daily Telegraph is the only newspaper to have published the full police report.

But this whole story and the coverage which it is receiving is due to anti-Tory left-wingers ? Get a grip. Plebgate would have received the same coverage, if not more, if the accused had been a Labour Chief Whip.

Get a grip. Plebgate would have received the same coverage, if not more, if the accused had been a Labour Chief Whip.

Not on here and not by you.

The topic of this thread is a major news story which is being extensively covered by the media, it is rather silly to suggest that there would have been no thread had a Labour Chief Whip been accused of launching a foul-mouthed rant at a copper in the street.

And I certainly would have expressed the opinion that he should be sacked. Do think I believe that Labour are above criticism ? 😀

ernie_lynch - Member
Well Mitchell has now started to shift his position. Apparently he did swear after all, despite previously vehemently denying that he had. In other words, he's admitted that he's been lying for the last couple of days. I can't see why Cameron wouldn't sack him now.

ernie_lynch - Member
Do you think Cameron should have sacked Mitchell ? Without any sort of investigation? It is normal to investigate things before sacking people.

Like you E-L, I have shifted my position on this one 😉 Knee-jerk reaction is that the guy should lose his position as Chief Whip. He lied, he showed insufficient respect to a PO, he swore and he was rude. And then as the faux-outrage intensifies and the story comes out, the issue becomes less clear.

He lied? Most probably, or was at least, "economical with the truth". The politicians defence (sic)

Respect the PO - No, but what are the rest of us doing. If the DT report above was accurate, the judgement of the PO was to warn AM, and when he went silent, to let the incident pass. That is until the words "you havent heard the last of it." But rather than respect the PO conclusion, people prefer to bring their own conclusions re the seriousness of the offence. How odd?

Swearing - funny that the F word is hardly commented on.

Rude - the pleb word. Rude and unnecessary. But then wave of double standards suggests that this moral outrage is strongly faux.

True to form in the UK - this really all boils down to class with pretty poor behaviour on both sides. Meanwhile, in the rest of the world.....

it is rather silly to suggest that there would have been no thread had a Labour Chief Whip been accused of launching a foul-mouthed rant at a copper in the street.

Mr MITCHELL was then silent and left saying "you haven’t heard the last of this"

Well you certainly can't claim that Mitchell doesn't have foresight, just maybe not in the way he thought 😀

Mitchell and his ilk have very few fans on leftwingtrackworld.

Maybe we just need to learn our ****ing place then eh?

*doffs cap*

Meanwhile, in the rest of the world..

Maybe I'm being short sighted, but (if the account above is true) I cannot see what the Policeman has done wrong. He refused to act as Mitchells bitch and open the gate for him as there was a perfectly fine pedestrian gate 1m away.
Should have told him to go see the padre 😀

I call jobsworth who thought he could abuse his power and get one back.

Even if the officer was being a bit of a jobsworth, in what world does that justify/excuse having a sweary rant at him? You try that one and see where it gets you.

In Mitchell's defence, it was International Speak Like a Pirate Day - perhaps he was just 'in character'?

Even if the officer was being a bit of a jobsworth, in what world does that justify/excuse having a sweary rant at him? You try that one and see where it gets you.

Well if a policeman stops you from going about your legal business for no good reason other than because being a policeman gives him the power to do so, then that's an abuse of power, and a much more serious problem than being a bit sweary.

davidjones15 - Member

It would be silly, wouldn't it? Thankfully there has been no mention of this.

Yes there was - by you in fact : [i]"Not on here and not by you"[/i]

You claimed that Plebgate wouldn't have received the same coverage if the accused had been a Labour Chief Whip.

Read your own posts ? 💡

It's a bit of a leap to claim that:

Plebgate would have received the same coverage

rather silly to suggest that there would have been no thread

The chief whip was only saying what the rest of the government are thinking.

Use your votes plebs, use your votes...

Well if a policeman stops you from going about your legal business for no good reason other than because being a policeman gives him the power to do so, then that's an abuse of power, and a much more serious problem than being a bit sweary.

Oh FFS, the PO told him to use one door a metre away rather than another door. Hardly an infringement of his human rights was it? The real 'abuse of power' is that he gets away with something most of us would have been arrested for simply because of who/where he is.

Well if a policeman stops you from going about your legal business for no good reason other than because being a policeman gives him the power to do so, then that's an abuse of power, and a much more serious problem than being a bit sweary.

Could you enlighten us as to how the copper is in any way, shape or form preventing him 'going about his legal business'?

Can you enlighten us as to why it was illegal for him to go through the main gate?

It wasn't, he expected the police to open the main gates for him. The police told him to use the side gates, like the plebs have to. Apparently, expecting someone of his breeding to mingle with the plebs is insulting, demeaning and offensive.

it's a bit of a leap to claim that:

Plebgate would have received the same coverage

means the same as

rather silly to suggest that there would have been no thread

Nothing silly about it all. I can only only see one current thread on Plebgate. Any less than one would be no thread.

You need to be honest and upfront davidjones15, your displeasure at the criticism being leveled at Mitchell is simply because he is a Tory, betrayed by your reference to "leftwingtrackworld".

For me it makes no difference, if it had been a Labour Chief Whip who had said "learn your ****ing place, you're plebs", I would have expected Ed Miliband to have sacked him. In fact probably even more so as I tend to place the bar a little higher for Labour.

This is not a party political issue, other than it embarrasses the Tory Party, the Tory press have given it [i]huge[/i] coverage. But you can't think of any other defence, so you stick to that line anyway.

Can you enlighten us as to why it was illegal for him to go through the main gate?

Nobody said it was illegal, just against policy to open it for cyclists which is fair enough. The bloke's doing his job according to his orders, Mitchell should have shown some respect instead of trying to throw his weight around.

"I'm sorry this one is shut. Use the one over there."

Response 1: "Fair enough. See you tomorrow."

Response 2: "Pleb."

One of these seems the more reasoned response you'd want to see from a man with a senior role in running the country.

One is very

[img] [/img]

Of course Malcolm is more likeable.

was it illegal or just not procedure- has anyone claimed it was illegal for him to use the gate?

Still easier to ask another question than answer binners

for mr jones
[img] [/img]

And how is the side gate "for the plebs". AFAIK it's the pedestrian access gate as opposed to the vehicular access gate which is the one he wanted/expected to go through. At the end of the day he was on a vehicle.

This does not, in any way, justify his actions.

If there’s a problem with the police officer treating a cyclist like a pedestrian rather than a vehicle, do you...

a) Say “Very well, but I’ll look into this”, then investigate what the actual policy is and then try to sort it through official channels if it needs changing?

b) Throw a tantrum at the police, swearing and insulting them whilst pointing out how you’re fabulously superior to them?

One of these responses is the response you’d hope to expect from a highly paid government official. The other is b).

Nobby - Member

And how is the side gate "for the plebs". AFAIK it's the pedestrian access gate as opposed to the vehicular access gate which is the one he wanted/expected to go through. At the end of the day he was on a vehicle.

So you're more familiar with the gates protocol in downing St than a member of the police specifically detailed with the protection of the residents and visitors to Downing St then?
And who uses the vehicular gate? Peter Pleb who pitches up to gawp at the ruling elite or the Chosen Few themselves? do you think Cameron & Co routinely use the pedestrian (2. without imagination; dull - dictionary.com) gate?