Having previously commented about the policewoman who seems unable to carry out her duties on religious grounds, it appears that we need not worry. Although the reasons may be different, it appears that she may be in good company when it comes to being unable to take appropriate action.
The Metropolitan Police are routinely issuing cautions to muggers, it was revealed today.
The force handed out 329 cautions for street robbery last year - even though the offence carries up to five years in prison.
Now according to the Home Office, a caution is 'a warning given to adults who admit they are guilty of first-time minor offences, such as vandalism or petty theft'.
So mugging doesn't really come into this category, nor does the 474 cautions given for burglary or the 617 for car theft, or the 1,477 for drug possession excluding cannabis, or the 5,216 for shoplifting, or the 5,955 for assault, excluding common assault.
A police spokeswoman said: "Every case is considered on an individual basis and the overriding factors are whether a caution is appropriate to the offence and the offender and whether a caution is likely to be effective in the circumstances.
"The aims of the caution are to deal quickly and simply with less serious offences, to divert offenders where appropriate from appearing in the criminal courts and to reduce the likelihood of re-offending."
Reduce the likelihood of re-offending! Who is she trying to kid, a caution for violent assault and burglary is no deterrent whatsoever.
The problem is that with the police unwilling to defend the law abiding citizen the temptation might be to fight back yourself. I bet if you do, you won't be let off with a caution.
Unfortunately as with more and more of Britain's institutions, the British Police Service is not fit for purpose.
Violent criminals escape prosecution
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I think you will find that there are a large number of individual officers that do there best under very trying circumstances. It is not fair to tar them all with the same brush.
I agree, but you sum it up yourself "do there best under very trying circumstances."
Imagine you are attacked in your vehicle, the window is smashed and you sustain cuts to your head. Several witnesses are at the scene and are willing to give statements as to what happened. The police are called and arrive 5 - 10 minutes later. A full description of the attacker is given, the registration of the vehicle, make and colour are given, addresses of the witnesses are available. The police response is to move everbody on, no statements taken, not even the addresses of the witnesses. The victim is asked to move his car as it is causing an obstruction, although informed that they will be contacted in due course if any action is to be taken. A few weeks later, a phone message on voice mails from the police states that the incident will be classified as undetected! Respect for the police, my arse.
It is the police service that is not fit for purpose, and maybe an increasing number of police officers. If you change the nature of any role, you will automatically start to recruit more people who fit the new profile and lose those who refuse to change. In the past I would always defend the police in their actions, and acknowledge the integritty and bravery of individual officers. I am sure their are still thousands that we should be proud of, but as time goes on ........
We need elected police commissioners. They will automatically have the same priorities as the public, not the government.
I agree in principal, nothing concentrates the mind more than the threat of an election. It would also allow lower ranks more opportunity to influence policy in the longer term.
Post a Comment