Andrew Mitchell and the police

[Pavilionaire]

I find it very depressing that this is one of the lead news stories when it is utter trivial bollocks. The same as the thick mother who won't give her son cancer treatment. These stories prompt hours of debate when, at the end of the day, it's down to an individual being a fuckwit, end of.

 

[goldstone]

I'm getting a bit lost with all this.

So the fact that he apparently called the policeman a "pleb" (dictionary definition "commoner") is worse than swearing at him?

Surely this MUST be a fricking joke.

Can our elected government please get on with what they were elected to do, running the country, not argue about what words were or were not used by an MP during a brief altercation.

 

[The Spanish]

The only thing that has come to light, as I understand it, is that an email seemingly from a member of the public corroborating the statements from the two officers involved in the incident appears to have come from a serving officer who was off duty at the time. Andrew Mitchell was the author of his own misfortune, firstly in his arrogant behaviour and language used and then by not making a full statement confirming exactly what he said. He merely kept saying that he didn't use the words attributed to him but would not state what he said. That in itself kept the issue in the headlines.

As far as I'm aware, the two officers have not changed their statements and the allegation that he used the words pleb. Heads will roll in the met for the apparently contrived corrobative evidence but Mitchell still deserved to go.

for swearing at a copper? who it is beginning to look like, might have some serious issues of his own. this is not big brother, rightly or wrongly we cant just have this off with their heads type entertainment based on some unevenly applied morality from the public/media consumers. Personally i dont think he should be sacked for swearing at a copper. if you do - then thats a lot of moral high ground to be constantly defending. tiring.

 

[BLOCK F]

The only thing that has come to light, as I understand it, is that an email seemingly from a member of the public corroborating the statements from the two officers involved in the incident appears to have come from a serving officer who was off duty at the time. Andrew Mitchell was the author of his own misfortune, firstly in his arrogant behaviour and language used and then by not making a full statement confirming exactly what he said. He merely kept saying that he didn't use the words attributed to him but would not state what he said. That in itself kept the issue in the headlines.

As far as I'm aware, the two officers have not changed their statements and the allegation that he used the words pleb. Heads will roll in the met for the apparently contrived corrobative evidence but Mitchell still deserved to go.

That serving officer wasn't even present at the time so how could he corroborate the evidence of the other officers?Moreover,why did he apparently feel the need to lie?Maybe to help stitch up a 'nasty Tory politician' whose Party were attempting to implement some reforms to the dinosaur that is the police service/force?
Yes,Mitchell swore at the police and he has admitted this.Don't think he deserved the sack for that.
Can't help wondering whether you would back a sacking if the politician involved had been a Labourite and more in tune with your own beliefs ,Drew!

 

[drew]

That serving officer wasn't even present at the time so how could he corroborate the evidence of the other officers?Moreover,why did he apparently feel the need to lie?Maybe to help stitch up a 'nasty Tory politician' whose Party were attempting to implement some reforms to the dinosaur that is the police service/force?
Yes,Mitchell swore at the police and he has admitted this.Don't think he deserved the sack for that.
Can't help wondering whether you would back a sacking if the politician involved had been a Labourite and more in tune with your own beliefs ,Drew!

Sorry, but I don't give a toss which side of the fence the politicians come, they shouldn't stoop to the lowest denominator. The inquiry will probably confirm that the off duty officer wasn't there because that seems to be what the video evidence is confirming. It doesn't alter the fact that the two officers who were there haven't changed their statements. Maybe under the investigation they will or maybe that is what was said. Mitchell has refused to state exactly what was said, however, one of the other things was the comment along the lines of 'you haven't heard the last of this' which itself is threatening. Mitchell is renowned for losing his temper and being a bit of a bully, hence he was suited to the post of chief whip however that doesn't excuse his behaviour and losing his temper with Police officers doing their job, which, after all, is diplomatic protection!

for swearing at a copper? who it is beginning to look like, might have some serious issues of his own. this is not big brother, rightly or wrongly we cant just have this off with their heads type entertainment based on some unevenly applied morality from the public/media consumers. Personally i dont think he should be sacked for swearing at a copper. if you do - then thats a lot of moral high ground to be constantly defending. tiring.

Do you blue rinse your hair to go with your specs? Yes, there are plenty of morons who go around swearing at the police, there was enough evidence of that last night. Mitchell was however a senior member of the Government of the country and that behaviour is not acceptable. Your standards are obviously lower than mine.

 

[The Spanish]

Sorry, but I don't give a toss which side of the fence the politicians come, they shouldn't stoop to the lowest denominator. The inquiry will probably confirm that the off duty officer wasn't there because that seems to be what the video evidence is confirming. It doesn't alter the fact that the two officers who were there haven't changed their statements. Maybe under the investigation they will or maybe that is what was said. Mitchell has refused to state exactly what was said, however, one of the other things was the comment along the lines of 'you haven't heard the last of this' which itself is threatening. Mitchell is renowned for losing his temper and being a bit of a bully, hence he was suited to the post of chief whip however that doesn't excuse his behaviour and losing his temper with Police officers doing their job, which, after all, is diplomatic protection!




Do you blue rinse your hair to go with your specs? Yes, there are plenty of morons who go around swearing at the police, there was enough evidence of that last night. Mitchell was however a senior member of the Government of the country and that behaviour is not acceptable. Your standards are obviously lower than mine.

no my standards arent necessarily lower, its just that my bars perhaps set a little straighter.

 

[drew]

no my standards arent necessarily lower, its just that my bars perhaps set a little straighter.

So you think it is ok for a leading member of the government to swear at the police who are protecting him and doing their job just because he had the inconvenience of having to get off his bike. Your bars are as warped as your standards are low.

 

[The Spanish]

So you think it is ok for a leading member of the government to swear at the police who are protecting him and doing their job just because he had the inconvenience of having to get off his bike. Your bars are as warped as your standards are low.

it appears now that that illusion of protection from the boys in blue may be a pretty flimsy one.

 

[drew]

it appears now that that illusion of protection from the boys in blue may be a pretty flimsy one.

What are you babling on about?

 

[BLOCK F]

So you think it is ok for a leading member of the government to swear at the police who are protecting him and doing their job just because he had the inconvenience of having to get off his bike. Your bars are as warped as your standards are low.

It must give you a lovely warm feeling to be so smug all the time.
How does it feel up in the rarified atmosphere of the ultra moral high ground?

 

[goldstone]

It must give you a lovely warm feeling to be so smug all the time.
How does it feel up in the rarified atmosphere of the ultra moral high ground?

Just read that there are 30 police on this case, THIRTY! Unbefuckinglievable! We apparently have a shortage of police officers (I wouldn't disagree) so how the hell can they justify more than 3 on a case such as this? If indeed it is even a case.

Meanwhile no doubt the police are busy telling hundreds of citizens on a daily basis that they don't have the resources to investigate their burglary, break in, mugging, etc. We the taxpayers fund the police and I for one am mad as hell. I couldn't give a shit about who called who a pleb (or didn't), and I want my taxes used to fund a police force that fights real crime.

 

[drew]

It must give you a lovely warm feeling to be so smug all the time.
How does it feel up in the rarified atmosphere of the ultra moral high ground?

So you also think it's ok for the senior government officials to swear at the police. No doubt you thought there was no problem when most of them were fiddling their expenses. Perhaps we should all try to live our lives to the lowest common denominator and we can all then go to football chanting 'no one likes us'.

If the off duty officer is proven not to have been in vicinity, let alone in earshot, then he is, quite rightly, for the high jump and will probably kiss his whole career and pension good bye and rightly so.

Mitchell made this considerably worse from himself because he denied saying the words attributed to him but would not qualify that with a statement saying exactly what he did say which made most people believe he had something to hide. He should have come clean straight away and let the shit hit the fan and it would have probably blown over in a few days.

Not sure why you think I'm on the ultra moral high ground, just seems it's a bit higher than you and Spanish, which, appears not to be too high!!!

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

So you also think it's ok for the senior government officials to swear at the police. No doubt you thought there was no problem when most of them were fiddling their expenses. Perhaps we should all try to live our lives to the lowest common denominator and we can all then go to football chanting 'no one likes us'.

If the off duty officer is proven not to have been in vicinity, let alone in earshot, then he is, quite rightly, for the high jump and will probably kiss his whole career and pension good bye and rightly so.



Mitchell made this considerably worse from himself because he denied saying the words attributed to him but would not qualify that with a statement saying exactly what he did say which made most people believe he had something to hide. He should have come clean straight away and let the shit hit the fan and it would have probably blown over in a few days.

Not sure why you think I'm on the ultra moral high ground, just seems it's a bit higher than you and Spanish, which, appears not to be too high!!!

Very odd you wish to take the moral high ground re; the politicians but don't wish to eradicate what appears to be police corruption. Something that has raised its very ugly head on more than one occasion in recent times. The police are rotten to the core.

 

[drew]

Very odd you wish to take the moral high ground re; the politicians but don't wish to eradicate what appears to be police corruption. Something that has raised its very ugly head on more than one occasion in recent times. The police are rotten to the core.

On the contrary, if or when it is proved this copper lied then he will be hung out to dry and I've said that previously he deserves what he gets. The same for those found guilty of the cover up relating to any corruption but your statement that they are rotten to the core implies every policeman is corrupt.

 

[00snook]

On the contrary, if or when it is proved this copper lied then he will be hung out to dry and I've said that previously he deserves what he gets. The same for those found guilty of the cover up relating to any corruption but your statement that they are rotten to the core implies every policeman is corrupt.

If "hung out to dry" = early retirement with full pension then I'm sure you are right.

Most likely suspended on full pay during the investigation too.

 

[BLOCK F]

So you also think it's ok for the senior government officials to swear at the police. No doubt you thought there was no problem when most of them were fiddling their expenses. Perhaps we should all try to live our lives to the lowest common denominator and we can all then go to football chanting 'no one likes us'.

If the off duty officer is proven not to have been in vicinity, let alone in earshot, then he is, quite rightly, for the high jump and will probably kiss his whole career and pension good bye and rightly so.

Mitchell made this considerably worse from himself because he denied saying the words attributed to him but would not qualify that with a statement saying exactly what he did say which made most people believe he had something to hide. He should have come clean straight away and let the shit hit the fan and it would have probably blown over in a few days.

Not sure why you think I'm on the ultra moral high ground, just seems it's a bit higher than you and Spanish, which, appears not to be too high!!!

Drew,just look back at many of your posts...............moral high ground,smug,righteous.Just a few thoughts that come to mind.
Anyway,enough of that,I generally enjoy reading your posts even if I don't necessarily agree with them all.
I hope you and your family enjoy a good Christmas!
Best wishes from this old moral degenerate!

 

[Simster]

Very odd you wish to take the moral high ground re; the politicians but don't wish to eradicate what appears to be police corruption. Something that has raised its very ugly head on more than one occasion in recent times. The police are rotten to the core.

This.

 

[8ace]

Tories and OB, shower of cnuts the lot of them.

 

[The Spanish]

So you also think it's ok for the senior government officials to swear at the police. No doubt you thought there was no problem when most of them were fiddling their expenses. Perhaps we should all try to live our lives to the lowest common denominator and we can all then go to football chanting 'no one likes us'.

If the off duty officer is proven not to have been in vicinity, let alone in earshot, then he is, quite rightly, for the high jump and will probably kiss his whole career and pension good bye and rightly so.

Mitchell made this considerably worse from himself because he denied saying the words attributed to him but would not qualify that with a statement saying exactly what he did say which made most people believe he had something to hide. He should have come clean straight away and let the shit hit the fan and it would have probably blown over in a few days.

Not sure why you think I'm on the ultra moral high ground, just seems it's a bit higher than you and Spanish, which, appears not to be too high!!!

what!!!!!

so what jobs can and cant you cheek coppers in drew? we need a list. its like the old footballers are role models bumkum.

this bloke has had an altercation with another grown man. it may well turn out to be the case that the other man then assisted in a chain of events that got the other bloke out of a very vital and important job. now contrary to most of the people on here i think the latter is the one seriously out of order, not someone who swore at a policeman. if mitchell had been 8 years old then yes he deserves to be punished for swearing at a policeman. if he is an adult man then that reaction is hysterical.

 

[Buzzer]

Prima facie it appears that 2 officers lied on their report logs, they or others conspired to leak this to the press and another officer either independently or in collusion assisted in discrediting a cabinet minister by lying about witnessing it and not revealing his job.

On top of that the Police Federation appeared to take a very extreme position on this and in calling for the minister to be sacked.

If instead of a chippy toff being the apparent victim it had been, say, Clive Stafford Smith I wonder if so many would be so keen to brush this under the carpet.