After ‘Plebgate’ How Can We Trust The Lying Police ?

The whole ‘Plebgate’ issue with Andrew Mitchell and the police has reared its head again over twelve months after it occurred. Why? Well basically because it’s emerged that now three police chiefs are refusing to back down after criticism by the home secretary for not disciplining their officers who were accused of trying to discredit Mitchell.

It’s now come to light that the Independent Police Complaints Commission said a misconduct case should have been answered. The three police officers in question are accused of giving a false account of a meeting with Andrew Mitchell.

The meeting was held after the row between police officers and Mitchell over words he used when he was stopped from riding a bicycle through the Downing Street gates way back in September 2012. A transcript of the meeting clearly shows, that, while he admitted swearing, Mitchell continually denied using the word "pleb" or insulting the police. But afterwards the three police officers who conducted the meeting said he had refused to elaborate on what had happened and should resign.

So it isn't about the whole "pleb" thing anymore. It's the fact that three police officers were proven to have colluded to lie, on national TV, about what was discussed during the meeting so they could heap pressure on a democratically elected minister. This was then exacerbated by their three, respective chief constables going on to support their lying officers.

Liars
Three weeks after the original incident, Andrew Mitchell met Inspector Ken MacKaill, of West Mercia Police, Detective Sergeant Stuart Hinton, of Warwickshire Police, and Sergeant Chris Jones, of West Midlands Police acting on behalf of the Police Federation which represents rank-and-file officers, at his constituency office in Sutton Coldfield. Rightly or wrongly, Mitchell recorded the meeting and from this recording the transcript was compiled.

I've read this transcript and I've listened to the interviews given afterwards by the police who were present. The transcript can be found here:

http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Documents/investigation_commissioner_reports/Transcript%20of%20meeting.pdf

Speaking to the press immediately after the meeting, Inspector MacKaill claimed Mitchell would not provide an account of the incident and called for his resignation. If you read the transcript you will very quickly conclude that this was a complete lie. So the issue now is no longer Mitchell and what he did or did not say to the Downing Street officer. The issue is whether police embellished an event for their own interests. Now to me, that is unethical and frankly below the standard I expect of, not just of the police. but anyone who can use their influence for their own purposes.

The whole thing points to a set-up by the police. After all it wasn’t Mitchell who blew anything out of proportion. It was the police officers who ran to The Sun and The Telegraph with what is now shown to be a false story using some very deliberate provocative words.

As much as I dislike Andrew Mitchell, if you read the transcript of the meeting he does say time and again that he doesn't want to accuse the officers of lying and wants to put the story to bed. It's the police themselves who insist that an investigation is needed, they then walk out to the press, and lie about what was said.

This is all now more about how senior police officers are well up to their necks in the lies and cover up. When you put this in the context of some other recent events, it increasingly proves that the police cannot be trusted to police themselves.

Trust Gone?

In the transcript of the Mitchell meeting is a statement from one of the officers that actually hits the nail squarely on the head, it’s a pity they didn’t abide by this statement. What he actually said was:

“You must understand we are in a bit of a hiatus here because Honesty and Integrity as I have said a number of times over the last couple of days, is a central tenor to the police core value and if that wasn’t the case anything could happen as it should be to politicians and anybody in public life and public office and there is nothing new I can say on that in the last couple of days and to have by implication if not direct accusation to have a Senior government figure suggesting that an officers account of events is inaccurate and possibly untruthful has wider implication, not just for that incident but for the police service in general.”

Rather than admit this in the subsequent statement to the press outside, he lied about what was said and set about trying to discredit Mitchell further. At this point my trust in the police’s ‘honesty and integrity’ was blown apart. These three policemen will now find it hard to present themselves as credible witnesses in any future cases that they might be involved in.

Not the first time
It's not just Plebgate, it's Hillsborough, it's the cover up when Ian Tomlinson died at an anti-globalization march, it’s the De Menezes shooting. Almost daily there are less famous tales of unprofessional police, lazy police, police covering one another's' backs and downright bent coppers. The cynicism and loss of confidence in the police is widespread even among us law abiding citizens. Go on YouTube and have a look, there's plenty of evidence of the police trying to throw their weight around and getting it wrong.

To me police credibility was destroyed by the De Menezes shooting. I can accept that the shooting itself was an honest mistake, but the way the police tried to alter the actual events, blacken Mr De Menezes character & just plain lie about what happened was totally unacceptable. Since then the police have behaved in exactly the same manner over a number of other incidents.

With Ian Tomlinson’s death, I always found it astonishing the police continually claimed he was a rioter then repeatedly used the phrase "pushed to the ground". The "push" came from 1 metre away, at pace with the truncheon impacting into the area of Mr Tomlinson’s liver/kidney. That’s some push!

Oh and remind me again, what was the number of police logs which were "modified" following the Hillsborough disaster, circa 120?

Above the Law
When we imprison people for lying on a speeding ticket and then do nothing to police officers who mislead in the same way it makes the police seem above the law.

There now seems to be a large number of policemen, particularly at senior levels, who believe that the rules that apply to the public in general do not apply to them! These days the police clearly close ranks when allegations are levelled at them.

Imagine if a member of the public lies to the police in an investigation, you can be sure he or she will be taken to account.

With the Mitchell case a major public issue about the honesty of a cabinet member is brought into disrepute by possibly dishonest police officers and these chief constables are refusing to answer or accept the IPCC findings. Utterly Outrageous!! We're told its a few 'bad apples'. If this were true they'd make an example of them. No prosecutions ever arise & the inherent corruption seemingly continues.

Do the police get how it looks?
I have no political axe to grind, but do the police have any idea how badly they are coming across to the general public? We can hear the interview with Andrew Mitchell. Then we can hear how the police reported it. Now we know the report conclusion was reversed.

For the police to just criticise the IPCC for making their views public misses the point entirely; the IPCC view is a view that seems an obvious conclusion.

If there is a good and reasonable explanation of what has gone on, the police need to be shouting it from the rooftops, rather than hiding behind phrases about how the IPCC could have conducted the investigation. This entire affair does appear determined to drag on with lie upon lie and whitewash upon whitewash.

I remain unsurprised that the Metropolitan Police continues to tolerate the presence of liars and criminals in its midst, but I did expect better of the Police Federation who must now join their more disreputable colleagues in public disgrace.

Unless Chief Constables are prepared to demonstrate clear honesty in all the police’s dealings with the public, then they are unfit for purpose and should be sacked instantly.

Sad State Of Affairs
The issue here is not whether you like or dislike Andrew Mitchell, he may well be a nasty little man who thought he was someone special, because he was a government minister. The issue here is the fact that the police, who are the enforcers of the law, lied and fabricated evidence on numerous occasions continuing to push the lie, even documenting the lie with a fake email from a supposed member of the public; who was in fact another police person, then compounding the whole thing by lying again about the meeting with Mitchell.

The British public has to wake up to the fact that morally this country has slipped backwards from the once decent place that it was. The really sad part of all of this is that as a kid I was brought up to believe the police were honest and good and that we should have respect for their position. I lost that long ago. Very sad.

Imagine, if instead of a cabinet minister and a gate, the row had been between my teenage son wearing a hoodie and a police officer. Would millions have been spent on an enquiry? Of course not, it would be down to the police station, fingerprints and DNA taken, cautioned and a police record for life, with no redress against a lying police officer. 

Makes you think, doesn't it !