I think it’s pretty troubling that the military may have to step in to cover what should be police matters when it’s not a matter of a national emergency.
I think it’s pretty troubling that the military may have to step in to cover what should be police matters when it’s not a matter of a national emergency.
I’ve got quite a few police officers in my circle of friends and tbh, I’ve rarely heard anything good about the justice system from them.
Normally they tell me of cases where CPS will refuse to charge for what should be easy cases with a ton of evidence and when all the procedures were followed.
My suspicion is that this charge is political grandstanding.
I was talking recently to a guy who worked rape cases. He said he hardly ever got CPS to take cases, even when he was 100% sure he had enough. It nearly made him leave policing. In the end he just left the department and went somewhere he had at least a tiny chance of getting it through.
So, you know that the CPS often don't charge but, also, this is clearly a gratuitous charge?
And it is political grandstanding but the Home Secretary opposes prosecuting officers?
It's ridiculously rare for police officers to face any kind of disciplinary action, let alone prosecution. We will have to wait for the court case, reporting restrictions are in place so none of us have enough information to judge.
But we do know that the CPS don't prosecute unless they believe there is at least a 50% chance of a guilty verdict and, if there is any political context to this prosecution, it is the belated recognition that criminal officers have routinely been allowed to stay on the job.