Here is a quote from an earlier guardian article on the subject
“Some of the decisions are made outside the Met, so people we’ve decided shouldn’t be police officers, an independent lawyer says ‘bad luck, you’ve got to keep them’. That can’t be right. No other employer has to deal with that.
Here is a quote from an earlier guardian article on the subject
“Some of the decisions are made outside the Met, so people we’ve decided shouldn’t be police officers, an independent lawyer says ‘bad luck, you’ve got to keep them’. That can’t be right. No other employer has to deal with that.
If the lawyers didn’t hand our soft punishments, the rules wouldn’t need to be changed. I don’t believe anyone on here knew that the final say on whether a police officer is sacked sits with an independent lawyer, which is completely bizarre
also, it's not as far as I can see, a panel of lawyers
police officers are officers and have a slightly different employment status, the procedure (at least since 2016 - thanks tories what a year for wins) seems to be that they are reffered to a misconduct hearing
the chair of the hearing, has to be a "legally qualified person", persumably because the cops couldn't be trusted not to hide things and given the performance of pervious Met comissioners I can see where that assumption would come from
but again
glad you agree that he wants the lazy Tory government to stop tweeting its support for net zero and get on with some reforms.
If the lawyers didn’t hand our soft punishments, the rules wouldn’t need to be changed. I don’t believe anyone on here knew that the final say on whether a police officer is sacked sits with an independent lawyer, which is completely bizarre
Where have you been since Rowley took over the Met? He's been complaining about this since day one of his attempts to reform the place.
I think that Sir Mark is not terribly bright. He called it wrong when he refused to accept the Casey Report finding that the Met is institutionally racist. And now he is blaming lawyers (rather than the law) for not being able to get rid of bad coppers as quickly as he would like.
It’s as if he cannot understand the difference between the circumstance and those implementing it.
4
0
oh, honey, good meatshielding, but
am fairly sure (looking at the times headline) that he blames the Tory goverment
"Met Police chief: Give me the power to sack rogue officers
Sir Mark Rowley attacks government inaction on reforms of misconduct hearings"
1
0
heh
2
1
Hahahaha
Absolutely pwned
0
1
Odd as on Times radio it was reported as him saying the panel of lawyers gave out soft punishments and didn’t sack officers…
0
0
Why do Tories hate the laws that they make?
It's weird
Gaslighting of Tory voters like risky is also very worrying
0
0
Here is a quote from an earlier guardian article on the subject
“Some of the decisions are made outside the Met, so people we’ve decided shouldn’t be police officers, an independent lawyer says ‘bad luck, you’ve got to keep them’. That can’t be right. No other employer has to deal with that.
0
0
feelingbrill10 Aug 23 08:51
Here is a quote from an earlier guardian article on the subject
“Some of the decisions are made outside the Met, so people we’ve decided shouldn’t be police officers, an independent lawyer says ‘bad luck, you’ve got to keep them’. That can’t be right. No other employer has to deal with that.
____________________________________________________________________
only 6 posts to have you agree that he wants the government to change the law/rules so the Met can sack it's own
I mean, good effort writing this post so it sounds a bit like you are disagreeing,
but we all know that's a very old trick
0
1
If the lawyers didn’t hand our soft punishments, the rules wouldn’t need to be changed. I don’t believe anyone on here knew that the final say on whether a police officer is sacked sits with an independent lawyer, which is completely bizarre
0
0
“On Times radio”
ffs
0
0
feelingbrill10 Aug 23 09:00
If the lawyers didn’t hand our soft punishments, the rules wouldn’t need to be changed.
_____________________________________________________
so, again, you agree he wants the rules changed
also, it's not as far as I can see, a panel of lawyers
police officers are officers and have a slightly different employment status, the procedure (at least since 2016 - thanks tories what a year for wins) seems to be that they are reffered to a misconduct hearing
the chair of the hearing, has to be a "legally qualified person", persumably because the cops couldn't be trusted not to hide things and given the performance of pervious Met comissioners I can see where that assumption would come from
but again
glad you agree that he wants the lazy Tory government to stop tweeting its support for net zero and get on with some reforms.
0
0
Lol. Got something against The Times? I prefer not to have the pc wokefest that is Today on….
0
0
Very much in favour of police reform.
0
1
Horace how can you post this shite with four rakes in your face?
0
0
If the lawyers didn’t hand our soft punishments, the rules wouldn’t need to be changed. I don’t believe anyone on here knew that the final say on whether a police officer is sacked sits with an independent lawyer, which is completely bizarre
Where have you been since Rowley took over the Met? He's been complaining about this since day one of his attempts to reform the place.
0
1
feelingbrill10 Aug 23 09:20
Very much in favour of police reform.
______________________________________________
that's not hard to believe
2
1
This really is a tough watch
0
0
I think that Sir Mark is not terribly bright. He called it wrong when he refused to accept the Casey Report finding that the Met is institutionally racist. And now he is blaming lawyers (rather than the law) for not being able to get rid of bad coppers as quickly as he would like.
It’s as if he cannot understand the difference between the circumstance and those implementing it.
1
0
to be fair, trying to deflect blame is the main qualification for the Met commissioner
0
1
He's actually blaming the whole process.
Join the discussion