Entry #: 756 |
Entry Date: 2013-05-24 16:04:04
|
| Name: |
The Undercover Copper. |
Visitor Comments: Livertonian
Thanks for your kind words. I do agree with your observations on cowboy builders etc.
London Incident.
Well my prediction that the police would start to get blamed within 24 hours of the Woolwich incident came true, as it obviously would! Police response time seems to be under the spotlight. Trouble is if your armed cops are 20 minutes away from the scene, and have to battle their way through some of the busiest streets in the world, 20 minutes is how long it takes. The only answer is arm ALL police so the nearest armed policeman is on every street corner. If an unarmed cop had been sent, he or she would now also be dead. What would that achieve?
Slightly amusingly I noted comments in several papers when this incident began, when it was thought that police had shot the two killers dead. Commentators criticised the police for killing the two men, when it would have been better to have captured them alive for questioning etc etc. THEN it was revealed that the killers were still ALIVE. Then the commentators criticised the police for NOT killing the two men dead. A prime example of what we're up against with the press and court of irrational public opinion.
Now M15 is in the line of fire. Seems like M15 knew of these two men for the last 8 years. BUT the security services have THOUSANDS of UK-based radical Islamists on its books. It simply cannot monitor ALL of them 24 hours a day. The resources simply do not exist. The irrational court of public opinion and the press have a very unrealistic expectation of what can be achieved with NOT an awful lot. Especially with the dwindling resources of the police and security services, continuing to dwindle with no sign of it stopping. Even so the police and MI5 have successfully foiled many UK terror plots since 9/11. One was bound to get though. Let's hope this is the only one?
This incident was possibly one of the most barbaric and evil events to occur on British soil since medieval times. Perpetrated by the followers of a medieval, backward and evil doctrine, that is spreading like a cancer across these islands. If you want us to fight it, the public has to get behind the police and security services, instead of attacking us at every opportunity. Perhaps its a modern day Anglo-Saxon trait, to respond to an attack from outsiders by turning on ourselves.
|
|
Entry #: 755 |
Entry Date: 2013-05-23 08:08:02
|
| Name: |
Livertonian |
| Visitor Comments: Undercover copper has made a series of brilliant posts here. Well done to him! On the British justice bit - justice wise, i.e.: application of the law wise I'd tend to agree, we are not the worst. It's the law which British justice is trying to apply that gives me cause for concern. Too many things - let's take as an example cowboy tradesmen who cheat defenceless old ladies - which ought to be considered criminal are not. In too many cases our laws do not protect the individual. I've worked in many countries and one that is much better than Britain in this respect is Norway. In Norway a person who writes a bouncing check gets pretty much the same punishment he'd get if he'd tried to rob a bank. In the UK on most occasions he doesn't even get his knuckles rapped. |
|
Entry #: 754 |
Entry Date: 2013-05-22 16:56:28
|
| Name: |
The Undercover Copper |
Visitor Comments: Wow thought I'd had a rough day on those mean streets..................
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2329089/Three-dead-London-street-armed-police-called-machete-attack-driver.html
Lets all make a wager? How long before the police get the blame for this incident. I give it 24 hours! Next headline will include "Trigger Happy Cops" or some such rot.
Now before everybody begins to hyperventilate over violent crime, and we all become hysterical Daily Mail readers; I hate to do this, but the government is right about violent crime. IT'S GOING DOWN!! I've noticed a significant drop in violence over the last few years. Why? No idea! Perhaps brotherly love is more infectious than we all thought? Certainly I stylishly zoom from violent incident to violent incident (see the Ray Bans) less frequently today than i did 10 or even 20 years ago. The late 1980s were far nastier than today. The 80's were actually rather evil!
So anyway this incident presently running in that there London, is pretty 'orrid, but lets keep in in context. This sort of thing's pretty rare!
Now let's blame the Old Bill!  |
|
Entry #: 753 |
Entry Date: 2013-05-22 16:37:16
|
| Name: |
The Undercover Copper |
Visitor Comments: 'Colossus The Forbin Project'
I'm all for it. Humans are by and large terminally stupid and prone to evil (Just read Daily Mail readers comments for all the evidence you could ever wish for!). Computers could do no worse. Perhaps Cyberdine Industries could build it, oh hang on.............
Anyway a long day harassing "innocent" members of the public has just ended. Feeling the urge to either drink myself into a stupor or punch a wall. The beer option wins !!!!  |
|
Entry #: 752 |
Entry Date: 2013-05-21 16:24:45
|
| Name: |
Steve Pendlebury |
Visitor Comments:
Have you seen a film called 'Colossus The Forbin Project'?
Judging by that comment, UC, I think you should.
Starts here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQjebwUrhvc
Cheers,
Steve P. |
|
Entry #: 751 |
Entry Date: 2013-05-20 14:49:07
|
| Name: |
The Undercover Copper |
| Visitor Comments: "Excellent post. I agree with every word - except that I'm not quite convinced about the "British justice is best" bit".
We'd have to disagree on that point. Its flawed as we know, but its better than the rest. Its not perfect and never will be, and whilst Human Beings are part of the process, miscarriages like the one you note will always occur. Perhaps if it was all run by some huge computor we'd all be okay. |
|
Entry #: 750 |
Entry Date: 2013-05-19 16:37:15
|
| Name: |
The Undercover Copper |
Visitor Comments: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2326656/How-Jill-Dandos-death-convinced-know-crime-wrong-NICK-ROSS-tells-shocking-truth-murder-friend-real-cause-crime.html
With thanks to Shijronotgeorgedixon for his insight:-
Most things Nick knows about crime is wrong too…
Nick ‘Crimewatch’ Ross has written a widely applauded article for the Sunday Hate called ‘Everything I knew about crime is wrong’ or something or whatever…he makes some good points but…nothing Gadget et al (and yours truly) haven’t been saying for years…
Here are the five myths and the real answers from someone that has worked in the field for 23-years as a uniformed officer and a detective.
Myth One: ‘Crime is caused by a broken society’
Nope… it’s caused by lazy knobs that just don’t want to work…they are the swamp dwellers…the benefit class…they don’t do all of it-but they certainly have the lion’s share…
Myth Two: ‘British justice is the best in the world’
err…it is… it’s fair to the point of being not-fair, but it’s the best. The problem we have is that we don’t listen to those that know and we are resistant to change/technology…
Nick makes the mistake of thinking CPS are the bastions of justice…they aren’t…
Overall…it’s the best. He is confusing the odd hiccup and the way we sentence with justice…very different things.
Myth Three: ‘Poverty is the main cause of crime’
No it isn’t… stupid, lazy, risk taking, immoral thinking based on a no consequence kind of upbringing is… that and the knowledge nothing much will happen to you should you be caught… if you have a deterrent that is bad enough-people think twice…you can’t stop it all (they have theft in Saudi-and they chop your hands off) but you can reduce the bulk by giving an alternative and making punishments for crime nasty…
Myth Four: ‘A ‘wicked’ minority is behind crime
Wrong…they are. I might have agreed with ‘behind ALL crime’ but the fact is, if we jailed ALL of the persistent acquisitive crime offenders, crime rates would dive to very low levels… but we don’t….we keep bailing, giving short sentences and silly community orders instead of porridge for 10-years…and making sure they stay in for 10-years too…
Myth Five: ‘There is more crime than ever before’
Nahh… it’s lower… sort of… well…I guess if we could workout how many actual crimes there are purely on a numbers basis I suspect there would be a few spikes but overall it would be quite low. Human beings are still human beings…
We have less car crime now thanks to better security, but higher amounts of shop theft-because they have moved to that…
Nick thinks that it’s opportunity that is the driving force behind crime- true…it’s an important factor…but the real way to deal with crime is to accept it will happen no matter what you do…
…then punish people severely when they do it.
I mean, imagine you are a persistent offender… You get caught shop-lifting…it’s your 50th/60th/70th conviction for theft. You attend court and say you’re a druggie, broken -fractured background, broken family, new kid to support, turning life around etc etc etc… and you walk with ANOTHER drug treatment order and a community sentence /tag that you won’t obey and probation can’t be arsed to enforce…
Where is your motivation to STOP offending?
But…this time the judge says, “OK mate…this is your 71st conviction. Clearly you see society as a resource to be exploited…so, society must be protected from you… you were told last time you appeared what would happen should you appear again-you decided to ignore that warning so, you are sentenced to 10-years in prison. This is a full tariff sentence too, so you will be released on May the 18th, 2023.”
Word would soon get around…we wouldn’t stop all offenders…but we would certainly get rid of them one way or another eh?
So…that’s Nick’s book in a nutshell and you didn’t need to pay £18 to read it…now that IS ROBBERY!!!! |
Admin Reply:
Captain Grumpy says: Excellent post. I agree with every word - except that I'm not quite convinced about the "British justice is best" bit. When you read of cases like the recently-publicised male nurse who was convicted and imprisoned five or so years ago for killing hospital patients ... it now transpires that he had never been anywhere near some of those who died, and that the ONLY evidence against was that he was the primary carer for a group that did die unexpectedly. Yet the jury convicted him on that one piece of circumstantial evidence. It's not good enough - see here. |
|
Entry #: 749 |
Entry Date: 2013-05-15 19:01:40
|
| Name: |
Agos |
Visitor Comments: VISCOUNT (MATT) RIDLEY’S MAIDEN SPEECH IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS
Date: 15/05/13 Matt Ridley, House of Lords
Viscount Ridley: My Lords, I wish to speak on the subject of energy and, in response to the prominent references in the gracious Speech, on the importance of economic competitiveness. However, as this is my first time speaking in the House, I hope that noble Lords will indulge me in a few preliminary remarks.
It is an enormous privilege and a daunting responsibility to speak in this House for the first time. I know that it is customary on such occasions to pay thanks to the staff but I have to say that I have been genuinely overwhelmed by the generosity and thoughtfulness of all the staff since I have come here.
I have also been touched by the warmth of the welcome that I have had from noble Lords on all sides of the House. I particularly thank my noble friends Lady Seccombe and Lord Henley, who have mentored me in my early weeks.
Listening to debates over the past few weeks, it has become clear to me that this is a House that not only respects but expects knowledge and expertise. This is something that my father made clear to me when he was enjoying a long and distinguished career in this House, but he would speak only on subjects that he knew something about—in his case, particularly the Territorial Army, the north-east of England and local government. When I spoke to the hustings a few weeks ago before being elected here, I said that if elected I would speak on three main issues: the north-east of England, science and technology, and enterprise and innovation.
I am here to fill the vacancy caused by the sad death of Lord Ferrers, and I pay tribute to that giant of a parliamentarian, who was on the Front Bench under no fewer than five Prime Ministers. I may hope to match his long legs but I do not expect to match his length of service.
I am that strange chimera—an elected hereditary Peer. As a result, I am acutely aware that I am here thanks at least as much to the efforts of my ancestors as to my own. I would not be human if I did not feel a smidgen of pride in being the ninth Matthew Ridley in direct succession to sit in one of the Houses of Parliament since the son of a buccaneering Newcastle coal merchant was elected to the other place in 1747. That brings me to the subject of my speech.
In 1713, exactly 300 years ago, the Newcomen steam engine was just coming into use all over the north of England. One of the very first was commissioned at Byker on the north bank of the Tyne by my buccaneering ancestor, Richard Ridley, in 1713. Within 20 years, more than 100 of these great clanking monsters were transforming the coal industry by pumping water from deep mines and vastly increasing productivity.
The effect of that innovation was momentous and global. By lowering the cost of energy and raising the wages of labour, it set in train a whole series of events, including the mechanisation of industry and the increase in demand for the products of that industry, and so the great flywheel of the industrial revolution began to turn. For the first time, an economy grew not through an increase in land or labour but through an increase in energy, because mineral energy from beneath the ground showed an unusual property that had not been shown by wood, wind and water or by oxen or people—that is, it did not show diminishing returns; the more of it you dug up, the cheaper it got.
At this point, I should like to declare an interest because I am still in the coal-mining business, albeit indirectly. However, my aim here is not to praise any particular kind of energy but to praise the cheapness of energy.
Today, an average British family uses as much energy as if it had 1,200 people in the back room on exercise bicycles pedalling away on eight-hour shifts. It is worth remembering that when people talk about how many jobs can be created in any particular sector of energy. We could create a lot more jobs by making energy on treadmills. What counts is not the jobs we create in producing energy but the jobs we create in consuming energy if we make it affordable—or, indeed, the number that could be lost if we make it unaffordable.
One reason why we in this country are falling behind the growth of the rest of the world is that in recent years we have had a policy of deliberately driving up the price of energy. To quote a recent report from the Institute of Directors:
“The UK’s energy and climate policies are adding more to industrial electricity prices than comparable programmes in competitor countries, putting UK industry at a disadvantage and making a rebalancing of the economy more difficult”.
Household energy costs have doubled in the past 15 years. In the US, where gas prices used to be the same as they are here, they are now one-quarter or one-fifth of the level here. That is an enormous competitive advantage to the US and a disadvantage to us. The chemical industry, as a result, is very keen to move to the United States, and other industries, including the cement industry, are feeling the pinch from high energy costs. Near where I live at Lynemouth on the north-east coast, the country’s largest aluminium smelter recently closed with the loss of 515 jobs, largely due to the rising cost of energy.
A nation can compete on the basis of cheap labour or cheap energy but if it has neither then it is likely to be in trouble. Surely these are not controversial remarks. I know that I am not supposed to be controversial in a maiden speech so, lest I go too far, I will now revert to talking about the north-east of England.
It is worth noting that the north-east is the only region of England with a trade surplus with the world, something to which the noble Lord, Lord Adonis, drew attention in his recent report on the region. We are also a region with strong offshore engineering capability, and I think that the north-east could once again steal a march on the world and deliver competitive energy to the rest of the world. There are 3,000 billion tonnes of coal under the British sector of the North Sea and, thanks to pioneering work at Newcastle University and elsewhere, the technology now exists to gasify this coal, getting carbon monoxide, hydrogen and methane from it and putting carbon dioxide back in. If this technology can be made to work then we can bring plenty of jobs not only to the region but, more importantly, to the whole economy by lowering the price of energy. There is enormous entrepreneurial spirit in our regions but it is held back by the high cost of energy.
So, for the sake of pensioners in fuel poverty, for the sake of small businesses struggling to meet their energy bills and for the sake of large businesses all too ready to leave these shores, let us repeat what our ancestors did in the early 18th century and drive down the costs of energy so that we can drive up living standards.
House of Lords, 14 May 2013 |
|
Entry #: 748 |
Entry Date: 2013-05-15 17:47:46
|
| Name: |
The Undercover Copper |
Visitor Comments: "But isn't the law intended, among other reasons, to satisfy the desire of victims and their families and friends for retribution and punishment of those who have wronged them? If the law didn't at least partially satisfy this desire, this feeling, then vigilantes, vendettas and the personal taking of revenge would surely be much more common than they are? To that extent, feelings must be considered by "The Law" as part of the very reason for the existence of that law"
I see your point, but no, I stand by what I said. The chief desire for all concerned should be for justice to be done. The very function of justice, if successful, would be "retribution and punishment". But that is an end result. That desire should not be the driving force behind a case. Because if we allow the desire for retribution to colour judgement, we allow our judgement and impartiality to become compromised. If judgement and impartiality become compromised, true justice is threatened.
Whenever I investigate something, I try my level best not to care if the person I'm investigating is guilty or not. I try not to make it personal. I'm certainly never on any moral crusade to make the world a better place. Anything I do in an investigation I do based upon evidence and nothing else. It can be far too easy to get too involved, and I mean on an emotional level, with a case. This most of all if you're dealing with something as emotive as child abuse. If that's the case you cannot hope to provide fully rational judgement.
The Captain's point is that Operation Yew Tree seems to have crossed that fine line, and is driven by emotion. If that's the case the overall Yew Tree investigation is compromised, and justice is destined to be lost in the fog of sympathy and hand ringing.
One very current example is the criticism of police relating to Asian Muslim men abusing white girls. It would seem that police had already been aware that Muslim men have been involved in organised large scale trafficking and sexual abuse. Why had nothing been done? Because of fear of upsetting the "Muslim Community". The notion that we should be terrified of upsetting people has been drummed into the police for quite a long time now. So here we have outside influences and emotions dictating how the law is applied, or not applied in this case. So that fear of emotions has allowed young girls to suffer further abuse. So like I said before, "The law should be cold, it should be black and white. It should be without outside influence". |
|
Entry #: 747 |
Entry Date: 2013-05-15 12:06:48
|
| Name: |
PT |
Visitor Comments: UC
I do not so much take issue with your comment, UC -"The law should be cold, it should be black and white. It should be without outside influence. One outside influence that should not be, is the feelings of the "Victims". Those can be dealt with after a court conviction, when various support services can be brought into play. "Feelings" should not be the engine that drives the conduct of an investigation prior to a court case." -
as seek to expand on it. You are quite right in that law professionals, from investigators to barristers, should try always to deal emotionlessly with both the investigative procedures and with any suspects or accused. They are not robots of course, but they should try.
But isn't the law intended, among other reasons, to satisfy the desire of victims and their families and friends for retribution and punishment of those who have wronged them? If the law didn't at least partially satisfy this desire, this feeling, then vigilantes, vendettas and the personal taking of revenge would surely be much more common than they are? To that extent, feelings must be considered by "The Law" as part of the very reason for the existence of that law. |
Admin Reply:
Captain Grumpy says: UC is right, in my view. The law exists to maintain civil order and to protect life, limb and property. The idea of "victimhood" and the need to pander to the whims of every wronged person is a modern phenomenon and has no place in criminal law. We have CIVIL courts for those who feel themselves to be wronged, and the fact that these either don't work very well or are denied to most of us because of the excessive cost is not something the police service ought to try and make up for.
Interesting you should mention vigilantes. I was watching "Ripoff Britain" the other night, with an item about these bogus prize schemes offered to elderly people - see the current Wanker of the Week. And I was prompted to wonder - why do we tolerate these tricksters? All right, we call the police, we write to our MP, we phone up the Ripoff Britain team, but why has a group of the more robust senior citizens not got together, hired a coach, travelled to the head office of the firm and set fire to it?
Similarly, when some poor little girl is abducted and murdered by some lame-brain psycho pervert, we wring our hands and express our sympathy and the grieving family tell us how woderful she was and they'll never forget her, but do they ever wait for the pervert to come out of prison and take a lump hammer to the back of his head?
I am not advocating these revengeful crimes, you understand, so don't bother telling me how wrong I am. Nor am I saying that I would do anything myself. I'm just puzzled as to why no one does. Apparently some of us have the nerve to take to the streets of Croydon and riot and loot department stores, but when we are actually wronged by criminals, our balls shrivel up and we can do nothing but whine weakly to anyone who'll listen. |
|
Entry #: 746 |
Entry Date: 2013-05-10 23:11:10
|
| Name: |
The Undercover Copper |
Visitor Comments: More Yew Tree
"it really does seem as though the investigations are being used as a means of providing comfort or redress or "closure" for the victims, and not as a means of enforcing the laws of the land. It's a dangerous path to go down, because of the precedent it could set."
Well to my shame this is a point that had previously escaped me. And of course it seems to be correct. You see I'm nothing whatsoever to do with Yew Tree, so frankly know little more than anybody else. I've gleaned what I know from the press, and that's it. The notion that the law is being used to provide "closure for the victims, and not as a means of enforcing the laws of the land" seems to be exactly what is occurring. That is rather disturbing, and breaks the oath that we as police officers are supposed to uphold.
The law is meant to be upheld, as the oath goes, "Without fear or favour". It's meant to be applied totally impartially. If we are to apply the law as a means to provide "closure for the victims" as a main objective, we lose the impartiality. The law should be cold, it should be black and white. It should be without outside influence. One outside influence that should not be, is the feelings of the "Victims". Those can be dealt with after a court conviction, when various support services can be brought into play. "Feelings" should not be the engine that drives the conduct of an investigation prior to a court case.
Some interesting and worrying points to ponder! |
|
756 Entries in Guestbook [ Accessed 281128 times ]
|