Police chief. ?

[bluesj]

Don't think he will be staying in the job long! Who is going to have any respect for the little worm

[grrclark]

From a policing policy perspective I can understand the reasoning behind the decision, the senior officer is protected as he or she offers greater advantage alive and able to control what could be a much bigger situation rather than tackle the knife wielding attacker without any means of defence against the knife.  It could have been that there were 20 armed attackers and not the lone attacker that we know it was after the event.  The theory being better to take action to save many lives instead of dying to save one.

Having said all of that, my first reaction when i read the story was one of dismay and my continuing reaction is also one of dismay.

[walshie]

He'll be growing a beard now. There's no way he'll be able to look at himself in the mirror any more. 

[Gordon R]

He could have got out of the car and tried to distract the attacker. He could have done that and still run away, but to sit tight - sorry, I would rather have got out of the car and taken my chances - even if they were slim.

I'm sure he will try to justify the decision, with a few trite phrases, but I think he is the wrong job.

[Duckandswing]

1 hour ago, The Heron said:

It is very easy to sit at your computer and be judgmental but think about it what would you do honestly.

 

I’d have kicked his teeth in.

[Dave-G]

He's likely going to get a lot of compensation for PTSD and a very good early pension.

[welsh1]

When it became time to stand up and be counted, he sat down and locked the doors.
He will have to live with his non actions for the rest of his life, and know that every officer will know what he failed to do.

[moose man]

And the blood of the Pc will be on the hands of all the senior officers who’s negligence allowed a lone unarmed officer to stand on the door of what surely must be the terrorists number one target ..The system that allowed it is a national disgrace , the senior career officer who did nothing as his comrade was attacked and killed is beyond contempt ..

I understand he is due to take early retirement, about fits the bill .

[countryman]

1 hour ago, moose man said:

And the blood of the Pc will be on the hands of all the senior officers who’s negligence allowed a lone unarmed officer to stand on the door of what surely must be the terrorists number one target ..The system that allowed it is a national disgrace , the senior career officer who did nothing as his comrade was attacked and killed is beyond contempt ..

I understand he is due to take early retirement, about fits the bill .

Says it all, what a disgraceful and cowardly act not to go to the aid of an officer down.

[mossy835]

the man is a coward.so should all police carry a gun.if he did he would be here today.

[bruno22rf]

I would imagine that he was doing what most Police Officers do these days - checking that the car used by the Terrorists was taxed and insured. On a more serious note he should be sacked for cowardice in the face of the enemy. Reading the report it also looks like he had his car driven away without even attempting to see if he could assist the downed officer - unbelievable, there was a time when he would have been shot for such actions.

Edited October 9, 2018 by bruno22rf

[12gauge82]

It's always the way. How many MPs came out to assist, like members of the public did, the answer, apparently 1 (who was an ex military service), yet it is the senior figures who decides who is brave and gives out awards, while they hide away, that officer should be locked up, he is a coward of the highest order, to sit there as a police officer, he will have sworn to protect the public, he has taken the money for years and when it came to it he hid. I would not have hesitated as a civilian to do what I could, let alone as a police officer, if you take the money and the responsibility, you take the risk in my view, to run away when faced with danger, no matter how grave, you shouldn't have taken the job in the first place, you've taken the job a useful person could have occupied.

[AVB]

As I read it it. He saw the attack, two armed policemen arrived, shot the assailant and told him to leave the scene. 

I am not going to condemn him. Fortunately I have never been in such a situation and don’t want to be. I have no idea how I would have reacted. 

[JohnfromUK]

20 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

How many MPs came out to assist, like members of the public did, the answer, apparently 1

I am not known for my defence of MPs in these threads (!) ....... but ......... where armed officers (police, security etc.) are to get involved (as I'm sure they would have been in this case), the last thing needed is a number of good intentioned 'civilians' in the field of fire.

There are times when 'leave it to the professionals is the right thing to do.  The police (and their senior officers) are of course 'professionals'.

[12gauge82]

2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I am not known for my defence of MPs in these threads (!) ....... but ......... where armed officers (police, security etc.) are to get involved (as I'm sure they would have been in this case), the last thing needed is a number of good intentioned 'civilians' in the field of fire.

There are times when 'leave it to the professionals is the right thing to do.  The police (and their senior officers) are of course 'professionals'.

In the initial stages there were no professionals equipped on scene, I'm not suggesting once armed police arrived civilians should act like Rambo, I just find the hypocrisy laughable, you've got MPs praising bravery after the event, basically deciding who was brave while they're whisked away by armed protection, they should keep their mouths shut, most haven't the first clue of bravery.

28 minutes ago, AVB said:

As I read it it. He saw the attack, two armed policemen arrived, shot the assailant and told him to leave the scene. 

I am not going to condemn him. Fortunately I have never been in such a situation and don’t want to be. I have no idea how I would have reacted. 

He watched his unarmed officer attacked for 80 seconds before he was dealt with, is how I read it, that's a long time in my opinion.

[Gordon R]

Ordinary Police staff have to potentially face knives every day of their life. Why is he different? Would he have expected constables to try to help or run away?

[AVB]

8 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

In the initial stages there were no professionals equipped on scene, I'm not suggesting once armed police arrived civilians should act like Rambo, I just find the hypocrisy laughable, you've got MPs praising bravery after the event, basically deciding who was brave while they're whisked away by armed protection, they should keep their mouths shut, most haven't the first clue of bravery.

He watched his unarmed officer attacked for 80 seconds before he was dealt with, is how I read it, that's a long time in my opinion.

That’s not what was written “From the moment Masood ploughed his car into pedestrians to him being shot dead, the atrocity lasted 82 seconds.”

That is different to the officer being attacked for 80 seconds. 

[12gauge82]

14 minutes ago, AVB said:

That’s not what was written “From the moment Masood ploughed his car into pedestrians to him being shot dead, the atrocity lasted 82 seconds.”

That is different to the officer being attacked for 80 seconds. 

Fair enough, but it still doesn't excuse him being sat locked in his car while he attempted to do nothing, he's a coward and not fit for the role he is in.

[Dekers]

14 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

I felt very uncomfortable when that was mentioned at lunchtime on the news. They sat there and watched because it "was a determined attack and they had no specific equipment to deal with the attacker."

I'm with you here.  Specific details still a little uncertain but seeing as most of this has come from his own mouth it must be close.  Latest version I have heard is that the police on duty told him to stay in car lock it and clear off at the time of the PC attack, I suspect this is a spin reaction to his original confession!

[Westward]

2 hours ago, Gordon R said:

Ordinary Police staff have to potentially face knives every day of their life. Why is he different? Would he have expected constables to try to help or run away?

This ^^^

As already pointed out, most senior ranking police were brought in on graduate schemes and at management level. The "special" ones (i.e. those that become freemasons) are fastracked to the top where they receive eye watering salaries and placed near the front of the queue for knighthoods.

They may have been out in patrol cars or riot vans to 'observe' policing in action but few chief officers have ever been serving officers at the sharp end of policing. This one may or may not be a coward, but my guess is he froze and was unable to make any rapid decisions beyond self protection.

They are of course the modern face of policing which pays no attention to what the public wants or expects of them, thanks to their innate sense of superiority over the common herd. Consequently they have decided for themselves that these days, the priority for the police is "Public Safety". They can of course do this because they've comprehensively reduced successive Home Secretaries to quivering wrecks - apart from Javid who's always been limp. All of which means the Home Office might as well be disbanded since we now have a virtually autonomous, self contained para military response force which avoids contact with the public wherever possible.

On the subject of eye watering salaries, Cressida earns over £250 but it's interesting that, unlike her predecessor the breathtakingly inept Bernard Hogan Howe who was of course knighted, Cressida hasn't been made a dame. Could it be that as a woman (allegedly), she cannot become a freemason?

 

Edited October 9, 2018 by Westward

[JohnfromUK]

4 minutes ago, Westward said:

As already pointed out, most senior ranking police were brought in on graduate schemes and at management level. The "special" ones (i.e. those that become freemasons) are fast tracked to the top where they receive eye watering salaries and placed near the front of the queue for knighthoods.

This is the underlying reason that the Police have lost the respect of the public; 

The result is a concentration on matters such as tax discs, 1 m.p.h. over speed limit, and of course a vastly expensive pursuit of 'alleged' abusers - some of whom are no longer alive such as Edward Heath - and many of whom would have found it virtually impossible due to their security whilst in post (e.g. Field Marshall Lord Bramall, Home Secretary Leon Britten).  I don't mean to belittle or make light of abuse offences (such as the despicable Saville), but a vast amount of effort and police time was entirely wasted pursuing false allegations that had very little credibility.

The Police are there to protect the public and maintain law and order.  That means tackling terrorists (where necessary with assistance from the security services and armed forces), burglars, violent offenders, fraudsters, thieves etc. 

Our Chief Constable here (https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/crime/2018/01/31/punish-drivers-who-go-1mph-over-speed-limit---west-mercia-police-chief/) has indicated that he would like to prosecute motorists 1 m.p.h. over the limit, but if your house is burgled, your car broken into, they are too busy to attend.

THAT is why people have lost respect for them.

[AVB]

The average police officer will have a stab vest, a baton and CS gas (I assume most don’t carry tazers). The policeman on the gate had all of these yet he was killed. So people are proposing than somebody, chief Constable or not, who was completely unarmed should tackle the madman with a big knife! Sorry but I would be on my toes. Anybody who does otherwise might be brave but also stupid. 

[harrycatcat1]

15 hours ago, walshie said:

It's not a case of what we, the public would do. It's a case of what the head of the police who supposedly look after the public should have done.  Any normal person would die of shame.

👍

[Westward]

9 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Our Chief Constable here (https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/crime/2018/01/31/punish-drivers-who-go-1mph-over-speed-limit---west-mercia-police-chief/) has indicated that he would like to prosecute motorists 1 m.p.h. over the limit,

That's exactly my point. Chief Officers are not legally empowered to decide such things for themselves any more than they have the right to add extras to the gun licencing system. But they can do these things because there are no functioning checks and balances to ensure the police do what they're supposed to do or do what the taxpayers want them to do which, in my opinion, begins with maintaining law and order.

All the talk  about protecting  the public is just PC politispeak and it's been shown over and over again that that it's largely unachievable. How can it be otherwise when they base themselves, as here in Glos, on a trading estate miles away from any towns or centres of population and located in about the most inconvenient place in the county for road access to any significant towns other than Gloucester. If for example a terrorist attack happened outside office hours at one of the royal residences, the police, who are about 15 miles away, could not attend in strength for at least 30 minutes even if the ARU were already kitted up.

[JohnfromUK]

15 hours ago, walshie said:

Any normal person would die of shame.

I have noticed that many  (not all) in 'high places' have no sense of shame, no concept of truth, and no conscience.  Examples;

• Blair - no sense of shame or conscience over Iraq, Libya, Dr David Kelly, the 'dodgy dossier' and many other issues.
• Trump - can't tell truth from lies and has frequently 'brushed off' past recorded speeches that he now contradicts.
• Jimmy Carter - lied and had no sense of shame or conscience over it (I never had sexual relations with that woman)
• Corbyn - no conscience over anti Semitism in his party on his watch
• Abbott - no shame or embarrassment over successive "car crash' interviews and speeches
• Boris Johnson - complete U turn over many issues (inc. Brexit where he only decided his position late in the game, Heathrow where he arranged to be overseas and miss the vote)
• Gordon Brown, who claimed and preached 'prudence' whilst quietly building up a mountain of debt for us all

They have what is known as 'very thick skins', or (which I suspect in some cases anyway, simply no sense of guilt or wrong.  Some have had consciences; Churchill suffered from severe depression (he called it his 'Black Dog') had many regrets over decisions he took - but knew he had to do it at the time to win the war.  Lord (Peter) Carrington resigned when he realised the mistake he had made over Argentina and the Falklands.

I think you are much more likely to succeed if you have little or no sense of shame or conscience and don't mind throwing your principles and friends and colleagues aside as you scramble up the greasy pole.  Sad, but I really do think it is true.

Edited October 9, 2018 by JohnfromUK