Andrew Mitchell

Oh I see what you are getting at pogs - there are so many issues involved and the waters are muddied by both the press and the police federation.
I certainly agree that trial by journalist or union boss is not a good thing.
My view remains though, Nando that seeing as he admitted to losing his temper and swearing at a police officer he should have resigned forthwith. And Cameron should have requested that he do so, immediately.
Behaviour like this is just not acceptable in any government minister and I'm sure you will agree sets a terrible example to everyone else - it is ok to lose your temper and swear at public officials.
All the nonsense that followed seemed to me to be immaterial to that original point.

Pogs - you put it beautifully.

I also wish the press would stop acting as a pack. What one prints they all pick up and follow blindly. Thank goodness one reporter proved to be a proper investigative reporter. We need more of his/her ilk.

POGS I think you put that rather well. I don't know what he said either, and I doubt we ever will but all the evidence has now been discredited as IMO have the police for not telling us what the CCTV showed.

jess I admit to being a bit surprised at your approach. I would have thought as a scientist you would have applied logic and reason to this issue. The evidence is confused and now tainted. We do not know enough to make a judgement. Therefore the 'innocent until proved guilty' concept must surely apply?

I was amused a few days ago to hear one of AM's supporters say, in a rather pompous voice, 'we would never use the word pleb'.

Oh yeh! Eaton schoolboys don't call the rest of us plebs? Suppose they have never heard of the word oicks either

Jess

Twice now you have asked me, 'why are you sticking up for Mitchell'.

I am sticking up for the right of anybody not to be subjected to possible false allegations. Because of the high profile of Mitchell he was relentlessly hounded by the media and the Police Federation used him as a stick in their war on police pay and conditions.

The e.mail sent by the police officer, who proported to be a member of the public and said he had witnessed what happened, was sent, I believe, initially to the Deputy Chief Whip. It now appears that officer and his e.mail have now been totally discredited. He was not a member of the public, he was not at the gates of Downing Street and cctv shows neither were any other members of the public, who he declared were as shocked as he was to witness what happened.

The police log book was obviously either leaked to, stolen, or copied and hence got into the hands of the press. This log book, if reported accurately?, also has been discredited as it too states there were members of the public at the gates.

The officers who are on duty at the gates of Downing Street are highly trained officers, they will also have fire arms training so hardly rookies.

I have stated he was wrong to swear at the officers. I personally do not think we will get to know if the word pleb was used. The mindless actions of the apparent 'rogue' officer has damaged any chance of that. A classic case of shooting yourself in the foot I say.

I say again, it cannot be the case that we simply 'pick and choose' if and when we uphold a persons right to have the truth told about them, irrespective of who they are.

Thank you!!!

Although I'm not thinking of this thread in particular, I hasten to add.

I agree too, Nanado!

Ditto Nanado

Mamie good spot. I read 'constables'; the rookie bit came from my imagination.

There's more than one way of winding people up. I actually get more wound up by pedantic, dogmatic, boring, overlong and pompous declarations than by your humerous posts JO

Thank you soop. x

jings ...deep breath...shoulders back...chest out...and

And I am sick and tired of people accusing me of "winding up" other posters. I DON'T DELIBERATELY DO IT!!!

Why would I be winding anyone up? I'm old fashioned enough to believe that one man swearing at another isn't that bad, policeman or not. But not to a woman. Not really.

I don't think the Downing Street protection squad includes rookie constables, petallus.

Yes that is certainly true movealot that the police don't seem to have fully investigated the leaking and that the police federation really made as much political capital out of it as they possibly could.
j05 are you winding us up again?
I don't think it matters whether man or woman. Point is that a professional public servant should respect police and not swear at them.
Of course not all those who swear at police get arrested - but it can happen. Policeman stops you and asks you to turn out your pockets. You argue back and swear at him/her. I would not advise any young person to do this, would you? If a teenaged son or grandson did that we would not be impressed and would think he had asked for it if he was taken to the station.

Oh right. I didn't know that. That was naughty. Not enough to have him out of his job though. IMO

I thought there was only one officer?

Yes, one was a woman. They were fairly rookie constables.

I thought so, too.

Wasn't one of the officers a woman? I could be wrong.

What is he guilty of? Just saying "I thought you were here to fu--ing protect us"? Most blokes swear. It's not as though it was a police woman.

Definitely not enough to lose him his job!

Jess I think you missed a little bit out. There was the email which purported to have heard the conversation and said that there were lots of people present. It has taken Channel 4 to find out that this is untrue which makes me wonder why the police didn't look at the CCTV themselves . If this had never been made up then I doubt we would have heard anything about it. A small spat which would have been over and done with. It is interesting that the log book and the trouble making email seem to have the same wording - collusion? I don't know.

The Police Federation then came out and made a lot of fuss, demos., Tshirts etc. Now the head of the PF has said he will apologise if it all proves to be false. He didn't wait for it to be confirmed to come out at the time though.

I am not defending, just want the whole story included.

I think it extremely unlikey the police prosecute every time they are sworn at!

That seems to be about where we're up to Jess, and I must say I can't see why Andrew Mitchell should be absolved of all guilt just because of the recent relevations.
Even if it does transpire that he didn't actually call anyone a pleb, he admits he swore and behaved in an unacceptable manner towards the officers and seemed to have accepted his punishment (without much grace, but still...).
He seems to be counting on this new information somehow making him the victim, and no doubt if he gets his job back he will be giving interviews on Newsnight giving his opinion on what's wrong at the heart of the Met...