Police state?

The Met has been out of control for years - at the very least since the reign of Sir Ian Blair. It believes that it is above the law and, indeed, that it makes the law. It is a disgrace and badly needs a complete overhaul.

And the allegations continue:

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/disgraced-hillsborough-officer-sir-norman-bettison-linked-to-campaign-to-smear-stephen-lawrence-family-8686211.html

Despicable!

Not a single day goes by without another story of police corruption/ cover-up/racism/ sexism/classism. Did you see the case last week about the 7 month pregnant woman?

The Met in particular has a long and inglorious history especially - remember the 1970s?

Just don't be any if the following in various combinations - young/black//working class/mentally ill

what the police say

Hm.....Mandy Rice Davies's immortal words spring to mind!

Oh yes, I use that quote quite a lot. Well, I would, wouldn't I?

I can understand the issue about discarded items like needles and rotting food being removed, but a soiled sleeping bag that is nevertheless the only source of warmth shoud not have been removed. The police are there to ensure the law is not broken, so why would they have carried out this operation themselves? Council street cleaners could remove items that no-one claimed, but if they're anything like Manchester, you have to complete FixMyStreet forms online to identify a rubbish problem before they remove it, and there's a straightforward process that doesn't involve confrontation with the police.

Likewise, if homelessness is compained about by local residents, there are workers who will visit rough sleepers to offer support, clothing and shelter, especially in the London area. No need for this treatment.

Pity the police aren't as keen to see what homeless people are doing when they are being abused and attacked on the streets.

When they say "soiled", what do they mean? To me "soiled" suggests faeces or blood, in which case they were right to remove it. If the sleeping bag was just dirty, the word dirty would do. Soiled is quite different.

What does the Independent mean by a "crackdown on homelessness"? How can you crackdown on homelessness? If people have no home, they have no home. Nothing the police do will change that.

Another report in the Huff Post:

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/05/24/police-take-homeless-peoples-sleeping-bags_n_3331100.html

I've just read both reports. They both read very differently don't they.
The Independent article used these words:
snatched
shocking
stunned
extremely draconian
dangerous

The Met article used these words:
cause for concern
discarded
soiled
danger to health
public safety concerns

Interesting.

The Met article's use of those words is interesting, Bags. If they want to talk themselves into the role of social workers, so be it, but they need to make their minds up.

A gentler hand by the police, with other agencies involved would, I hope, have provided a compassionate approach to concerns about homelessness and health issues for all.

Do we actually know that the police 'hand' was ungentle? The Independent says it was; the police statement says it wasn't. Do we actually know the truth or are we second guessing?

Good idea about involving "other agencies", but how easy (or otherwise) is that, especially at night?

Indeed B. A good point. It has to be second guessing doesn't it. Just goes to show how easy it is to jump to conclusions, as I have just done, whilst trying to maintain an overview from both articles.

Bags there are many caring workers representing charities and public sector organisations working at night to help the homeless, and London has the highest representation. I've worked on a rota myself when I was a probation homelessness volunteer, homeless centre worker, and then a probation officer, along with Lifeshare, Salvation Army, CentrePoint, Buddhist groups, council staff and lots of other people who were willng to go out at night to offer support and practical help. Councils have routinely changed ther homelessness policies, but there have always been people on hand at the frontline to assist, so the police have no excuse for going in there the way they did.

I wonder what Boris Johnson has to say? He has a foot in both camps of police and homelessness.

www.homelessuk.org/document/download.asp?id=232

Good to know about those charities and volunteers, when, and to know that they are on call overnight. As for police "going in there the way they did", I still don't actually know what that way was. I've read the Indie article and I've read the police statement. Is the truth on one side only or somewhere in the middle?

Call me an embittered old cynic but if I have to choose between the Met and the Indie, I know exactly who gets my vote. Just think of what the Met has been upto even recently and look st their compassionate (ha) record with the poor and dispossessed. They have a PR machine second to none and pay handsomely for it

And When is absolutely right - she gets my vote as well!!

I might be biased because I've been there when police officers have charged in with their size 11s and used sledgehammer tactics that are completely unnecessary. So different from child protection police officers, who are amazingly sensitive and aware, in general. I have seen boot shaped bruises on ribs and police dog bites on legs and hands, when police have turned up to disperse homeless people who were eating food we had just distributed. Someone had complained about a 'drunken mob' who were just a steady stream of (noisy) homeless people heading for the soup van. They acted first and then asked questions later. The men who were sleeping rough complained to us, didn't leave names and disappeared. Leaves you with a terrible sense of injustice!

"“A local school, which had raised concerns for their pupils, allowed police access to a disused swimming pool on 15 May to remove trespassers."

" Local authority staff cleared up drug paraphernalia, a soiled gym mattress, rotting food and other rubbish from the location."

Come on! What are you complaining about?