Today’s post has been written in response to the news published today that a suspected burglar has been shot during an incident in Worcestershire. As this is a developing story the details are rather scarce and whilst it is not clear at the current time exactly what had happened, I anticipate that the report is likely to bring back into focus the debate on what housekeepers can do to protect their properties and how the police deal with such reports.
Whilst I am going to touch on what the law says about what you can – and perhaps more importantly can’t – do if you’re unfortunate enough to confront a burglar in your house, the main aim of this post is to explain why it is the case that victim may end up being arrested along with the burglar himself.
To do this I’m going to consider the widely reported case of the burglar, John Bennell, who was stabbed by Peter Flanagan during a raid on his Salford home back in June this year. Below is the ITN report on the original incident.
On attending a report of an incident during which someone has received a serious injury or has been killed, it is the role of the police to establish exactly what has happened and under what circumstances.
Whilst media reports of incidents involving home owners using force against intruders ofter portray the matter as a black and white ‘got what he deserved for breaking in’ story, for the officers first on the scene things are rarely as simple and we need to look at the evidence in front of us to establish what has really happened.
People rarely tell us the whole truth and as such we become very skeptical about accepting a version of events without there being something to support it, without the account being tested and compared with those of others so that we can establish some idea about the account’s veracity.
Put simply, if we walk into a house and find a body and someone standing over them with a knife we can’t take their word that the deceased was a burglar and stabbed in self defence.
As we need to be sure that things have indeed happened as the homeowner has claimed, we need to be looking at preserving the scene and asking the homeowner some questions. Because we suspect that homeowner has – rightly or wrongly – killed the intruder we need to be interviewing the homeowner about the matter on tape.
For these reasons – because we need to preserve the scene, gather the evidence and interview – we need to consider arresting the homeowner as again at this point we can’t be entirely sure what has happened.
If you caught my previous blog about arrests, you might remember that we can arrest on suspicion of an offence. This means that being arrested doesn’t necessarily carry an implication of guilt, only that we have reason to suspect a person may have been involved in the commission of a crime.
Having fully investigated what has happened and taken a full account of the incident from the arrested person, we’re then likely to need to consult the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) with our evidence.
It is the CPS who decide firstly whether there is enough evidence to take the matter to court and secondly – and crucially in cases such as that considered – is it in the public interest to do so?
Relevant to the use of force by homeowners (or indeed anyone else) is S. 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967. It basically allows anyone to use ‘such force as is reasonable’ in the prevention of a crime. The CPS have to look at the case, decide whether the evidence gathered supports the homeowner’s account of events and then consider whether their action was ‘reasonable’ in the given circumstances.
I’ve touched briefly on what may be considered ‘reasonable’ in a previous blog and will say now as I’d said then that the topic could not be done justice over several blogs, let alone a paragraph. Furthermore I wouldn’t even feel qualified to write about it with any authority, such an involved topic it is. I would say though that the easiest way to define a ‘reasonable’ use of force is that the force used was necessary and proportionate to the threat faced and absolutely no more.
Should the CPS, having considered the facts of the case, be satisfied that the actions of the homeowner were necessary, they can rule than a prosecution would not be in the public interest and any charges considered be dropped.
Crucially they cannot make such a decision without a detailed, impartial police investigation beforehand.
On the face of it I can understand that the police arresting someone for ‘protecting their home and family’ may seem contrary to what appears right. It is, however, in the interests of all parties that the matter is fully investigated so that the CPS can act to do the ‘right’ thing.
I can understand that if a homeowner killed a burglar then it goes a bit too far but at the same time, why are people being burgled in the first place? Why do people think its ok to break in to other people’s property and expect to get away unhurt while they can threaten homeowners, who are just protecting their property?
I think the respect in today’s society has just disappeared personally. I will never understand from a burglars point of view. I guess though, homeowners should be able to use some force against burglars, especially if they threatening families and that these intruders are harmed. It wouldn’t be so bad if burglars actually apologised to homeowners about their crime, but how many would actually do that? How many criminals actually have guilt or remorse?
A fact that always surprises people is that less than 5 percent of homeowners who are accused of assaulting a burlgar are ever prosecuted. (this figure comes from cps data 1995-2005) There are dozens of cases every year where no action is taken against homeowners, as their actions are seen to be reasonable, either under common law, (RvButler? i think) or s3 C.L.A. Needless to say, the people who aren’t prosecuted are quickly forgotten by the press, the small number who are prosecuted are trumpeted for months, creating a perception of institutional injustice, where none exists. In short, since the Martin case an irrational paranoia has swept the nation, fuelled by ignorance and an irresponsible media, about this issue.
@”we need to consider arresting the homeowner as again at this point we can’t be entirely sure what has happened.”
Dear Mr Stanley –
I am sure that you will, doubtless, have considered the ‘necessity criteria’ for arrest (as clearly set out in PACE Code G) prior to making your arrest. (Did you arrest the DP by the way, in this case, or are you talking hypothetically?)
I may be slipping a bit here, but, in law. I cannot for the life of me recall where “not being sure what happened” gives grounds for arrest.
Perhaps your tutor Constable or supervisor can shed some light? I am sure that (despite your admirably enthusiastic approach) they are as keen as we all are for you to act within the law?
Sincerely,
DSS
Unlike DSS above, who is very polite, I am afraid I cannot really stomach the drivel I have read here which purports to come from the ‘pen’ of a probationer with twelve months service. All the posts and statements in answer to comments (and in most cases the comments themselves), shout out as being the carefully produced propaganda of a Public Relations Department. The posts are quite patronising in their format, and thereby insulting the readers intelligence. The information, if you can call it that, is straight off the desk of some office bound back room contender for fiurther promotion, who I suspect never spent that much time working outside a Headquarters building. If you really exist Richard Stanley, I would be most surprised if in fact you are not being used as the voice of Senior Management, your reward being ‘Brownie Points’ to set against your own advancement. Come on West Midland Police, if you are operating a ‘Force Blog’ please do not annoy your reader by expecting him to believe it is written by a One Year Probationer Constable alone.
‘Public Relations Department’
Ha I got that feeling SP, ‘its all okay folks’ line is being trotted out a lot here…
Possibly the most pretentious blog I have seen in a long time. It’s bad enough being patronised by ACPO who seem to think we need constant buzzword laden reminders of what we are here for and how to do our job…..
BUT for a probationer to lecture people on the bleeding obvious will endear you to no-one.
But I doubt that you really exist!
It is no recommendation in the eyes of Gadget’s apostles but I do like this police blog. Strangely bereft of the obligatory crudeness and obscenities (standard features of anonymous police blogs), this welcome effort can only improve an image sabotaged by dissenters and rabble rousers.
Well, Dr Melvin, you’ve probably been banned from most police blogs because you attack those with views that you don’t agree with. I’ve got news for you, the situation within British policing is appalling.
Blogs such as this are merely a reflection of the force’s PR section, and I imagine that PC Stanley has been encouraged to ‘write’ this blog by them. It bears no relation to the true picture.
Thank you, Journo. And notwithstanding serious grammatical errors, spurious claims and wild hypotheses, I do not doubt your journalistic credentials.
hurrah,
Melvin is back and mad as ever!
I have missed you and your lunatic ramblings. They make me smile.
Thanks for brightening up the day and consider yourself as having free reign to verbalise any of the images that spring into your crazy little head!
Fortunately, Dr M, I’m not actually a Journalist, but I’d like to congratulate you on your mastery of the art of Pedantry. As for spurious claims and wild hypotheses, I’m sure you’d know rather more about that me. Bring it on, you barking fool!
Melvin, you wouldn’t be banned from my blog if you weren’t such a wanker, all you did was abuse everyone commenting on it because you don’t agree with our point of view. I let you argue and debate, but you behaved like a child because you couldn’t win-common sense did….
Decent folk shun the profligate Ducreux character whom you so obviously admire and emulate. Whatever distinction arises from your ban is a badge I must wear proudly, Dibble.
Well that’s the seal of doom on “PC Stanleys” blog. If Mad Merv thinks it’s good it’s gotta be a big steaming pile of cr@p.
Dick Stanley is doomed now that Melvin ‘Wibble’ Gray is a fan.
I do believe that Dickie is actually a fictional character made up by WMP ACPO bods to push their propaganda, the photo is just an actor I’m sure.
….. either that or this blog will be wound up fairly soon as Dick gets some actual service under his belt and realises the utter lies we serve under everyday.
I think some commenters here are missing the point.
PC Stanley most definitely does exist (I work with him – do I exist though?) and his blog is not intended as a thesis for a law degree. It is aimed at people who are interested in police work but perhaps don’t have the knowledge of the internal structures and policies of policing.
It’s impossible to cover every ‘what if’ in a short blog, but I think the picture has been painted. It is not a cut and dried decision to arrest every householder who tackles a burglar, but nor is it the policy to ignore any injury caused to an intruder just because the householder says it was self defence.
In the case Richard mentions, where a ‘burglar’ was shot breaking into a house in Herefordshire, it turns out that the householder was cultivating cannabis. Not such a simple scenario now.
If the blog is for the edification of interested persons who lack knowledge of the structure and form of the police, why feed them patronising propaganda. Tell it as it is by all means, but do not dress it up to mislead those interested readers, who I assume are not police officers.
Police morale is at rock bottom, staffing also, recruiting is on hold, PCSO’s patrol instead of warranted officers and have no real powers, they are window dressing. The public is paying for red tape and bureaucracy, which Mrs. May insists she has reduced. Meanwhile HM Government and ACPO tinker with what remains of the best police service in the world. The service is on it’s knees, tell the public so that they can contact their MP’s in an effort to stop the rot.
Meanwhile Sergeant De Hayes, it’s good to see you backing your troops and if this blog is officially supported, as I suspect, I have no doubt that you have just had a box ticked on your record sheet.
I don’t do anything to tick boxes, but I do support police officers who are doing their bit to make the public more aware of the dangers and difficulties we face on a daily basis.
I know the problems the police face – I’m likely to be a victim of the pay cuts as well. I also know that the only way we can hope to win our case is to have the public behind us. At the moment, they are on our side, especially after the recent riots.
One thing about PC Stanley that can’t be said for a lot of social media contributors is that he doesn’t hide his opinion behind a pseudonym. I too voice my opinion in a public forum and I use my real name. I’ve asked people to write to their MPs to protest at the devastation that this government is planning to bring down on policing. I’ve been in contact with my own MP. I’ve done my bit to raise awareness of the problems we face and the difficulties the community will face if 20% cuts aren’t stopped. My views aren’t likely to endear me to the senior officers in my force, but my duty is to the public and they deserve a better police force than the government propose to give them.
We’re all on the same side, so why are we arguing about the content of a blog that merely shows one officer’s views on a topical issue? Can I suggest that rather than knocking PC Stanley’s efforts, those with time to write put their word processing software to more constructive use?
How is it patronising?
It’s a fairly straightforward narrative which gives us (Joe public) a view from the other side. If someone gets killed or injured it has got to be investigated, or do you want to lure into your home someone against whom you have a grudge and kill
them with impunity?
Don’t be daft, they’ve got to take every possibility into account, and that’s as it should be
“One thing about PC Stanley that can’t be said for a lot of social media contributors is that he doesn’t hide his opinion behind a pseudonym. I too voice my opinion in a public forum and I use my real name”
…. and can therefore only voice opinions which are on-message and are not contrary to what your force decides you should be allowed to say.
Would you or Dickie ever make a controversial post or one which is an honestly held opinion but is at loggerheads with your force’s official line?
If you are a response skipper as you say, then I’m sure you have some very critical points to make about some of the very stupid ideas and policies currently infecting British policicng….why not air them?
Go on, after all, you’ve just told us all you don’t ‘hide your opinion behind a pseudonym’.
Come on Sarge, lead from the front…..
Some wise man, a legend of a street cop, at the start of my service gave me my “welcome to the police speech”
“You have so little time in, the ink on your warrant card is still wet. You know nothing, in fact, its worse than that, you know less than nothing, because you still have no idea of the magnitude of the job you have signed up for. Therefore you can equate yourself to the level of idiot, and the worse thing an idiot can do, is open his gob on matters he knows little about, and confirm to everyone listening that he is an idiot. You will maintain that status until you are confirmed in rank”.
A fine piece of advice on so many levels, which has served me well, throughout my career. That and “get the teas on, sprog”.
Still, when you have the distinguished Melvyn T Gray on side, you can certainly judge on which side of the professional fence you dwell.
“get the teas on, sprog”
Ahhhh my job at the nick…
I think the lad should be congratulated and not knocked for writing the blog. So what if he’s only a probationer? Has he no right to his point of view?
What does concern me on twitter is people who do hide behind a pseudonym for no real reason, purporting to be a Police Officer, using anonymity to belittle people and pick up women.
I’ve seen quite a bit going on this last few months of supposed officers behaving in an unacceptable manner on Twitter. I think that is what really scares Police Forces and not their personal political views.
I am not a Police Officer but I am a wife of one who has a lot of service. I fully understand the banter and sense of humour but surely instead of being cruel to this lad we should support him. You if you are truly a peeler, you were once a Sprog too.
Leave the personal attacks to the anti police and understand even Officers with 25 years service still get things wrong. We are all human.
Using my real name and not hiding behind an alias I jump feet first into the fray.
I am not a police officers and I know nothing about policing – I am however a UK resident, extremely interested in community matters and a blogger. I read PC Stanley’s blog with that in mind.
This blog informs me of the work the police do behind the scenes which is often different to what we see and hear in the media and what I encounter myself of the street. I value the human side of policing that blogs like these offer, it is opinion not text book spiel, it is hard slog not PR spun, or media driven sensationalism – it is real people talking about real life situations that I doubt any of the commentators on here would ever be unfortunate enough to find themselves in.
It is really unfair to pick apart one mans opinion because he happens to wear a uniform don’t judge less ye be judged and have walked a mile in his shoes!
steph
I think you might find that the majority of people picking him apart, are other cops.
This might tell you something.
oh and the reason some have to use an alias, is because we have a special little department that loves hunting down police who are not on message and adhering to the party line.
As long as you are spouting the current propaganda, a “yes man” you are fine and have no need for a hidden identity.
If you start outing some nasty truths, trust me, its a career ending move, with potential criminal repercussions.
That is why many police have an inherent distrust and dislike of “yes men”. The “yes men” support a system that needs changing, simply for their own ends and have no regard to the consequences for the public or their colleagues.
They are the first to tell the Emperor that his new clothes are fabulous and the quickest to inform on anyone who points out that the Emperor is actually running around like a lunatic, in his birthday suit.
Then as serving police officers would it not be more beneficial to use your time to approach those in a position to help change “the party line” than berate those who cannot and are simply attempting to engage with their community?
No one is being unfair to the officer, it is a matter of a person with little knowledge and experience publicising the views and sound bites of senior managers who have already been proved incapable of common sense policing. The next time you feel unwell, don’t go to your Doctor, consult instead a First Year Medical Student, for that is the level of Constable Stanley’s knowledge. He will no doubt, with time, be an excellent officer and I would welcome him to a career I had for twenty seven years, and that my dear Steph is more walking than he will ever do (in his shoes). There are reasons for most of us using pseudonyms, it just takes a little thought to understand that. I campaign constantly for a return to sensible policing and where appropriate do so using my own name. A blog in this case is not for me an appropriate place to do so.
.
Towing the party line is what every working in every profession needs to do. You work in retail – you sell the products you are told to sell, You work as a doctor you prescribe the drugs that happen to being funded in you post code this month
I know if I dialled 999 who I would prefer to turn up to assist and it would be PC Stanley because at least he is professional
The police fight a back lash of public criticism every day and here you are in fighting in a public forum and arguing with a member of the public who is actually very PRO police – just imagine if I were anti police and all the negativity you would have once again stirred up
As a member of the public who reads this blog for what it is – an informative way of engaging with the police – as this post is just one of many piece Pc Stanley has written – I am appalled that you as serving or ex officers would degrade it in this way!
I shall no longer be replying to you on here as I choose to spend my time engaged with individuals who behave professionally and care for their communities enough to try and start a conversation with them – not just bitch and moan.
Steph, this is the real world, we’d be sacked
‘help change “the party line”’
My way of doing that is by writting my blog, check it out if you want to hear about Specials being shit!
Steph, I would like a real policeman to respond to my 999 call actually. One who may be a little rough around the edges but is basically a good and effective cop. If I was being attacked I would prefer my policeman to be about 6′ 6″ and built like a brick s**t house. If I was filling in a form or writing an essay on diversity or community I think Richard may be my man, but otherwise no.
Hear hear.
Just to contribute a comment, using my real name and to offer a perspective from a Walsall resident to boot. Whatever the pros and cons of blogging anonymously, it’s easy to be negative, cynical and to criticise when hiding behind a pseudonym.
Yes, this blog is written by someone who doesn’t hide behind anonymity and because of that, there will always be *some* element of towing the party line and I don’t see what’s wrong with that? PC Stanley is a serving police officer and this blog has never offered anything other than an insight in to what his particular role involves. I for one find it hugely interesting and informative. What is admirable to me, is that this blog is written with considerable personal thought and feeling. This makes what is a remarkably unenviable job gain some degree of real-world connection. It’s easy to criticise “the police” and see that criticism leveled at an anonymous entity. What I admire about PC Stanley’s honesty is the connection is makes between the general public and those who chose to serve their communities through the enforcement of the law.
Our law is a complex thing. I for one love the debate about it’s complexities and I certainly love the opinions offered by those who have the unenviable task of enforcing it.
PC Stanley should be praised for offering the opportunity to engage, interact with and gain some understanding in to modern day policing. That statement isn’t offered as a defense about some elements in the police force which, I’m sure, are less than admirable, but offering a general criticism for all in the force based on certain elements is irrelevant and, frankly, uncalled for.
Journalists have not had the easiest time of it of late, with recent coverage of journalistic practices and standards. But, as (I hope) an intelligent and rational man, I understand that all journalists shouldn’t be tarred with the same brush. Equally, PC Stanley’s engagement with the community in which he serves should be supported and encouraged.
The recent open day at Walsall Police Station demonstrates that engagement with communities, rather than criticising with the safety blanked of anonymity from either side of the fence, actually goes a long way.
Sorry for using a screen-name but I don’t always tow the party line.
This blog is drivel but should assist in his promotion.That is it’s only purpose.
I can only ask you to re-read the post by just more cannon fodder at 13:42 a little more carefully.
I’m sure the that the general public felt for a long time that the Libyan government-funded, propaganda media channels were honest and hugely interesting and informative. That was until they had access to alternative sources where anonymity was crucial to enable people to speak freely with no fear of “disappearing”.
I am using an extreme example to make my point.
There is a very useful role in police officers using social media in all it’s forms to connect with the community.The criticisms leveled here by serving and non-serving officers is that the party line is being firmly toed here.
There are many excellent police blogs and maybe a gander at Inspector gadget among others would explain a little better.
Don’t insult peoples intelligence there are plenty of blogs that also highlight the other side of policing – here is one:
http://minimumcover.wordpress.com/
Unlike, I suspect some posters, I have taken the time to read your posts and what screams out at me is that you are, deliberately or otherwise simply towing the party line. There is nothing of substance, which I hope is simply your lack of service.
I am surprised that you are allowed to Twitter when clearly on duty. Do you also maintain this blog in duty time?
I wonder.
For the sake of your future career I would carefully consider whether it is appropriate to do so as I am sure WM Professional Standards may take a dim view of your using ‘Job’ time in personal Twittering or Blogging. Unless of course they have given you permission in which case your blogging is debased and simple WM police propaganda
Richard can I suggest that if you wish to be taken seriously as a police blogger that you actually present the nonsense of modern day policing for what it is. I would suggest though that you do so in your own time and with a false identity, then again I know that takes courage and experience.
West Midlands Police encourage the use of Twitter by officers for a number of reasons.
(By the way, this isn’t a Press Office release – this is me talking in my own right, because fortunately my force don’t always treat us like naughty children. We’re expected to act professionally and try to do so)
Police officers use Twitter both on and off duty to make contact with local people and those who are interested in how policing works (or doesn’t)
It is used to make appeals, broadcast results, give traffic updates or debunk myths.
There is no censorship by the Press Office, Professional Standards or senior officers. If you read some of my tweets, you will see me circulating messages from the Police Federation and other sources, some of which are probably at variance with the views of our leaders.
We are expected to apply common sense when we tweet. There’s not much point tweeting that we’re about to do a drugs warrant on a certain road, because the toilets would be flushing within minutes. However, if a load of police cars suddenly turn up in your street, wouldn’t you want to know what was going on? A quick tweet can allay a lot of fears, providing of course there are people following.
I’m followed by a number of media sources, including local and national newspapers and TV reporters. So, when I tweet about something, there’s every chance it could reach a lot of people. That’s why I also tweet about things that are impacting on police officers and the community.
Like Richard, I tweet on and off duty. There’s no point encouraging two way communication if you aren’t prepared to respond. And no, we don’t get paid extra or get time off either. It’s something we choose to do.
Nobody has ever told me what to say or what not to say. If they did, I would not be impressed. I’ve been tweeting for about two years now and I’ve never been told “You shouldn’t have said that”.
Like it or not, Twitter, Facebook and other social media sites are here to stay. Some forces are trying to pretend they don’t exist and are issuing dire warnings to their officers to dissuade them from using these sites. Some forces still won’t allow their officers access to the internet. How short-sighted!
It takes seconds to write a tweet (providing you can type and there is a working computer in the station) so it isn’t detracting from our duty to tweet. While waiting for a document to print or a search to come back, a quick tweet to allow people to know what’s going on is not wasting public money. In fact it probably reaches more people than will see a patrolling officer during the day.
Some people seem to think we are all puppets of the Press Office – that’s disingenuous at the least. If there are police officers commenting on here who still believe that this site and Twitter are simply used for ‘propaganda’ then I’m afraid you’re wrong.
In case you’re wondering – I’m typing this in my own time.
I find it very hard to believe that WMP officers are encouraged to use social media without prior approval or at the very least a set of formal guidelines from your press office. In Northumbria that would have the chief herself in apoplexy as the force has a rather different approach to keeping the public informed, or not, as is usually the case. It would be a race between Professional Standards and Media as to who got hold of you first. Frankly, if you have that freedom, I’m jealous.
PC Stanley’s blog lacks credibility because it’s a view through rose-tinted glasses and just doesn’t portray the job as it is. Surely you can see that even the public will realise this? Perhaps the inclusion of some of the more frustrating aspects might lend it some of that missing credibility and reality. It really does appear to be a PR sanitised propaganda message.
Regardless of what other people think, I agree with you Sgt John De-Hayes (@ResponseSgtWMP). Before, I never thought Twitter or indeed Facebook was useful, but much can actually be learned from it. I think if a load of police cars were coming up my area, I would like to have some idea whats going on. But apart from that, I think it its great for the police to be reaching out to the communities, providing useful information. Social sites has downsides as I know, but there is also the good points. Anyone here is welcome to disagree with me. By the way my first post on here wasn’t about disagreeing with the job of the police.
Having also taken the time to read the posts, I can honestly say I`ve never read such a pile of drivel in a long time. This is just a propoganda/PR exercise…nothing more and nothing less….and as such fails. As can be seen, the police KNOW you`re talking rubbish..and even I, a member of the public can tell its bilge….Informing the public as to the nature of police work is all well and good…but if its not honest, then its just empty words…
It also worries me greatly that you seem to have plenty of time to post on Facebook and Twitter while you`re supposedly working..
like this from a few days ago..`Currently dealing with a report of s missing person, just had @WMP_Helicopter helping us search`
If you add up the time taken to send tweets during duty time, it would probably equate to less than ten minutes a shift.
Smokers get more time than this to have a fag.
What would you prefer?
`What would you prefer?`
I`m sorry…but that is a ridiculous comparioson.
Since its OK since it only takes up a little time, it therefore follows that its OK for a heat surgeon to quickly update twitter then? `Just opened the left ventricle…`
What would I prefer?…Honesty about policing, not a PR exercise… not tweeting about cakes and drawing competitions and then expecting to be taken seriously…
A few general observations:
Blogging is interactive, and sparks debate. That’s the whole point. If debate wasn’t expected, there wouldn’t be the facility for readers to post their comments on blogs.
Policing, like all professions, should be able to examine itself and air key issues. The British Police Service is surely robust enough for the “party line” to be both articulated and deconstructed in public. In the absence of intelligent debate, stagnation is inevitable.
Serving Police Officers and Staff use pseudonyms online because posting on Police blogs can – and does – lead to career-ending disciplinary action. One of the best Police bloggers (in my opinion) was “Nightjack”, whose career was destroyed after he was “outed” by a national newspaper. Personally, I think this is completely wrong in a democracy, but it is the status quo, so I will continue to use my pseudonym and keep my job.
We are a diverse service. There is therefore always going to be a spectrum of opinion within the Service on any issue (e.g. human rights legislation, positive action at domestics, public order tactics etc. etc.). Blogging allows this debate to happen, and also brings on board extremely insightful opinion from outside the Police service. I therefore believe that it strengthens the validity of the debate, as it is widened from a bunch of bobbies having a whinge in the Report Room to incorporate views from other forces, other countries, and the public.
The downside is that the debate can sometimes descend into personal abuse. This is unattractive… but sadly we’re all only human at the end of the day. Wise advice might be “never blog (or comment) when you’ve had a drink!”
)
I will be continuing to follow PC Stanley’s blog. It may be “the party line”, but that doesn’t matter. A lot of the time, I agree with the party line, actively support it, and make sure my team do their jobs properly. However, sometimes it is right to question things, and I will do so robustly.
So, PC Stanley, power to your elbow and keep going. The more blogs there are, and the more informed debate there is, the better for the Service. You are contributing to that. I will post when I agree with you, and I will post when I disagree with you (e.g. I cannot support your view that cutting and pasting evidential statements is professional and ethical). That doesn’t always necessarily make either me or you right or wrong, it just shows that there is a difference of opinion.
I love being a copper. I love helping people and locking up villains. I also love arguing about important issues on blogs. It’s a democracy – it’s what we should be doing.
DSS
It’s probably also important to reassure any members of the public who read this (or ay other) Police blog that the reason serving officers like me, get wound up and sound off from time to time in these fora is that we love our profession and want to deliver the best service to you that we can.
We are proud to be Police Officers. When we moan, we do so because we’re frustrated about the bureaucracy and the organisational culture which many of us feel gets in the way of our core function, the prevention and detection of crime. Opinions which are perceived as supporting this bureacracy are often subjected to robust criticism.
(Actually, we’re not that bad… compared to the Army for example! Go check out the Army Rumour Service (at http://www.arrse.co.uk) if you don’t believe me)
I totally understand this…I was in the NHS for 30+ years…and I always strove to do the best I could, no matter the obstacles….and so the concommitant need to `let off steam` sometimes…but at least thats honest. I fully support the police…and to quote my post from elsewhere…`I have FAR more respect for the cops who grumble about the ystem/shortages/lack of support/whatever…and STILL go out every day to do their job…THEY have my respect.
NOT a blatant PR/Propganda bit of fluff
Many anonymous police blogs have infamous reputations as a result of their offensive content. Accordingly, many UK Libraries deny access to them.
I suggest it would be an embarrassment to the Police Authority, were this blog similarly categorised as a result of sabotage evident in samples of crude and offensive police comments.
Decent readers do not wish to share the gutter with the likes of Special Dibble. It is a matter entirely for you but specific culprits could be dealt with through comment moderation.
Oh, Doctor, come come now…
I admit that you’re arguably an expert on being banned from blogs, but I thought you were a liberal sort of chap.
How on earth can you advocate censorship? Surely that isn’t consistent with your principles?
That’s the whole point of liberals: They force their views onto others, shout down any dissent, attack the arguers rather than the argument, then if all else fails, silence the dissenters. Entering into a debate wouldn’t cross their dogmatic brain cells.
I don’t think PC Stanley writes his blog on the instruction of WMP. Most of the stuff I read on here seems to be the observations of someone doing their job. I am sure he has personal feelings which he would like to express, but just the same as if he worked in an office of a small company and slagged off his boss, it would be unprofessional. Just like a crap TV show, there is always the back button on your browser like there’s a channel change button on the telly remote.
We live in a relatively free country where we are allowed to express our opinions which is what this lad is doing here.
Level an opinion on the subject matter of what he writes, just the same as you might on my or anyone elses blog. If you think you can opine better, set one up for yourself and see what opinions you can poll.
There’s an old saying – Opinions are like arseholes. Everyone has one and most people think the others stink !
Judging from the number of Police Officers in the West Midlands with Blogs it appears they’ve too much time on their hands. Try a bit of real Police Work like actually protecting your public. Now there’s a novel idea.
The law abiding community are sick and tired of the stretched resources of the Police Force (sorry Service) being spent making sure targets are met and bonus’s paid to already highly paid individuals and to crime figures being fiddled to make everything look good.
Robert Peel had the right idea, pity his principles appear to have been lost.
I’ve been following the efforts of PC Stanley and other WMP coppers on twitter and social media, a tide started by Supt. Mark Payne. They’re doing an excellent job of talking to the public as humans doing a job, facing real hassle, real danger and real limitations. They are putting a human face on a job that has a serious PR problem in many circles.
Sadly, many of the commenters here are also doing a fine job of displaying the old police dogma – bullying, abuse to those who differ and unwillingness to accept anything other than their own view. I find that sad, to be honest.
PC Stanley is a nice bloke, trying hard to do his job and also present a human face to the outside world via social media. He’s doing a damned good job. I don’t agree with everything he says, but he’s willing to discuss things, which seems a lot more than many people commenting here.
Bob
Given some of the rather bizarre comments above, as a Walsall resident I am delighted to have Richard on my Twitter stream. The information and insight he offers is invaluable. More importantly, I value his presence on the streets of my town.
I`d rather have him protecting my family and property than some of the old school masonic, hit first ask questions later racist thugs that sadly still cling on to police service pensions.
PC Stanley proves that ACAB is not true.
PC Stanley may not be in a position to rant and rave from behind the riot shield of anonymity, but at least he is making a worthwhile effort to give some idea of what the job is like to the public of Walsall, who are lucky to have a number of social-media active officers at every level willing to engage with them online – even in their own time.
I’ve had the privilege of coming into contact with the human face of policing in Walsall more in the past year than in the past fifty, thanks to initiatives like this blog and the other guys on twitter, senior and junior officers alike, which have led me to actually meet and talk face-to-face to police in the town, and it does a lot to counter the image of the bullying, arrogant headbangers whom we regularly see on the telly.
We members of the public already know what our wonderful unelected government is doing to our police force, our local government, our armed services and our NHS.
Attacking our local coppers on here because you feel hard done by on your own patch simply gets you less sympathy, not more.
Go take the fight to the real enemy – our clueless, pussy-obsessed Home Secretary.
Dear Mr Williams
PC Stanley is writing an “officially sanctioned” blog so ‘ranting and raving’ is probably not something he would need do here. If, in his own time, he wishes to engage with the wider debate in a more contentious manner, he would be well advised to do so under a pseudonym, for reasons which are well documented.
We (us Bobbies) are in general all engaged with our own communities, and we all spend a lot of off duty time resolving local issues and “policing” with a small “P”. I can’t even go for a pint without having to defend public order tactics (or whatever) down the pub. I’m not moaning, it’s part and parcel of the job.
Where I live, we Bobbies aren’t “social media active” so much as socially active. Coppers run the Scouts, serve on the lifeboat, coach junior rugby and soccer teams, are school governors etc. etc. etc. … the list is endless.
I note your frustration with the current round of cuts. I think you will find we (i.e. Plod) all share your view, by and large. What many of my colleagues are reacting or perhaps over-reacting to (in precisely this context) is those whom they percieve as being unwilling to tell the Emperor that his new clothes don’t exist.
I don’t think anyone here is commenting on local issues: that’s up to you guys to sort out for yourselves.
My take is that when a blogger starts to give opinions on issues at the national level, then they will be subject to scrutiny and comment from a wider audience. This is what is happening here.
Personally, I welcome this. Open debate about the future of policing is what is needed. (In fact, it is robustly argued elsewhere that a Royal Commission on Policing is what is really needed).
I’m sure that PC Richard Stanley (like me, and every other copper in the world) will have noticed, that when you swear the oath, put on the uniform, and walk out on the street to try to make a difference, you attract comment. Some of that is critical. If he hasn’t already done so, I am sure he will develop the “skin of a rhino”. @RS – the last 24 hours may have ben instructive – get it in your SOLAP
)
However, criticism is healthy. So, too, your defence of him is healthy. The way that others take issue with him is healthy as well (if they make coherent arguments and do not descend into personal abuse). The more engagement we have around these issues, the better. I strongly believe that if more people switched off Big Brother or the X Factor and re-engaged with politics (with a small “P”, in the widest sense, from the local to the national) then that would be “A Good Thing For The Country”.
We (Plod) do not have the ability to take on Catwoman – we’re not allowed to. That would constitute “Causing Disaffection” an offence against the Police Act 1996. All we can do is moan, and passively pass the ball to you. (And actually, that’s the reason why you get negativity from coppers on blogs like this. Please take the hint!).
Over to you – you obviously care. So do those whose comments you perceive as negative. If they weren’t bothered by all this, they wouldn’t be posting.
Yours sincerely
DSS
Any chance you might put in for my boss’s job?
I really appreciate the posts from PC Richard Stanley. Having worked closely with different police officers on community projects, I see the value of the community getting to know the police officers that serve us in different ways. Whether that be a blog about policing issues or tweets about cakes. These all pave the way to building relationships with the public
I will say well done to PC Stanley and his fellow WMP officers who regularly engage members of the public via various social media sites.
What i can’t see is the point of all the negative comments against what is essentially one officer’s personal efforts to portray his role in public service.
Here in Walsall there has clearly been public support in this open approach as shown by the fantastic attendance at the recent open day at the police station (despite the rain). We should welcome the opportunity for discussion rather than the snide comments posted above.
Imran
Dear Mr Azam
What I said above
yours sincerely
DSS
Imran, I’d like you to just consider the possibility of PC Stanley’s blog being a complete fabrication of the true picture of a police officer’s job, It’s not just untrue, it’s patronising and insulting. He isn’t ‘engaging’ you, he’s delivering policy.
A single question if I might be permitted?
PC Stanley are you on the HPDS?
If he is I will make sure he buys me a pint the next time we are at Bramshill on a “Masterclass”. Just for taking up so much of my time.
‘HPDS’ and ‘twunt’ are not necessarily coterminous, Randomer. I myself am living proof of that
Not necessarily but you could say commonly… certainly round these parts.
Still don’t understand why HPDS exists anyway.
As a last stand against “Direct Entry”, Randomer.
One day I will be ACPO and I _will_ sort it out. But for now I’m just shovellin’ shite…
Oops sorry West Mids – immoderate langiage.
Please delete my last post
Theres nothing wrong with what PC Stanley writes, it is though not really a blog as we know it. One expects a blog to be personal, and to reflect the bloggers personal view or recount something that the blogger has done or witnessed; something at least personal to the blogger.
This blog seems to be the apparently, young, and enthusiastic officer, recounting the party line. There are some very nice Janet and John bits where he tells us what he learnt about PACE, reasonable force and all that, there is nothing wrong with that. I felt it was almost if he had had the lesson the day before and went home and posted.
What he does not tell us is anything about the reality of policing. The only really realistic portrait of policing he gives is a cut and paste from another blog, the experience of another officer. (Minimum cover).
He describes himself as a Geek, I rather see him as a teachers pet, saying things he thinks his bosses would like to hear.
If he is to continue blogging I would really like to know what he has actually done in policing and how he feels about that. It is interesting for an officer so young in service to go public with his view, and it would be a useful experiment to compare what he thinks now with what he thinks in 10 years time.
Some people may like the sort of press release feel of his blog, it however says nothing to me about PC Stanleys policing experiences, and might as well come from West Mids PR department although I accept it does not.
Does PC Stanley see his future as a PR type chap rather than a street cop?
A large number of comments have been critical of PC Stanley’s blog, and there’s been a moderate number of comments in support of him, but then the pattern changes and a number of comments suddenly have become somewhat biased in his ‘favour’. A modern day Glavit alive and well.
Glav_l_it, Journo. Glavlit.
With an “L”
(Главное управление по охране государственных тайн в печати при СМ СССР)
I know it’s late, but that’s no excuse for slackness.
Next thing you’ll be mass producing statements and cut and pasting evidence?
Although I think a more appropriate designation would be GOSKOMIZDAT – VГоскомиздат – not GLASLIT, on reflection.
Sorry, I know that’s all a bit anal… Go ask the Box: the devil’s in the detail…
PS I remember loving Dolph Lundgren in Red Scorpion when he trashed that bar! – “Soyuz nerushim’i respublik svovbodnik”!! Awesome.
As yesterday progressed, the line of demarcation between commenters became very pronounced.
Anonymous psychopaths, liars and fools resorted to the cyberspace equivalent of a cavalry charge upon calm but assertive protestors.
Waves of abuse and nonsense were substituted for physical violence.
Melvin
You never fail to make me smile. I really have to thank you for raising my morale, at a time when it is non existent in the service and 90% of officers believe morale at rock bottom, frantically digging for new lows.
You are something special. Keep using that gift to raise a smile.
Stay mad my friend!
I think I will avoid this blog from here on. I get enough of this soul destroying propaganda in duty time, without feeling like I have been put in a communist re education camp, when I am off duty as well.
Still, well done to the author. You seem to have firmly secured your reputation and position, whatever our individual view point of what that positions ethical standing is.
Right, I’m off to catch baddies & protect decent members of the public
“Right, I’m off to catch baddies & protect decent members of the public”
Bye. The good people of Gotham City need you.
Pc Stanley, This was a good blog, in my opinion, which was aimed at explaining a topical subject to members of the public. I am appalled & embarrassed by the negativity & unprofessionalism posted by some of our, so called colleagues. Keep calm & carry on …
For goodness sake leave the poor fellow alone, his blog might be boring for well established and experienced police officers, cos, of course, they know it all, but for those of the general public who are not fully cognisant with the law it’s a fascinating insight into daily police work. I admire his enthusiasm and his obvious love of a job that most of us wouldn’t want to take on. I’m not surprised that most of the vitriol spouted against him here comes from other police officers, I’ve seen it in other professions and it’s called Tall Poppy Syndrome!
Richard you may have “ducked out” so far from answering anything at all that has been highlighted here but at some point as a serving officer you will have to prove your ‘brass’.
If this is an interactive, “engaging with the public blog” then you should at least think about the Peelian? principles.
Engage and answer some of the points raised by fellow officers.
Your silence and constant re-tweeting about creme eggs does the police no favours; neither you nor the senior members of the police service you purport to serve,
Okay, haven given some time for the discussion to develop and taken into account what people have said I’ll add the following –
First of all, the target audience of my blog is members of the public. I try to write about topics of public interest in such a way that they can be understood and I write in a manner that I hope is accessible.
Secondly, the feedback on this post so far has been split between the readership of the Inspector Gadget blog (overly critical) and members of the public (more positive) and this suggests the aim of my blog is being achieved.
I am not writing to satisfy the readership of Inspector Gadget’s blog, I am writing for members of the public who are interested but not conversant in policing and over the span of more than seventy posts, feedback from the public has been excellent.
I believe the aim of the posts left by some members of the Gadget readership is well encapsulated by Druid Shift Skipper’s comment “I’m going to “follow” him and make unhelpful comments. A lot. You may wish to do this too…”.
Unhelpful comments they are and little more.
Perhaps then, in the interests of ‘writing for members of the public who are interested but not conversant in policing’, you might offer more information than is already freely available on many force websites. You aren’t offering anything like a true insight into police work, but a carefully sanitised version. I’m not suggesting a clone of Inspector Gadget, but perhaps an element of the challenges faced by officers from dealing with both the public and from their own force. By all means miss out the cynicism but tell it like it really is, including the good bits that so often get overshadowed by the internal bureaucracy and management issues.
The majority of the posts on this blog, again written for members of the public, are designed to be informative and accessible. They are written with these aims in mind and the feedback has always been strong.
The blog is not meant to stand alone – I find the Twitter stream a far more effective way of giving an insight into police work and if I spend a whole shift on a cell watch, at the hospital or working on a file upgrade I have no qualms in telling people such.
Some of the followers have been surprised at the time often spent on tasks such as these and other similar duties, like chasing after the same missing persons and arresting the same people over and over, but I joined because people are interested in what we spend our time doing and social media has been a great way of telling them.
I write and give updates from one point of view, Gadget from another and there are many other police blogs and feeds, both official and anonymous, available for the public to read, all offering different perspectives. All are accessible by the public and I think the by taking in the wide range of viewpoints represented, they can make up their own minds about the ‘reality’ of police work.
2 points to make here -
He is trying to educate and explain to MOP why certain courses of action are taken, not teach granny to suck eggs!!!
If you don’t like what he posts, don’t follow!!
I say well done, great job, keep it up
Richard, if you wanted to inform and educate then you could do better by looking at Nightjack’s ex-blog.
Unfortunately the way I read you is a bit patronising, very basic, very ACPO and not very interesting.
Sorry.
Horses for courses. You obviously put a lot of work into this. It’s not my cup of tea, but hey ho, I’m not going to criticise.
Get out there, feel some collars, learn about the pitfalls of this job AND THEN blog about it! Or better still, get out on foot and be in the right places at the right times so that the public can come and talk to you.
We gain the trust and the respect of the public by doing it, not talking about it.
PC Stanley, I do believe you are getting confused.
From a previous post of yours “Paperwork is part of our job and probably always will be. It’ll never be a big part though.”
From a reply of yours above “if I spend a whole shift on a cell watch, at the hospital or working on a file upgrade”
So, you could spend a whole shift doing a file upgrade, but paperwork will never be a big part of the job?
I tell you, I hope defence solicitors start reading your blog. Especially the part about cut and paste statements. I’d love to be the brief for one of your jobs and be able to refer to that in court.
So here’s a question, you arrest someone 20 minutes after you start work for burglary. You find them in the building and arrest them. What paperwork do you have to complete? Include everything you do, pocketbook, forms and entries on computer systems, then tell us all how long that takes? Do you have civvies that do some of it for you or do you do it all yourself? How long do you spend usually trying to get through to the crime recording centre? How long does it take for you to get a CPS charging decision?
My point is that whilst we do occasionally (and my last was at least two months ago) have to spend a shift putting together a file, it is far from the norm. Paperwork is part of the job and I’d not argue otherwise, in my job and in my role though it is not the dominant part.
Proforma statements are not uncommon and the file build program we use offers a range of them to use as templates which helps save a lot of time. The types of statements that we complete on a regular basis – arrests, exhibit production etc – usually follow a common structure which means using a template is appropriate and only serves to make their completion quicker.
There are too many variables to give any idea for a burglary arrest, not least because officers on a response shift wouldn’t be dealing with a burglary post arrest.
I’m happy to accept though that some jobs can take a considerably amount of time to deal with, but then this said the time spent on a job tends to be proportionate to the seriousness of the incident.
To take an example from my last shift, taking details for a robbery took me and my colleague nearly five hours. This involved taking two detailed statements, seizing exhibits, taking photographs, visiting CCTV control to obtain camera footage, booking items into property, writing statements of our own concerning the exhibits, completing crime reports, offender body maps and investigation records and also conducting intelligence checks.
This is the exception rather than the rule though and is readily justified for an offence such as robbery which demands thorough enquiries.
What is not representative is to imply that a minor incident necessitates the completion of twenty something different forms that see us restricted to the station for an entire shift as simply put, it wouldn’t.
“This is the exception rather than the rule though and is readily justified for an offence such as robbery which demands thorough enquiries.
What is not representative is to imply that a minor incident necessitates the completion of twenty something different forms that see us restricted to the station for an entire shift as simply put, it wouldn’t.”
This statement alone says a lot for you. You are clearly not very often on the street taking jobs or when you are, you are ducking the jobs that involve paperwork. Not surprising to an extent as this blog and twitter must take up a lot of time.
If you were truly busy, you would find yourself tied to a desk a lot as most jobs generate paperwork, even the ‘minor incidents’. There is no such thing as a minor incident anyway as to the victim in that incident, this is very high on their priorities.
As a Probationer, you should be snowed under with paperwork due to volunteering for every job to gain the valuable experience that every incident holds for you.
As a future leader, you should be taking a pride in making sure that you know as much as possible to ensure that you become a credible leader, even with the lack of service that you will have on accelerated promotion or whatever it’s called now.
It’s nice that you are receiving support from your community for keeping them appraised of what you feel is important. Sadly to those of us time served it comes across as contrived and an attempt to popularise yourself with your chiefs. Your public would be better served and much happier to have you on their street corners reducing crime and nicking the bad guys, a pastime well spent!
You see, I’m concerned that you have not even had sight of a job such as the one that you describe to be able to pass comment upon. The rest of us, sadly, have seen too many.
Good luck
Harry, the blog isn’t maintained whilst on duty and the cumulative time taken to update the twitter feed throughout a shift would be less than the length of a cigarette break. Neither are at a distraction to my work as a response officer and I’m as busy as any other officer on my team as we’re all doing the same thing, going to the same jobs and dealing with the same incidents.
My length of service makes no difference when it comes to realising the aims of the blog – to explain to the public matters of law and procedure – and has received good feedback from people stating they have found it helpful. The blog may not appeal to some police officers but then I’d not expect it to, it’s written to be understood by people with no grounding in the law.
I don’t disagree that many incidents do generate paperwork, I do disagree with the assertion made previously that the paperwork is often excessive and disproportionate. I’m writing as a response officer and am well aware the amount of time spent filling in forms varies between departments and forces. I’m simply stating that from my point of view as a front line officer, the paperwork isn’t as much an issue as some people would imply.
You know what, I for one like following what PC Richard Stanley has to say, both here and on Twitter, no i’m not a police officer, i’m a normal run of the mill general public person.
One thing I must say after trawling through all the drivel and defamation of character posted in the comments, I am totally disgusted by the so called police officers who have commented on here. You should be bloody ashamed of your selves, you all sound like a bunch of school kids, in the playground. I suggest you grow up and start acting like the police officers you are meant to be. Shame on you all!!!!!
PC Stanley, keep up the good work
“Shame on you all!!!!!”
There can be little doubt that UK police have brought much shame upon themselves.
Until the true identities of all police who submitted obscenities and abuse to ‘Inspector Gadget’ and other police blogs are known, it would be foolish to place PC Stanley himself, beyond suspicion.