A great deal is being said about Partygate today. Those with considerably more legal expertise in this area than I have got appear to be befuddled by the Met's decision-making process.
How is it possible for one person to be fined for attending an event that was obviously illegal in itself, and for another person known to have been there to be found not guilty when attendance was, in itself, the crime? That is very hard to work out. Unless, that is, the Met is a corrupt instrument within a fascist state, knowing what is required of it. Then everything makes sense.
Which leaves just one question to ask. What are the odds that the Durham police are also corrupt? I can only guess, but my money would be on that being the case.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
My immediate neighbour works for Durham police as an aide to a deputy chief constable. I can tell you that they are not corrupt and think you should stop casting filthy aspersions in this direction.
The local police are sensible people, have been one of the top-ranked forces in the country for a while (yes, there are league tables for this), and have a sense of proportion. If they see minor breaches of regulations that don’t lead to the spread of infectious disease then they will call it that and take their enquiries no further as in the Cummings example.
But if you want to put money down, then define your terms and let’s have a friendly bet.
I don’t bet
There is no police force I now trust in the UK
There is far too much evidence of bias, misogyny and more to let me do so
One day I suspect they will knock at my door for opposing the state, a crime they will happily enforce
It won’t be Durham police knocking at your door, and there is no crime of opposing the State. (BBC accountability being the exception)
This is fantasy martyrdom territory. Proper out the back of the magic wardrobe.
Just please stop accusing one of the best provincial police forces of being bent.
And stop saying you’d put money on something and then within an hour saying that you don’t bet.
Durham police failed on Cummings and are investigating Starmer
I rest my case
And your status as a troll is confirmed
Sorry, I’m a Durham houseowner too and I was astounded when Cumming’s MAJOR breach of the regulations was brushed under the carpet by Durham police. Especially as I’ve always had confidence in our local force…
The Met, though, is on a much higher plane in the corruptions stakes…
Interesting, Durham Houseowner. My experience of working in criminal defence in the north east, primarily within Durham and Cleveland force areas, means I cannot agree. I would not put Durham at Cleveland’s level but what I witnessed as commonplace within police station custody suites does not gell with your comment “I can tell you that they are not corrupt and think you should stop casting filthy aspersions in this direction.”
What evidence are you using to back your belief?
Yes. Police forces have for some time or perhaps always been subject to political pressure or indeed direct command from politicians. I was a regular collector for food parcels during the miner’s strike in Durham (county), and one Saturday we were subject to intimidation by police, one asking for our permit (first time ever) and saying, it’ll take a letter from the f-ing home secretary to stop me nicking you today son. When their presence led to several little old ladies emptying their meagre purses into our bucket, they ended up true to their word. Turns out it was a concerted action. We were led to the station, no charges, released in evening. Sure, some coppers are great, but there are plenty of bullies willing to follow orders.
That is my experience
What did they arrest you for? More specifically, what power of arrest did they claim they were employing? Street collecting without a permit may be an offence, but I think just a minor fine, and I doubt it was an arrestable offence then. (Gosh – the concept of an “arrestable offence” ceased to exist under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 …)
I am quite concerned about the recent vogue for arresting people on more or less spurious grounds, and then “de-arresting” them later, as if the state’s forcible interference with their liberty never took place.
This still happens….
I know someone to whom it happened recently
It was the Summer of 1984 and I was mostly thinking, oh shit will I still be able to go to university if I get a criminal record. When they took away my belt and my trainers I was was wondering what was next. So sorry Andrew, I have no idea what powers they were purporting to be using. It was pure intimidation by hardened and quite senior officers. I will go to my grave not trusting the police. Years of hanging out with lawyers at the criminal bar has only served to convince me that while a police force of some sort is necessary, they obviously are and probably always have been part of the state’s coercive apparatus, as Pilgrim says elsewhere on this blog entry.
There is a an ex criminal barrister who runs a cafe in Ely.
The menu says all are welcome, except the West Midlands police
Having just snook in Simon Kuper’s book ‘Chums’ about Oxbridge (but mostly Oxford and the ‘elite’ who led us to Brexit and Covid death) into to my reading regime, I can only conclude that the middle class dominated police have been got at by their socially superior (but bent) toffs who have obviously strong armed them into doing the wrong thing.
Let’s not forget that the rot in this septic isle starts at the top eh?
And it always has.
I think we have all seen enough fictional and real trials of Mafia bosses to know it is next to impossible to convict powerful men, with powerful allies, thuggish ways and expensive lawyers, who deny everything.
It has all the hallmarks of a lengthy plea bargaining process. If you let him off all the many other egregious examples of law-breaking he will cough to the most minor event for which it is easiest for him to maintain the lie that it was not his fault i.e. the surprise birthday party.
That it also throws his bossy wife and leadership rival under the bus is an added advantage.
Daniel Morgan Inquiry found Met police institutionally corrupt
https://bylinetimes.com/2021/07/22/met-police-response-to-its-institutional-corruption-is-a-form-of-institutional-corruption/
Partygate was not about Parties. It was a matter of Trust (Capital-T), Integrity (Capital-I) and Leadership (Capital-L). Boris Johnson’s Downing Street failed all three, beyond redemption.
Downing Street is Johnson’s functioning executive arm of Government. He establishes the culture, the competence, the standards, and the values of his Downing Street. He failed, catastrophically on every count.
The us of the term “Partygate” is a deliberate Conservative media PR scam, to cheapen the significance of the fundamental failure of basic values, and minimum competence.
Absolutely right. And what was Johnson doing meeting secretly with Sue Gray a month ago?
I am no legal expert, but it seems to me that police only issue Fixed Penalty Notices when they have evidence they think is absolutely clear-cut and not open to question. In this case they knew that whatever they did would be raked over by the media.
For example, speeding FPNs are reported only to be issued when a driver is driving at least 10% above the speed limit. That doesn’t mean driving at 5% above the speed limit is legal – someone would be charged with that if it resulted in an accident – merely that on its own it is too easily challenged for them to issue a FPN.
My guess is that with similar practice not having really been established for Covid lockdown violations, the Met played it cautiously given the high profile. For example, with Johnson living at number 10, they knew they had problems proving (sufficient to withstand challenge) that he had gone into his “own” back garden to attend a party, rather than just do so to relax as many of us with gardens did around that time. The birthday party was clearer cut, not only was there a cake and singing but there were guests invited (Carrie and the wallpaper lady) who were not part of any work activity.
However it was a surprise to me that Johnson wasn’t issued a FPN in connection with the party for which invitations were issued by his own Chief of Staff; it is inconceivable that happened without Johnson’s knowledge and at least tacit approval. Nevertheless I suspect that on this business the Met weren’t being corrupt, merely over-cautious knowing the likely public response from the Johnson-supporting press. It was extremely unfair though on more junior staff who seem to have been given the majority of FPNs; it is likely that many of them will have been well aware of the restrictions at that time and relied on the behaviour of their seniors – so ultimately Johnson – to guide them).
(I am not defending the Met as such, since they have many times proved themselves capable of behaving corruptly, but suggesting a more likely reason they didn’t issue Johnson with more FPNs),
Sorry Jonathan, but I think you are being too generous
This failing was deliberate
The Met chose only to investigate two of the six events Johnson was at. There is no explanation why they ignored his involvement in the rest
They interviewed no one
And on the forms they sent out they did not ask people to conform whop were the other people at the party people attended i.e. they did not ask if there was a party
This is a basic failure to investigate
And that supports my hypothesis
I think there is an explanation.
The Tories are going to need the police to enforce their Fascist laws.
It is clear that some sort of accommodation, some sort of non-aggression pact might have been arrived at between the Government and part of its coercive apparatus.
But it all comes from the standards set from the top and their ‘requirements’.
It’s all neatly laid out in ‘On Tyranny’ (2017) by Timothy Snyder.
“And that supports my hypothesis”
Jesus..haven’t you got any real work to do?
More than you have, apparently
I was always under the illusion that a provincial force like Devon and Cornwall are not as bad as the Met but even they have had a suspend an officer recently for sexual misconduct though thankfully not as bad as the Sarah Everard fiasco.
Take a look at the case of DCI James Mason.
Found guilty by a police misconduct enquiry.
https://www.donoghue-solicitors.co.uk/dci-james-mason-gross-misconduct/
Classic stage in a failing state. Sad local comment on police yesterday “I skin’sthe trust them to put bread in a toaster”. Consensus government is disappearing before our eyes.
Dave
This is not corruption – it’s something else – inappropriate is the nicest way to describe it.
What the hell does he think he was doing?
He should have been busted and demoted and sent on a some sort of course about sexism with the provision that if he ever did something like that again, he was out – pension too.
Its worth remembering Peels old adage that The Police are The Public and The Public are The Police so they have the same virtues and vices as the rest of us.
But……..
It seems to me that there are significant issues about ‘equality before the law’ something even Churchill recognised. The issues in the UK with women are well recognised as are the issues in both the UK & USA with the Black Community. The obvious question I might ask is why is there so much interest in ‘Public Order’ policing and Drugs compared with the epidemic of Fraud. In the same way.
I suggest that we need some serious discussion about Police and legal priorities. Then of course we need to look at the management and supervision of The Police.
You know what – I agree with all of that.
It would be nice for once to get past this notion that our police seem to be on this high wire act between lawfulness and lawlessness, with external forces able to pull them down increasingly to uphold the more malign.
I think we should be wary of levelling accusations of corruption as that implies reward for making one decision over another. It also falls into the trap of seeing everything in black and white or right and wrong, something the political right delights in as it stokes the divisions on which they thrive.
I can quote from experience as I joined my local Police Force on leaving school at 18. I joined out of a sense of duty and a sense of wanting to help others however it didn’t take long for the naivety to be exposed for what it was. I left because I couldn’t stomach the institutional attituded to race, sexuality and gender to name but 3 as well as the” us and them” attitude to the public. I can still recall the sense of unease I felt when during training, the public were described as “the enemy”.
I found my colleagues to be deeply Conservative and part of a profoundly insular organisation, distrusting anything that looked like interference from outside and deeply suspicious of change. They were especially hostile to anything that looked as though it affected their own perception of themselves as independent, and in particular, political interference.
Decisions were made at a variety of levels so, for example, a side road leading to a main road on my patch had entry to the main road controlled by a no right turn sign. It was especially convenient to me as 100 metres down the road a supermarket fronted onto the footpath, its awning offering protection from the rain so, if I was short of process I could stand there for an hour or so in all sorts of weather safe in the knowledge that I could report 3 or 4 drivers indiscretions and demonstrate to my superiors that I was actually paying attention. Did ignoring the next offence I saw make me corrupt or just a Police Officer who couldn’t be arsed with the paperwork?
The decision as to whether or not to prosecute Johnson would have been taken at a high level due to the social position of the suspect. In essence, that decision would have been taken about a member of the establishment by someone senior enough to themselves be a member of the same establishment. One might liken it to the rather cosy gentleman’s club arrangement described elsewhere in this morning’s blog, and that is before we get into the details of a hastily, and as a result no doubt badly worded law. It shouldn’t be forgotten that evidence is required to prove guilt.
In the case of Starmer, there appears to be photographic evidence of him holding a beer but, what defines a party? The Labour Party’s view is that Starmer was working with a number of colleagues who, at some point decided to order pizza and some beer and combine an evening meal with a celebration of Starmer’s birthday. Their contention is that there is email evidence that Starmer at least continued to work after the food and drink had been consumed so, at what point did work become a party and at what point did work resume?
My personal view is that Policing is a difficult job. It is made worse by the institutional failings of an organization that has an outdated view of itself and that is struggling to recruit officers of sufficient quality. I know of two former colleagues from industry for example who were recruited into the regulars via their part-time roles as special constables who don’t possess a single educational qualification between them.
If you add to that declining standards in both public and private life, and by that I mean more and more people less and less inclined to police themselves and behave with decency, honesty and discretion what you get is the situation we are currently in, and I suspect that the Police are not the only ones to be struggling to deal with the new normal.
Your last paragraph is spot on. I would add the example of football hooligans who run onto the pitch after, or sometimes during, a game.
I maintain my view that when it comes to Partygate that the Police at a high level will do as they are told by the Government.
However, noting some of the other comments here, I have to say that I know a number of colleagues whose spouses work in the force.
I have noted that these colleagues are pro-BREXIT and pro-Tory in their attitudes. There is a deference shown to Government that is quite unquestioning, so once again it is the Government setting the tone of the service.
Speaking to those I know in the force, the job these days is taken up with lots of other roles – policing those who should be in some form of mental health care and where the care regime has broken down; spending too much time dealing with the consequences excessive drinking; the loss of back office staff under austerity meaning more desk time than patrolling; reduced pay and incentives.
Not long ago (before 2010) I was working with local police officers on how to stop LGB&T persecution in one Midlands town and officers and gay, lesbian and transgender reps were sitting down together having constructive conversations about how to stop homophobic assaults just be sharing local information. And it worked.
All that went out the window after 2010 like so much else, as budgets were cut. Our local housing offices used to have a community policeman/woman based there. That was lost too from 2010.
My point is that we can have the police service we want – just like much of all else we want – if we invest and spend money in the right places. Austerity just makes things virtually unworkable and causes spill overs from other services that the police of all people just end up having to deal with as the back stop service. It can be quite soul destroying really from what they tell me. When things finally breakdown, they end up dealing with the consequences as a last resort.
I’m not football fans running onto the pitch is an example of declining standards. I can remember this happening back in the 60s.
“I think we should be wary of levelling accusations of corruption as that implies reward for making one decision over another.”
Where would falsifying evidence to convict an individual fit in this hypothesis? I consider it to be the height of corruption, but I can’t easily identify a reward.
Sadly I agree with you Richard. I have worked with many dedicated police officers over the years . I am beginning to think they are a dying breed. It comes from the top so I would like to know who appointed Cressida Dick in her very senior role when she was guilty of negligence that led to the murder of DeMenzies in Stockwell. ? I also hold her responsible for the murder of Sarah Everard as she was responsible for the vetting process for new officers . Some years ago I was producing a film in Brixton about grooming and county lines . These excellent officers were fearful of the force being infiltrated by mercenaries like G4S . I fear it’s happened.
Cressida Dick was appointed as Met Commissioner in 2017, when Amber Rudd was the Home Secretary, and a year after Sadiq Khan was elected as Mayor of London and Theresa May became Prime Minister.
Not entirely irrelevantly, at the time, Boris Johnson was doing such a good job as Foreign Secretary. Dick had left the police in 2015 to take what has been described as a “shadowy security role” a the Foreign Office. Given her previous roles in counter-terrorism, one can just imagine.
corruption is endemic not pandemic in all organisations since the beginning of time.. But it does not involve all. So the nonsense that the police is institutionally and systematically racist. Saying so is a racist agenda
So, by your definition, these people have a racist agenda?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/dec/12/uk-police-leaders-debate-public-admission-institutional-racism
or this one, following on from the GMP’s own Chief Constables comments some years ago
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-57982273
What are they admitting to?
Isn’t the answer obvious?
It seems to me many coppers want to do a good job, the issue as always is management and accountability. In the past we had watch committees, now we just have police commissioners. We need public supervision at all levels not just at the Constabulary level but at least mirroring the polices own hierarchy. I suggest we need collective oversight bodies made of 50% appointments from the relevant levels of local government and 50% randomly selected citizens. This isn’t to get into operational detail but is to look at performance and priorities. If too much heavy handed racially biased stop and search is going on local reps would soon be on to it. The police should be our service doing what we need about the bad-uns in our areas. Fix that and the rest would follow.