h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

It appears that a report by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabularies reveals that only 1 in 40 police officers are available to respond to Emergency calls. ( BBC Radio 4 / The Independant )

One could ask what the other 39 are doing, and whether this ontributes to the public's obviously accurate perception of police response in some areas.

The reort also reveals that some patrol officers sometimes questioned why they were being sent to calls, and even failed to respond.

Any bobbies out there who would like to comment?

Novo

I can highly recommend a book entitled "Wasting Police Time", by 'PC David Copperfield'. It's somewhat depressing, but also quite funny, and makes perfectly clear what it is those other 39 officers are doing at any given time. The answer is usually paperwork related to the last time they responded to an emergency call. The level of bureaucracy in the modern UK police force is a wonder to behold.

SoRB

http://coppersblog.blogspot.com/

Added to favourites.

Thanks SoRB,

I've been reading the Policemans Blog - hilarious, but what a sad commentaryy on how they have to work.

Before reading it I WAS going to ask why civilians couldn't handle the paperwork, but it is obviously too specific for that. Still, you might think that John Reid might allow filmed or taped evidence.

I'm not sure that Blues Shark would like the remarks about the CPS's lack of testicles!

Novo

Some of them have been dealing with the minutiae of Mark Thomas' latest demo stunts to highlight the stupidity of the SOCPA law, as this very entertaining show on Radio 4 last night demonstrated. They even gave him an escort at one stage.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/comedy/markthomas.shtml

What is often forgotten in discussions regarding the police is that they have the strongest, most militant trade union; the Police Federation. They make Red Robbo and the Upper Clyde Shipbuilders look like amateurs. Take a look at their pay agreement.

I'm not sure of the statistics but I think their absenteeism is the highest of all the professions. That's why there are no bobbies on the beat. At last the Firemen's working practices are being modernised but I've yet to hear the same of the police.

Thanks for putting that linmk up Chrsi: saves me doing it.

That show was the single most funny and worrying programme I have heard in sometime.

Funny because it's Mark Thomas...the Patricia Hewitt protest won my vote.

Worrying because of the law that parliment set up to move ONE person we now have police officers wasting their time doing paperwork for protests.

I having said that I will be taking off down to London on a future '3rd Wednesday of the month' with my placard...not sure what I wil be protesting about though: 'Make Allotment Golf an Official Olympic Event'?

Make Oliver Letwin Put A Bag Over His Head.

'All Politicians should be made to wear Clown suits by Law'.

>I'm not sure that Blues Shark would like the remarks about the CPS's lack of testicles!<

Well, Blues has just read the following sentence from an Inspector;

'I would like to make a statement about an incident I was assaulted during, which I attended whilst on duty as a Special Police Officer back in Augaust 2006'.

So whilst he may have testicles of brass, it appears that the average copper has as much brain as pooh bear. Guess which wins court cases, officer?

My wife read part of the book and inbetween yawning and reading the ofdd snippet of lunacy came to the same conclusion as I did. For 'lack of testicles 'read 'require evidence other than "He must of done it, his eyes are too close together" '.

Hi B S

Perhaps, if some way to circumvent the officers doing the paper work, they could attend more often, and speedily enough to gather the 'evidence'. Witness the family in Wythenshawe to whom the police did not rspond, and were subsequently fire bombed?

Admittedly the caught those responsible in the end, but ratther too late.

Novo

Well, it remains a fact of life that they still have to be able to put forward a case in court that satisfies the basic requirement of satisfying a jury so that they are sure.

Unless you are contending they be allowed to present their cases in mime or through the medium of modern dance I'm a little at a loss to understand how the paperwork isn't necessary.

(mentally picturing a cop miming the evidence in court)

Actually, that might enliven things a bit. Beats "Judge Judy".

I wouldn't underestimate Judge Judy. Very smart cookie in more ways than one. Though of course she doesn't deal with *criminal* law, but civil law.

The problem is that so many people base their knowledge of the law on Judge Judy and GMTV.

Well, yes. But so many people are so stupid it beggers belief.

Ah, but stupid people make the world go round. Our economy would fail without them. Maybe that's why the govt is encouraging schools to educate kids in stupidity

Morning B S

My contention would be that police officers are not per se 'clerks', I can see no logical reason why, having attended a crime scene, they cannot record 'contemporaneously' onto voice recorders or camcorders what evidence thay see and take ( verbally), for later transcription by a typist which is then signed by the policeman/woman police officer in question. I accept thte PC may nee to attend court to attest to his report.

If you consider a murder scene. much is done and recorded by SOCO personnel, and their evidence is accepted in court. This can be recorded observations , photographs, medical reports etc.

The point thet I make is that it shouldn't need the attending PC to spend hours filing reports when technology is available to negate this need.

Novo

The comparison with SOCO's is erroneous, I'm afraid. Their evidence is demonstrably either right or wrong, and can be challenged by the use of comparable experts from the 'outside' world.

Non-expert officers are much more likely to inject conjecture, opinion and waffle into their observatuions which are much more difficult to challenge once they have been introduced into the case. *That* is why officers *must* be able to write statements in clear, concise English *themselves* because it should hardly need pointing out that a third party typing things up merely adds to the likelihood of erroneous or extraneous material being added to the case.

BS

I bow to your expert knowledge with regard to the SOCA team, and the absolute nature of it's evidence.

With regard to third parties typing up reports. I can see your point about errors , but if a typist incorrectly typed up a report or letter in industrial concerns, it wouldn't get signed off. That was the line of thought I was following.

Obviously I am not familiar with hat PC's need to state about an event, but isn't it at least possible that they could 'record' on the spot for later transcription?. or perhaps even directly to a pen pusher at the time?

Novo