England's second largest police force failed to record one in five offences committed between 1 July 2019 and 30 June 2020

by Tommy Monk Thu Dec 10, 2020 3:40 pm

Greater Manchester Police failed to record more than 80,000 crimes in a year, closing cases prematurely without consulting vulnerable victims, a report has found.

England's second largest police force failed to record one in five offences committed between 1 July 2019 and 30 June 2020 - the equivalent of around 220 crimes a day.

One in four violent crimes went unreported, including domestic abuse, stalking and harassment, with detectives deciding to close cases without considering victims' wishes in "too many" circumstances.

Inspectors from Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) said the findings were "deeply troubling".

They estimated that the number of reported crimes recorded by the force fell 11.3% from 2018 - to just 77.7%.

https://news.sky.com/story/greater-manchester-police-failed-to-record-over-80-000-crimes-report-finds-12156647

by Tommy Monk Thu Dec 10, 2020 3:42 pm

The police are still fudging the figures all over the country!

by Original Quill Thu Dec 10, 2020 4:34 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Greater Manchester Police failed to record more than 80,000 crimes in a year, closing cases prematurely without consulting vulnerable victims, a report has found.

If failing to "record" means "without consulting vulnerable victims", the victim has no real standing in criminal cases. Persons upon whom the crime was perpetuated are the “complainants”; all crimes are technically against the state. That's why they are called "State v." or "United States v." in the US (differs in UK, which are brought by the Crown Prosecution Service, or CPS).

Except in jurisdictions that have a "Victims Right's Act", there is no mechanism by which a state must notify a victim, least of all seek the approval of the victim. The police can be sensitive, respectful and even solicitous...but unless there is a law granting the victim the right to be notified/approve of the disposition of the case, there is no recourse.

by Tommy Monk Thu Dec 10, 2020 5:28 pm

"...One in four violent crimes went unreported..."

It is a blatant act of failing to record crimes to hide the true figures on crime.

It has been going on for many years now, ever since the police changed to a 'soft on crime and soft on the causes of crime' policy under Tony Bliars Labour party in govt.

by Maddog Thu Dec 10, 2020 5:48 pm

Government rarely keeps good records when it makes them look bad or it cant be used to their advantage.

by Original Quill Thu Dec 10, 2020 7:08 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:"...One in four violent crimes went unreported..."

If the crimes are not reported, that's on the victims.

by Maddog Thu Dec 10, 2020 7:59 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:"...One in four violent crimes went unreported..."

If the crimes are not reported, that's on the victims.

The correct word was unrecorded.

Victims don't record crimes, they report them.

by Original Quill Thu Dec 10, 2020 10:27 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

If the crimes are not reported, that's on the victims.

The correct word was unrecorded.

Victims don't record crimes, they report them.

So, the OP article is right: to “fail to record” means to “to close cases…without consulting…victims”. Since complaining victims are not a party to the action, the Manchester Police are within bounds to do this.

It seems rude, but not improbable. As the second largest city in the UK, perhaps they are busy.

by Maddog Thu Dec 10, 2020 10:48 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

The correct word was unrecorded.

Victims don't record crimes, they report them.

So, the OP article is right: to “fail to record” means to “to close cases…without consulting…victims”. Since complaining victims are not a party to the action, the Manchester Police are within bounds to do this.

It seems rude, but not improbable. As the second largest city in the UK, perhaps they are busy.

Or incompetent.

Or they are being told to push an agenda.

by Original Quill Thu Dec 10, 2020 11:15 pm

Or they don't have the money for a PR department. Coddling victims is not always crucial to the crime prevention mission.

by Syl Thu Dec 10, 2020 11:25 pm

"Crimes it particularly identifies as slipping through the net include domestic violence and referrals from agencies concerned about children or vulnerable adults, as well as stalking and harassment.
“The service provided to victims of crime by Greater Manchester Police, particularly vulnerable victims of crime, remains a serious cause of concern,” it says.
“Over one in five of all crimes reported to the police in Greater Manchester are not making it onto the books

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/greater-manchester-police-failing-record-19430359

by Maddog Fri Dec 11, 2020 3:49 am

Syl wrote:"Crimes it particularly identifies as slipping through the net include domestic violence and referrals from agencies concerned about children or vulnerable adults, as well as stalking and harassment.
“The service provided to victims of crime by Greater Manchester Police, particularly vulnerable victims of crime, remains a serious cause of concern,” it says.
“Over one in five of all crimes reported to the police in Greater Manchester are not making it onto the books

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/greater-manchester-police-failing-record-19430359

According to Quillie, those women and children just want to be coddled. Rolling Eyes

by Syl Fri Dec 11, 2020 12:22 pm

They don't want to be coddled, but neither do they expect their reports to be binned without investigation.
Children at risk need help immediately, and many women who report domestic violence have suffered for years before escalating violence spurs them on into involving the police.

GMP themselves have admitted they have got things terribly wrong, but it's no wonder their statistics have shown less violent crimes over the last year.....they have not even been recorded.

by Vintage Fri Dec 11, 2020 1:49 pm

It all went down the plughole when they became a police service instead of a police force.
We would get stopped all the time when coming home from the disco, shows how long ago that was. While one police man/woman spoke to the occupants asking where they'd been and where they were heading, the other would be checking around the car. If you were a known criminal you be watched and spoken to anytime, anywhere just to make sure you knew you were being watched and keep out of trouble, you could also be hauled in for questioning if any crime fitted your previous, now its harassment..
I suppose we have to progress though and be nice to misunderstood criminals.

by Maddog Fri Dec 11, 2020 3:56 pm

Syl wrote:They don't want to be coddled, but neither do they expect their reports to be binned without investigation.
Children at risk need help immediately, and many women who report domestic violence have suffered for years before escalating violence spurs them on into involving the police.

GMP themselves have admitted they have got things terribly wrong, but it's no wonder their statistics have shown less violent crimes over the last year.....they have not even been recorded.

Exactly. Crimes that harm people are the most important. They should take precedence. .

by Original Quill Fri Dec 11, 2020 3:57 pm

Syl wrote:"Crimes it particularly identifies as slipping through the net include domestic violence and referrals from agencies concerned about children or vulnerable adults, as well as stalking and harassment.
“The service provided to victims of crime by Greater Manchester Police, particularly vulnerable victims of crime, remains a serious cause of concern,” it says.
“Over one in five of all crimes reported to the police in Greater Manchester are not making it onto the books
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/greater-manchester-police-failing-record-19430359

It is not the category of the crime that prompts dismissal, but the quality of the case moving forward. Anyone can bring a charge. A lot of domestic charges are civil matters that are best decided by in civil court.

Each alleged crime falls into a category, yes, but that is not determinative of guilt or innocence. There is also the probability/improbability that the case is valid and that the evidence is there to gain a conviction. The starting point is innocent until proven guilty, and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

by Maddog Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:09 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Syl wrote:"Crimes it particularly identifies as slipping through the net include domestic violence and referrals from agencies concerned about children or vulnerable adults, as well as stalking and harassment.
“The service provided to victims of crime by Greater Manchester Police, particularly vulnerable victims of crime, remains a serious cause of concern,” it says.
“Over one in five of all crimes reported to the police in Greater Manchester are not making it onto the books
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/greater-manchester-police-failing-record-19430359

It is not the category of the crime that prompts dismissal, but the quality of the case moving forward. Anyone can bring a charge. A lot of domestic charges are civil matters that are best decided by in civil court.

Each alleged crime falls into a category, yes, but that is not determinative of guilt or innocence. There is also the probability/improbability that the case is valid and that the evidence is there to gain a conviction. The starting point is innocent until proven guilty, and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Recording isn't the same as prosecution.

If you blew your brains out, the police would have a record of the event, because they would have to investigate.

They could then determine that your life of lies finally took its toll and the shot was self inflicted. That would also be part of the record.

by Original Quill Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:14 pm

Maddog wrote:According to Quillie, those women and children just want to be coddled.

And so, you don't think women and children should be coddled? It's odd to see you on this side of the domestic violence issue, given your proclivity for anger and personal attack. The fact that your wife suddenly left you is all the more curious in that regard.

by Original Quill Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:18 pm

Maddog wrote:Recording isn't the same as prosecution.

A quick dismissal without record obviously takes into account the strength of the case and the probability of success. It's common sense.

by Tommy Monk Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:47 pm

I don't think quill understands what this op is about.

When a crime is reported to police, they should make a record of the said crime and then investigate.

They are routinely and deliberately failing to make a record of 1 in 5 crimes, which is falsifying and hiding the actual numbers of crimes being committed!!!

by Tommy Monk Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:09 pm

Crime rates are rising rapidly based on police recorded crimes figures...

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/london-crime-five-times-higher-rest-of-uk-a4501526.html

https://www.policeprofessional.com/news/knife-crime-rises-to-record-levels/

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46984559

And this is after the police are known to not even be recording 20-25% of crimes!!!

by Maddog Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:19 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:According to Quillie, those women and children just want to be coddled.

And so, you don't think women and children should be coddled? It's odd to see you on this side of the domestic violence issue, given your proclivity for anger and personal attack. The fact that your wife suddenly left you is all the more curious in that regard.

Haha.

God you're full of shit.

by Maddog Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:20 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

I don't think quill understands what this op is about.

When a crime is reported to police, they should make a record of the said crime and then investigate.

They are routinely and deliberately failing to make a record of 1 in 5 crimes, which is falsifying and hiding the actual numbers of crimes being committed!!!

He understands. He's a liar not an idiot.

by Maddog Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:22 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:Recording isn't the same as prosecution.

A quick dismissal without record obviously takes into account the strength of the case and the probability of success. It's common sense.

You left off this part.

If you blew your brains out, the police would have a record of the event, because they would have to investigate.

They could then determine that your life of lies finally took its toll and the shot was self inflicted. That would also be part of the record.

by Original Quill Fri Dec 11, 2020 6:13 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

I don't think quill understands what this op is about.

When a crime is reported to police, they should make a record of the said crime and then investigate.

They are routinely and deliberately failing to make a record of 1 in 5 crimes, which is falsifying and hiding the actual numbers of crimes being committed!!!

With good reason. Much of it is utter nonsense. There may be mistakes, but police work is decision-making. And, a lot of the decisions have to do with whether a crime has even been committed. People love to involve police as a means of escalating neighborhood, or other disputes.

A lot of civil cases go masquarading as criminal cases. To label someone as a criminal, even a potential criminal, is an invitation to a defamation lawsuit. So, police must make an initial determination as to whether a crime has even been committed. It's called police discretion.

by Tommy Monk Fri Dec 11, 2020 6:23 pm

These are crimes that have not been recorded by police and therefore do not show up in the crime figures.

by Original Quill Fri Dec 11, 2020 7:28 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:These are crimes that have not been recorded by police and therefore do not show up in the crime figures.

Exactly! They are mostly civil grudges and grievances, not meant to be recorded as crimes.

by Tommy Monk Fri Dec 11, 2020 7:40 pm

No they are reported crimes and should be recorded as such... For the police to be making any decisions on what is reported, first it needs to be officially recognised as a recorded crime.

by Original Quill Fri Dec 11, 2020 7:58 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:No they are reported crimes and should be recorded as such... For the police to be making any decisions on what is reported, first it needs to be officially recognised as a recorded crime.

Police have discretion, and may exercise that discretion when, hearing the complaint, they feel that a crime has not taken place. Like it or not, they are trained to determine when a criminal act has taken place.

A crime is an unlawful act against the state, not the victim. Police are designated and trained representatives of the state. The victim is merely the complainant in the process. Only the police have the say when a crime is, or is not committed.

If the individual victim feels that the decision is wrong, s/he can always take direct civil action against the person accused. Let a judge or jury decide.

by Maddog Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:11 pm

Fuck me.

by Tommy Monk Fri Dec 11, 2020 10:45 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:No they are reported crimes and should be recorded as such... For the police to be making any decisions on what is reported, first it needs to be officially recognised as a recorded crime.

Police have discretion, and may exercise that discretion when, hearing the complaint, they feel that a crime has not taken place. Like it or not, they are trained to determine when a criminal act has taken place.

A crime is an unlawful act against the state, not the victim. Police are designated and trained representatives of the state. The victim is merely the complainant in the process. Only the police have the say when a crime is, or is not committed.

If the individual victim feels that the decision is wrong, s/he can always take direct civil action against the person accused. Let a judge or jury decide.

Yes, I'm well aware of the bit you say highlighted above...

However... We are not talking about these non crimes that get told to police and are considered not to be crimes and not worthy of recording as crimes...

We are talking about a vast number of actual crimes that get reported to police and are worthy of being recorded as such, that are routinely not being recorded/logged by police as crimes!!!

by Original Quill Sat Dec 12, 2020 12:12 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Police have discretion, and may exercise that discretion when, hearing the complaint, they feel that a crime has not taken place. Like it or not, they are trained to determine when a criminal act has taken place.

A crime is an unlawful act against the state, not the victim. Police are designated and trained representatives of the state. The victim is merely the complainant in the process. Only the police have the say when a crime is, or is not committed.

If the individual victim feels that the decision is wrong, s/he can always take direct civil action against the person accused. Let a judge or jury decide.

Yes, I'm well aware of the bit you say highlighted above...

However... We are not talking about these non crimes that get told to police and are considered not to be crimes and not worthy of recording as crimes...

We are talking about a vast number of actual crimes that get reported to police and are worthy of being recorded as such, that are routinely not being recorded/logged by police as crimes!!!

Well, when it comes to your opinion, or that of the Greater Manchester Police, apparently they win. England's second largest police force failed to record one in five offences committed between 1 July 2019 and 30 June 2020 479860004

England's second largest police force failed to record one in five offences committed between 1 July 2019 and 30 June 2020 479860004

by Syl Sat Dec 12, 2020 12:26 am

Original Quill wrote:
Syl wrote:"Crimes it particularly identifies as slipping through the net include domestic violence and referrals from agencies concerned about children or vulnerable adults, as well as stalking and harassment.
“The service provided to victims of crime by Greater Manchester Police, particularly vulnerable victims of crime, remains a serious cause of concern,” it says.
“Over one in five of all crimes reported to the police in Greater Manchester are not making it onto the books
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/greater-manchester-police-failing-record-19430359

It is not the category of the crime that prompts dismissal, but the quality of the case moving forward. Anyone can bring a charge. A lot of domestic charges are civil matters that are best decided by in civil court.

Each alleged crime falls into a category, yes, but that is not determinative of guilt or innocence. There is also the probability/improbability that the case is valid and that the evidence is there to gain a conviction. The starting point is innocent until proven guilty, and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Reports of crimes commited against children and vulnerable adults should not be dismissed as undeserving police involvment Quill.
The report also states that one in four of the unrecorded crimes were involving violence.
Greater Manchesters mayor Andy Burnham has apologised on behalf of GMP.....I suspect resignations will follow.

by Maddog Sat Dec 12, 2020 1:43 am

Syl wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

It is not the category of the crime that prompts dismissal, but the quality of the case moving forward. Anyone can bring a charge. A lot of domestic charges are civil matters that are best decided by in civil court.

Each alleged crime falls into a category, yes, but that is not determinative of guilt or innocence. There is also the probability/improbability that the case is valid and that the evidence is there to gain a conviction. The starting point is innocent until proven guilty, and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Reports of crimes commited against children and vulnerable adults should not be dismissed as undeserving police involvment Quill.
The report also states that one in four of the unrecorded crimes were involving violence.
Greater Manchesters mayor Andy Burnham has apologised on behalf of GMP.....I suspect resignations will follow.

They're just kids. Why would you expect crimes against them to be recorded? Rolling Eyes

by gelico Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:09 am

Syl wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

It is not the category of the crime that prompts dismissal, but the quality of the case moving forward. Anyone can bring a charge. A lot of domestic charges are civil matters that are best decided by in civil court.

Each alleged crime falls into a category, yes, but that is not determinative of guilt or innocence. There is also the probability/improbability that the case is valid and that the evidence is there to gain a conviction. The starting point is innocent until proven guilty, and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Reports of crimes commited against children and vulnerable adults should not be dismissed as undeserving police involvment Quill.
The report also states that one in four of the unrecorded crimes were involving violence.
Greater Manchesters mayor Andy Burnham has apologised on behalf of GMP.....I suspect resignations will follow.

ugh, syl, i've been seeing for some years now, many comments on twitter aimed at GMP and Andy Burnham with regular accusations of corruption. Some bloke said he had some court case just cancelled and then got threatened over it and ultimately lost his house cos he wouldn't back down, and he never got any justice. it's reputed to be a complete cesspit of corruption and perhaps someone will get thrown under the bus for this one but it won't change the general theme of the place

by Syl Sat Dec 12, 2020 12:54 pm

It does seem that in the GMP people are watching one anothers backs and lots of corruption is being covered up...hence this latest revelation.
Andy Burnham, as mayor has the same responsibilities as a police commissioner in overseeing the force, has apologised for the failings, whether he will sack head of GMP Ian Hopkins ...who so far has avoided answering any questions....who knows, my guess is he will.

Andy Burnham imo is honest and takes responsibility for his actions...but he is a love or hate figure....our council tax has sky rocketed under his watch...my OH hates him. Razz

by Tommy Monk Sat Dec 12, 2020 4:04 pm

Andy Burnham only cares about Andy Burnham... And he is full of shit!

Also... What is he even doing in the position of "mayor"?

Didn't Manchester vote against there being any regional mayor?

Manchester votes against a directly elected mayor - BBC ...
www.bbc.co.uk › news › uk-england-ma...
4 May 2012 · The people of Manchester have voted against having a directly-elected mayor to run their city.

So much for democracy...

by Original Quill Sat Dec 12, 2020 4:40 pm

A poll taken in April 2012 found that a majority of Mancunians would favour a mayor for the wider Greater Manchester region, which includes 10 metropolitan boroughs, over a system of individual mayors for towns and cities.

"On 3 November 2014 it was announced that a directly elected Mayor for the Greater Manchester region would be introduced with the first Mayoral elections to be held in 2017."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_English_mayoral_referendums

by Tommy Monk Sat Dec 12, 2020 4:58 pm

That was a bullshit opinion poll in April 2012...

There was a proper referendum on the issue in May 2012 and here is the news report on the result...

"The people of Manchester have voted against having a directly-elected mayor to run their city.

The referendum saw 48,593 people vote to retain the status quo, while 42,677 voted to have an elected mayor.

The poll had been notable for the lack of campaigning either in favour of an elected mayor or against one.

Manchester City Council leader Sir Richard Leese said a majority of almost 6,000 was "a very clear rejection" by the people of Greater Manchester. "

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-17949390

by Syl Sat Dec 12, 2020 5:28 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

That was a bullshit opinion poll in April 2012...

There was a proper referendum on the issue in May 2012 and here is the news report on the result...

"The people of Manchester have voted against having a directly-elected mayor to run their city.

The referendum saw 48,593 people vote to retain the status quo, while 42,677 voted to have an elected mayor.

The poll had been notable for the lack of campaigning either in favour of an elected mayor or against one.

Manchester City Council leader Sir Richard Leese said a majority of almost 6,000 was "a very clear rejection" by the people of Greater Manchester. "

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-17949390

My opinion wasn't asked for in 2012 and I am a Mancunian. snobby

Anyway, Andy Burnham is a very popular local figure, when his term is up it wouldn't surprise me if he doesn't return to mainstream politics, maybe even put his hat in for leader of the Labour party. He would certainly make a better job of it than the last few.
Who knows what could happen in the future, a popular charismatic Labour leader could oust the Tories at last, and it would be good to have someone who actually cares and knows about the north of England leading the government.....for a change.

by Tommy Monk Sat Dec 12, 2020 5:34 pm

Andy Burnham only cares about Andy Burnham!

He is exactly the 'lies and spin' type labour lefty that people hate!!!

by Original Quill Sat Dec 12, 2020 5:47 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

That was a bullshit opinion poll in April 2012...

There was a proper referendum on the issue in May 2012 and here is the news report on the result...

"The people of Manchester have voted against having a directly-elected mayor to run their city.

The referendum saw 48,593 people vote to retain the status quo, while 42,677 voted to have an elected mayor.

The poll had been notable for the lack of campaigning either in favour of an elected mayor or against one.

Manchester City Council leader Sir Richard Leese said a majority of almost 6,000 was "a very clear rejection" by the people of Greater Manchester. "
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-17949390

That's for Manchester City. This was for the Greater Manchester region. There seems to be a difference.

A mayor for the Greater Manchester region was elected in 2017.

by Tommy Monk Sat Dec 12, 2020 8:13 pm

Yeah... Ok quill...

by Ben Reilly Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:45 pm

Okay, it really is up to the police to determine whether a crime has actually been committed or if someone's just trying to get someone they're angry with in trouble, which happens all the time.

You'd hope that allegations of serious crimes would be taken seriously and investigated thoroughly, of course, but sometimes police think they smell bullshit and leave it -- rightly or wrongly, because I'm not saying their instincts are always right.

But the UK can convince me that it takes crime seriously when it overturns the bewildering decision to dramatically reduce the police force. You do that and you're inviting unpunished crime.

by eddie Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:53 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:According to Quillie, those women and children just want to be coddled.

And so, you don't think women and children should be coddled? It's odd to see you on this side of the domestic violence issue, given your proclivity for anger and personal attack. The fact that your wife suddenly left you is all the more curious in that regard.

Really? You can’t make a point without resorting to petty insults?

What is wrong with you people? I don’t get it.

by Tommy Monk Fri Dec 18, 2020 5:01 pm

Greater Manchester Police's top cop quits with force put into special measures

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/greater-manchester-polices-top-cop-quits-with-force-put-into-special-measures/ar-BB1c2UPM

Although the chief hasn't actually resigned in disgrace... he has just been retired, so gets full payout for failure...

by Syl Fri Dec 18, 2020 5:21 pm

Odd how the day after GMP was put into special measures Hopkins health deteriorated so rapidly he had to retire. Rolling Eyes

by Tommy Monk Fri Dec 18, 2020 5:32 pm

Sounds a bit fraudulent to me... Maybe the police should investigate him... But not GMP of course, because they are useless!

by Tommy Monk Sat Dec 19, 2020 12:40 am

Ben Reilly wrote:Okay, it really is up to the police to determine whether a crime has actually been committed or if someone's just trying to get someone they're angry with in trouble, which happens all the time.

You'd hope that allegations of serious crimes would be taken seriously and investigated thoroughly, of course, but sometimes police think they smell bullshit and leave it -- rightly or wrongly, because I'm not saying their instincts are always right.

But the UK can convince me that it takes crime seriously when it overturns the bewildering decision to dramatically reduce the police force. You do that and you're inviting unpunished crime.

You don't seem to understand what has been going on here!

We are not talking about bullshit reports of crime... we are talking about actual crimes which the police routinely did not record as crimes.

by Original Quill Sat Dec 19, 2020 12:59 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:Okay, it really is up to the police to determine whether a crime has actually been committed or if someone's just trying to get someone they're angry with in trouble, which happens all the time.

You'd hope that allegations of serious crimes would be taken seriously and investigated thoroughly, of course, but sometimes police think they smell bullshit and leave it -- rightly or wrongly, because I'm not saying their instincts are always right.

But the UK can convince me that it takes crime seriously when it overturns the bewildering decision to dramatically reduce the police force. You do that and you're inviting unpunished crime.

You don't seem to understand what has been going on here!

We are not talking about bullshit reports of crime... we are talking about actual crimes which the police routinely did not record as crimes.

What crimes? It's not up to you to say. It's up to the experts. The police are the experts.

EOS.

by Sponsored content