Following the monstrous incident of harassment by Cambridgeshire Police that was experienced by Mr Tommy Robinson of PEGIDA whilst he was quietly watching a football match with his children, I put in a complaint to Cambridgeshire Police.
Their ‘professional standards’ department has, as expected, summarily dismissed my complaint on the grounds that I wasn’t a direct witness to the police officers’ grossly rude behaviour.
Cambridgeshire Police said:
Under the Police Reform Act 2002 an individual may make a complaint against the police if they fall into any of the categories below:
• Experienced inappropriate behaviour from a police officer, member of police staff or contractor working for the police. For instance, if you felt they were rude or aggressive in their treatment of you.
• Witnessed in person an incident where a police officer, member of police staff or contractor working for the police acted inappropriately
• Has been adversely affected by the conduct of a police officer, member of police staff or contractor working for the police, even if it did not take place in relation to you. –
“Adversely affected” means if they have suffered any loss or damage, distress or inconvenience, if they are put into danger or is otherwise unduly put at risk of being adversely affected.
On reviewing your email, you do not meet the criteria as a complainant under these terms as you witnessed the incident via a media site. Therefore an official complaint will not be recorded.
On reading this reply, several things strike me. Firstly those who directly witnessed these officers behaving like thuggish bullies should immediately put in a complaint to Cambridgeshire Police. Direct witnesses to this bullying by Cambridgeshire officers may have better luck than I have had in getting a satisfactory answer out of them.
Secondly, granted I did not witness this incident in person, but I do feel that I have been ‘adversely affected’ by this incident because it has lessened my trust (which was pretty low to begin with) in the police. Because of this incident, I am now even more disinclined to help the police in the future than I was before. Should police officers ever ask for my help, I’m going to recall what Cambridgeshire officers did to Mr Robinson and tell the officers to ‘go forth and multiply’. I most certainly feel ‘distressed’ about this incident and feel that Cambridgeshire’s dismissal of my complaint is unwarranted.
The third thing that strikes me about this reply is that if in not being a direct witness to this outrageous behaviour by Cambridgeshire officers, I am not allowed to put in a complaint; how is it that some minorities, most notably Muslims, are allowed to use ‘third party’ reporting mechanisms to make complaints, influence policing or report what they perceive as ‘hate crimes’? Surely if one group can use a ‘third party’ reporting service, then we should all be able to complain to the police about their misbehaviour, even though it has been observed via media.
If, for example, citizens can be arrested for what they’ve said on social media because someone has been vicariously ‘offended’ on someone else’s behalf, why cannot a citizen complain about the police if they have been disturbed and distressed by observing bad behaviour by the police? Why are members of certain other groups allowed to influence policing via generalised complaints about ‘racism’ etc via mechanisms such as “independent advisory groups,” even if they were not directly affected by the pertinent issue?
Although the police may be sticking to the letter of the law on this one, they are also hiding behind it to avoid acknowledging the misbehaviour of their officers.
The reply I got from Cambridgeshire police is nothing but a bucket load of bullshit. They’ve been caught out acting like bullies and appear desperate for this matter to go away. They treated Mr Robinson badly, the pub security staff badly and most of all they treated Mr Robinson’s children badly. It looks likely from viewing the video, that these officers were attempting to provoke Mr Robinson into reacting in such a way that would give the officers grounds for arrest.
In other words these officers gave the distinct impression, even to the casual viewer, that they were acting as agent provocatuers. This is something that could be seen to contravene the English law of ‘entrapment’ of which the Law Lord, Lord Hoffmann, in the case of Regina vs Loosely said: “Entrapment occurs when an agent of the state – usually a law enforcement officer or a controlled informer – causes someone to commit an offence in order that he should be prosecuted” The Lord Hoffmann said that although entrapment doesn’t automatically entitle the accused to be acquitted, it does compromise the integrity of the criminal justice system.
The state should not be provoking people into breaking the law but this looks very much like what these officers were attempting to do with Mr Robinson. Even if the police were behaving lawfully in this instance, that doesn’t excuse them from being criticised for their rude and overbearing manner with Mr Robinson. Compromising the integrity of the criminal justice system is not a good use of police time, it reduces our faith in them and there are far more important matters like rape and murder or even genuine football hooliganism, that they should be investigating.
It seems that the police have realised that they’ve been caught out misbehaving. Evidence of this desire for the matter to just go away, along with their rude and dismissive attitude to those of us who pay their wages, can be found in the statement, included in the reply to me from Cambridgeshire police.
Cambridgeshire police said:
“Cambridgeshire Constabulary have released the following statement in relation to the incident that you highlight:
“A group of 18 Luton Town football supporters at the Grain Store Pub in Cambridge were asked to leave the area at about 6.30pm on Saturday in order to prevent disorder”
“The group left peacefully, without the need for a dispersal order to be invoked”
In effect they are saying ‘nothing happened’ and ‘nothing to see here’, but those of us who viewed the video showing the incident involving Mr Robinson being harassed know better. it looks like Mr Robinson was being targeted for harassment. Yet again I find myself asking the question ‘whose side are our police on?’ I have come to the sad and troubling conclusion that they are not on our side, not one little bit. We should be able to trust our police officers but after this incident I, along with others are finding ourselves unable to do so.
Links
The piece from this blog written in response to Mr Robinson’s appalling treatment at the hands of Cambridgeshire Police
https://www.fahrenheit211.net/2016/08/29/more-british-police-are-truly-earning-the-epithet-of-filth/
Lord Hoffman in a judgement about entrapment
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200102/ldjudgmt/jd011025/loose-2.htm
Here is the PDF of the communication sent to me by Cambridgeshire Police.
30.08.16 – Editor at Fahrenheit211 Cambs Constabulary response
UPDATE:
I have contacted Cambridgeshire Police to express my dissatisfaction with their reply and here is my communication wit Cambridgeshire Police’s Professional Standards Department
“Dear Cambridgeshire Police
Thank you for your reply. I’m afraid that it is not in my view satisfactory. Although I witnessed this incident ‘via media’ I do find that it has ‘distressed’ me and ‘adversely affected’ my trust in the police. It makes me less willing to trust the police in the future and even less likely to volunteer help to the police should it be asked of me.
I give my full opinion in the piece linked below.
Best Regards
Joshua
Editor Fahrenheit211″
