>Lord Justice Fraser acknowledged that the fine would be taken from the budget of Northamptonshire Police, which would have an impact on front-line policing.
Why is that the case if he was found personally liable? The police shouldn’t be recouping him for his prosecution in this matter.
OneNormalBloke on
The Force is fined but ultimately the taxpayers pay for it.
PerceptionGreat2439 on
The fine should be deducted from him and the muggers involved.
At the moment it’s cost them nothing at all.
things_U_choose_2_b on
This £50k should come from the pockets / pension of the officers responsible, and any of those in the chain of command who blocked release of the video. Not the funding for that police service.
BestButtons on
> Northamptonshire’s Chief Constable **Ivan Balhatchet was found to be personally liable** and in contempt of court at the Court of Appeal on 11 November.
> Speaking at a sanctions hearing on Thursday, **Mr Balhatchet apologised to Ms Buzzard-Quashie and said: “The failings of my force has been appalling.”**
Taking a piss and walking away without any repercussions.
CameramanNick on
The only thing which makes this unusual is that it was fully investigated and appropriate criminal charges brought.
It is amazing, but I could tell you about situations in which for four, five or (in one situation I know of personally) six police body cameras magically stop working simultaneously. They withhold embarrassing video as a matter of policy. It’s quite normal.
They’ll tell you that they can’t delete footage, but of course, they can – just don’t mark it to keep and wait 31 days, and it’ll automatically be deleted.
Obviously, this very commonly involves the deliberate destruction of evidence, implying offences around perverting the course of justice, corruption, contempt of court, and other things. The reality is that other than in the most blatant and serious cases, to all practical purposes, British police officers cannot be charged with crimes.
Again, the only reason this case is news is that a police officer has been found guilty on a criminal charge, which is incredibly unusual.
Mysterious-Bit-2671 on
Alternative headline – UK taxpayer pays for a Police mistake.
7 commenti
>Lord Justice Fraser acknowledged that the fine would be taken from the budget of Northamptonshire Police, which would have an impact on front-line policing.
Why is that the case if he was found personally liable? The police shouldn’t be recouping him for his prosecution in this matter.
The Force is fined but ultimately the taxpayers pay for it.
The fine should be deducted from him and the muggers involved.
At the moment it’s cost them nothing at all.
This £50k should come from the pockets / pension of the officers responsible, and any of those in the chain of command who blocked release of the video. Not the funding for that police service.
> Northamptonshire’s Chief Constable **Ivan Balhatchet was found to be personally liable** and in contempt of court at the Court of Appeal on 11 November.
> Speaking at a sanctions hearing on Thursday, **Mr Balhatchet apologised to Ms Buzzard-Quashie and said: “The failings of my force has been appalling.”**
Taking a piss and walking away without any repercussions.
The only thing which makes this unusual is that it was fully investigated and appropriate criminal charges brought.
It is amazing, but I could tell you about situations in which for four, five or (in one situation I know of personally) six police body cameras magically stop working simultaneously. They withhold embarrassing video as a matter of policy. It’s quite normal.
They’ll tell you that they can’t delete footage, but of course, they can – just don’t mark it to keep and wait 31 days, and it’ll automatically be deleted.
Obviously, this very commonly involves the deliberate destruction of evidence, implying offences around perverting the course of justice, corruption, contempt of court, and other things. The reality is that other than in the most blatant and serious cases, to all practical purposes, British police officers cannot be charged with crimes.
Again, the only reason this case is news is that a police officer has been found guilty on a criminal charge, which is incredibly unusual.
Alternative headline – UK taxpayer pays for a Police mistake.