Has Anyone Knowingly Eaten Horsemeat?
ChatterBank1 min ago
Spot The Difference.
21 Answers
1. The passage of time means that allegations of assault and misconduct could not now be pursued.
2. No matter how far back, how long ago or how old a person is, cases will be pursued.
One is allegations against the Police. One is allegations of child abuse. It seems the Police are immune to historical allegations. After all, our wonderful police officers would never do anything wrong would they?
2. No matter how far back, how long ago or how old a person is, cases will be pursued.
One is allegations against the Police. One is allegations of child abuse. It seems the Police are immune to historical allegations. After all, our wonderful police officers would never do anything wrong would they?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by 10ClarionSt. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
in 1, both sides acted appallingly, for essentially political reasons. but at the end of the day, nobody was maimed for life or killed, and there were no miscarriages of justice.
in 2, victims are still suffering PTSD.
can you really say that being hit over the head with an impromptu weapon is as serious as being sexually violated?
in 2, victims are still suffering PTSD.
can you really say that being hit over the head with an impromptu weapon is as serious as being sexually violated?
http://
Buenchico
I'm no great fan of the police but I do accept that the CPS would find it extremely hard to pursue a case against any specific officer for what occurred at Orgreave. Perhaps the IPCC is simply being realistic?
I've worked (on the railways) alongside a former Suffolk copper who was sent to assist at Orgreave (and elsewhere) during the miners' strike. He made no secret of the fact that he and his colleagues regarded it as an excellent opportunity 'for a bit of a punch up'. (He also mentioned removing their shoulder flashes, so that they couldn't easily be identified). I've little doubt that he committed criminal offences while on duty but I imply can't see how anyone could actually prove it.
There is lots of truth in what Buenchico post up there.
Buenchico
I'm no great fan of the police but I do accept that the CPS would find it extremely hard to pursue a case against any specific officer for what occurred at Orgreave. Perhaps the IPCC is simply being realistic?
I've worked (on the railways) alongside a former Suffolk copper who was sent to assist at Orgreave (and elsewhere) during the miners' strike. He made no secret of the fact that he and his colleagues regarded it as an excellent opportunity 'for a bit of a punch up'. (He also mentioned removing their shoulder flashes, so that they couldn't easily be identified). I've little doubt that he committed criminal offences while on duty but I imply can't see how anyone could actually prove it.
There is lots of truth in what Buenchico post up there.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Mushroom
This one died and it wasn't at the hands of the police. This was the type of people the police were up against.
http://
This one died and it wasn't at the hands of the police. This was the type of people the police were up against.
http://
Bit of an attempt to cover up as well by a future Labour MP as a result of that murder
//Kim Howells, the South Wales NUM official who commented on the killing of David Wilkie, later became a Member of Parliament for the Labour Party and served as a minister in the Blair government and later became chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, a committee of parliamentarians that oversees the work of Britain's intelligence and security agencies. In 2004 he said that when he heard that a taxi driver had been killed, he thought "hang on, we've got all those records we've kept over in the NUM offices, there's all those maps on the wall, we're gonna get implicated in this". He then destroyed "everything", because he feared a police raid on the union offices.[17]//
//Kim Howells, the South Wales NUM official who commented on the killing of David Wilkie, later became a Member of Parliament for the Labour Party and served as a minister in the Blair government and later became chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, a committee of parliamentarians that oversees the work of Britain's intelligence and security agencies. In 2004 he said that when he heard that a taxi driver had been killed, he thought "hang on, we've got all those records we've kept over in the NUM offices, there's all those maps on the wall, we're gonna get implicated in this". He then destroyed "everything", because he feared a police raid on the union offices.[17]//
Oh dear Talbot
You seem a little over emotional again. Have you not recovered from your rant with divebuddy. I was only pointing out you were wrong in guessing I had posted that link before. Do you get a red mist when you are corrected.?
What has muslim bombers got to do with this post? You must try to take it easy.
You seem a little over emotional again. Have you not recovered from your rant with divebuddy. I was only pointing out you were wrong in guessing I had posted that link before. Do you get a red mist when you are corrected.?
What has muslim bombers got to do with this post? You must try to take it easy.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
