Metropolitan Police admit they didn't refer cyclist Michael Mason's death to DPP - five days after saying they had

vonhelmet wrote:

It's said that you send cases for prosecution if you think you can win them. Perhaps the police aren't passing this one on because they fear - as we do - that no jury will convict the driver under the circumstances.

Either way, someone is failing here, but perhaps the police are just jaded.

Indeed. But, the decision should be based not on whether they fail because of prejudice, but because there is no legal tenet on which they could be won. So, they should keep on filing the cases, until they start being won.

That's how positive change happens - keep at it.

Joselito wrote:

Just been tweeted...

Martin Porter QC ‏@MartinPorter6
@CTC_Cyclists Reasons @metpoliceuk will not refer to CPS include victim not wearing helmet and not wearing high viz.

This has actually made my stomach turn.
How are we to have any faith in 'the system' any more?

Holy FUCK.

That's utterly, completely, disgusting.

Al__S wrote:

The Met is almost twice as large as the next largest police force (Police Scotland) and over four times the size of the third largest (West Midlands). Using the numbers I can find, approximately 20% of police officers in England & Wales are at the Met.

Now, question is- do they make 20% of the high profile cock ups?

There were 127,909 police officers in the 43 police forces of England and Wales in March 2014 and of those 31,000 were in the Met so its nearer 25%. As for your question they appear to be involved in a hell of a lot more than 25% of the cock ups.

My personal opinion is that the Met should be split into maybe 2 or 3 smaller forces. You already have the City of London force so why not have one south of the Thames and one north as well, each with seperate budgets and chiefs. Admittedly they will say that there are various area commands which have their own independant budgets and own bosses, admin etc but ultimatley its one force which is where the problem lies.
They also have a problem with recruitment, due to its size and turnover the recruitment dept cant be picky with its intake, unlike other forces - i know when i joined i was one of 10, out of 2500, who applied who got in, whereas the Met cant be as picky and will get rotten apples in the barrel due to the amount of recruits it takes on. I could go on for longer but i'm digressing from the original article.

stumps wrote:

As a serving officer i cringe whenever an article appears about the Met. Yes you get the odd article about other forces but they pale into insignificance when the Met is involved.
Why cant they get things right or is it because they are such a big force that they appear to make more mistakes.

The problem with the Police Service is not at the bottom but at the top.

At the bottom you have a huge number of hard working, diligent and conscientious officers doing there very best for the community they work in. Yes you get morons but they are thankfully few in number.

However, as you go up the greasy pole it becomes more and more important to 'Police the Rainbow' as the operational decisions become more political. There has been no doubt about the position of Chief Constable being political ever since the unnecessary and craven removal of the Chief Constable of Humberside Police by the then Home Secretary Jack Straw. The Head of the Met has always been a political appointment.

Do Mr Mason's family belong to a group with political clout? No.
Are Mr Mason's friends and family likely to riot in the streets? No.
Are Cyclists likely to smash all the windows down the high street? No. (For one thing think of all that broken glass.)
Can Mr Mason, his family and cyclists be discounted by the powers that be? Yes.

End of rant!

levermonkey wrote:

stumps wrote:

As a serving officer i cringe whenever an article appears about the Met. Yes you get the odd article about other forces but they pale into insignificance when the Met is involved.
Why cant they get things right or is it because they are such a big force that they appear to make more mistakes.

The problem with the Police Service is not at the bottom but at the top.

At the bottom you have a huge number of hard working, diligent and conscientious officers doing there very best for the community they work in. Yes you get morons but they are thankfully few in number.

However, as you go up the greasy pole it becomes more and more important to 'Police the Rainbow' as the operational decisions become more political. There has been no doubt about the position of Chief Constable being political ever since the unnecessary and craven removal of the Chief Constable of Humberside Police by the then Home Secretary Jack Straw. The Head of the Met has always been a political appointment.

Do Mr Mason's family belong to a group with political clout? No.
Are Mr Mason's friends and family likely to riot in the streets? No.
Are Cyclists likely to smash all the windows down the high street? No. (For one thing think of all that broken glass.)
Can Mr Mason, his family and cyclists be discounted by the powers that be? Yes.

End of rant!

The Chief Constable of Humberside was sacked because he was a useless an inept officer who's actions in ordering the deletion of vital records resulted in Ian Huntley not being caught much earlier. He had the chance to do the honourable thing and resign but failed to do so. His removal by Jack Straw was very necessary. I know from personal experience what the man was really like and he was a self serving bottom feeder of the lowest kind.

End of my rant.

AJ101 wrote:

Unreal, can't imagine how the family must be feeling.

I'm hoping that the family get the justice they clearly deserve and I for one would back having read some details of the case. My wife doesn't really like me cycling in London, and it's examples like this that give her that feeling. I hope that this moves forward as it should.