The 14 most useless gadgets of all time: nauseating, crappy and downright silly technology, from a…
Given the news reports regarding police activities or "inactivities" in some areas and the public's distrust, especially since the 'incident' in Tottenham which acted as the catalyst for the riots,is this a good idea to reinstate this officer.?
Would it not, in the public eye,reflect the belief that they are above the law they claim to represent/defend.
How, exactly, does this show he is "above the law"?
His conviction was quashed by the Appeal Court. In the eyes of the law he is as innocent as anyone else who's conviction is quashed.
He may have been reinstated as an officer but he is likely to be immediately suspended as any other officer facing serious criminal charges would be. Undoubtedly though he will challenge the suspension.
Dizaei is an embarrassment to the police and I am sure they, more than anyone else would like him gone but as he has shown in the past he will very quickly instigate legal proceedings if he believes he has in any way been treated unfairly.
maybe i should have been grammatically correct in my final sentence but public perception is not necessarily respectful of such niceties.
At this point i am not saying he should have remained in prison but questioning his reinstatement.He could have been suspended without loss of earnings until the new trial was concluded.
His innocence is 'pending',he is in limbo not 'free'.
No until proven guilty he is innocent to say it's pending is the same as saying you are a pending peadophile. no one can say you won't be or will be one in the future. He's not in limbo floating between dimensions he is free to come and go anywhere in the world.
He's been reinstated as his original sacking was due to the conviction that's now been quashed, for this reason the Police have no alternative but to reinstate him.
As he's due to be re-tried next year he will no doubt be suspended.
Basically all he'll be is a drain on Met resources...
Kevcar and Alan14,
I appreciate your input but it still does not appear to be the 'right' course of action.The fact remains that serious charges were levelled against him and 'provisionally' these charges were dismissed pending a new trial,it seems only reasonable that in the circumstances consideration should have been given to the interests of the police service as a whole rather than to an individuals concern.
I agree that he is "free to come and go",i do not deny him that freedom but if you are under suspicion how detrimental is that to both the police force and public notions of public service and upholding of the law.
Until he is exonerated of all charges laid against him there will be a question mark.
The charges were not "provionally dismissed", his conviction was quashed and a retrial ordered.
However distateful this is, he is innocent and must be treated accordingly.
So he has been reinstated and suspended from duty.
Even if he was allowed to take up his previous position, he would have been destined to the 'back office'. That in itself would have most likely brought further complaints and possible problems, from this officer and others working around him.
Throughout the country there are a number of similar people who are on full pay and benefits, while decisions are being legally made as to the way forward on their destinies. My local council (the tax payer) are spending something in the region of £1m a year, while legal consultations are being undertaken with suspended from duties employees.
Reading this latest report, I wonder how Tariq Ghaffur (ex-Met Assistant Commissioner) is taking this?.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.