It seems that a particularly odious bully, who was abusing his position of trust, has received his just desserts. Four years might not seem a long time, but for a man of good character, two years in prison, of whatever category, are going to be distinctly unpleasant. For a policeman, it's going to be even worse.
He'll certainly lose weight, let's put it that way. Maybe he'll be joined by some MPs in due course?
On a side note, can anyone guess in which county a practising coroner has a conviction for perverting the course of justice?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Coincidentally, his website expired yesterday.
ReplyDelete"Registrant:
albaghdadi waad (469387)
30 hoylake road
east acton
7np w3
GB
Domain name: alidizaei.com
Administrative and Technical contact:
Master Host (HM6761)
One.com
Kalvebod Brygge 45
Copenhagen V 1560
DK
hostmaster@one.com
45.46907100 Fax: 45.70205872
Record created: 2008-07-02 18: 54: 33
Record last updated: 2008-07-02 18: 54: 45
Record expires: 2010-07-02 00: 00: 00
"
The convicted Coroner:
ReplyDeleteWell, Mr Prosecutor, Google doesn't seem to know so I guess you will have to tell us!
out of curiosity when do you expect the other 142,000 or so uniformed bully boys to be prosecuted, its a start, but we all know Dizaei is but a drop in the ocean.
ReplyDeleteIf there is such a creature as a practising coroner in this country (albeit there are several overseas) who has a conviction for perverting the course of justice, then it seemingly wasn't in connection with the discharge of his duty as coroner, otherwise proceedings under section 3(5) of the Coroners Act (which provides that a coroner found guilty of corruption, wilful neglect of duty or misbehaviour in the discharge of his duty shall be liable to conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or a fine or to both) should have been taken, with a follow up under section 3(6)...a possible order by the Court for removal from office as Coroner.
ReplyDeleteNeither has the Lord Chancellor seen fit to exercise his section 3(4) powers of removal.
Apparently (and regardless of the optional nature of the section 3(6) order) no case of a section 3(5) conviction, from the past decade or so, is known to the relevant Secretary of State, and he should know... (shouldn't he?).
So you raised the topic, please give us a few clues...else we needs answer "no, we cannot guess" to your query.
Yes, bullying of members of the public is unfortunately rather widespread. A common example is harassing photographers. See here for a typical example -- police officers being less than precise about their powers, and an intelligent person asking probing questions. Result: arrest, DNA swabs, custody.
ReplyDeleteAs for the coroner, I will post up a name in due course.
Full details re: naughty coroner in a week or two -- I am planning to see if the county in question wishes to comment first. Feels almost like journalism.
ReplyDeleteRather a sweping generalisation from Thomas Grenaway. I'm surprised no-one else has picked up on that aspect.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the incident reported in the Guardian and linked to by the anon prosecutor, if I was their skipper they'd have been given some pithy advice about a) knowing their powers and b) communicating effectively. I'm sure the incident would not have escalated in the way it did if the PCSOs had been confident enough to explain that some other members of the public had expressed concern about what he was doing (yes, I can't understand why either, but 22 years as a cop tells me it's not unlikely), and to ask him, politely, what he was doing. Unless he was intent on winding up Plod (do people really do that? Oh yes they do) then the satisfactory explanation he provides to the journo would no doubt have satisfied the PCSOs too.
My point being that the police are not intent on establishing a police state, but often we should be better at talking to people!
Thank you
Grumpy old sergeant