"Mr Jenkins added that the public would be 'shocked' if they saw PC Pearson's actions."

Not so sure about that, most would be cheering him on!

The Hampshire Constabulary misconduct hearing was told in June 2022 PC Pearson and a junior female colleague identified only as PC Rich attended the boy's home on the Isle of Wight to speak to him after he hit two youngsters.

PC Pearson was tasked with reaching a Community Resolution - which are used for low-level crimes - and the boy's father was in and 'encouraging his son to listen to the officers and pay attention'. The 'naughty' boy, who can't be named for legal reasons, was said to be 'rude' and 'obnoxious' towards the officers. PC Pearson asked the child 'Why did you whack them?' to which the boy replied 'Why not?'

The uninterested youth sat on his phone and the constable, raising his voice, told him: 'Excuse me, don't talk to me like that, boy.

'You don't start talking to me like that - do you understand me?'

And the father who was present? What did he do about this child's behaviour?

Mr Jenkins said PC Rich described her senior colleague's approach as 'old school' and commented that he 'escalated the situation' which potentially put both of them in danger.

He continued: 'The situation developed by PC Pearson grabbing the boy's arm and there was a short struggle in which the boy's head hit the wall, whereby he sustained some minor injuries.

'The boy's father was understandably angry and he demanded that both officers leave the house, which they did.'

I guess we can see why the child's a little hellion... 

Mr Jenkins said: 'If it is to be suggested that the later conduct of [the boy] is relevant to show that, by June 2022, he was gradually turning into a youngster with violent or criminal tendencies, the Appropriate Authority [Hampshire police] would suggest that PC Pearson's violent actions played a role in that development.

'The boy's strong dislike for the police is plain enough from the bodyworn video material from June 21, 2022, and there are flashes of hatred after he had had his head knocked against the wall.

'His attitude towards police officers and being a law abiding young citizen is unlikely to have changed for the better after PC Pearson's actions on that day.'

I very much doubt anything's going to change his attitude at this point. Why should it? There are absolutely no consequences whatsoever for him, and those who try to impose some are stopped cold.

Am I the only one who can see that?  

PC Pearson denies gross misconduct. The officer admits that bending down and raising his voice breached a Standards of Professional Behaviour offence.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why we have a crisis in policing. 

It's About Time!

Grassroots police officers have launched a gender-critical network to push back against forces they are concerned have adopted self-ID policies not recognised in law. The serving officers have launched the Police Sex Equality and Equity Network, accusing the service of 'actions that embed gender ideology' within forces nationwide.

They called on bodies representing both rank and file officers, as well as chief constables, to recognise lobby groups and activists within policing in England and Wales had created a 'culture of fear' among those holding gender-critical views.

Maybe they should solicit donations from the public? 

Police SEEN have said the group intends to emulate the civil service network, which was established 'to re-focus attention on improving equality and equity between women and men'. The group said in a statement: 'Police SEEN warns that the influence of lobby groups and activists within UK policing has created a culture of fear which prevents officers and staff who believe there are two sexes and that sex is real and immutable, from speaking out, for fear of disciplinary action.

'They believe a formal internal network is desperately needed, not only to provide a voice and support for those who want to ensure the law is upheld, but also to restore political impartiality to policing.'

Oh, that it's come to this..! 

No, Sidney, There’s One Better!

Blimey, Sidney, you don't have to look all the way across the Pond. There's a better option much closer to home, after all:

The Met Police's chief has claimed that the special constable who told off a Christian busker for singing 'church songs' on Oxford Street was trying to 'do her best', but made a mistake.

Rowley, 59, told BBC Radio London: 'She’s a volunteer doing her best who made a mistake.

''We had a special constable who was on patrol and because of complaints about busking decided she would deal with the case and she didn’t deal with it perfectly well – it was a woman singing some sort of religious songs – and we’re dealing with that as a management issue and we have said we got that slightly wrong.'

The utter contempt for the public who pay this uniformed weasel's wages by referring to Harmonie London (a popular and well-known figure on the street) as 'a woman singing some sort of religious songs' is utterly breathtaking. But hardly surprising. 

He effortlessly pivots to the attack and claims victimhood on behalf of his Karen-with-a-badge:  

He said he was disappointed to see that Hadzhipetkova had received a wash of racist abuse following the incident, which took place on Sunday.

'She has had massive racist abuse online, she has had all sorts of vitriol. Now that doesn’t help policing in London.

It might, if it curbs this ignorant power-drunk bitch in any future interactions with the public, and teaches her that her actions are scrutinised and will draw consequences.

'People behaving like that to me, I’m paid for it, I’ve stepped into a senior role. Someone who’s just out there a couple of days a week trying to help out her community who gets that vileness, that’s a real, real problem.

'That’s tough for my men and women on the frontline having to cope with that sort of thing day in, day out.'

I'm glad you mentioned 'your men and women on the frontline', 'Sir' Rowley. Because this wasn't a case of one ignorant volunteer making a mistake, there were four other officers with her - presumably at least one or two were real cops. 

Yet not one stepped in to defuse the situation, apologise for her mistake and reassure Ms London that she was perfectly well entitled to be there. Why is that? Are they all cut from the same cloth? It would explain a lot. 

Photography And The Police In The UK

Filming in public? Cut it out!

A pianist has slammed the 'ludicrous' demand from flag-waving Chinese tourists not to film them as he performed at a busy London station.

If they don't want to be filmed, stay in China, where the police enforce it, not in England, where the police w...

Oh, FFS! 

After the footage of the row went viral on social media, Mr Kavanagh appeared on TalkTV where he slammed the 'ludicrous' demand - including from a British Transport police officer who asked him not to upload it.

Ask away, you've no right to compel him. You've been told this over and over again and you've lost every time.  

This comes after one of two police officers, who were walking by and stopped due to the loud argument, told the pianist 'this is not to go on your channel' as Mr Kavanagh kept on filming after the officers intervened.

I know what you're thinking, Reader. Just another case of an ignorant male cop who isn't au fait with the law. Well...not quite!

When the police officers approached, one tourist said to the male officer that Mr Kavanagh filmed them and they asked him to remove the footage, but he refused.

'You're in a public place,' the policeman explained repeatedly - until the female officer chimed in and said to the cameraperson: 'Excuse me, if we're having a police matter, you need to put that phone down.'

No. He doesn't, Miss Diversity Hire, you should listen to your colleague.  

Meanwhile, elsewhere, filming your neighbour's children in their back garden? Go right ahead!

A grandfather has been told it's 'not a police matter' after he found a secret camera pointed at his grandson's treehouse that might have been put there by a convicted paedophile.

Martin Prior, 65, first contacted police on December 22, 2023, after discovering a CCTV camera placed on a lane by his property in Cross Keys, near Hereford.

An officer visited the next day and spoke to the suspected owner of the camera but Mr Prior was shocked when the police said they were powerless to act.

A spokesman for West Mercia Police said: 'We are aware of a concern raised about the placement of a CCTV camera.' 'However, no crime has been reported to us and therefore it is not a police matter. CCTV concerns need to be raised with the Information Commissioner's Office.'

And what does the Information Commissioner's Office say?

'The use of recording equipment, such as CCTV or smart doorbells, to capture video or sound recordings outside the user's property is not a breach of data protection law.

'People should try to point their CCTV cameras away from their neighbours' homes, shared spaces, or public streets. But this is not always possible.

'If someone is recording your child using CCTV, we would suggest talking to the person doing the recording.

'If you feel the person is filming your child inappropriately or to cause them harm, you should contact the police.'

A perfect snapshot (Ed: *preens*) of the situation with the police in this country. 

Update: And it's not just photography. Who is in charge of recruiting these people?

Won't Do Anything About Shoplifters...

While the authorities are targeting criminal gangs who distribute dodgy fire sticks — conducting police raids and making arrests — they are also starting to create a list of names of people who are using the sticks illegally. Police have this year started knocking on doors and asking users to stop using the devices in their homes.

...but will come and knock on your door if they think you're watching 'Mrs Brown's Boys' on catchup illegally.

Detective Inspector Steve Payne, from the Bedford-based Eastern Region Special Operations Unit of the police, which led the investigation, says: ‘We have also gained access to the details of those purchasing the streams and I would remind anyone doing so that they will be breaking the law and could ultimately be subject to criminal proceedings.

‘The two arrests made last week are part of an investigation into a sophisticated large-scale criminal operation that has generated significant sums through the illicit sale of TV subscription packages.

‘Money generated through illegal means such as this often funds wider organised criminality.’

You couldn't make it up, could you? 

Are The Police Too Satisfied Too Easily...?

The arrests follow an initial statement from Lancashire Police in which the force suggested no criminal offence had been committed.

'After viewing the footage, we believe this happened some time ago and that the cat was already dead at the time of the incident,' Lancashire Police said on Facebook.

'While distasteful and obviously upsetting to view we are satisfied no criminal offence has been committed.'

Yeah, that's what police said about Huw Edwards at first... 

The initial statement was, however, followed up with a subsequently deleted post, claiming the force had 'conducted further enquiries' and that an investigation would be underway.

Oh? Why the change of heart? 

'We can confirm, having reviewed the footage and conducted further enquiries, an investigation is underway and we will be speaking to a man in due course in connection with animal cruelty offences,' the police force said.

Which would indicate either the cat wasn't dead, or further footage of other acts this charming individual has been involved in have come to light. It's amazing what you find when you bother to do your job instead of giving people the brush off, eh? 

Because if you don't do your job, you might find others do it for you...

'We are aware some people have targeted those shown in the video and their families and subjected them to threats and anti-social behaviour,' the force said.

'We would remind people any criminal behaviour will be dealt with robustly. Thank you for your continued support and we will update you in due course.'

Then deal with it. Before it leads to the inevitable.  

But It Doesn't Really "Apply To All Styles And Genres Of Music", Does It?

Last October, days before what would have been his biggest home town show yet, the chart-topping drill rapper Digga D posted a statement online. “I’m gutted to announce that my Brixton Academy show next week has been rescheduled for reasons beyond my control,” he wrote. “Without going into too much detail, you can probably guess why this might have happened.”

The detail that Digga omitted was that the Metropolitan police had spent the preceding weeks putting pressure on the venue – sponsored by O2 and operated by the Academy Music Group (AMG) – to pull the plug on the show.

And why? Well, Reader, I think we all know, don't we? 

The Met’s interest in Digga D, AKA Rhys Herbert, is well documented: in 2020, the Bafta-winning documentary Defending Digga D depicted his efforts to pursue a music career under the terms of a uniquely restrictive criminal behaviour order (CBO), which he is still under.

And still breaking...some people just can't learn, can they? 

The Met – which was found last month by an independent investigation, once again, to be institutionally racist – has an established history of interfering with Black music events in London.

We know, don't we, Reader, as on my blog it's been covered before.  

A central London nightclub owner who also asked to remain anonymous corroborated this experience. “It’s 696 by another name. It’s not a predesigned form, it’s a risk assessment that I have to provide to them. But both parties know exactly what I have to include, which is to state what style of music is playing. And both parties know that if that style of music is one that is preferred by people of colour, then the police will immediately say something like ‘whilst we would never tell you what events to put on, we regard this as high-risk and if anything should happen we will review your licence.’ Which is essentially them saying ‘we will close you down’.”

Good! A bit of pre-emptive action is to be welcomed. 

The Met said this approach “applies to all styles and genres of music”.

Heh! Yes, I'm sure it does. But it's not applied to all styles and genres, and we all know why... 

Digga is forbidden from rapping about certain topics and has to submit lyrics to the Met before releasing new tracks and videos. He was recalled to prison in 2019 for a breach of his CBO – inside, a stabbing left him partially sighted – and again in 2020 after pleading guilty to his role in a central London brawl where machetes were wielded.

That's why! 

Stop Talking, And Start Fining...

Officials have launched renewed talks with Deliveroo, JustEat and UberEats after a week-long operation saw 60 moped riders held for illegal working. Most of them have now been detained pending removal from the country.

Ah, the 'immigrants who are vital to our economy' again, I see... 

Follow-up searches uncovered two imitation guns, a machete and a telescopic baton, a Home Office spokesman said. Telescopic, or ‘friction-lock’, batons can be flicked out to use as a cosh, and are banned under offensive weapons laws.

The operation also found evidence that legitimate moped riders were sharing delivery jobs with acquaintances - usually by the WhatsApp messaging service - and allowing them to carry out the work, the spokesman added.

And what are the authorities doing to ensure these companies take steps to crack down on their employees? 

‘We are in conversations with the delivery app companies to try to improve their engagement with the rules on carrying our right to work checks,’ the spokesman said.

*sighs* 

And Nor Should They...

The latest moral panic:

Some machetes and other knives can have 'legitimate uses', such as those used for gardening, agriculture or culinary purposes.

This complicates legislation around knives, as it means certain blades can be kept at home and remain unseized by the police.

Currently, this means that even if police find a machete or other legal blade inside someone's residence and they believe the items could be used for violent or criminal activity, they have no lawful right to seize a blade.

Why, exactly, should we be tightening legislation because the police have trouble understanding it? We did that with the Dangerous Dogs Act, and yet the lazy bastards still refuse to act if they think they can get away with it. 

And since when did police 'suspicion' that you might do something illegal with a legal possession count for anything? 

Zombie knives are already included in the list of banned knives, meaning it is illegal to possess them, bring them into the UK, sell or hire them out or lend them to someone. But this only applies to the weapons which meet the three criteria: cutting edge, serrated edge and words or images that imply they are to be used for violence.

You have to have some criteria. What's wrong with these? It's not like my kitchen doesn't contain several knives just as capable of killing someone even without the words 'zombie annihilator' written on the hilt... 

Current Home Secretary Suella Braverman said: 'The thugs wielding these deadly knives aim to terrorise their victims and the public, and too often even carry out horrific or fatal attacks.

'They are emboldened by the cowardly idea that carrying these blades inflates their own status and respect.'

And Home Secretaries seem to be emboldened by pressure groups and newspaper headlines into knee jerk reactions that do little to resolve the real problem, Suella. 

"It is like living in an area with no policing or government."

Just like, well, you tell me, Reader...

Each night here vendors, who set up stalls on both sides of the pavement, sell goods from perfumes to street food. However a councillor warned some may be unlicensed and illegal and vowed action will be taken.

Anti-social behaviour and fights are commonplace with one stall brawl on April 3 prompting a police visit. The road is also plagued with traffic congestion with some vehicles taking 20 minutes to get from one end to another. A concerned resident claimed an ambulance could not even get to his house for a medical emergency because of the nightly congestion.

When BirminghamLive visited the road was clogged with traffic. Drivers stuck in the queues blared their horns in frustration.

Import the Third World, get Third World markets...

Cllr Raqeeb Aziz, Councillor for Bordesley Green, said in a statement to BirminghamLive: "The Council is taking action to stop illegal activity around the Coventry Road area. The Council's Highways Department, Community Safety Team, and the Regulation and Enforcement Division are all visiting the area to take the details of those who are involved in setting up the stalls."

Really? The licensed traders and residents say different. They say they rarely see any police or council officials and complaints go unrecorded... 

"The Council is proactively pursuing individuals who don't have the relevant permissions, and are working with West Midlands Police to gather evidence and will be consulting with residents to find long-term solutions to stop this sort of activity in the future."

That'll come as a surprise to residents, who might want to point out, should this consultation ever occur, that the council should already know what solutions are needed. 

"I will continue to work closely with the Council on this issue, so that residents of Bordesley Green can continue observing Ramadan and enjoy the upcoming Eid celebrations in a safe and peaceful way, and that all relevant regulations are adhered to by traders."

There's a name for a statement like this, isn't there, Reader? 

"...attacks continue with little consequence to those at fault."

Hey, it's not just sheep, either, Phil:

He added: “There is a real concern amongst sheep farmers in the UK that the situation is spiralling out of control and becoming the norm. As reported in the survey, farmers are taking what steps they can to protect their flocks including displaying signs, moving sheep to areas with less public access and working with communities via social media but unfortunately these actions seem to be having little impact in improving the number of incidents.”

Start taking the only action these people will understand - shoot Fido dead in front of them! 

The findings of the survey also showed 82% of respondents strongly agreed that additional powers are necessary to act as a deterrent to dog owners allowing attacks to happen.

Why? Most of the current powers aren't enforced, why give lazy cops even more to ignore? 

Mr Stocker continued: “The Kept Animals Bill is well behind schedule which is frustrating on one hand, but I still don’t believe that it is fit for purpose, still not requiring dogs to be on leads when in fields with sheep and suggesting maximum fines for those found guilty being limited to £1000 in England.

“This compares to a recent change of legislation in Scotland that has seen the same crime punishable with up to a £40,000 fine or prison sentence. This disparity must be addressed. A lack of punishment and continued varied responses from police rural crime teams across the UK is frustrating farmers who are experiencing great upset as well as financial loss because of this issue.”

Do you see 'animal lovers' assisting farmers? Harrying morons with loose dogs the way they harry hunts or animal testing labs? No... 

It's Another 'Fill In The Blanks' For You!

 

Ooh, this is easy! It must be 'burglars', right? 

No..? OK, 'drug dealers', then. Well done, cops, making these hardened criminals fear for th..

Oh...

Many social media users questioned why police were 'wasting time' catching illegal streamers instead of crimes such as robbery and assault.

We all know the answer, don't we? 

At Least 'Lincolnshire Live' Is A Reputable News Organisation...

...because the others appear to have omitted a rather salient point.

An attempted shoplifter who was held face down at a branch of Sainsbury's for more than 30 minutes died of injuries sustained during his detention, an inquest heard. Mr Paskauskas was threatening and aggressive, and his behaviour was worsened because he had consumed alcohol, he was confused about what was happening and there was a language barrier.

It will be interesting to see if the police now charge anyone. Because they have in other cases, as we've seen.  

A jury which considered the evidence during the inquest last week reached a conclusion of death by misadventure.

Because they don't have a 'death by drunken criminality' verdict, I suppose. 

A Sainsbury’s spokesperson said: “We supported the police and coroner on this matter and acknowledge that this case has now concluded. Our thoughts are with Mr Paskauskas’ friends and family.”

Let's hope they are also with your traumatised staff as much as with the family of a habitual foreign criminal. 

Maybe They Are All In A River Somewhere..?

It'd explain their failure to find them, wouldn't it?

It has emerged that senior officers believe there are still “many” firearms in the hands of people who should not have them, despite the former home secretary Priti Patel ordering them to look again at cases where they returned firearms to people after confiscation.

If I disobeyed my boss I'd expect to have a very uncomfortable conversation. Why is that never the case for failing police farces? 

Alarm bells have also been rung because the number of shotgun certificate applications Devon and Cornwall are rejecting has doubled since the Plymouth shootings but the rate in the rest of England and Wales has remained at just 3%, suggesting some forces may still be looking too leniently on applications.

Maybe. Or maybe Devon & Cornwell, realising they had not just dropped the ball but then drop-kicked it into their own goal, were overzealous? 

The new chief constable of Devon and Cornwall, Will Kerr, who came into the post the year after Davison’s attacks, is among those calling for fundamental change.

He said the firearms legislation, introduced in 1968, was “no longer suitable”, arguing that the emphasis was on “permitting rather than preventing gun ownership”.

As indeed it should be. In a modern capitalist democracy, that should always be the default, shouldn't it? Whether we are talking about cars, second homes or guns... 

Remember, 'They Work For You'...

...while the police, who won't bother to turn up for your burglary unless the criminals are injured in the course of the crime, well, they work for them, clearly:

Retired teacher Fran Swan and yoga instructor Beverley Glock both tried to register for a meeting in a nearby village, hosted by West Dorset MP Chris Loder. But after they submitted questions about sewage in the online registration form, Mr Loder wrote to say the meeting was specifically for villagers in Chideok - but said he would 'see what he could do'.

And what could he do to ensure democracy was upheld? Well...

And at 7.30pm last Thursday, the night before the meeting was due to take place, a police officer arrived at Ms Swan's home to ask the 70-year-old about her intentions.

What a snivelling little weasel of a man. And what a misstep by the police. 

And it gets worse: 

Mr Loder told the Mail it was necessary for him to inform the police about 'anything out of the ordinary' as he and his family have received threats in the past.

The Tory MP added that it was 'unusual to receive the interest of two people who were not invited to attend a localised surgery', and cited the murder of Sir David Amess who was stabbed to death at a constituency surgery in 2021.

But not by a retired yoga instructor and teacher from a nearby village, Chris, so even the bumpkin farce down there in Dorset should have performed a better risk assessment.

A Dorset Police spokesman said officers from its neighbourhood policing team 'wished to understand the intentions' of the women 'to ensure that public safety was preserved and any lawful protest could be facilitated'.

He added: 'Dorset Police would like to apologise if the attendance of a police officer to the home address of individuals going to the meeting caused alarm.'

I suspect that was exactly what they wanted to cause.  

April 1st Gets Earlier Every Year...

I mean, this must be an April Fool? Surely?

Assistant Commissioner Matt Jukes, the Metropolitan Police's new 'HeForShe Gender Equality Lead'...

Wait, what? That's a genuine post? FFS! 

...wore the 'Menovest' garment in a meeting to mark Menopause Awareness Month.

Couldn't he just mark it without a stunt? 

For instance, by getting his PA to write something cobbled together off Internet articles, like normal people who want to get shot of this pointless task so they can get on with real work? 

... as the heat came to him in 'waves' while he attended the force's Environment and Sustainability Board, he had a feeling of 'Oh no, not now' and 'an anticipation before really losing my train of thought'.

I think that particular train left the station a long, long time ago... 

Mr Jukes' Menovest experience was headline news on the Met's intranet this week.

And if they have a Yammer network, I bet it was humming... 

Rather Refreshing, Eh?

The visibly disgusted sheriff described Black as 'the most despicable excuse for a human being I've ever seen in my life.'

He added: 'There is a special place in hell for this woman. Until she gets there, she's going to rot in our jail'.

Wow! No doubt this will have the Guardian-reading progressives clutching their pearls in horror... 

Ivy said the video was taken last October by a home surveillance camera and provided to the Sheriff's Department by a former roommate of Black's. Ivy called the incident sickening and showed visible anger and disgust as he walked Black into the women's annex of the Brevard County jail.

'If I hear as much that she has a pet rock, I will lose my cr*p because this woman doesn't deserve to have anything,' Ivy said. 'You know, usually when I'm walking people in, I have something to say to them,' he tells Black. 'I'm disgusted by you.'

But isn't it refreshing not to hear a law official sound like a social worker for once? We could do with some of that over this side of the pond...

Putting Diversity Before Public Safety...

In a judgment today, Mrs Justice Heather Williams rejected the forces's bid to overturn the decision to reinstate the convicted officer.

Yes, it's this case. Again.  

She said: 'The PAT was entitled to regard this as an exceptional case in which dismissal for the officer's gross misconduct was not a necessary and proportionate sanction.'

And what was so 'exceptional' about it? 

The judge continued: 'The PAT reached the conclusion that it did because of the unique circumstances of the conviction, the officer's stellar career, the substantial impact she had had on enhancing the reputation of the MPS as a whole and its assessment that her dismissal would reduce confidence in the police in some of the communities in which the MPS had struggled to gain trust.'

In other words, the perception of those 'communities' that the police and white society has it in for them counts for more than being able to get rid of a proven liar in the force. Just because she's black.  

Isn't there a name for that? Doesn't it begin with 'r'..? 

Scotland Yard also challenged the reinstatement of Detective Constable Asweina Gutty, who was dismissed following her conviction for assaulting her then-partner, before being given a final written warning after an appeal to the PAT.

However, Mrs Justice Heather Williams also rejected this challenge, finding the PAT was 'entitled to conclude' that a final written warning was suitable in the 'unusual circumstances of this case'.

What was unusual about it? That it was a mixed race relationship? That they were lesbians? That the aggressor racially assaulted her lover as well as physically assaulted her? 

District Judge Nina Tempia said: 'What concerns me is she is a serving police officer prone to anger outbursts and she is dealing with members of the public.'

It would appear not to concern Williams overmuch... 

"He was allowed to be dangerous, untreated, and at liberty..."

Like so very many others:

The MoS revealed earlier this year that a psychiatric team decided not to detain Glover just weeks before the December 2019 attack, even though police had warned that he was planning to run over children.

Now a report by the Independent Office for Police Conduct reveals:

• Glover called Essex Police ‘many hundreds of times’, including on 117 occasions in the eight months before Harley’s death;
• On at least 30 occasions, he made threatening comments, including eight calls in which he threatened to run over children;
• A worried parent warned police that Glover was driving suspiciously near the school and watching children as they went home after lessons.

Despite that, the IOPC probe cleared Essex Police of any blame and makes no recommendations to change its policies or training.

‘Essex Police appear to have acted reasonably in their dealings with him and, having responded in line with the powers available to them in response to his vague threats to kill, cannot be judged to have contributed to Harley Watson’s death,’ it concluded.

Now an inquest has - quite rightly - decided differently. But this is just the one case. How many others are similarly allowed to be at large?

A Tale Of Two Deaths...

The Independent Office for Police Conduct is investigating Arthur’s death. The driver of the unmarked police car is under criminal investigation for the offence of causing death by dangerous driving. He has not been arrested.

Elsewhere...

A 56-year-old man, thought to be driving a black BMW, has been arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving.

It's a bit of a puzzle, no..?