Police who hide ID numbers face the sack

Police officers who conceal their Force Identification Numbers “will face the sack” according to Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson. He said it is “totally unacceptable” for officers not to wear their shoulder numbers.

From the BBC:

His comments follow allegation against several officers at the G20 protests – including the man who pushed newspaper seller Ian Tomlinson before he died.

New footage has emerged of the moments leading up to his death, as a third post-mortem examination was held.

Mr Tomlinson, 47, died minutes after he was pushed over during the demonstrations in central London.

The officer at the centre of the allegations has been suspended and interviewed under caution on suspicion of manslaughter.

Two previous post-mortem examinations have come to different conclusions on the cause of death – one coronary artery disease, the other abdominal bleeding.

Sir Paul said: “If somebody is trying to deliberately avoid being identified and the reason he is doing it is so he can behave inappropriately, badly or criminally, then of course they will face the sack.”

Read more by or more about , , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

3 Comments

  • David Evans 24th Apr '09 - 1:31am

    I’m afraid Sir Paul Stevenson’s comment is largely empty rhetoric. It will be quite impossible to prove that “somebody is trying to deliberately avoid being identified and the reason he is doing it is so he can behave inappropriately, badly or criminally,” unless the policeman is stupid enough to cough. Hence they will never face the sack. Every case identified, irrespective of the officer’s reason or behaviour should be a disciplinary offence that is dealt with most severely. Also, in order to make it more likely that unacceptable behaviour such as this does not go unmissed; it could be made an offence for the officer with the direct command role of the perpetrator to be disciplined as well.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarLorenzo Cherin 27th Feb - 11:24pm
    David Was not referring to our former leader Charles, only to Ludovic. Let me say more. After winning Rochdale, in the fifties, if he had...
  • User AvatarJohnny McDermott 27th Feb - 11:23pm
    You missed the point, David Evans, and I fear rather failed to make your own. Which makes sense, given your aversion to full stops. Glancing...
  • User AvatarGlenn 27th Feb - 11:21pm
    Science isn't liberal and climate change research is not liberal either. It's an accumulation of data that that strongly indicates human behaviour (use of fossil...
  • User AvatarGary J 27th Feb - 10:39pm
    Brian Ellis - Actually I think Peter Morrison is also unfairly treated in the Report. Unlike with Cyril Smith there is no evidence against Morrison,...
  • User AvatarSally Burnell 27th Feb - 10:30pm
    William Wallace - completely agree. Your 'left behind' paper was discussed by FPC, including at our away day, and it directly influenced our paper on...
  • User AvatarKatharine Pindar 27th Feb - 10:26pm
    "Even the most committed party member should be asking themselves what the party is for or if it still serves any purpose at all.' I...