Officer says he saw this coming & kept notes for own protection. Could be argued that @DamianGreen called into question integrity of his colleague Bob Quick/police service generally & he was entitled to respond. Could also be argued it’s a breach of Official Secrets Act. Arguable
-
-
Replying to @brianpaddick @theJeremyVine and
Peculiar though that it was only this case he kept notebook from. I've known lots of cops over the years and if they do keep their notes, it tends to be for lots of cases, not just one. Anyway, the retired officer seems to be under investigation himself now.
5 replies 4 retweets 20 likes -
Replying to @ScareyClaire2 @brianpaddick and
Agreed Claire. It’s the fact of ten years passing that’s odious and an officer retaining info for personal gain that stinks. If the original investigation was happy not an illegal act why on earth keep the “legal” data/info that’s inexcusable and reflects very badly on the force
3 replies 5 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @Nick_F3D @ScareyClaire2 and
How do people with no experience of the culture or practice of police know what the motivation of the retired detective was or is? Evidence is routinely retained in case of civil action even if there is no prosecution. Not justifying anyone’s actions but we are not mind readers.
10 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @brianpaddick @Nick_F3D and
Well Brian, you may not have liked the CPS, but I did work for them for 28 years, so worked very closely with police & do have an inkling of their culture & practice. Evidence is retained but usually by the force not individual officers. I find the retired officer's actions odd.
3 replies 1 retweet 16 likes -
Replying to @ScareyClaire2 @Nick_F3D and
The evidence (copy of hard drive) was kept by the Force, not the officer. He kept his notes, as far as I understand it. The question of who started it was, I think, Bob Quick & not this officer. Damien Green then retaliated calling officers’ integrity into question. No winners
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @brianpaddick @ScareyClaire2 and
Thank you that’s helpful it’s such a shame how hard vast majority of Police Officers work and how reputation is so important to the role and hard won. This sort of stuff is bordering on political tampering and will have repercussions on trust. Have a good weekend.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Nick_F3D @brianpaddick and
Brian you appear to draw equivalence btwn v. senior police officer (ret'd) engaging in political smear and v. senior politician (active) doing same. Is that your point of view? No difference, same expectations of character and expected behaviour? Hope not
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @WayneHenderso12 @Nick_F3D and
I think likely to be personal rather than political (Quick v Green). Personally, porn on computer not an issue but press story related to attitudes in Parliament to sexual harassment of women. MP said officer was lying about porn - appears he wasn’t. Poor judgement on both sides.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @brianpaddick @Nick_F3D and
Agree poor on both sides but police have powers that if misused destroy civic trust even more than politicians. This speaks to character and our faith that those with warrant cards don't misuse them. Quick shows why he was removed, but how did he rise so high?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Quick may believe (I don’t know) as a result of investigating Green in connection with unauthorised leaks, a simple mistake by Quick a few weeks later led to him being unfairly forced out of the police. If Quick was after revenge, that’s very poor but not typical of all police.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.