Jump to content
Wanderers Ways. Neil Thompson 1961-2021

Sarah Everard


Rudy

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Zico said:

Yes, the team did a brilliant job in tracking him down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Rudy said:

...how does a copper think he’ll get away with it?

Ignorance, arrogance, stupidity and, too often, confidence that colleagues will 'look the other way'.

I've never particularly been of a criminal bent, juvenile japes aside, but have plenty experience of the above 'attributes' in application (in encounters with the O.B. personally), as well of 2nd hand accounts from people I trust not to have flights of fancy.

Edited by Youri McAnespie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats a very interesting read, and all those terrible unanswered questions that they need explanations on.

I just still can't get the thought of how she must have felt when she realised something was badly wrong out of my head when I hear about the case, it makes my chest feel tight and my stomach turn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter

I doubt he thought colleagues would look the other way if he was questioned and arrested on suspicion of the crime. 

He may have been emboldened by previous allegations not being followed through, and in the end whatever urges he felt overcame any serious attempts to conceal his activity. 

Hiring a car in his name, not being bothered about cctv/npr cameras, being filmed buying things from shops, chucking her phone into a stream locally-none of these show him making significant attempts to hide himself.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Tonge moor green jacket

They 'looked the other way' with his other indiscretions.

They nicknamed him 'the rapist'.

Only Nazir Afzal (Mail+) spoke out (at the time) that serving officers spoke favourably (for Couzens) at the sentencing hearing.

Tinfoil hatters talk of the MSM burying stories, a broken clock however, one poster (on here) even retracted his statement made in regard to this, such was the lack of confirming sources.

It took the Sentencing Judge to acknowledge this was the case before it was widely reported on.

One wonders what the press have on the Police/Met and vice-versa. I'd venture they have some symbiotic relationship that isn't always working towards the public's good.

Flashing and events such as what happened to B. Blondie at the weekend aren't relatively 'harmless' they're often indicative of more serious transgressions to come.

They should as such always be reported and investigated (and prosecuted), not laughed off as minor or a 'quirk', especially by the law itself.

Edited by Youri McAnespie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Youri McAnespie said:

@Tonge moor green jacket

They 'looked the other way' with his other indiscretions.

They nicknamed him 'the rapist'.

Only Nazir Afzal (Mail+) spoke out (at the time) that serving officers spoke favourably (for Couzens) at the sentencing hearing.

Tinfoil hatters talk of the MSM burying stories, a broken clock however, one poster (on here) even retracted his statement made in regard to this, such was the lack of confirming sources.

It took the Sentencing Judge to acknowledge this was the case before it was widely reported on.

One wonders what the press have on the Police/Met and vice-versa. I'd venture they have some symbiotic relationship that isn't always working towards the public's good.

Flashing and events such as what happened to B. Blondie at the weekend aren't relatively 'harmless' they're often indicative of more serious transgressions to come.

They should as such always be reported and investigated (and prosecuted), not laughed off as minor or a 'quirk', especially by the law itself.

The Leveson inquiry established the police, politicians and newspapers massively in cahoots.

Part 2 of the inquiry was supposed to explore this relationship in detail. For some reason this hasn't gone ahead yet and I wonder why. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, jayjayoghani said:

The Leveson inquiry established the police, politicians and newspapers massively in cahoots.

Part 2 of the inquiry was supposed to explore this relationship in detail. For some reason this hasn't gone ahead yet and I wonder why. 

I can imagine the sentencing hearing reports were quelled by a combo of the three - probably ostensibly in the interest of 'protecting public trust [in the Met/Police]'.

Backfired massively, one wonders, if a former Public Prosecutor hadn't 'broke rank' (Afzal) if the story would've seen the light of day at all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
On 05/10/2021 at 12:59, Youri McAnespie said:

@Tonge moor green jacket

They 'looked the other way' with his other indiscretions.

They nicknamed him 'the rapist'.

Only Nazir Afzal (Mail+) spoke out (at the time) that serving officers spoke favourably (for Couzens) at the sentencing hearing.

Tinfoil hatters talk of the MSM burying stories, a broken clock however, one poster (on here) even retracted his statement made in regard to this, such was the lack of confirming sources.

It took the Sentencing Judge to acknowledge this was the case before it was widely reported on.

One wonders what the press have on the Police/Met and vice-versa. I'd venture they have some symbiotic relationship that isn't always working towards the public's good.

Flashing and events such as what happened to B. Blondie at the weekend aren't relatively 'harmless' they're often indicative of more serious transgressions to come.

They should as such always be reported and investigated (and prosecuted), not laughed off as minor or a 'quirk', especially by the law itself.

Not disagreeing with that. That's why I said allegations should have been investigated!

As for the statements given by colleagues, I would assume they weren't condoning his actions in any way, but perhaps just their own experiences of his work. If someone had found him decent, then it's right they say so. 

Equally, if they hadn't then then it's right they say so.

Presumably a judge looks at previous conduct when making a sentence when someone admits guilt. Didn't make a difference here for all the reasons we know.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.