Breach of public trust

11:38am Tuesday 25th September 2012 in Letters

I AM writing to express my view of the incident in Downing Street involving the Chief Whip, Andrew Mitchell, and the police. I would like to know why Mr Mitchell was not arrested.

The law states that when a person who holds a position of public trust commits a crime, it is to be treated as an aggravation of the crime and as such will attract a higher penalty.

Recently, people involved in the riots in England received harsh terms of imprisonment, in some cases for petty crime.

It was explained that because they had committed these crimes during the riots it was treated as an aggravation of that crime.

The Metropolitan Police’s code of conduct states “officers have a particular responsibility to act with fairness and impartiality in all their dealings with the public and colleagues. In particular officers must avoid favouritism of an individual or particular group.”

I have heard John Tully, chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation, saying on radio and television that had any member of the public behaved as Mr Mitchell did “they would have been arrested”.

Earlier this year in Glasgow, a woman police constable was charged with perverting the course of justice.

She failed to arrest someone she had seen committing a crime.

She received a term of imprisonment and left the police service.

I believe the officers who dealt with Mr Mitchell broke their code of conduct and breached criminal law by not arresting Mr Mitchell because of his high office in Government.

I think the officers and Mr Mitchell should all face criminal prosecution.

Alistair Watson (retired police officer) Milngavie, East Dumbartonshire

Comments(13)

Micklegate says...
12:01pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Why on earth in a letter on a national issue published from a letter writer in Scoland? Fair enough if it was a local issue or local letter writer but neither just looks stupid

Report this post »

Zetkin says...
12:43pm Tue 25 Sep 12

The answer to the question is of course that Mitchell wasn't arrested because he is a member of the cabinet.

His contempt for his "social inferiors" is bolstered by undue police deference to those who lord it over the rest of us.

Nothing new in that - it's what this government exists for.

Report this post »

Scarlet Pimpernel says...
2:32pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Arresting everyone who swears at the police would be a waste of time and resources. A warning or caution is all that is required. There are far worse examples of breaches of the peace, anti-social and insulting behaviour that go unpunished.

The media fallout that Mitchell's reputation has suffered is far worse and embarrassing than an arrest would have been.

The Police used sensible judgement in not arresting him, and avoided the ridicule that would have ensued had they arrested him.

This has all been blown out of proportion. There are far more serious issues that deserve front page news. The media frenzy is pathetic.

Report this post »

jimmy120883 says...
4:08pm Tue 25 Sep 12

One rule for one and one rule for another.
If Joe Bloggs had said what he did to a police officer in the street he would have been arrested no question,

Report this post »

Firedrake says...
4:17pm Tue 25 Sep 12

I don't know what Mr Mitchell said which was interpreted as swearing, but it can hardly have been "pleb". Although looked down upon by the Patrician class, the Plebeians were by no means the bottom of the heap. They were the rising middle class of ancient Rome and often held the balance of power because they controlled the cash. They could even refuse military service unless cleared of all debt to Patricians. Sometimes, they come across as just the kind of rampant capitalists you'd expect to gladden the Tory soul!

Or perhaps that's the problem: the "Top Drawer" never did like the "New Money". Far too vulgar ...

Report this post »

Even AndyD says...
4:36pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Whilst I'm certainly no apologist for the rather bullish Mitchell, the letter writer would appear to be long retired indeed. As per the 1986 Public Order Act, for swearing at a police officer to be an offence, it has to be to a degree to cause 'alarm and distress'. If this officer was distressed because a middle-aged toff on a bike flounced a few f-words at him, he'd probably be in the wrong job.
It is for this reason that the Met Police advise their officers to be 'very wary' of making such arrests.
Personally, if I were writing (presumably) to every local paper in the land, I'd check my facts first - but hey ho.

Report this post »

E=MC^2 says...
5:21pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Funny how the Tory Law and Order brigade back peddle when they stand to be on the receiving end. Mitchel exemplifies the arrogance and privilege of the tory ruling class and their contempt for the rest of us..I wouldn’t forcibly argue with a copper,let alone an armed one and he should be grateful that they are there to risk their necks to protect his greasy well fed one...Its great that the letter writer keeps this news alive,and adds an interesting new twist. This tory deserves all the toxic publicity he gets.

Report this post »

hendom says...
6:01pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Focussing on relatively trivial issues such as this diverts attention away from far more serious issues with the police of ignoring warnings about the abuse of underage girls by predominantly asian gangs over a ten year period in Rotherham and Sheffield.

Report this post »

ColdAsChristmas says...
6:13pm Tue 25 Sep 12

In one respect this was just a bit of unfriendly banta that shouldn't have happened but in any case, should not have come to light as a big issue.
On the other hand, I am aware of an 18 year old with no previous who was given a 16 week jail sentence for the same offence of swearing at a Policeman. (Radio 5 interview 3 nights ago)
Where therefore is the consistency? Why wasn't saying sorry good enough for that young man?
What this publicity does do however is put the spotlight on Mitchell and his like showing their disrespect for others less fortunate both financially and within the nations decision making process. Just remember the Cabinet is overloaded with such people. Maybe Kate Lock should worry about that instead of Polar Bears?

Report this post »

Jezreel says...
6:15pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Fortunately the revolting BNP is virtually defunct and we will hearless of this revolting racism in the future

Report this post »

Seadog says...
8:55pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Fascinating! I've just compared the above comments on my phone with those which appear here on my laptop. Some correspond and some do not. Weirdly, some which appear on one device are ascribed to other posters on the other!

EG: "Even Andy D" 's long post beginning "Whilst I'm certainly no apologist ... " is acribed to Scarlett.
Pimpernell on my phone!

What's going on? I suppose it may be something to do with conflicting formats and "posts within posts" but it's still potentially misleading!

I don't like to think anything I've said has been ascribed to someone else - either for their sake or mine!

Report this post »

Scarlet Pimpernel says...
12:10am Wed 26 Sep 12

Jezreel wrote:
Fortunately the revolting BNP is virtually defunct and we will hearless of this revolting racism in the future
Are you referring to the Rotherham and Sheffield issues ?

Report this post »

jorvik says...
6:11pm Wed 26 Sep 12

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:
Jezreel wrote:
Fortunately the revolting BNP is virtually defunct and we will hearless of this revolting racism in the future
Are you referring to the Rotherham and Sheffield issues ?
Surely if a group of men,lets say of mainly pakistani and bangledeshi origins,were grooming/exploiting/
raping and trafficking young white girls and the local councils (labour)and politically correct police force were aware of these crimes they wouldn't let it continue for years would they? Oh wait a minute

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree