Feeble police excuses make me feel very anti-social

Maurice O'Brien • Published 20 Mar 2010 09:00 2 Comments

See also:

ONE can only assume that when it comes to their neighbours, most police officers are blessed with extreme good fortune.

Maybe they get to borrow a Panda now and then to park in the drive, hang their stab proof vest out to dry on the line, or stand a tall hat on the front window sill, lest the local intelligentsia's in any doubt as to who lives there.

Certainly their elderly mums, or disabled relatives, can never have had local yobs ringing the door bell, hurling stones at the windows, playing football in the flowerbeds or spitting foul-mouthed abuse any time they venture out.

If they had, then Chief Inspector of Constabulary Denis O'Connor wouldn't be telling us that one-in-four reports of anti-social behaviour (ie cowardly thuggery) are being ignored by police.

The Home Office says annually there are 3.6million reports of anti-social behaviour.

Mr O'Connor says the true figure is probably double that because victims have learned that reporting it is pretty much a waste of time.

In the main, he says, police do not comprehend how menacing a few bits of paper shoved through a letterbox can be when it's part of a campaign of threats and intimidation.

Nor, seemingly, can they be bothered to find out. Mr O'Connor's sensitive approach to this problem is in stark contrast to police forces which fail to respond to 23% of anti-social behaviour complaints, and the conduct of officers laughingly known as neighbourhood specialists who are apparently unaware of the plight of pathetically vulnerable targets living right under their noses.

The optimism engendered by Mr O'Connor's appearance on Radio 4's Today programme didn't last long.

He was soon being patronised by Sir Hugh Orde, president of ACPO and director of something called the Police National Assessment Centre, who was all for "getting engaged with our partners" and adopting a "cross-agency approach", and our hearts sank at the empty sound of such politically correct cobblers.

He was followed by a nonentity of a Home Office minister I'd never heard of, and hopefully never will again, whose wish is to see "a community taking ownership of the problem". Ye gods!

But it gets worse. This week we hear Thames Valley Police is officially graded "poor" at solving crime.

Responding to this news our fair chief constable informs us: "I am concerned about the grade for solving crime and we have agreed with the police authority that this will be a priority for the next year."

Well, bully for you ma'am. But what other priority could there possibly be?

This article appeared in Reading Chronicle 18 Mar 10

Have your say. Post a comment on this article.

Oranjepan
Unregistered User
Mar 20, 17:27
Report comment

I think you deserve a hearty congratulations for being so far-sighted and ardent that you can only see one side of the story.

As I wrote earlier this week detection and prevention are the two conflicting priorities.

http://bythemuddybanksofthethames.blogspot.com/2010/03/crime-confusion-stirs-fresh-controversy.html

Clearly you and your publication favour emphasising detection over and above prevention.

It's is a shame wou have neither the self-awareness to recognise this, nor the honesty to declare it.

Perhaps this goes some way to explaining the public's declining trust in the capabilities and intentions of both you and your estimible organisation.

Recommend? Yes 0 No 0
politico
Unregistered User
Mar 22, 10:25
Report comment

orangepan, if detection was so important to TVP wouldn't its "neighbourhood presence" and "reducing crimes" ratings on this same scorecard be above 'fair', which is 2 stars on a 1 to 4 star scale?

Recommend? Yes 0 No 0

Return to the main index, get more from this section or browse our Opinion archives.

Follow @rdgchronicle