Resident Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

49 Reputable

1 Follower

About RossLondon

  • Rank
    Learning Curve

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Previous Fields

  • Police Force
    Metropolitan Police Service
  1. Addressing Senior Officers

    I'm not sure I'd want to ham the Queen either.
  2. Really? Why not pay civilians to do the jobs then, ensuring a more reliable workforce? Oh wait, because this is designed to save money.
  3. Is anyone else impressed at the McDonalds alarm / panic system? Panic button activates remote CCTV in a central control room where operators are able to take over the cameras and monitor the incident, alert the police and a message is broadcast over the in-store PA to notify staff and customers that that they are being recorded and the police are en route!
  4. How is an operator supposed to know there is no such thing as a military train? The fact is the call handler needs to type out the details of the call as quickly as possible so that resources can be dispatched. That call handler may have zero local knowledge. They can't be expected to Google the local area to check it's a valid call. You've got to remember, the call handler who answers the 999 call is probably not the person who dispatches the resource. The dispatcher is probably reading a typed out message from the call handler that ended up saying on the screen "military train accident at location X". I know in the Met, quite often the dispatcher is reading out the call as it is appearing on their screen "standby, I grade call coming in. Military train accident reported at location X". You can easily see how this could happen and I don't think it's fair to say "don't you think the operator should have known if there was a military railway in the area". They have a lot of incidents they could be managing at once, etc. Mistakes happen, it's not the end of the world. Better to have an over the top response, than someone say "hmmm I'm not sure there's any such thing as a military train, so I'm only going to send 1 foot patrol PCSO" and then find out it's a major incident. Going back to your first line: The fact the article states it was misheard as "military train" and you are talking about a military railway serves as an example of how easy it is to misread, mishear or misunderstand. Now sit in the 999 operators seat, managing multiple incidents in an often high pressure environment. Perhaps now you can be more forgiving !
  5. Metropolitan Police In Major West End Crackdown

    Before I had heard about this Op, I came out of Oxford Circus tube station earlier in the week and was surprised (and laughed) at the 'watch tower'. I managed to snap a picture on the phone for those who haven't seen one yet!
  6. Met Police To Track London Gun Injuries With A&e Data

    If you knew hospitals would inform the police of these types of injuries, it may discourage some people from attending hospital and seeking proper medical care. You could end up with effectively a criminal black market of 'hospitals'. I presume this is the reason the police are not informed.
  7. 5 Officers Injured In Dog Attack

    Yes, I'm sure you would have heroically jumped in and saved everyone. I really wish people would stop saying what they would have done with such absolute certainty, having never been in this situation before. Really? Because that's a smart thing to do. And you know as a matter of fact you would have done this, presumably because this has happened to you before?There is a distinction between what we'd like to think we would do and what would actually happen in reality. I don't think anyone can say for certain how they would have reacted, as you just did, until faced with the situation. This is why these sorts of flippant comments annoy me and would likely cause further distress to the officers who did actually face this situation.
  8. 5 Officers Injured In Dog Attack

    The thing that disturbs me most about this whole incident are the armchair hero's on this forum who are effectively branding the other police officers in this video as cowards. Actually, if you're so brave, why don't you make that statement again and support it with your shoulder number? Oh that's right, you're not even brave enough to type that, yet you would apparently dive in the middle of a frenzied dog attack. We all know who the real cowards are now.
  9. 5 Officers Injured In Dog Attack

    I had this happen once when I was in plain clothes, running to intervene in a fight when a pitbull was let off and ran straight towards me. Didn't even think, I just racked my baton and shouted loudly "GET THAT DOG BACK" or something like that. The dog then changed direction. I would have just hit it on the head as hard as possible, which I presume would have worked but may ultimately be fatal to the dog.
  10. Black cabs blocking bus stops

    This is actually a real situation so I'm curious as to what laws, if any, come in to play... I was standing at a bus stop near Waterloo in the morning and about 400ft around the corner is a Park Plaza hotel (this link shows the road layout). Black cabs were queueing up at the hotel, right the way around the corner, in to the bus lane - leaving no way for buses to pull in. Many buses consequently chose not to stop otherwise they would have completely blocked the road. When I boarded a bus that did stop in the middle of the road, I showed my warrant card to the driver, who asked if I could do anything about the taxi's. I explained to him that I was off-duty and without uniform, I had no way to clearly identify myself without speaking to each driver (of which there were many). I said he should report the problem to his control room. BUT, that got me thinking, are the black cab drivers committing any offence by queuing in the marked bus stop? I say queuing, they are essentially waiting to turn left - they have not 'parked'.
  11. petrified :(

    That's a bit of a sweeping generalisation. Without knowing more about the situation, I don't think it's fair to say he isn't being straight. If, for example, the Officer in question holds a Developed Vetting (DV) clearance for his role, then cohabiting (with a partner, friend or random lodger) requires a 'Change of Personal Circumstances' (14-page!) form to be completed and further vetting is carried out. The difference is, the vetting on the friend/partner/lodger won't result in any form of security clearance. An example of the Change of Personal Circumstances form, along with some explanation, is available on the MoD web-site here.
  12. Taser used on animals

    Posted in error - Deleted.
  13. I know it isn't the answer you want to hear, but I think Vixxer is right. Of course, the only way to know for sure is to call your vetting section. Being up front and honest with them as early as possible is always the best way. Different forces and organisations vary in their exact vetting procedures and their criteria for 'passing' vetting. So you could, for example, fail vetting with one organisation or force, but pass with another - even though its technically the same 'level' of vetting, such as a CTC. The financial check, generally speaking, is to cover a few things. It is normally to check that you are able to manage your finances correctly - evidence to the contrary could deem you to be financially at risk (i.e. your track record indicates you may be likely to go past the threshold of unmanageable debt). If you have, or are likely to have 'unmanageable debt' in the future, you may be considered more vulnerable to bribery, for example. That alone could be reason to decline your clearance - particularly if the financial problems are recent. This also works the other way around with 'unexplained wealth'. The main thing with vetting is that debt is not a problem (even for much higher levels, like a DV). Unmanageable debt, or evidence that suggests you struggle to manage your finances are an issue. Of course, nothing is black and white - your credit report may suggest you have struggled with debt in the past, but if you had some medical condition that stopped you from working, placing you in a position where you could not repay your debt, that will be looked at very differently. Vetting is a dark art - the exact criteria is not published. Depending on the organisation, quite often the power rests with your individual vetting case officer whether to grant clearance or not. Consequently, the only people who can tell you for sure are the vetting department of the organisation you're applying for. As has already been said, finances is the one part of vetting that you can 'repair' after a few years. Best of luck.
  14. Legal Knife

    I'm simply trying to explain to the OP my trail of thought if I had stopped and searched him. The OP, for example, probably wouldn't be aware if an area was being pro-actively targeted. The OP doesn't appear to take issue with what I've said, so I don't know what the point of your post is. I'm trying to give the OP an insight in to what might happen if I had searched him. I'm not really concerned whether you think my posts are valid or not. I'm not talking to you, I'm talking to the OP, thanks.
  15. Legal Knife

    Fair enough, although I wouldn't be arresting you simply because you couldn't provide me with a reasonable excuse. As you rightly point out, you are not required to provide one. But you need to understand, while you are not required to answer the questions, we can draw inferences from the fact you don't answer. Which is why part of the caution states "it may harm your defence, if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court". I understand it might be annoying to be stopped and asked such questions, but it's in your best interest to cooperate and remain calm. Doing anything else is likely to raise suspicion. It could well be that you politely explain yourself and I'd be satisfied with your explanation and conclude you are telling the truth. But, there is a chance that on taking other factors in to account, say it's a burglary hot spot, you appear nervous, or whatever, that could lead me to draw another conclusion. As I said, your "EDC kit" on it's own wouldn't cause me to make an arrest. I hope that makes sense and you can understand why I'd be thinking this.