Coffee House

Theresa May’s apology to Andrew Mitchell

15 October 2013

4:50 PM

15 October 2013

4:50 PM

Giving evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee this afternoon, Theresa May said it would be ‘appropriate’ for the West Mercia chief constable to apologise to Andrew Mitchell over the way the ‘Plebgate’ allegations were handled. She was being questioned on the Independent Police Complaints Commission’s report, published this morning, which found that there was an ‘issue of honesty and integrity’ which went above ‘merely naive or poor professional judgment’ on the part of three Police Federation officers who gave an account of a meeting with Mitchell following the ‘plebgate’ allegations that contradicted the claims of the former chief whip. The report said West Mercia Police’s own investigation into the meeting was wrong to conclude that the three officers had no case to answer for misconduct or gross misconduct. May said:

‘I have to say I agree that the IPCC statement makes troubling reading, and if it is indeed the case that warranted police officers have behaved in the way that Deborah Glass has described, then that is not acceptable at all. Now, having received the IPCC statement West Mercia police do have the ability to decide to begin disciplinary proceedings against the officers involved. I understand that they’ve said that they won’t do so. There isn’t a legal power for anybody to compel them to do so and under the existing laws the IPCC cannot at this stage do anything further. If they had taken over this investigation in the first place, rather than passing it back to West Mercia, that would have been a different matter.

‘But in future as you know we are transferring more resources to the IPCC for them to take on more investigations themselves. But it would be a matter for them to decide whether to intervene or whether to force an investigation or not. I defend the operational independence of the police and I have always done so but I have to say that in view of the statement that has been made today by the IPCC I think that it is quite wrong of West Mercia not to take disciplinary proceedings against these officers.’

[Alt-Text]


The committee chair Keith Vaz asked whether there should be an apology from West Mercia to Mitchell. May replied:

‘I think Andrew Mitchell himself has said today that he and his family were waiting for an apology and it would appear that they have been waiting in vain… I think that the – in a sense, the best approach would be actually for disciplinary proceedings to be taken against these officers but I think the police should be clear, the IPCC report is very clear about what they believe has happened in this case, and I think it would be appropriate for the chief constable to indicate to Andrew Mitchell that he recognises what has happened here.’

Pressed again on whether that would be an apology, May said:

‘I think that would be appropriate.’

The Home Secretary is calling for someone else to apologise to Mitchell, but this appears to be her own way of apologising to her former Cabinet colleague over her involvement in the row as well. Mitchell himself was convinced that the Home Secretary was instrumental in turning colleagues against him and that she briefed the media that he could not hold on to his job. She didn’t deny when quizzed about this that she had been at the ‘vanguard’ of calls for him to step down. Today was an opportunity for her to suggest some solidarity with Mitchell, and in doing so, say sorry.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
  • Boleslaw Smialy

    Was the recording made by Andrew Mitchell legal?

  • JabbaTheCat

    I suspect that wasn’t the first time the arrogant pr*ck Mitchell got up the old bill’s nose. Shame they had to concoct some of their story…

  • MirthaTidville

    The really frightening thing on here, is that having heard evidence from just one side , and I personally wouldnt trust the hapless `Nasty Party`May to tell me the time correctly, so many have made a decision and formed the firing squad..

    Ladies and Gents always remember there are 2 sides to every story, any lawyer will tell you that, and before we rush to judgement, hear out the other side of the argument….

    Try to be objective ffs…

    • Andy

      You need to be objective. Three West Mercia Police Officers held a meeting with Andrew Mitchell after which they made a statement. Go and watch it on youtube. Unknown to them Mitchell had recorded the meeting. Their account of it does not tally with that recording. Again go and listen to it.

      The IPCC report is perfectly clear about this. Go and read it. Those three Police Officers did not tell the truth. Why is that so difficult for you and one other to understand ???????

  • Wombeloid

    If Ms May really wants to demonstrate her leadership potential, she should clean out the Augean stables. It’s not as if she has to protect her popularity with the police. And it could be a huge vote-winner for the Tories.

  • Jimmy R

    Despite what is being portrayed as fact the only people who know what was actually said and what words were used in what occurred at the gates of Downing Street are Mitchell and the two officers present. The CCTV camera has no sound recording so, whilst is shows that other people who later claimed to be present were not there. There are two versions of what was said and only the three present know which one is accurate. All other people can do is make assumptions about the wording.
    What happened with other people afterwards is a separate issue, unless the two officers who were present actively requested others to lie on their behalf. If they were not involved in any way with later deceptions then there is nothing to show they have acted wrongly. Where any of the officers linked in any way to the incident can be shown to have acted with intent to deceive or mislead then they should be dealt with in an appropriate manner and punished severely.
    Rather a full and complete investigation, however long that takes, than a rushed and inadequate one which ends up creating more questions than it does answers with great chunks either missed completely or hastily skipped over,

    • Greenslime

      The fact that the visual record clearly indicates that the story did not occur as the peelers who reported the incident say it did should inform us that their recollection of the verbal discourse might also be a little ‘off-piste’.

    • Andy

      It is perfectly obvious from the CCTV that the Police Officers version of events is untrue. It is also perfectly plain that the reports given by Police Officers of a meeting with Andrew Mitchell are different to the recording he made.

      I would ask why it has taken 13 months for these issues to be ‘full and complete investigation’. I would have thought the proper facts could have been established in 13 hours.

  • Radford_NG

    Andrew who? I doubt most people in the street would recall off- hand who Andrew Mitchell is……and I doubt anybody would have heard of this item with the three reps. before May and David Davis MP started sounding-off about it…..and I doubt they care.What they care about is the policing on their streets…..and the police being ordered to stand-down for three days when London was burning,in the name of community relations……and police and local politicians doing nothing for ten years about “males of Pakistani heritage” (as Jack Straw calls them) raping and using as sex-slaves young English children…doing nothing in the name of community cohesion.

  • Nick

    Good luck to the police I say.
    They do a brilliant job dealing with the scum of society which includes politicians.
    In actual fact…….I LOVE THE POLICE! And I support them in all they do.
    WELL DONE THE POLICE! And thank you for protecting us.
    But the next time you try to stitch up an MP,you need to be a bit more canny about it.

  • anyfool

    I see that the police have put into the public domain a transcript of an interview with Jimmy Saville.
    This is a smokescreen to cover their illegal acts during Plebgate, you can guess which story the media will run with.
    The police are a disgusting bunch who have taken well to the Alaister Campbell school of deflect and distort, or did he learn from them, all involved in this further corruption should also be investigated by the PCC.

    • Andy

      You can guess which story the BBC will run with and that Fascist rag the Guardian.

      The Police have been shown to be liars and it is time they were called to account. They must pay and that includes the Commissioner: he has to go.

      • telemachus

        Fascism embraces typically right-wing positions, in opposition to communism, socialism, liberal democracy
        Not sure I recognise these qualities when I pick up my morning Guardian

        • Colonel Mustard

          If you cannot recognise communism and socialism in the Guardian you are even more stupid than your inane comments suggests. As for liberal democracy as an apologist for Stalin you are not fit to use the words.

        • Andy

          You obviously don’t know what Fascism is. Hitler was a Socialist: Mussolini was a Communist – he even edited a Communist Newspaper. Fascism = Socialism. Hence you are merely a Fascist.

    • Colonel Mustard

      Yes, I noticed the curious timing of that too. And it is an extraordinary thing to do anyway. To what purpose? To whip up hate hysteria over a dead man? Why?

      • telemachus

        Apologists for paedophiles are doing a disservice to society

        • Colonel Mustard

          You really are quite a disgusting creature. I hope you get the karma you so richly deserve. What you knowingly do here at this blog cannot be good for your soul.

  • jazz606

    I expect that the police have a lot of experience in fitting people up. They clearly though they could get away with this (and might yet).

    Theresa May’s abysmal response is no more than one should expect…..to the extent that you begin to wonder if it was just the police who wanted to stitch Mitchell up ?

    • telemachus

      May did what was necessary
      Her ex-colleague swore at the police

      • Greenslime

        Were you there?

        This is a case of one man’s word against another (or others). But given that the visual record shows that the police ‘misreported’ that aspect, and given that at least one police officer (whilst pretending to be an interested bystander) has been proven to be lying about overhearing the alleged verbal exchange, and given that it is pretty much proven that the written ‘contemporaneous’ records surrounding this affair appear to be confections, why should we believe their version of anything else they report on this incident and the resultant enquiry into it?

        Fairly or not, this brings into doubt the integrity of all police officers.

  • Smithersjones2013

    One thing’s for sure this won’t do May’s poor relationship with Senior Cops any good. She may well need more of her foreign super cops than she first envisaged if she’s not careful.

    Still the behaviour of the police is quite alarming….

    • Holly

      I doubt very much that from today the ‘relationship’ between May and senior coppers will be any higher than the public’s.
      And I don’t think she’ll give a fig if they hate her forever, while they are (hopefully) either sacked with no pension, or sat in a cell.

  • swatnan

    Mitch deserves an apology, and the Speakers Chair.
    If the Fed had wanted to nobble a Cabinet Minister, why didn’t they go for Pickles instead?

    • ButcombeMan

      Because Pickles on a bicycle would have had to go through the main gate?

  • Tron

    May, Cameron, The Civil Service, The Labour Party, The BBC and The Press all believed the police.
    The police have been shown with video evidence to be liars.
    That is the story.

    • telemachus

      Now just why do you think all these folk believed the police

      • Holly

        Along with the majority of the public, we just do…Did…Don’t any more..

        • telemachus

          You cannot apply generalisations to a one off pique

      • real_telemachus

        This is the real crime behind the already heinous conspiracy. Before this sorry episode the police had a vestige of public trust; now they have none. In one horrendous swoop they have undone 175 years of police integrity.

      • ButcombeMan

        They believed the Police because in the UK we have a habit of thinking & believing, based on cultural atavism, in the wholesomeness and incorruptability of our Constabularies.

        It has not been true for a very long time, but we, especially those of us who never come into contact with them in our safe middle class lives, believe in Dixon of Dock Green.

        It is just a fact that a few Police Officers abuse their power, have always abused their power.

        It is usually extremely difficult to investigate corrupt Police Officers and extremely difficult to gain convictions, often even with overwhelming evidence.

        If Senior Officers like Hogan- Howe struggle to understand, is it surprising that juries struggle with the concept?

    • Tony_E

      I’m not sure that they did believe the police – it was more a question of the public believing what was written in the Sun, reported by the BBC and pressed by eager Labour politicians.

      Certainly it is clear that the previous government left its footsoldiers behind, and Home secretaries generally tend to try to keep the police on side, in public at least. But we are now seeing growing public evidence of Police corruption at nearly all levels.

      Does any of us now currently believe that the Police still have to adhere to the law they uphold? Everything from using a mobile phone while driving and speeding, to self protective mistruth in police reports. Do you really believe that in an altercation with an errant policeman you could get any justice?

  • Peter Stroud

    Theresa May was in the same position as the majority of we ordinary folk. She believed the police. Who would have thought that members of the Diplomatic Protection Section, of the Met would have altered their note books. Who would believe others would concoct completely false stories. Sorry Ms Hardman, Mrs May has no need to apologise. But, it seems, many in the police need to do so

    • Andy

      As I understand it the officers didn’t ‘alter their notebooks’. They manufactured an account that was wholly and utterly untrue. Whether you like Andrew Mitchell is neither here nor there. What is here and there is that he was a Minister of the Crown. For that reason the Officers involved must not merely be disciplined: the law should be applied with vigour.

      • telemachus

        And how do you prove it
        Unauthorised recordings can be doctored

        • Andy

          So the line from Fascist Party HQ is that the recording was ‘doctored’ ? As far as I know the recording was made in Mitchell’s own office and as far as I know (someone correct me if I am wrong) that he can make such a recording.

        • real_telemachus

          But police notebooks can never be nothing but the truth.

          • Andy

            They were probably written at Fascist Party HQ.

            • real_telemachus

              Much like the idiot who stole my identity and avatar who is polluting this blog with his inanities defending a corrupt plod.

        • ButcombeMan

          Keep on digging

        • Alexandrovich

          I bet you’re really good at Twister.

  • David Booth.

    The three numpties from the Police Federation now look rather ridiculous after their meeting with Mitchell.
    Three of them came out of the meeting saying one thing and Mitchel said the other.
    The idea that Mitchell might (did) record the conversation must have come as a surprise to the Pompous Boys In Blue.

    • anyfool

      If it came as a surprise to the police who record every word in an interview room automatically then they are monumentally stupid.
      Their Chief Constable is even more stupid if he thinks they are not liars and crooks.

    • ButcombeMan

      The average Police Officer andf I do mean average-not all of them, is of generally low intelligence, that is why the coalition are proposing an Officer Class.

  • In2minds

    Now we have, to quote this blog, ‘super cops’ it won’t happen again no more canteen culture, lessons learned, blah blah blah!

  • kyalami

    Why aren’t there prosecutions of the relevant police officers?

    • Holly

      I think it is the top brass of the force they are in who is ‘responsible’ for any further action.
      Great eh?

    • telemachus

      Why is there not a prosecution of a politician who recorded a meeting with the police without declaring it

      • Andy

        It was a private meeting. As far as I know he was entitled to record the event.

        • telemachus

          A private meeting that he has trumpeted ever since

          • real_telemachus

            Yes indeed, a private meeting that the 3 members of the police gave a press conference about immediately afterwards. How dare these people here question their veracity even after they were proved to be liars?

          • Andy

            You’ll find the West Midlands Police Federation are the ones who did the trumpeting. Unfortunately they lied about it didn’t they. We all understand that with you being part of the Fascist Party the truth and honesty are alien concepts.

          • ButcombeMan

            Of course he has, he was fighting back, for his reputation, against a number of Police Officers engaged in a calculated fit up. Over an extended period of time.

      • James Strong

        Why do you think that is a crime?

        • telemachus

          He entered the meeting like the others with good faith
          Did he declare it?

          • real_telemachus

            Yes, recording a conversation without informing the participants is a heinous crime far worse than conspiracy, fraud and corruption of a public office. How have we not seen this before and sentenced Mitchell to ten years hard labour?

          • Andy

            He didn’t need to. It was held on his premises. Please tell us under which Act and which Section of that Act it is a crime to record a conversation.

            • telemachus

              Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), it is not illegal for individuals to tape conversations “provided the recording is for their own use.”
              This manifestly was not for his own use
              Or did I imagine the tape I heard on WATO

              • Andy

                Manifestly it was ! He already knew that the Police were lying bast*rds. Police Pocket Books are not for publication, but they found themselves plastered all over certain newspapers. Those who live by the leak die by the leak.

              • real_telemachus

                Private use but released in the public interest – no offence. Next time learn the law before spouting of, you inept, numpty troll.

              • ButcombeMan

                Oh Dear, what a confused and desperate mind you have.

                Protection of his public repuation IS his “own use”.

              • Colonel Mustard

                I’d steer well clear of citing law in a way that makes your ignorance even more apparent if I were you.

                • telemachus

                  RIPA is clear
                  The interpretation of private use is the issue

                • Colonel Mustard

                  RIPA has never been clear. It is one of the most damaging pieces of legislation ever passed.

      • real_telemachus

        Quite right, we cannot have our elected Conservative Ministers of the Crown proving they were stitched up by our lefty police federation. Mitchell should be banged up for proving his innocence.

      • ButcombeMan

        He is not required to declare it. It is always open to any party to any conversation to record it.

        Solicitors do it all the time.

        In Mitchell’s situation it was very wise indeed.

      • Hexhamgeezer

        Because he already knew the cops were fitting him up and he needed to protect himself. Dork.

    • ButcombeMan

      I am being whispered to, that charges against MetPol Officers are imminent.

  • Colonel Mustard

    Misconduct in public office is an offence at common law triable only on indictment. It carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. It is an offence confined to those who are public office holders and is committed when the office holder acts (or fails to act) in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office.

    The elements of the offence are summarised in Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 2003 [2004] EWCA Crim 868. The offence is committed when a public officer acting as such wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconducts himself to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder without reasonable excuse or justification.

    In Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 2003 the court approved the definition of ‘wilful’ as ‘deliberately doing something which is wrong knowing it to be wrong or with reckless indifference as to whether it is wrong or not’.

    Never mind disciplinary proceedings there appears to be prima facie evidence that these three officers committed this offence. Why are the Home Secretary, the Attorney General, the DPP and the West Mercia Chief Constable apparently so ignorant of the law that they have not sought to bring proceedings? Are they suggesting that the West Mercia Police are above the law?

    • Andy

      The officers from West Mercia Police who attended a meeting with Andrew Mitchell gave an account of that meeting which was contrary to the recording of it. In other words they are liars. They should be dismissed.

      As to Pleb-gate this is nothing but a tissue of lies created by the Police. Why has it taken 13 months and still no resolution ? It should have been plain that this was a nonsense after 13 hours, 13 days and even 13 weeks, but 13 months ? As the Colonel points out these officers have a case to answer for ‘Misconduct in Public Office’. The law should take its course. And Hogan Howe should consider his position.

      • telemachus

        Come on
        He confessed to using the F word at police, there to protect him

        • arnoldo87

          Telemachus
          Why are you digging such a deep hole on this issue? The facts seem fairly clear:-

          Mitchell did swear at the policemen. I don’t like bad language, but we all use it when frustrated, as Mitchell was.

          There does appear to have been a conspiracy to “get” Mitchell by the police, and the statements of their representatives yesterday do nothing to dispel the worry that this is continuing.

          Mitchell seems to me to be an honourable man, and there is no substantiated evidence against him (other than his confession that he did swear).

          The big issue here is the one that Theresa May articulated – that of the Police losing the public trust.

      • MirthaTidville

        so having heard one just side of it, you know the full facts and are able to make a decision beyond all doubt……shakes head

        • Andy

          Listen to the recording of the meeting.
          Listen to the statement the three Police Officers made immediately after that private meeting.

          Compare the two. Which do you believe ????

    • KestrelSprite

      It seems to me that the misconduct in public office of Gordon Brown and his cronies was a far worse crime than this one but I’ll would be pleasantly surprised if they are ever charged.

    • telemachus

      All that has been shown today is that the Police Federation meeting was recorded and the account was inconsistent with the comments of some of the participants
      We have not heard objectively what was said in Downing street
      Contrary to today’s triumphalism Thrasher is not out of the woods yet

      • Andy

        What has been shown today is that the account given by the officers from West Mercia is a lie. We have a recording that proves that ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.

        As to what happened in Downing Street we know that the ‘member of the public’ who witnessed the incident was NOT a member of the public, but a serving policeman. We know that he wasn’t even there at the time – more lies. We know that the claim made that ‘the event was witnessed by several members of the public who were shocked by the comments’ is a lie. There was no one there as is clear from the CCTV.

        What we don’t have yet are a number of Police Officers charged with various offences, nor the head of Bernard Hogan-Howe. But that is where this is all going and will go. And you will be forced to eat a lot of humble pie for having so defamed an innocent man. He should sue you and the Fascist Party for libel.

        • telemachus

          I, nor others, are defaming

          We have on his own admission the statement (this transcribed from the DT)

          Mr Mitchell said he then dismounted his bicycle and wheeled it across to the pedestrian side exit but in doing so muttered: “I thought you guys were supposed to ******* help us.”

          • real_telemachus

            We must learn the difference between an adjective and a noun. We must differentiate between swearing in frustration and swearing at someone. We must be able to put aside our inbred student-Marxist rhetoric and understand that stitching up our elected representatives is not a good thing. We must grow up.

          • Andy

            Now telemachus, Fascist, where did he use the word ‘pleb’ ??????????????

            So the Police are liars ?????

            • telemachus

              The West Midlands Police

          • ButcombeMan

            It may have been undemeaning but it was not ilegal. It is not illegal to swear with frustration when alongside a Police Officer. We would not have many serving Police Officers were that so.

            Since it appears to me there was a criminal conspiracy to “Fit-Up” and “verbal” Mr Mitchell, his anger should be excused.

            You telemachus, and many others here and in the media, have been wrong about the Mitchell affair, from the beginning. You have enjoyed the spectacle too much, your judgement on this, as on so much, is seriously impaired.

            It was always an obvious old fashioned MetPol “verbal”.

            It is not just the Chief Constable Of West Mercia’s head which should be on a spike.

            Bernard Hogan- Howe made an utter fool of himself too. His leaping to the defence of the Officers has, I understand, complicated the eventual enquiries.

            Of course as I have said before, it is not the verballing of Mitchell that matters the most, it is the corruption inside MerPol and The Dipolomatic Protection Group, that leaked the fabricated log to try to damage a serving government Minister.

            This is third (corrupt) world stuff, worthy of Mr
            Mugabe’s finest.

            There needs to be a thorough stable clearing

            The gaggle of clowns from the Police Fed who also seem to have tried it on, may well have also been involved in a criminal conspiracy, as The Colonel says, to commit a malfeasance in public office.

            All the bent officers have let down their honest colleagues. They have thoroughly damaged the Police Service

            If any other Officer knows anything of this or any other wrong doing, they should step forward now and speak up..

            • Andy

              Totally agree. Which is why – because this involves the Diplomatic Protection Squad – that ALL those officers involved in this conspiracy must be severely punished.

            • telemachus

              Lets try another tack
              If you were a hard pressed under paid public servant and a Public School prefect type came along and used the f wort at you would it not be reasonable to do something to put that fool down?

              • Andy

                FFS, you really are an evil piece of work. Today the IPCC published a report which makes clear that the account of a meeting given by three serving officers from West Mercia Police and a Minister of the Crown was a lie. The IPCC believes that those officers should be held to account for those lies. And so they should.

                Just because Andrew Mitchell went to Rugby School you seem to believe it is perfectly acceptable for members of the Police Force to blatantly fabricate and lie about him. You seem to think it is perfectly acceptable for Police Officers to fabricate a story and record it in their pocket books and attempt to ‘stitch up’ a Minister of the Crown – not an ordinary member of the public, which would be outrageous enough, but someone who is one of Her Majesty’s Ministers.

                I have rarely read so contemptible and disgraceful a post seeking as it does to justify criminal actions on the part of serving Police Officers. You are indeed a member of the Labour Party (the Fascist Party) and your complete and utter lack of any sense of morality, honour or respect for the law shows the Labour Party is indeed the heart of evil.

                • telemachus

                  The police officers were wrong
                  That is not the same as the view that an imperious Cabinet Minister who uses the F word at minor public servants is not fit for office
                  Some would consider justice served

                • Andy

                  Which Police Officers were wrong ? We have two issues here.

                  And I would remind you that swearing at a Police Officer is not an offence in Law.

              • 2trueblue

                If you are a public servant and you perceive that you are underpaid, and that a ‘Public School prefect type’ came along and you make a judgement to lie about the facts, thats OK ? Frankly the question is Are you are just morally bankrupt?

                • telemachus

                  As above
                  The West Midlands Police Federation were in the wrong
                  All we know about Downing Street that is agreed is that Mitchell used the F word
                  This behaviour unbecoming of a Cabinet Minister

                • Colonel Mustard

                  The bad tempered swearing of a Cabinet Minister is as nothing compared to the politicisation of the police and an apparent conspiracy to subvert the rule of law.

                • telemachus

                  Come on
                  An officer who was wronged exceeded his brief to get his own back
                  What is political about that

                • Colonel Mustard

                  It was more than one officer and it was more than “exceeding his brief”. But then we already know your views about fabricating evidence against political opponents you disagree with. You once urged it here for UKIP so yours is hardly a credible opinion.

                • telemachus

                  Police pique versus Cabinet Ministers arrogance
                  This is the current nub
                  That is all

                • Colonel Mustard

                  Not for you to judge. You are not omnipotent just a silly little fellow mischievously disrupting a blog with inane comments that you and I both know are worth nothing.

                  Get help. You need it.

                • Andy

                  It is Police lies versus Cabinet Ministers honesty.
                  This is the current nub.

                • Andy

                  Not what you have been busy saying for hours. Why don’t you actually tell the truth: the three Police Officers form West Mercia Police lied. It isn’t difficult even for Fascist Party HQ to grasp that.

                • 2trueblue

                  So to lie is OK? To take a persons good name is OK? You really need to question yourself before you press the button. Or maybe you believe it is OK and then you have nothing decent to offer.

              • Hexhamgeezer

                Hard pressed and underpaid? You no-nothing tool

                • telemachus

                  Yes underpaid compared with the rich folk that use the F word at them

                • Hexhamgeezer

                  I refer the dishonourable threadworm to my previous answer.

              • Colonel Mustard

                I do hope for the sake of justice in our country that you are never allowed anywhere near government, never allowed to propose or draft law, never allowed to make any judgement decisions concerning the fate of a fellow human being.

                If you are an example of the inner workings of the Labour party then God help us all.

                • telemachus

                  Justice was served (see above)

                • Colonel Mustard

                  No, justice in this case has been very badly served.

                • telemachus

                  Which bit
                  Mitchell, a Cabinet Minister acted inappropriately and paid the price

                • Colonel Mustard

                  The conspiracy to defame and fabrication of evidence by the police bit, you red balloon.

                  Why do you keep repeating the same line over and over again like a parrot? Is that the Labour HQ brief? I notice they have expressed no outrage over police behaviour in this case. Does that presage another dose of East Germany from your nasty Marxist masters?

                • telemachus

                  Yes
                  On the contrary
                  The comments from straw have been unhelpful

                • Colonel Mustard

                  Like your comments here then.

              • ButcombeMan

                You have lost, are losing, the debate.

                Mitchell was fitted up by bent cops, it is that simple.

                It may also have ben pre-meditated, even the closing. or keeping closed, of the main gate, (which they would have opened had he been in car., as most Ministers are) may have been pre-meditated.

                Your desperation to turn the debate from the rather obvious Police corruption, to Mitchell, again, is silly, it is puerile, it betrays your partiallity and selectivity.

                You Sir, are an idiot..

                If Old Labour, which is what you represent, is FOR, Police Corruption and conspiracy, against a Cabinet Minister, just remember, your lot can be conspired against too.

                Mugabe would be proud of you.

                You are without morality or sense of justice.

                As “the Great Leader” would have put it, you are without moral compass.

                You disgust me.

                • telemachus

                  The moral dimension here includes the West Midlands Police who were wrong
                  AND Mitchell who swore at the Downing Street Police and was wrong
                  The outpouring of sympathy for a Cabinet Minister who admits swearing at the police is misplaced

                • Colonel Mustard

                  Which takes moral relativism to a whole new dimension. We all know that had the Cabinet Minister been Burnham your view would be completely different. You are an asinine tribalist of epic stupidity and malevolence. Even your comrades in the Labour party must be ashamed and embarrassed of your ridiculously disruptive antics here.

                • telemachus

                  Burnham would have had more respect
                  As to party loyalty I decry Straw’s interference in this matter

                • Colonel Mustard

                  You cannot possibly know that.

                • telemachus

                  He would have enough respect not to do so

                • Colonel Mustard

                  Well, he had little respect for the helpless elderly and infirm in a dozen hospitals under his supposed “care”.

                • Andy

                  Let us all remember those murdered in Mid Staffs. Amen.

                • ButcombeMan

                  You have so misjudged the whole situation that I fear for your sanity.

                  Personally I have no sympathy for Mitchell.

                  I am very angry about the criminality displayed by MetPol staff, the duplicity of the Police Federation jerks and the faiulre of the Commissioner and Chief Constables to understand what was going on.

                  One wonders how on earth these people get to these powerful posts if they fail to comprehend these issues.

                  Actually Bernard Hogan Howe getting it so wrong I think is terrifying, he still has responsibility for Anti Terrorism.

                  What price HIS judgement?

      • real_telemachus

        Mitchell is a Conservative and must therefore be guilty of all unfounded accusations. We cannot allow Cameron to get away with this and demand a public investigation by Sir Brian Leaveusalone to do what that nice Mr Grant tells him and find him unfit for office.

    • John Clegg

      I agree totally with your analysis. I would go further and say that this affair is potentially the most serious that I have known in my 60 odd years. Firstly, I have no truck with Conservative Ministers and even less with our corrupt Police Forces.

      However, whichever way you “cut this cake”, it remains the case that this looks like a deliberate attempt by some members of the police to undermine a democratically elected member of Her Majesty’s Government. I can think of nothing worse in our so-called free society.

      At the very least, there should be a thorough Judicial Inquiry, a trial of those accused and, if found guilty, then long prison sentences. Additionally there should then be immediate sackings of some very senior police officers.

      We all need to thoroughly clean out these corrupt police institutions, but I won’t be holding my breath.

      • telemachus

        Look so

        Mitchell has confessed to swearing at the police

        “I thought you guys were supposed to ******* help us.”
        This alone from a Cabinet Minister justifies his fate
        The CPS can decide on criminality but a Judicial Inquiry?
        Over the top Squire, don’t you think?

        • Tony_E

          You seem desperate that the word ‘F@@K’ be a reasonable sacking offence.

          And of course, with you being such a right on lefty of such moral high standing, it’s a word you have never used.

          • telemachus

            Of course we all get frustrated and swear
            But we are not all Cabinet Ministers required to respect our police and justice system, particularly in respect of those who protect them in sensitive areas

            • James Strong

              Michell said ‘you guys were supposed to f****** help us.’
              Very different from saying, ‘you f****** guys were supposed to help us’
              or ‘you f***ers were supposed to help us’
              The swearing, in the way Mitchell did it, is trivial. Or even less than trivial.

              • telemachus

                From a Cabinet Minister?

        • Colonel Mustard

          The machinations of the police in this case, including the behaviour of the three Chief Constables, is of far more significance to our society than the antics of a bad tempered Tory grandee on a bicycle. If you cannot appreciate that you are even thicker or more malevolent than any of us could have ever believed.

          • telemachus

            Any organisation should expect the leaders to protect the workers
            We only know for sure that Mitchell confessed to swearing at the police
            Listening to the WM statements I think you will agree they are a little equivocal

            • Colonel Mustard

              More dissembling from a very tedious troll. He did not “confess” to swearing “at” the police.

              I doubt that I could ever agree with you about anything – you are far too disagreeable. Some other Labour advocates at least attempt to engage reasonably. You on the other hand are just a tribalist propaganda parrot who would be denouncing the police as Tory conspirators if the Minister involved had been Burnham. That reduces your credibility below zero.

              Your comments are deliberately disruptive provocations. You know that and I know that. Far from being “reasonable” they demonstrate a sociopathy that you ought to seek help with.

              • telemachus

                You again introduce the irrelevance of Andy Burnham
                Are you trying to smear the man
                Your ad hominem devalue most of your posts

                • Andy

                  Let us all remember those murdered in Mid Staffs. May they receive JUSTICE. Amen.

          • John Clegg

            Agreed

    • Tony_E

      The CPS are due to report soon. If there are no charges brought against officers, then I think that a lot of questions about the effectiveness of Starmer’s department.

      • telemachus

        What is the crime in dissembling to the Press
        Politicians do it every day

        • Tony_E

          Because if I think a politician is lying I can campaign or even stand against him, or at very least vote for his opponent. The police are supposed to be public servants – and you are being wilfully ridiculous in drawing the comparison.

          • telemachus

            He swore at the police
            Was there not justice for that alone
            He is a Cabinet Minister and I do not wish my Government to do other than respect the Police

            • Tony_E

              How many people do you think swear in the presence of a policeman every Saturday night?

              How many of them end up with the police briefing the national press over the issue?

              Hmm. Do you think there might be an alternative motive?

              You have a real ‘hate’ issue. If they had tasered Mitchell, given him
              a good kicking and thrown him in the cells, you’d be here saying the
              same things you are now – your hatred of all Tories blinds you to
              anything other than the idea that the b#####d got what he deserved – the
              slave rose up against the master.

              The means justify the ends

              • telemachus

                Many Saturday night swearers end up kicking their heels in a Police Cell overnight and then a morning in front of the beak
                Mebbe that should have happened here

                • Hexhamgeezer

                  Rubbish.

            • Colonel Mustard

              Respect for the police is earned by their behaviour not warranted by their existence.

              • telemachus

                A society that respects not the law is moving towards anarchy
                The Machnovists understood this

                • Colonel Mustard

                  Respects not the law? Matthew Hopkins and labels again. Titter ye not.

        • Colonel Mustard

          Don’t judge everyone by your standards when it comes to willingness to lie and dissemble. You do that here every day so we understand your moral vacuum perfectly well.

          • telemachus

            The moral dimension here is the haughty arrogance of a Public Schoolboy who feels that the norms of society do not apply to him

            • Colonel Mustard

              No, it is the dimension of widespread politicisation, corruption and malfeasance in the police who seem to believe that they are above the law. That is the most significant aspect of this case.

              • telemachus

                By and large the police follow a Tory agenda
                Inasmuchasthis we have a measure of agreement

                • Colonel Mustard

                  You are incapable of measuring anything. You exist in a world of your own narcissistic dogma.

  • In2minds

    Cameron, who in another moment of weakness sacked Mitchell, should be the one to apologise.

    • Holly

      Maybe it is because Mitchell IS arrogant….
      But the police are Fc*king liars…..
      At least you know where you are with an arrogant b*****d.

    • ButcombeMan

      Indeed he should because he used somone to investigate the matter who by training and nature lacked the required competency.

  • Holly

    So lets just ‘harass May’ get her to apologise, and draw a line under dishonest police and their reps..
    Isabel I hope you never inadvertently write/say, or are involved in anything that involves police officers…Especially if YOUR innocence is reliant on THEIR notes!

    This blatant culture of dishonesty in the police is what you, the MSM, and the press should be telling us, not leaving us with the idea that May was in on the plot to ‘get rid of Mitchell…Then you wonder why we no longer ‘rate your ilk’.

  • Hexhamgeezer

    Snivelling squirming May and a corrupt politicised Police (Self) Service.

    Time for a change.

    • Holly

      You fell for Isabel’s ‘take on this’ then… That it is May who is in the wrong, and police deliberately falsifying events…AGAIN! is some kind of side story.

      • Hexhamgeezer

        No not at all. May nows the real story and has done for a long time and has mainly sat on her well upholstered @rse. She should have been on Hogan-H’s back since around Christmas.

        PS – I don’t think the ‘take’ is Ms H’s she’s just a conduit for @rse covering on obfuscating.

Close