Hello, is that the Stasi, I have some information…
Just as I look forward to getting my full pension ex-PC Stuart Janaway has had his taken away. He was sacked this week by Greater Manchester Police following a disciplinary investigation into his association or otherwise of the British National Party.
Janaway was found to have worn a BNP badge whilst off duty at a football match at Old Trafford in 2006. Details of how this came to the attention of the rubber heel squad doesn’t appear to be reported but at some stage they received information that he might have items connected to the right-wing party at his home address & obtained a search warrant. A photograph of his wearing the badge at the match was found.
The former chief of GMP, a serial shagger who topped himself earlier this year, made an order in 2004 banning employees of GMP being members of the BNP, National Front & Combat 18. A GMP spokesman has admitted that there was no evidence found that Janaway was a member of the BNP & the BNP itself has said that he is not a member. Never-the-less he has been ‘required to resign’, for a discipline offence which he doesn’t appear to have committed.
There are several things which concern me. Firstly, what are the police doing getting search warrants to investigate disciplinary offences? I guess they would have had to prove to a magistrate that they had sufficient cause to search his house for property linking him to a criminal matter, what was this matter? nobody is saying.
Secondly, WTF has it got to do with GMP what their employees think? Surely they should be concerned with what their employees do? I have no wish to support the BNP or much of what they stand for but I support their right to believe what ever they want to believe; they are a legal political party.
I’m also worried that the ‘thought police’ are creating more problems than they are solving. There is little equality in the way discipline matters are investigated. If you send an ‘inappropriate email’ or tell a dodgy joke you can get the sack, but threaten to cause harm to an ex female partner or try to get away with a criminal offence by perverting the course of justice, you can keep your job & even get promoted.
PC Tariq Mahmood, in the same force as Stuart Janaway, fled the scene of an RTC in which 2 people were hurt, he then sprayed his car to cover up any evidence of the collision and tried to persuade his sister & girlfriend to say they had been driving at the time of the accident. He was fined one week’s wages.
Compare the two cases? Was there fair justice in either of them? I don’t think so.
James says:
It could appear that we already have the inverse of the BNP in power – or at least useful idiots.
How anyone could allow Tariq Mahmood to remain in the police is completely beyond the pale.
October 3rd, 2008 at 8:51 pm
MarkUK says:
I detest the BNP and all they stand for, but freedom of expression means freedom for ALL – even the obnoxious.
October 3rd, 2008 at 10:05 pm
officer dibble says:
I dont think the legitimacy of the assorted CC’s sacking/banning their troops from association or even membership of BNP was ever legally legitimate anyway.If ever challenged I feel it would fall by the wayside.
Whatever opinions there are on the subject of the BNP they remain a legal ‘non proscribed’ political organisation.Boris has a BNP member on his assembly.
So wearing a lapel badge with BNP would appear to be an offence that presumably some one has passed by a magistrate/judge for a search warrant.Does the sight of a PC with a Labour lapel badge merit this?
I suggest PC Janaway gets some representation a damn sight better than the Federation have provided so far and engage them to do some digging.
October 3rd, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Blueknight says:
If the Labour Govt had the bottle they would proscribe (ban) the BNP. They haven’t, so it remains a legitimte political party.
Why not make a it a rule that Police Officers cannot be a member of any political party, or wear any political party badges? – Including Labour.
October 4th, 2008 at 12:40 am
Too afraid to say says:
The police in the UK are now politicized in a way which I have never seen before. It is reminiscent of a totalitarian state. Weeks is right in his use of the term “stasi”. OK we don’t shoot people in the back of the head or throw them into furnaces for holding a politically incorrect viewpoint but we do sack them and seize almost all their savings (pension contributions) leaving them penniless and probably unemployable. In what way are Janaways’s actions different from officers who attend “approved political events” in full uniform, for example gay pride marches and Black Police Association activities?
I had always thought that as a police officer it was a requirement of my office NOT to take an active part in politics. Is this no longer the case? Not if your activities are “approved” or “correct” it would seem…
I find it utterly repugnant that a race based pressure group is given official sanction and many of its members seem to be the new untouchables. Anecdotal evidence abounds in every force of people like PC Tariq Mahmood and their antics and the organizations fear to deal with their criminality. No wonder Dodgy Dizai thinks he can act with impunity (unlawful arrests, false imprisonment, perverting the course of justice, embezzlement, threatening his ex). Surely a police officer is a police officer whether they are black white or sky blue pink and so long as the people they sleep with are consenting adults – who cares – but the same standards of behaviour are, or should, be expected of us all.
I would be very interested to hear the information laid to get the warrant to search Janaways home.
Am I alone in finding this disturbing?
October 4th, 2008 at 2:01 am
Rob Brown says:
Wouldn’t it show that common sense can prevail if PC Tariq Mahmood was to go public with his support for PC Janaway.
That would show that the normal coppers have more sense and loyalty to each other and are far more intouch with public feeling than their political puppet superiors are.
Go on Mr Mahmood you know its the right thing to do and you could get headlines for the right reasons, I for one would take my hat off to you.
October 4th, 2008 at 9:21 am
Twining says:
I’m with the last comment above.
October 4th, 2008 at 11:32 am
Sarah Davies says:
Certainly if this were any other political party it would be a human rights issue. This man has been punished for supporting a legal political party and that is outrageous, it is effectively state interference in a citizens political beliefs.
If the BMP were illegal then there might be an excuse but it is not.
This is thought control and what’s next? will someone get sacked for belonging to a church those in power disapprove of?
October 4th, 2008 at 11:51 am
John Simons says:
The origonal falsity that ‘A state employee could not support a particular legal party’ was so wrong it is scary that was given the time of day!
THIS CASE MUST BE USED TO CHALLENGE THIS UNJUST MADNESS
A judgement here would also assist others, for example the Teacher who was also sacked for BNP support despite a good career record
October 4th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Civ_In_The_City says:
Might I hazard a guess that Mr Janaway is white?
The kind of diversity we don`t celebrate in this country is diversity of political opinion, or thought. Equality for all, except those whose political views we don`t agree with. That is the essence of what is wrong with political correctness. It has the opposite effect to it`s own declared intentions.
If Janaway was spotted on a BNP march through his town centre chanting some sort of abuse then he should be up for serious disciplinary action and probably dismissal. Of course he should.
But having said all of that, from the sounds of it there is no evidence of him having any involvement with the BNP other than displaying a badge on at least one occasion and a couple of panphlets in his own home. No marching, no chanting, no firebombs, no recruiting of fellow officers, no fights in the canteen.
But when there is the possibility of breaching ‘politically correct’ views you don`t need any evidence of course. The GMP don`t need evidence he is a member of the BNP, they don`t need any evidence that he holds racist, homophobic or sexist views. They don`t need evidence that these views have affected his ability to do his job impartially.
They only need evidence that he is white, and that there is a remote possibility that he may once have held a view that could potentially be an embarrassment to the GMP.
A police service that decides guilt based on something other than evidence? Should make clearing up murder cases a lot easier doing it that way. Just pick up the next person walking past the station whose eyes are a bit too close together. Easy.
I will dare to say that there are staff and officers working in the GMP right now who are involved in far more distasteful things than Janaway, as there are throughout the country.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Tony F says:
As the BNP is still, unfortunately, a legal political party, supporting it is still legal. Perhaps a policeman showing support for the BNP is a bit thoughtless, but as he was in civvies and not on duty, what offence has he committed? If he was wearing an Al-Qaeda badge and if he was a muslim, would be treated in the same way? I think not.
October 4th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
ted says:
Perhaps GMP could assist us all by giving a list of which other legal political parties you can be sacked for supporting.
I don’t share the beliefs of the BNP and would question the judgement of anyone who did but sacking anybody for wearing the badge of a legal organisation whilst off duty is a step on the road to a big brother society.
October 4th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Plodnomore says:
As mentioned above, the BNP, although a party which actively promotes obscene, obnoxious and racist policies, is still a legal political party and, in law, no Chief Constable has the authority to ban members of his Force from being a member or supporting that party. Are the same restrictions placed on officers being members of a Left Wing party such as the Communist party – which also actively promotes obscene, racist and obnoxious policies – or the Labour or Conservative parties, or even the Monster Raving Loony Party which actively promotes rather strange policies. The law states that a Constable may not take an ACTIVE part in politics. The question arises whether wearing a badge, if there is any proof that the badge was worn, constitutes taking an ACTIVE part. Also, where were the Federation in this? Have they challenged any part of this Force’s appaerently hooky methods of investigation? If not, why not? I would think that a very good lawyer would result in this young man being re-instated, possibly with a wedge of cash in compensation (which could then donate to a fund for the vicitms of the holocaust). I have, in my home, flags of the old DDR and Soviet Union which I obtained as souvenirs of my time in the Army in BAOR. The possession of these did not make me a card carrying member of the Communist party, at least, not where I was serving. Not so long ago, a county foce not so far from the Metropolis made it a disciplinary offence to have racist, homophobic or sexist THOUGHTS (and introduced a dedicated telephone line where ‘offenders’ could be reported whilst the accusers could retain their anonymity). Any student of the history of the Communist party in Russia will know that this form of thought crime was only the precursor to the introduction of a totalitarian state ‘for the good of the country’. Dasvadanya.
Plodnomore
October 4th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Just Interested says:
Plodnomore: If it’s not an indelicate question, which force was it that made it an offence to have racist, etc. thoughts? Are there any news items about it you can direct me to?
October 15th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Guilty Without Association « Solomon Hezekiah says:
[...] the badge. It was a member of the public who had a grudge against him. Something even scarier? As another police officer noted, how did the police get a search warrant for Janaway’s house because of something that did [...]
November 19th, 2008 at 2:04 am