October 24th, 2008

Ready, Steady, Cook!

Posted in The Job - Comment by 200

I don’t know about all this fuss over the police ‘cooking the books‘ on violent crime. I didn’t realise there was any story in it, to be honest; we’ve been classifying crime to the government’s best advantage for 30 years, I have no reason to believe it’s not much longer than that.

What I don’t understand is that we’ve actually done anything wrong. The nuts & bolts of it are that we’ve apparently been under-recording violent crime & classifying stuff less serious than it actually was.

The example I’ve seen on TV all seem to revolve this around the GBH with Intent offence. GBH (grievous bodily harm) is a serious injury usually involving some kind of serious wound or broken bone, so a black eye would be ABH (actual bodily harm), a fractured eye-socket would be GBH. A more serious offence than straight GBH would be GBH with Intent, so not only did you cause a grievous injury, you actually meant to injure him.

The example the reports are giving is that someone who, for instance, tries to hit someone with a broken bottle but misses should be charged with GBH with intent, because they obviously meant to injure someone.

Maybe we have a lot of failed violent thugs. You can picture the scene. “I’m a failure officer, I really meant to do him some damage but I only managed to cause a little love-bite sized bruise, please record this as a GBH with intent, it’ll go down much better on the litter-clearing community service I’ll get.

I guess, ultimately, it is part of the government’s modern ethos of recording ‘everything’ in the biggest arse-covering exercise we’ve been through which means we now criminalise people for throwing cream buns & pushing each other in the playground.

You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site. RSS 2.0

7 comments

  1. officer dibble says:

    As we are,by far,the most visible public punchbag,this type of ‘mia culpa’ chest beating often ends up at our door.
    The benchmark CPS charging ‘standards’routinely allow more serious injuries to be categorised as lesser offences.
    To me however what can be the far greater sin is what the CPS will accept as a plea if we ever get a decent assault to court to obtain an easy conviction

    October 25th, 2008 at 01:14

  2. Ready, Steady, Cook! | Low Price Cooking Info Blog says:

    [...] See the original post: Ready, Steady, Cook! [...]

    October 25th, 2008 at 01:24

  3. Chris Close says:

    Reading the press today is like reading bad fiction.

    Jean Charles de Menezes was murdered by a policeman.

    No-one accepted responsibility for this man’s death.

    No-one has been charged.

    Am I alone in thinking it is wrong for a policeman to shoot someone in the head whilst pinned down by another policeman?

    Especially when his only ‘crime’ appeared to have been that he was a bit ‘dark skinned’?

    Why has there been no clamour for prosecution of ‘C12′ for murder because he is murderer of that there is no doubt?

    Instead we read of his ‘tears’ and his ‘distress’.

    Is there no ‘clamour’ because Jean Charles was a ‘foreigner’ and so not ‘worthy’ of our anger against these Government sponsored killers?

    My mind ‘boggles’ at the ramification of this guy getting ‘off’ with murdering this man.

    Let’s start a clamour.

    Justice for Jean Charles

    Justice for Jean Charles
    Justice for Jean Charles
    Justice for Jean Charles
    Justice for Jean Charles
    Justice for Jean Charles
    Justice for Jean Charles
    Justice for Jean Charles
    Justice for Jean Charles
    Justice for Jean Charles
    Justice for Jean Charles
    Justice for Jean Charles
    Justice for Jean Charles

    October 25th, 2008 at 14:48

  4. Civ_In_The_City says:

    I heard the Hom Sec on the radio trying to explain that this was good news, violent crime is falling, we`re just ensuring that the variations of types of violent crime are being put in exactly the right slot. Clear as can be.

    But, oh dear, was anyone listening? All they heard was government policy has been to downgrade serious violence into lesser offences. Cooking the books as you say.

    Why are you doing this now? What are you trying to cover up? Why didn`t you do this years ago if you were so bothered about getting it right? IS this just sping because knife-crime is in the headlines? Etc.

    A good news day getting buried in an avalanche of criticism. Hom Sec must wonder what she has to do, already using the shorted simplest words possible, speaking really slowly. There was nothing she could say to straighten things out. Shame.

    More than ten years of Blair & Co spinning, misleading, looking on the bright side. Now we don`t believe that anything the government says hasn`t got some shady shenanigans behind it, especially when it comes to stats.

    If you live by the sword, be prepared to die by the sword.

    October 25th, 2008 at 14:48

  5. Plodnomore says:

    It’s true that the ‘books have been cooked’ for many a year, even long before the Home Office instructions, oh sorry, guidelines. An attempted burglary where entry was not full gained had to be crimed as a criminal damage; theft of a motor vehicle was often downgraded to ULT/TWOC even if the car was found burnt out; robbery was crimed as a theft and assault; the list goes on – at one stage a burglary was only a burglary if there was a body on the end of it, until that point it was a theft! Senior Management never wish to look incompetent and their wishes and desires would slowly filter down the chain of command by word of mouth – nothing written down so no come-back. However the Home Office interference and the CPS charging standards moe or less made this fraudulent crime recording acceptable, but not respectable. A more recent case of blatant stalking (harrassment) was twice downgraded to telephone nuisance calls before someone decided to take a really good look at the circumstances, though the powers that be weren’t best pleased. Our Crime Management Unit used to be known colloquially as the Crime Figures Manipulation Unit and as far as I know, still is.

    October 25th, 2008 at 15:00

  6. Blueknight says:

    Officer Dibble, I agree, the Police arrest for the actual offence.CPS undercharge it. NCRS over record it.Do CPS and NCRS ever talk to each other?
    Chris Close,the 21/7 bombers have been charged. They are ultimately responsible for the death of ‘Jean Charles’. The firearms officers should have been awarded medals.

    October 25th, 2008 at 23:48

  7. MarkUK says:

    As the difference between ABH & GBH is the degree of injury, how can people recording the stats know which category a failed assault fits in? OK, trying & failing to stab someone with a huge sharp knife is either GBH with intent (that failed) or attempted murder. No problem there.

    When it comes to a clown taking a swing at someone using an unbroken bottle, where does that fit? With enough force and targeting the back of the victim’s head, it’s attempted murder. Swiping at a collar bone would be attempted GBH with intent. If the target was the chest, then it’s a failed ABH and if the gluteus maximus that was targetted then it would have been Common Assault (with little or no injury).

    If the fool with the bottle was so drunk or slow as to miss completely, then how can the stats-gatherer know what was running – sorry, slowly ambling – through his/her mind?

    October 26th, 2008 at 15:06

Leave a comment