The Ferris Conspiracy Forum
Sign up  |   |   |  Calendar

Note: This topic is locked. No new replies will be accepted.

  Author   Comment   Page 6 of 18     «   Prev   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   Next   »

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 8,395
Reply with quote  #76 




'INFORMATION is money," Elmore Davies said. "And I am privy to a great deal of information." As a detective chief inspector working on investigations into drug dealing and smuggling, Davies undoubtedly had information that was very valuable to criminals - and utterly devastating to his fellow policemen.

Davies was willing to sell whatever he knew. A promise of £10,000 from a drug baron, Curtis Warren, was enough to secure the knowledge that there was an undercover agent spying on Warren in his Dutch prison. It also bought information that would enable Warren's minions to intimidate a policeman whose evidence would be crucial to a trial Warren wanted aborted. It included details on how to get to the officer's children.

How many more policemen like Davies are there? The judge who sentenced him evidently believes the answer is "very few". He said Davies's offences were "completely out of the normal line of cases of perverting justice and corruption". The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) has publicly asserted the same. David Blakey, ACPO's president and Chief Constable of Mercia, stated recently that: "The true level of corruption in the modern police service is extremely low."

Really? The Sunday Telegraph has obtained the minutes of a highly confidential meeting organised by the National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS). The topic of the meeting, held on June 23, one month before Blakey's statement, was "Combatting Corruption in the Police Service".

The 10 participants, all past or present members of ACPO, were among the most senior chief police officers and policy-makers in the country. They included the director general of NCIS, the deputy chief constables of Merseyside and West Midlands police, the director general of the National Crime Squad and two representatives from Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary.

They all agreed that "corrupt officers existed throughout the UK" - not just in the Met, nor even just in the major conurbations. Roger Gaspar, NCIS's director of intelligence and probably best placed to know, indicated that police corruption had become "pervasive" and may have reached "the situation which occurs in some Third World countries".

The "common activities" of corrupt officers included theft of property and drugs during searches; planting of drugs or stolen property on individuals; supplying details of operations to criminals; and aborting investigations or destroying evidence.

"In severe cases," NCIS's director of intelligence added, "this would include the committing of serious crimes, including armed robbery and drug dealing, or the licensing and organising of such crimes."

The Met has the reputation of being the only force where corruption is a serious problem because of Sir Paul Condon's frank admission that he might have "250 corrupt officers" working for him. If NCIS's director of intelligence is right, chief constables of provincial forces have a problem of similar magnitude. The only difference is that they have been far less open about it.

Consider Merseyside police force, where Detective Chief Inspector Elmore Davies worked. In 1992, it became clear to Sir James Sharples, the Chief Constable, that some of his officers were selling vital details of police operations against drug dealers - details such as the identity of undercover informers, the date and times of proposed arrests, and the location of police observation posts.

A joint operation by Customs and the regional crime squad obtained the itemised phone records of a number of notorious drug dealers. Those records showed that the criminals were ringing numbers inside Merseyside police drugs and fraud squads. So great was the fear that corrupt officers were gleaning information about investigations into drug smugglers that one major operation had to be moved outside the Merseyside police force area altogether.

But it did not put an end to corruption. In 1995, Customs provided further evidence that Merseyside officers were still selling drug barons information that sabotaged operations. In what amounted to an astonishing admission of the lack of trust he had in his own officers, Sir James secretly gave permission to Customs officers to tap telephones, not just at the Admiral Street police station in Toxteth, but also in his own HQ at Canning Place.

It was not just drugs squad personnel who were not informed of the Customs investigation. Even Sir James's own senior staff were not told. No operational orders were issued from his office. More than 30 Home Office-approved telephone surveillance warrants were also issued - many of them for police officers' domestic phones.

After the investigation was complete, Sir James quietly disbanded Merseyside's drug squad, its fraud squad and its serious crime squad. An unknown number of officers retired early on grounds of ill health, or were moved to less sensitive positions. There was no public statement of any kind. Indeed, this is the first time that this extensive corruption investigation has been made public.

Sir James subsequently set up his own anti-corruption force, tactfully called the "Professional Standards Unit". It was commended this month by the Inspectorate as "a brave and far-sighted initiative" - as indeed it is. But the events that led to its creation show how different the reality of Merseyside's corruption problem is from the picture of "a few isolated rotten apples" painted for the public.

Merseyside is by no means alone, or untypical of police forces across England and Wales. There are at least 110 officers in seven different forces who are either under investigation or facing charges. And that is just those who have been stupid enough, or unlucky enough, to raise the suspicions of their honest colleagues.

It is extremely rare for officers to be caught red-handed, and still rarer for their corruption to be publicly acknowledged by their chief constables. As the NCIS meeting noted: "Acts of corruption . . . are not normally seen or recognised for what they are . . . Most corrupt officers are efficient and effective investigators . . . Obtaining quality evidence is extremely difficult."

Obtaining corrupt policemen does not, however, seem to be difficult for drug dealers. "Finding a cop who'll help out is not a problem," said one drugs smuggler who works outside London and who has spoken extensively to The Sunday Telegraph. "Some policemen just want a share of the money you can earn through drugs. They can collect more than their month's salary for a few minutes work for one of us."

The criminal claimed to have policemen who would sabotage operations against him and his friends for as little as £3,000 - "holiday money", as he calls it. He also said that there was a contact in the Crown Prosecution Service who had been used because he could ensure that vital pieces of evidence were "lost".

Curtis Warren is estimated to have amassed a fortune of nearly £50 million through drug smuggling. He would hardly have noticed the few thousand pounds needed to corrupt DCI Davies. And though Warren is now serving a 12-year sentence in Holland, little if any of his money or assets have been tracked down.

Tracing the money is one way of combatting corruption. The director of intelligence for NCIS suggested others: for example, greater use of "integrity testing", a procedure in which a corrupt offer is made to an officer in order to test his reaction. If he takes the bait, he could face dismissal or even prosecution.

The June NCIS meeting also "considered radical options", such random drug testing and polygraph tests for officers. The director of intelligence also suggested using techniques of "profiling" in order to identify corrupt individuals - although one problem with profiling (which is normally used to help identify serial killers) is that it may fail to pick out the worst offenders, for the simple reason that "some of the most overtly honest officers have actually been extremely corrupt".

The meeting also noted that one of the controls on corruption is "a vigorous, uncensored media". Recognising the media's role, it decided that "ACPO should develop a strategy to deal with the adverse publicity" that the exposure of corruption always gives rise.

The result was the ACPO press release stating that "the true level of corruption in the modern police service is extremely low". The "strategy" seems to consist of denying that there is a serious problem with corruption at all. In this connection, the participants at the NCIS meeting noted that "the dismissal of officers for breaches of the code of conduct may prove a more attractive option than their pursuit through the courts", even though, as the minutes of the meeting dryly noted, "in a large number of cases we are dealing with serious and organised crime".

It seems still to be true that of all of the police forces in the country, only the Met is actually prepared to be open about the scale of corruption and the measures being taken to combat it. A senior Merseyside police officer told The Sunday Telegraph that he felt his force was in an impossible position - "damned if we do, and damned if we don't". The more the police arrested corrupt officers, the more the public would believe that the whole service was corrupt.

He insists that Merseyside is in the process of changing its stance. "We are going for a warts-and-all strategy. We accept that we will have a price to pay. We just ask the public to have faith in us and trust us."

But if there has been a change of heart on Merseyside, it would seem to fly in the teeth of ACPO's policy. That policy currently seems to consist of deliberately deceiving the public about the true level of corruption within the British police - and thereby ensuring that the Met has an unjustified reputation as the only place in Britain where cops take bribes.

The TRUTH is out there...........

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 8,395
Reply with quote  #77 



While serving his latest sentence, Ferris detailed his criminal exploits in his book. This also implicated his former confidante, Thomas McGraw, the leading underworld figure known as "The Licensee", in several crimes, leading to rumours of a four-figure price being placed on Ferris’s head.

Yesterday, though, Mr McKay said his friend was determined not to return to his old ways.

He said: "We already have several books in draft form, which we will begin working on as soon as he is out of prison.

"Paul has said goodbye to being a criminal and wants to draw on his experiences and his knowledge of the underworld to write about crime instead. We are determined to make crime fiction as realistic as possible."

However, not all are convinced Ferris can leave behind his former life of crime and the lifestyle that went with it.

One detective said: "It will come as no surprise to me and many of my colleagues if he is back to his old tricks within days of his release.

"He may think he is clever but he hasn’t got the brains or the conviction to lead an honest life."


ferrisconspiracy VIEW: How WRONG when you look back at the past and read one very WRONG detective and his MANY colleagues comments.


As for brains? perhaps that is why they chose a career in the police farce in the first place

The TRUTH is out there...........

Posts: N/A
Reply with quote  #78 

Steeleyma was drivin along Greenock today n what passed me by.....An ARNOLD CLARK minibus full o polis!  n whats about them traffic polis hidin in corners in GREY they think we are blind! eejits, more o our money wasted! xxxsteeleyma

Posts: N/A
Reply with quote  #79 

hi hammers6.i have read your quote from the pond life.when they say hasn't got the brains.well anybody who can sit down and write books and expose police corruption and grasses i would call that person very intelligent  .as far as them saying up to hes old tricks maybe its because there walking on egg shells terrified of the thought that more is going to be exposed aboat all there dodgy dealings.

Posts: N/A
Reply with quote  #80 

Hi Linda just when you were saying about brains I remember doing a course not long ago criminology at college one theory was "criminals" had low intelligence.  I then went to do another while volunteering in a prison and people who think "criminals" are thick are sooooo wrong if you look at the planning that goes into some crimes and the things they get up to in prison they would make a fortune if they put that work in2 something society sees as legal........I was amazed at some of the stuff 


Avatar / Picture

Posts: 9,107
Reply with quote  #81 
Originally Posted by linda

hi hammers6.i have read your quote from the pond life.when they say hasn't got the brains.well anybody who can sit down and write books and expose police corruption and grasses i would call that person very intelligent  .as far as them saying up to hes old tricks maybe its because there walking on egg shells terrified of the thought that more is going to be exposed aboat all there dodgy dealings.

Dodgy dealings?.........................Cop for a bit of this again that ended up with MASS PERJURY & 2 INNOCENT men spending 20 odd years in jail for a crime the never even committed.


We all know who got the Doyle's killed and we ALL KNOW WHO COVERED THEIR ASS.


Archive from transcripts of a supergrass:


LOVE:  It was the man called Norrie Walker, now…. I don’t know who the other man is but I think his name is McKillop.  I don’t know, I’m not sure, that’s only me people hearing that his name was that, I’m not sure, but like, I could recognise him again and say that was him.


LISA: Craig didn’t eh, suggest anything?


LOVE: Oh he was in on it.  He had me up at Easterhouse Police Station telling that I was to say this, and I was saying this, and everything would be alright….


LISA: So it was Walker, Craig and another officer?


LOVE: That’s it, yes.


JOHN: How many times did Craig have you at Easterhouse Police Station?


LOVE: Twice.  He had me there like, the day after I got out on bail and then a couple of days later he had me there.


JOHN: Did they ever have you at any other Police Station, or other location?


LOVE: Yes, Pitt Street.


JOHN: How many times did he have you at Pitt Street?


LOVE: I think I was at Pitt Street maybe three or four times in the, all the time that I was, I was also actual…actually at eh, the old Central Police Station, you know the Central at….


JOHN: At Turnbull Street, the Central District Court building….?


LOVE: That’s it, the Central Courts are in it…. Yes, I was in there a couple of times as well.  That’s where they used to take me when I was seeing…. Like it just depends.  I used to go to this Fiscal’s office and that or they would take me to a cop station first and like, you know what I mean.


JOHN: You were at Easterhouse a couple of time, Pitt Street


LOVE: …a couple of times, maybe three or four times….


JOHN: …couple of times, three or four times….


LOVE: Then I was at Central maybe twice or something….


JOHN: …Turnbull Street….twice.  Any other locations?


LOVE: No, no other locations.


JOHN: And was all this prior to your giving evidence in the Doyle trial?


LOVE: It was prior to me going to court and giving evidence in the trial.


DOUGLAS: When it comes up on the computers down here when you’re arrested, how do the Police in London and England react to what you’ve done?  Are they impressed?


LOVE: I mean, they’re reaction is that they want fucking more, they’re greedy cunts… they don’t know when to stop man.  Are you on the bandwagon like that, “Bill, come on now man, just sign that there mate and we’ll sort it out in the morning, you’ll get bail”.


DOUGLAS: How do they… when they find out that eh, the law in Glasgow didn’t fulfil their promises….?


LOVE: But that’s what I’m saying.  Now when I was arrested in Ealin and all that other day there right, the cops and that in Ealin because it comes up now and they contacted up the road just to make sure and all that right, that I wasn’t….  Now, the guys were sick, the guys were sick that they had to go back to that fucking address at the house in Northolt and all that and they knew what was happening because I told them.  I said, “listen mate”, I said, “see all them up the road, they’re all just dirty fucking scum mate”, I said, “I don’t want to help them”, know what I mean.


JOHN: Are you talking about the police?


LOVE: This is the police in Ealin and I’m telling them what’s going on and I’m saying “listen mate, I don’t want to help them up there”, and all that, you know what I mean, I said I’m not interested.


JOHN: Them up there, who would “they” be?


LOVE: That would be the cops in Glasgow.


DOUGLAS: Had they suggested  that you help them out up there or something?


LOVE: Oh yes.  I mean they, I mean they, they would still have had me in Garthamlock just now if they could have gotten away with it – giving them information and telling them what this is and that, you know what I mean.  I mean, they fucking had me marked, they sent me back to Garthamlock after I had Norrie Walker sent me back to Garthamlock….after Tommy Campbell had been arrested and all that.  And wanted me to go back into Garthamlock and find shotguns and drugs and all that carry on.


JOHN: Did you know anything about shotguns and drugs?


LOVE: I didn’t know anything about shotguns and drugs.  I had only seen one in my life.  That was the first time I think I had seen a sawn off shotgun in my life.


JOHN: Is that the one you used at the icecream van?


LOVE: That’s the one I used, yes.


DOUGLAS: Did you go back to Garthamlock?


LOVE: Yes.


DOUGLAS: Did you do that?


LOVE: For a day.  Then I fucked off down the road, down here with my wife and that.  Then like, I had cops…. I ended up in my stepdad’s house in Ivy Bridge Estate, that’s Summerwood Road, not that address but a different address on the same road.  And like, I actually had a fucking cop tracking me down man, I was fucking, I walked out of my fucking unc… my stepdad’s  man, and there was a big cop station there.  He says “Billy Love”, I said, “You’re fucking kidding man”.  I fucked off with the intention of just blanking them and not giving them evidence.  I was wanting to get off man, on my toes, but they tracked me down again.  And then, this is what they did.  I ended up back in Dundee and they nicked me for a driving while disqualified because they knew I was fucking off didn’t I?  I kept trying to move and all that….


JOHN: Are you saying that you were trying to avoid being available to give evidence?


LOVE: I mean, if they hadn’t of got me, I wouldn’t have given evidence in the trial, as simple as that.  I wouldn’t have turned up.


DOUGLAS: And you’re willing to sign statements and affidavits based on your previous conversation with Mr Carroll?


LOVE: That’s it, that’s it.


DOUGLAS:  And just to recap.  Nobody has threatened or offered you any inducements at all?


LOVE: Nothing at all, no.  A cup of tea, I got.


DOUGLAS: A cup of tea, yes…


LOVE: In a nice hotel room.


DOUGLAS: I think that’s it, right.  Thanks very much.


JOHN: Do you want to date that Doug….


DOUGLAS: Oh yes, its eh, Saturday the twenty second February….


JOHN: It’s nineteen ninety two and it’s my birthday.




Avatar / Picture

Posts: 1,480
Reply with quote  #82 

It was a damn disgrace then and still is now. Why aren't those responsible for this Mass murder in jail and why are those who agreed to, and aided and abetted in a cover up not in prison with them......WHY IS THERE STILL NO JUSTICE FOR THE DOYLE FAMILY??????????????????????????????????????? Bilko

Law and justice are not always the same. When they aren't, destroying the law may be the first step toward changing it. :D

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 9,107
Reply with quote  #83 

Bilko, where there is no justice the judiciary have to look at themselves for the shame and the pain of a terrible crime.


For the judiciary to look at the case it opens up a can of worms that so many so-called police officers committed MASS perjury in a MASS murder trial that resulted in the wrong guys being fitted up.


What do you expect them to do?........admit what they done? ......nay danger mate.


The PUBLIC & the DOYLE family have been deceived again and again....there is nothing for the Doyle family except sadness and not a whiff of TRUTH... SHAME ON ALL WHO COVERED THIS UP!


Avatar / Picture

Posts: 1,480
Reply with quote  #84 
Originally Posted by Admin2

Bilko, where there is no justice the judiciary have to look at themselves for the shame and the pain of a terrible crime.


For the judiciary to look at the case it opens up a can of worms that so many so-called police officers committed MASS perjury in a MASS murder trial that resulted in the wrong guys being fitted up.


What do you expect them to do?........admit what they done? ......nay danger mate.


The PUBLIC & the DOYLE family have been deceived again and again....there is nothing for the Doyle family except sadness and not a whiff of TRUTH... SHAME ON ALL WHO COVERED THIS UP!


Bilko knows full well that no one will be stepping up to admit blame in this case Admin2. I knew the answer to my question a long time ago.....I was  putting the question out there again for others to read and ask the same.....WHY NO JUSTICE YET FOR THE DOYLE FAMILY?????????????????       Bilko

Law and justice are not always the same. When they aren't, destroying the law may be the first step toward changing it. :D

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 9,107
Reply with quote  #85 

I fully understand there will never be justice for the Doyle family nor the Campbell's or the Steele's..


Avatar / Picture

Posts: 8,395
Reply with quote  #86 

Large Audio Image

The BBC's Colin Blane

Small Audio Icon Real Media

"Thomas Campbell and Joseph Steele claimed they had been framed"

11 Dec 2001

The TRUTH is out there...........

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 9,107
Reply with quote  #87 

Ice cream trial judge slams appeal verdict.

THE judge in the original Ice Cream War murder trial has condemned an appeal court ruling overturning the conviction of the two men he sentenced to life in prison.

In 1984, Lord Kincraig told Thomas ‘TC’ Campbell and Joe Steele that he regarded them as "vicious and dangerous men" as he passed sentence for the murders of six members of the Doyle family who died after a fire-raising attack on their flat in Ruchazie in Glasgow, in April that year.

But last week, after a 20-year fight to prove their innocence, Campbell and Steele were cleared by the court of appeal, which ruled police officers’ testimony had been called into serious doubt by new studies carried out by psychologists.

Different police officers testified at the original trial that they had recalled incriminating statements made by the men almost word for word, but in tests the psychologists found people were not able to remember even short statements to a high degree of accuracy.

But Kincraig, now in his 80s, said the validity of the officers’ statements was a question for a jury and not a judge.

"The court of appeal has usurped the function of the jury. The function of the jury is to decide questions of fact not law," he said.

"They seem to have said that evidence [the police statements] is not believable, which is the jury’s province. That’s a decision in fact. The court of appeal has decided in fact the jury was wrong."

During his summing up before the jury went out to consider its verdict, Kincraig said that to believe the defence’s claims that police had invented statements by Campbell and Steele would mean accusing a large number of officers of taking part in a conspiracy to frame them.

Following the appeal court decision, Kincraig told Scotland on Sunday: "I cannot accept there was a conspiracy among the police. That’s the implication of the [appeal court] judgment, but I don’t accept that."

The retired judge said he did not have a view on whether Campbell and Steele were actually guilty of the crime or not, insisting that was a matter for a jury rather than him or any other judge.

But Kincraig admitted: "I’ve been retired for 18 years and what happens nowadays goes over my head."

Psychologist Professor Brian Clifford was asked by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) to look at the statements allegedly made by the men and reported by police.

Campbell was claimed to have said: "I only wanted the van windaes shot up. The fire at Fat Boy’s was only meant to be a frightener which went too far."

He denied making it but it was written in the notebooks of four police officers at the time with a high degree of similarity.

Clifford carried out studies in Scotland and in England testing people on their ability to recall phrases immediately after hearing them.

On average, people recalled between 30% and 40% of the actual words they heard. The highest score by anyone trying to recall what Campbell was supposed to have said was 17 out of 24 words used.

Under questioning by Graham Bell QC, acting for Campbell at the appeal hearing, Clifford said the results "strongly suggested it was not at all likely" the four officers would have separately recorded what was said "in such similar terms".

Speaking to Scotland on Sunday, Clifford said in the past courts had not recognised such psychological studies as evidence. But he added: "Nowadays law practitioners are becoming much more aware of psychological literature.

"The science behind it is how people remember utterances. The science clearly says you process it for meaning rather than actual wording. The one thing we know about memory is that it’s limited. Because it is limited, we engage in a number of different strategies to remember. We focus on the meaning and forget about the words."

In the appeal court ruling issued last week, Lord Gill, the lord justice clerk, told Campbell and Steele, who had already been freed from prison pending the appeal: "Your convictions are quashed and you are free to go."

The judge stressed the importance of the psychological studies in the decision to overturn the 1984 jury’s decision.

"Our conclusion is that any jury hearing Prof Clifford’s evidence would have assessed the evidence of the arresting police officers in an entirely different light," Gill said.

"The evidence of Prof Clifford is of such significance that the verdicts of the jury, having been returned in ignorance of it, must be regarded as miscarriages of justice."

Following the quashing of his conviction, Campbell has called for a public inquiry and a re-investigation of the murder.

However, while police and the Crown Office are still to consider the written judgment from the case, it is thought unlikely that a fresh murder investigation will be launched.

Two leading police officers on the case have also since died.

In 1988, Detective Superintendent Norrie Walker was found dead in his fume-filled car. Detective Chief Superintendent Charles Craig, head of the CID at the time, died in 1991 at the age of 57.

Related topic


Avatar / Picture

Posts: 8,395
Reply with quote  #88 

Strathclyde Police Primary Inspection 2004.

Description 2004 Primary Inspection of Strathclyde Police Force
ISBN 0 7559 4310 4
Official Print Publication Date
Website Publication Date September 28, 2004

Contents | Next »

hmic badgeStrathclyde Police Primary Inspection 2004
A Report by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabularyfor Scotland

This document is also available in pdf format (576k)


Structure of Force
Senior Management
Change Management
Strathclyde Joint Police Board
Strategic Planning
Programme Management
Performance Management
Corporate Communications
Policy Management
Structure of Human Resource Management
Staff Appraisal
Career Development
Race Equality Scheme
Occupational Health and Welfare Services
Ill-Health Retirement
Innovation and Creativity
Special Constabulary
Partnership Working
Glasgow Airport Limited
Dalmellington Area Centre
Bridging the Gap
Community Planning
Financial Performance
Devolved Budgeting
Local Authority Precept
Activity-Based Costing
Best Value
Internal Audit
Force Inspectorate
Allocation of Resources
Management of Resources
Legal Services
Crime Management
Information Resources - Pinnacle
Covert Policing
Forensic Support
Strathclyde Policing Model and NIM Process
Intelligence Analysis
Family Protection Unit
National Standards for Child Protection
Financial Investigation Unit
Vulnerable Persons Database
Youth Justice
Reporting Offenders
Integration of Scottish Criminal Justice Information Systems
Call Management
Victim Issues
Family Liaison
Operation Prism
Road Policing
Road Policing Intelligence Office
Strathclyde Safety Camera Partnership
Community Speedwatch
Air Support
Marine Unit
Public Order
Emergency Planning
Professional Standards
Health and Safety
Custody and Care of Prisoners
Freedom of Information
Police National Computer
Race Issues - Internal
Race Issues - External
Corporate Health
Corporate Identity
Service Delivery
Firearms Licensing
Crime Recording


Professional Standards

5.109 It is normal practice for HMIC during the inspection process to examine a force's complaint handling process. As HMIC has recently completed a thematic inspection of complaints against the police across Scotland, including Strathclyde Police, and published the resulting report, Quality of Service (2004), on this occasion, it has restricted its examination to the force's Complaints and Discipline Department, Professional Standards Unit (PSU).

5.110 In Quality of Service, HMIC has recommended that ' all forces should be supported by a dedicated professional standards unit, capable of conducting robust proactive investigation'. Strathclyde Police operates a very significant dedicated unit which meets these criteria. Professional standards units were a result of a recommendation contained in a 1999 thematic report produced by HMIC for England and Wales, designed to ensure forces were capable of dealing with internal corruption and pro-actively maintaining integrity. Strathclyde Police established its unit in 2000 following a force working group that examined integrity issues within the force. The Unit currently consists of a superintendent, chief inspector, two inspectors, five sergeants, two constables and two force support officers. HMIC was pleased to note that four of the units police officer's were female. The unit's strength is such that it is able to sustain an intelligence gathering function alongside a pro-active capability.

5.111 Supporting the force Integrity Strategy, the remit of the section is as follows:

  • to protect the integrity of the force
  • to protect the integrity of employees
  • to protect the integrity of force systems.

5.112 In pursuit of raising the unit's profile and awareness of the issues surrounding integrity within the force, the unit provides considerable input to training both locally and nationally. At a local level, these include training for cadets, probationary constables and newly-promoted sergeants. HMIC was pleased to note that when officers throughout the force were questioned as to their knowledge of the section during inspection visits, there was a general level of awareness and that awareness was positive and appreciative of the need for the section. In particular instances, officers had either been involved with the unit or knew of someone who had made contact seeking advice or guidance. The unit has operated a confidential help-line for the last 3 years and there has been a significant increase in referrals, by this and other means, from 59 in 2001/2002 to 200 for 2003/2004. HMIC sees this as further evidence of raised awareness rather than a growing integrity problem.

5.113 The unit is represented on a variety of national forums including the ACPO Counter Corruption Advisory Group (ACCAG) and the ACPOS Professional Standards Practitioners Forum. Such bodies are important to encourage the sharing of best practice, to develop policy in the area of specialism and to allow the service to make its views known, as appropriate. The Practitioners Forum has a key role to play if HMIC's recommendation in relation to professional standards units in Scotland is to be achieved.

5.114 Measuring the success of such a unit and the integrity strategy is a difficult area. HMIC acknowledges the development that has taken place within the force. Measuring progress against the recommendations of the 1999 working party report and the position prior to the unit's establishment in 2000 provides clear evidence that significant progress has been made. Further, the force can point to a pro-active capability that did not exist before, a number of successful convictions of staff as a result of actions of the unit, a deterrent effect and improved processes and procedures. HMIC is aware that the head of the Professional Standards Unit is considering benchmarking with another unit in England and Wales and regards such an exercise as good practice. However, there are still areas where it is acknowledged that further progress can be achieved. For example, the need for an internal threat assessment and for improved vetting procedures. HMIC would encourage the completion of such a threat assessment and will monitor progress at the next review inspection.

5.115 The importance of vetting, not only at the recruitment stage, but at various points throughout an individual's career was recognised within the original force working party report and is also a key element of the force Integrity Strategy. With the likelihood of significantly enhanced levels of recruiting in the next decade, as many more officers reach retiral age, successful vetting is the first line of defence in preventing inappropriate individuals becoming part of the Scottish police service. Accordingly, HMIC welcomes the force decision, reached since inspection fieldwork was carried out, to appoint a Force Vetting Officer.

5.116 HMIC is also aware that ACPO in England and Wales has recently adopted a national vetting policy to which the head of Strathclyde's PSU has had an input. This policy has been circulated to all Scottish forces via the ACPOS Professional Standards Standing Committee with a view to the policy being adopted in Scotland. HMIC is supportive of an all encompassing vetting policy for the Scottish police service which operates not just at the recruitment stage but throughout an individual's career, meeting the need to ensure integrity is sustained.

Contents | Next

The TRUTH is out there...........

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 8,395
Reply with quote  #89 

Word of the law that first failed two men, then set them free... 

The historic judgment by the Court of Criminal Appeal in the "ice-cream wars" case illustrates the measure of change in the legal world in the 20 years since Thomas Campbell and Joseph Steele stood trial.

Comments made by the judge to the jury about their defence case would have raised few eyebrows when Campbell and Steele stood in the dock in 1984.

If the judge’s words were uttered now, particularly during such a sensitive and high-profile case, outrage would erupt all around.

Campbell, 51, and Steele, 42, were jailed for life in 1984, following the most tragic episode of the Glasgow turf-war over the control of ice-cream van routes which were used to peddle heroin and stolen goods across the city.

The two men were found guilty of the murder of six members of the Doyle family, including a 18-month-old baby, in a blaze at the home of Andrew Doyle, on the Ruchazie housing scheme on 16 April, 1984.

Eighteen-year-old Andrew, known as "Fat Boy", had resisted attempts to intimidate him and to take over the route he worked his ice-cream van. Before the fire at his property, a shotgun had been fired through the windscreen of his van.

The prosecution of Campbell and Steele depended on statements which each was alleged to have made to detectives when they were arrested following the blaze.

According to evidence presented by Strathclyde Police, four detectives heard and noted down Campbell saying: "I only wanted the van windaes shot up. The fire at Fat Boy’s was only meant to be a frightener which went too far."

Steele was said to have replied: "I’m no’ the one that lit the match."

Both men insisted the "verbals" had been fabricated. The police denied "fitting up" the men, or any collaboration between officers or comparing of notebooks in their recording of the comments.

Addressing the jury before they retired to decide their verdicts, the judge, Lord Kincraig, said that they must consider what would follow if they accepted the defence team’s argument that the police officers were "liars and bullies".

Lord Kincraig added: "What follows is that you are saying that a large number of detectives have deliberately come here to perjure themselves, to build up a false case against an accused person, and they have carried this through right to the end; a conspiracy of the most sinister and serious kind. They have formed this conspiracy to saddle the accused wrongly with the crime...of murder of a horrendous nature. If so, it involves their making up and persisting in a concocted story...Now, what do you prefer, ladies and gentlemen? It is up to you..."

The jury preferred to disbelieve the defence, and find Campbell and Steele guilty.

But these comments came under scrutiny in the appeal ruling which last week saw Campbell and Steele walk free 20 years after they were convicted, and on their third attempt at appeal.

In the appeal court judgment, Lord Gill, the Lord Justice-Clerk, said that comments like those made by Lord Kincraig about defence criticisms of the police were not uncommon 20 years ago. But, he added, the appeal had to be decided "by the judicial standards of today".

Lord Gill continued: "The essence of a judge’s charge is the giving of directions in law. In strict theory, the judge need say nothing about the facts. But in modern practice, in all but the simplest cases, he should refer to the main points of the evidence. In that way, he can give some context to his directions on legal concepts such as corroboration. But, whenever the judge refers to the evidence, he should do so with restraint.

"[Lord Kincraig] not only referred to the defence in forthright terms, but went on to warn the jury that if they accepted the defence case they would be accepting that there had been a police conspiracy ‘of the most sinister and serious kind’. That sort of comment was appropriate for the advocate-depute’s speech, but it was perhaps inopportune in the [judge’s] charge.

"Nevertheless, it did not misrepresent the defence. On the contrary... that was a central point in the defence. In our view, the judge’s comments were not a misdirection."

With that ruling, an expert in linguistics became the man Campbell and Steele had to thank the most for persuading the appeal judges that there had been a miscarriage of justice.

Professor Brian Clifford, 58, had been asked by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission to examine "the verbals" when it was deciding whether Campbell and Steele should be allowed to mount a fresh appeal.

Prof Clifford has held the chair of cognitive psychology at the University of East London since 1996. "He is an expert of international renown in the field of psycho-linguistics as applied to memory. He has written extensively on the subject," said Lord Gill, sitting with Lords MacLean and Macfadyen.

Prof Clifford had concluded from experiments which he conducted, his experience and scientific literature, that it was unlikely in either case that all of the officers concerned could have recalled the statement, and noted it in their notebooks, in virtually identical words. His opinion was backed by fellow expert, Dr Peter French.

Lord Gill said Prof Clifford’s evidence raised the principal issue in the appeals.

"Before we even consider it, we are surprised by certain aspects of Campbell’s alleged statement, and the circumstances in which it was made. It seems remarkable that an experienced criminal like Campbell should have said anything at all, let alone have made so incriminating a statement. Perhaps the most remarkable feature of all is that this crucial statement, which was a breakthrough in the police inquiry, was not reported to [the officer in charge] until the following day."

The judges said that it was equally remarkable that Steele, another experienced criminal, should also have spontaneously volunteered such an incriminating statement. It was said to have been made in a police car, and only the driver had noted it at the time. The senior officer, whose hands were free, did not.

"We are sceptical about this evidence even without the benefit of Prof Clifford’s conclusions, but that is merely our own reaction. We acknowledge that all of these points were put to the jury who nevertheless convicted Campbell and Steele unanimously," added Lord Gill.

In a study conducted by Prof Clifford, 57 people heard the statements individually via a Glasgow accent and were asked to write them down. None could recall all 24 of Campbell’s "words".

"The memory performance that apparently was exhibited by the police officers...must be seen as truly remarkable. So remarkable in fact as to be doubtful," concluded Prof Clifford. He added that the probability that any random four officers could recall a sentence of 24 words in identical terms was "infinitesimal". The degree of similarity in the statements could have resulted only from comparison or collaboration.

In another experiment, Prof Clifford looked at the probability of recalling accurately Steele’s eight "words" some ten minutes after they had been uttered, as three police officers claimed to have done.

On the findings, he could say that identical verbatim delayed recall was "not readily available to humans". The fact that three officers had managed to recall it verbatim was "quite remarkable" and it was hard to escape the conclusion that the similarities were "due to other than independent retrieval of a stored memory of a heard utterance". The Crown argued at the appeal that the experiments could not replicate the significance which the statements had for the police officers. It had been one of their most important cases, and they knew they would have to remember the statements.

Lord Gill said: "[Prof Clifford’s] evidence is based on established theory and on experimental proof. His reasoning appears to be logical and his conclusions appear to be cogent. Nothing put to him on behalf of the Crown persuades us that we should not accept his key conclusions.

"In our view, any jury hearing Prof Clifford’s evidence would have assessed the police evidence in an entirely different light. While that evidence would have been more convincing in relation to Campbell’s alleged 24-word statement, any doubt that it cast on that statement would have carried over to the alleged statement of Steele.

"In our view, the new evidence is of such significance that the verdicts of the jury, having been returned in ignorance of it, must be regarded as miscarriages of justice."

Related topic

The TRUTH is out there...........

Posts: N/A
Reply with quote  #90 

hammers6.thats one sad statment.thank god this prof clifford helped prove there innocence.nothing will give those two men all the years back theyve lost.i just hope whatever there doing there happy and healthy for the rest of there lifes

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.