Jump to content
Coronavirus topics renamed and some locked. No new topics. ×
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
Sign in to follow this  
manxst

Thieving Cop

Recommended Posts

Latest report by IOM Today states the officer is being tried for theft of a watch...

 

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id=53740&headline=Constable is set to stand trial for theft&sectionIs=NEWS&searchyear=2020

 

what happened to the other charges (including the 100 grand theft?!) reported earlier...

 

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/former-cop-denies-financial-offences/

 

is this a case of offences being ‘brushed under the carpet’ and dropped to prevent embarrassment to the Force, or haven't IOM Today reported the whole facts (which, admittedly, isn’t beyond possibility...!) ?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't we get told not to discuss this last time? Or was that the other allegedly thieving cop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two different cases, two different policemen. But also poor reporting of this case..

Reminder, no discussion or posting of facts, supposition, hearsay, speculation that may prejudice a fair trial. That’s the sub judice rule.

Why? Well jury members May read here. The trial may be put at risk. 
 

The moderators May have heavy handed approaches by police or adverse comment by judiciary. We don’t need that. It has happened. Including by a certain senior officer, now retired, who had no idea of the Electronic Communications Legislation, and on another occasion when the courts themselves carelessly posted a judgment on the public judgments on line site about someone being tried for something else. MF got slated.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst on this subject, I thought it odd last week when Manx Radio News named the man caught drug driving among other offences, yet IOMNewspapers said in their reporting, that for legal reasons, he could no be named.

Are there different rules for different outlets ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, dilligaf said:

Whilst on this subject, I thought it odd last week when Manx Radio News named the man caught drug driving among other offences, yet IOMNewspapers said in their reporting, that for legal reasons, he could no be named.

Are there different rules for different outlets ?

just incompetence and lies i'm sorry to say.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, dilligaf said:

Whilst on this subject, I thought it odd last week when Manx Radio News named the man caught drug driving among other offences, yet IOMNewspapers said in their reporting, that for legal reasons, he could no be named.

Are there different rules for different outlets ?

No, but they get advice from different sources. Two consultants, about same patient,  3 opinions. 2 advocates, same situation, 10 opinions  - because it depends on what instructions are given, and lay people/reporters may not realise what facts are important.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, John Wright said:

There are two different cases, two different policemen. But also poor reporting of this case. ( edited to add crucial second sentence )

Are there two policemen called Kevin Scott Williams of Port-E-Chee Avenue,Douglas who like Rolex watches?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, display name said:

Are there two policemen called Kevin Scott Williams of Port-E-Chee Avenue,Douglas who like Rolex watches?

No. But there are still two different cops charged with two different sets of offences before the courts.

The recent reporting on this is very short and appears not to list all offences.

I see you’ve selectively quoted, omitting a sentence so as to make it seem I say something I didn’t. Your prerogative. I’ve corrected it. That’s my perogative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, forestboy said:

Think you should lock this topic John. 

So far it’s fair comment, and doesn’t cross any line.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, John Wright said:

So far it’s fair comment, and doesn’t cross any line.

Hope it doesn’t John 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Likely best, with every case, cops or otherwise, to wait for the outcome and then debate it. Just not worth the risk of upsetting proceedings.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, John Wright said:

There are two different cases, two different policemen. But also poor reporting of this case..

Reminder, no discussion or posting of facts, supposition, hearsay, speculation that may prejudice a fair trial. That’s the sub judice rule.

Why? Well jury members May read here. The trial may be put at risk. 
 

The moderators May have heavy handed approaches by police or adverse comment by judiciary. We don’t need that. It has happened. Including by a certain senior officer, now retired, who had no idea of the Electronic Communications Legislation, and on another occasion when the courts themselves carelessly posted a judgment on the public judgments on line site about someone being tried for something else. MF got slated.

Was that me John? I don’t remember that one. Drop me a line to jog my memory when you get chance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Isle of Man press is woefully inadequate at reporting what is going on. They could hold government to account but don’t. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Derek Flint said:

Likely best, with every case, cops or otherwise, to wait for the outcome and then debate it. Just not worth the risk of upsetting proceedings.

Apologies for ambushing the thread Derek but use of the phrase "The Cops" implies some elite force which clearly the island does not have. Sadly the IOM force has a few glaring holes in the recruitment policy - there should be a general ask about town before employing - there are some thoroughly barely employable elsewhere ones in the Police - including a current Sgt. whose father begged his previous employer to not press charges for nicking tools off site and selling them on (he doesn't wear glasses) and a couple of tall CID chaps that essentially are home address mixed gender boxing champs.

The documentary that showed Schuey not able to shoulder the 4mm ply door in had a custody Sgt that used to be in the "Huts" at Ballakermeen and was only allowed to write in wax crayons - a genuinely lovely fella but.....

Its a job that people sign up to do because they want to do it and no special appreciation or reverence / deference should be offered.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...