Andrew Mitchell MP

AndyK
Posts: 1498
Joined: 17 Aug 2007, 2:08pm
Location: Mid Hampshire

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by AndyK »

Psamathe wrote:
AndyK wrote:
Psamathe wrote:I think there are actually two stories/issues here.

Three, actually. Bringing it back on topic for this forum, I'd like to know whether the Met Police still has a policy of treating government ministers like plebs - sorry, second-class citizens - if they choose to ride a bike rather than be driven round in the ministerial limo? In the excitement everyone's forgotten that the altercation started because by choosing to cycle, Mr Mitchell suddenly wasn't important enough to have the main gate opened for him.

My impression is that it (Security Policy) has nothing to do with bikes but is about security (i.e. open the main gates as rarely as possible as they represent a greater risk). I don't get the impression this is anti-cycling at all.

Ian

I don't think it's deliberately about cycling. I do think it's about stereotypes of who's important and who isn't.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by thirdcrank »

AndyK wrote: ... Three, actually. Bringing it back on topic for this forum, I'd like to know whether the Met Police still has a policy of treating government ministers like plebs - sorry, second-class citizens - if they choose to ride a bike rather than be driven round in the ministerial limo? In the excitement everyone's forgotten that the altercation started because by choosing to cycle, Mr Mitchell suddenly wasn't important enough to have the main gate opened for him.


Now that the case is all over bar the shouting, I fancy there will be a lot of "analysis" of the history of this by journos and politicos enjoying the greater freedom to comment.
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by 661-Pete »

Case closed. Judgement delivered. Costs apportioned. Move along there please, nothing more to see..... :lol:
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by Mick F »

Heard on the radio this morning, that it was Macmillan who brought in the system of ministerial cars so the "Mitchell Situation" wouldn't ever occur.

Why wasn't he "protected" from the police by using a ministerial car?
Mick F. Cornwall
TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by TonyR »

I'm surprised given the number of dismissals and prosecutions of police officers over the event, the judge found against Mitchell because the policeman wasn't bright enough to have made the conversation up. Did he not consider the possibility that someone might have made it up for him?
TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by TonyR »

AndyK wrote:I don't think it's deliberately about cycling. I do think it's about stereotypes of who's important and who isn't.


I suspect you are right and if he had had an engine fitted to his two wheeled vehicle they would have opened the gate for him without question. From some of the reports about other officers who were dismissed/prosecuted it does seem they were out to get him in a premeditated way.
User avatar
Graham
Moderator
Posts: 6489
Joined: 14 Dec 2006, 8:48pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by Graham »

Mick F wrote:Why wasn't he "protected" from the police by using a ministerial car?

Perhaps he is one of us lot that want to normalise the use of bicycles for transport ? . . . full marks in that regard.

A very crude comparison . . . . . ( that old cycling in France cookie ) . . . .
In France** it seems that a lot of people go out of their way to enable you benefit from choosing to cycle.
In UK it seems that a lot of people go out of their way to PREVENT you from benefiting from choosing to cycle

. . . and sometimes when one gets used to a benefit and then suddenly that benefit is removed or obstructed the bewildered cyclist might get a bit vexed and uppity !

** And many other northern European countries
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by Psamathe »

TonyR wrote:From some of the reports about other officers who were dismissed/prosecuted it does seem they were out to get him in a premeditated way.

I think the other officers who were dismissed/prosecuted were out to "get" the government (probably as a result of the deteriorated relationship between the Police and the Home Secretary). And his actions/attitude just presented an easy opportunity.

Ian
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by Psamathe »

TonyR wrote:I'm surprised given the number of dismissals and prosecutions of police officers over the event, the judge found against Mitchell because the policeman wasn't bright enough to have made the conversation up. Did he not consider the possibility that someone might have made it up for him?

I think there were a lot of contributory factors in the judge's decision. e.g. stories from other protection officers about his attitude/language/loss of temper when travelling and under their protection. e.g. statements from Mitchell's friends about how he had said to them (privately) 5 days after the event that he could not remember what he had actually said and is now somehow completely sure, etc., etc.

Ian
User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 13780
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by NATURAL ANKLING »

Hi,
TonyR wrote:I'm surprised given the number of dismissals and prosecutions of police officers over the event, the judge found against Mitchell because the policeman wasn't bright enough to have made the conversation up. Did he not consider the possibility that someone might have made it up for him?

Well done that man :wink:
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy - Some day Soon I hope
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.
beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by beardy »

TonyR wrote:I'm surprised given the number of dismissals and prosecutions of police officers over the event, the judge found against Mitchell because the policeman wasn't bright enough to have made the conversation up. Did he not consider the possibility that someone might have made it up for him?


There havent been any such actions over the event, have there? All of the dismissals and prosecutions have been about subsequent events, havent they?

I heard that the Judge went to some lengths to make that distinction, in case people tried to muddy the waters by mixing the two up.

I imagine I would have been rather insulted if I heard a Judge describe me as "too thick to make it up" it just goes to show that they all think of us commoners as plebs.

Now was it about a class issue of plebs v toffs or motorised privileged main gates v pedestrian side entries, probably a bit of both.
If it was a bit of discrimination about non-motorised access that doesnt remove the element of assumed class superiority.

Quite amazing that a Judge chose to believe a PC over a Minister of Government who used to hold the Queen's commission and is a prestigious banker.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by thirdcrank »

It's worth remembering that the judge was required to decide the case on the evidence brought by the parties to the case, rather than the other events that the incident triggered or exposed and in particular a lot of accompanying spin.

Reports suggest that the judgment took some eighty minutes to deliver: there' will have been a lot more in there than the bits highlighted by the media immediately after the judgment was delivered.
irc
Posts: 5192
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by irc »

beardy wrote:Quite amazing that a Judge chose to believe a PC over a Minister of Government who used to hold the Queen's commission and is a prestigious banker.


But it wasn't just that PC's word against Mitchell. Judges are good at deciding who is telling the truth. He took into account all the other evidence. Mitchell's previous conduct, CCTV, other PCs evidence, the fact Mitchell told one friend not long after the incident he couldn't remember what he had said etc. It seems the whole incident stemmed from Mitchell's belief that being an MP, Minister, banker etc meant normal rules didn't apply to him, only the little people.

Unfortunately for him he didn't get Jeremy Thorpe's judge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kyos-M48B8U
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by thirdcrank »

Or Mr Justice Caulfield (Doesn't she have fragrance?)

I thought beardy was being ironic BTW. :?
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Andrew Mitchell MP

Post by Psamathe »

Just read an interesting comment on one of the newspaper feeds, taking a slightly different view of what happened. The comment points out that the entire incident was the fault of the bicycle. Had Mitchell been in a chauffeur driven limo he could have been in their calling police/public/everybody f'ing plebs and nobody would have heard him so no incident. It was only because of the bicycle he was heard so it is the bicycle's fault (and presumably the bicycle should be paying the £3m bill).

Ian
Post Reply