Direct Entry To CID

[irc]

When I read about this scheme where graduate recruits avoid the usual route into the CID I had my doubts. Usually you need to do several years in uniform and perhaps a trial stint attached to the CID before being appointed. Seems there is a high dropout rate.

"She was thrown in at the deep end after just five months’ classroom training, plus a probationary stint at Bethnal Green police station. "

Yes she was thrown in at the deep end. That was the idea I thought. Avoid wasting time in uniform.



https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jun/07/th...

[JuanCarlosFandango]

irc said:

When I read about this scheme where graduate recruits avoid the usual route into the CID I had my doubts. Usually you need to do several years in uniform and perhaps a trial stint attached to the CID before being appointed. Seems there is a high dropout rate.

"She was thrown in at the deep end after just five months’ classroom training, plus a probationary stint at Bethnal Green police station. "

Yes she was thrown in at the deep end. That was the idea I thought. Avoid wasting time in uniform.



https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jun/07/th...

Self regarding nit wit meets reality might be a better headline.

[ianrb]

If you scroll to the bottom of the article you'll see she has a book to sell.

Don't think I'll be buying a copy.

[Wacky Racer]

Very difficult to get a rape conviction when it is one person's word against another, sad but true, and even if the offender is convicted, it doesn't mean 100& they did it.

[pavarotti1980]

I think her stance may be slightly different if she was accused and convicted of something because of the charging threshold being lowered just to improve conviction rates.

How does she expect someone to be convicted of a crime which would have lifelong consequences when there is little or no evidence to prove it bar the word of someone else (regardless of whether it did occur or not). A very slippery slope and one to avoid

I will just leave this recent example here to demonstrate the devastating consequences of being falsely accused of such offences
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/03/el...

[irc]

pavarotti1980 said:

I will just leave this recent example here to demonstrate the devastating consequences of being falsely accused of such offences
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/03/el...

How the fk did that one get as far as a jury?

"The jury was shown a photograph of Jordan Trengove in the back of a police van with another girl at the exact time he was supposed to have raped Williams."

Surely he would have told the police he was in custody the night of the alleged rape?

Or if he went no comment his lawyer would have drawn that inconvenient (for the rape conviction rate) fact to the attention of the crown long before trial?

More worryingly had he not been in custody could he have been convicted.

Yes. Rape convictions are low but rather rapists go free than innocent men jailed for rape.

[Hants PHer]

I'm sure I saw Jess McDonald being interviewed on TV a while back - Channel 4 News, perhaps? Anyway, her story then was much the same as this article in the Grauniad. She strikes me as an idealist, with a rather sensitive nature; these are not bad qualities in themselves, but probably unhelpful if entering a direct-to-CID scheme in the Met, especially an experimental scheme. The article suggest that she's tried four other career options prior to policing, and had abandoned them all. Right.

She seems to want the CPS to bring rape cases to court even if there's little chance of success: “They want a realistic chance of conviction. But with these crimes against women – and they are predominantly crimes against women – you can’t have that,” she says. So she wants the courts to hear cases with no realistic chance of conviction? That's just pointless, and probably counter productive.

[JagLover]

Wacky Racer said:

Very difficult to get a rape conviction when it is one person's word against another, sad but true, and even if the offender is convicted, it doesn't mean 100& they did it.

Most of the ones that don't have any realistic prospect of conviction usually involve alcohol.

[princeperch]

I expect she was either useless at her job and or a trouble maker. Public sector organisations absolutely hate taking disciplinary action against their staff because it's an utter utter ball ache to do so I suspect she was either inept or a pain in the backside. Or both.

It must be a short book in paperback given how long she actually "served" for.

[Derek Smith]

irc said:

"She was thrown in at the deep end after just five months’ classroom training, plus a probationary stint at Bethnal Green police station. "

I was thrown in at the deep end after just 10 weeks training and two days with a probationer constable. How much training did she need? A PC could get an attachment to CID within 2 years back in my day, and be expected to cope. Where's the savings?

[irc]

Derek Smith said:

I was thrown in at the deep end after just 10 weeks training and two days with a probationer constable. How much training did she need? A PC could get an attachment to CID within 2 years back in my day, and be expected to cope. Where's the savings?

I'm not sure there are any savings. I suspect that the inventors of the scheme thought that highly intelligent graduates could do a tricky job dealing with serious crimes after a short bit of training unlike the thick woodentops who need a bit of hands of experience dealing with the public in all their glory in all sorts of stressful situatons before progressing or not to CID or other specialisms.

As the Federation said back in 2017.

" we believe that individuals first need a grounding on what it takes to be an officer in the 21st century. Direct entry is not a magic bullet for the current detective shortage which has reached crisis proportions, as recognised by HMIC earlier this year.

“Detectives need first-hand experience of responding in an operational capacity to incidents they would not encounter in any other walk of life – the bedrock of British policing is the Office of Constable. “In relation to this specific role the question must be asked, what has changed to create the gap? Why is a role that people once queued up to do not a desirable one anymore? There are many contributing factors including workload, the changing types of crime, the fact that the role is not family-friendly and more.”

https://www.politicshome.com/members/article/direc...

Seems the idea was to deal with shortages of detectives. The correct answer would probably be to find out why serving cops were no longer attracted to the CID and deal with that.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jul/27/ma...

Back in the day the CID was attractive because of interesting work, responsibility, and huge amounts of overtime on major enquiries and regular court appearances. Has that all gone?

[Bigends]

To get on CID once required a 3 month aide ( once you'd got around 5 yrs time in and shown an aptitude for crime / Detective work) - which, if successfully completed was followed by a 10 week Detectives course at one of a number of training schools including Hendon and Wwkefield.

[Hugo Stiglitz]

irc said:

When I read about this scheme where graduate recruits avoid the usual route into the CID I had my doubts. Usually you need to do several years in uniform and perhaps a trial stint attached to the CID before being appointed. Seems there is a high dropout rate.

"She was thrown in at the deep end after just five months’ classroom training, plus a probationary stint at Bethnal Green police station. "

Yes she was thrown in at the deep end. That was the idea I thought. Avoid wasting time in uniform.



https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jun/07/th...

A quoted line from the article:
While poor policing is often blamed for low conviction rates

Everyone is running at 100% from the start of the shift beyond the end every single shift.

In your job, can you imagine being rushed off your feet all the time, hounded. No time for a toilet break. You often go late/when you've finished and never get home on time.

Poor policing? That is insulting.

[oddman]

Hugo Stiglitz said:

A quoted line from the article:
While poor policing is often blamed for low conviction rates

Everyone is running at 100% from the start of the shift beyond the end every single shift.

In your job, can you imagine being rushed off your feet all the time, hounded. No time for a toilet break. You often go late/when you've finished and never get home on time.

Poor policing? That is insulting.

The context is

While poor policing is often blamed for low conviction rates, McDonald insists this is not the full story with rape or domestic violence. “There are obvious cultural issues, which the Casey review flagged up. However, I do think sometimes they’re (ie. the police are) being scapegoated a little and we’re not looking at the broader picture. For women having access to justice, it’s CPS charging standards.” That said, in the book, she quotes a male colleague who had worked on domestic violence for years announcing: “I don’t get it, why don’t they just leave?”

She's saying that blaming poor policing is insulting to the police because the CPS guidleine are hobbling police.

Do you struggle with comprehension or do you want to misrepresent the author?

[Hugo Stiglitz]

No it's a emotionally charged line, the comment 'why can't they just leave'.

Angry are we?

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz on Thursday 8th June 20:09

[MDMA .]

Hants PHer said:

I'm sure I saw Jess McDonald being interviewed on TV a while back - Channel 4 News, perhaps? Anyway, her story then was much the same as this article in the Grauniad. She strikes me as an idealist, with a rather sensitive nature; these are not bad qualities in themselves, but probably unhelpful if entering a direct-to-CID scheme in the Met, especially an experimental scheme. The article suggest that she's tried four other career options prior to policing, and had abandoned them all. Right.

She seems to want the CPS to bring rape cases to court even if there's little chance of success: “They want a realistic chance of conviction. But with these crimes against women – and they are predominantly crimes against women – you can’t have that,” she says. So she wants the courts to hear cases with no realistic chance of conviction? That's just pointless, and probably counter productive.

Might have seen the same one. Wearing a pair of white Crocs?

[oddman]

Hugo Stiglitz said:

No it's a emotionally charged line, the comment 'why can't they just leave'.

Angry are we?

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz on Thursday 8th June 20:09

That's the author of the article quoting from the book.

I can understand why a cop would say that in frustration, but it does betray a fundamental misunderstanding of the dynamics of coercive control/abuse/DV which is, I guess, why an idealistic and educated woman might include it in her critique.

[Earthdweller]

Derek Smith said:

irc said:

"She was thrown in at the deep end after just five months’ classroom training, plus a probationary stint at Bethnal Green police station. "

I was thrown in at the deep end after just 10 weeks training and two days with a probationer constable. How much training did she need? A PC could get an attachment to CID within 2 years back in my day, and be expected to cope. Where's the savings?

Problem is Derek, you and I were chucked onto the streets of London with a beat duty helmet a pocket book and a truncheon and we dealt with dross mostly, really low level stuff. If we locked up for something serious it was ace because all you did was write a statement

And we learned slowly and gained experience and had great mentors who really knew what they were doing and passed their knowledge down to us

Then maybe a few years down the line you could get on “beat crimes” and spend some time dealing with the low end crimes .. then maybe you might get into the local crime squad and then become an aide in the general CID office and if you were good at investigating stuff ( not all cops are ) then you could apply to be DC and then you went to Hendon and the CID training school

I did that route as well as relief then TSG and a dedicated surveillance unit and various squads before becoming a DC with 12 years hard won experience of policing inner London


Contrast that with today

You get a degree, you join as a DC and after initial training with zero practical experience, no “street nous”
and pretty much totally clueless you are posted to the general CID office or a specialist unit such as the DV or rape teams and six months after being a civilian you are managing a workload of maybe 30/40 live ongoing serious criminal investigations some of which will be complex, some of which maybe conspiracies with multiple offenders and numerous lines of enquiry

You then find that your DS has three years service and your Inspector is direct entry and has 9 months service and both just like you are clueless

The only person with any knowledge and experience is the retired Detective who has come back as a civilian investigator who is supposed to be supporting you the detectives, but ends up being the person that runs it because he’s the only one that actually knows what he’s doing

So then …. You wonder why they are quitting in droves, its like lambs to the slaughter

Being a tec on a busy inner city division is hard, bloody hard work and the hours I had to put in almost cost me my marriage as I was never home

I took promotion back into uniform and never looked back at the CID and got my life back

What is happening today is a disservice to the new DC’s, the job and the public

It’s a broken system

[silentbrown]

irc said:

How the fk did that one get as far as a jury?

"The jury was shown a photograph of Jordan Trengove in the back of a police van with another girl at the exact time he was supposed to have raped Williams."

I think you've misunderstood - It was shown at Williams's trial.

Trengrove spent 70+ days in custody before charges were dropped, https://www.watsonwoodhouse.co.uk/jordan-trengove-...

[irc]

silentbrown said:

irc said:

How the fk did that one get as far as a jury?

"The jury was shown a photograph of Jordan Trengove in the back of a police van with another girl at the exact time he was supposed to have raped Williams."

I think you've misunderstood - It was shown at Williams's trial.

Trengrove spent 70+ days in custody before charges were dropped, https://www.watsonwoodhouse.co.uk/jordan-trengove-...

Sorry.You are correct. Still, if he hadn't had a 100% irrefutable alibi?