Remember the outrage ..poor innocent dogs

[Earthdweller]

Back in 23 there was a huge outrage when police marksmen shot dead two dogs on a canal towpath in East London

There were calls for the offices involved not just to be sacked but also charged with the "murder" of the animals

Now 18! Months later the IOPC has published its findings of the investigation into the officers

To be met with absolute silence, I wonder why ?
https://x.com/policeconduct/status/187773218789568...

IOPC investigation clears police officers over shooting of two dogs in East London

[bitchstewie]

Excellent that the officers have been cleared.

It's on the BBC London page and in the Telegraph and Evening Standard.

From what I can remember at the time I didn't think there was too much "outrage" in the reporting I thought it was more the local "they murdered those poor dogs" types more than anything.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Ridiculous investigation. You could see from the original video that the officers were well within their rights.

[irc]

Would it have hurt them too much rather than say "found no wrongdoing" say "we found the officers acted correctly"?

[Mr Penguin]

irc said:

Would it have hurt them too much rather than say "found no wrongdoing" say "we found the officers acted correctly"?

What if they did find that the officers acted correctly?

[irc]

Website version here.

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/news/iopc-investi...

A year and a half to clear them!

[Murph7355]

Mr Penguin said:

irc said:

Would it have hurt them too much rather than say "found no wrongdoing" say "we found the officers acted correctly"?

What if they did find that the officers acted correctly?

The point being made, I think, is that using a positive is better than a double negative.

It's a subtle difference, but meaningful. "You did well"..."You didn't do badly". A clear affirmative rather than a double negative.

[bitchstewie]

irc said:

Would it have hurt them too much rather than say "found no wrongdoing" say "we found the officers acted correctly"?

Is the role of the IOPC to determine if the officers acted correctly or is their role to look for wrongdoing?

As much as I take the point isn't it just about what their remit is?

[119]

So they shot the womans dog as well as the aggressive one?

[Mr Penguin]

Murph7355 said:

Mr Penguin said:

irc said:

Would it have hurt them too much rather than say "found no wrongdoing" say "we found the officers acted correctly"?

What if they did find that the officers acted correctly?

The point being made, I think, is that using a positive is better than a double negative.

It's a subtle difference, but meaningful. "You did well"..."You didn't do badly". A clear affirmative rather than a double negative.

I misread it, I thought he was saying he wanted them to use "found no wrongdoing". Sorry irc.

[eldar]

Mr Penguin said:

irc said:

Would it have hurt them too much rather than say "found no wrongdoing" say "we found the officers acted correctly"?

What if they did find that the officers acted correctly?

I've heard you haven't had sex with dead goats in the past week. Well done.

[mac96]

Trouble with ' found no wrongdoing' is that is so open to the response ' you didn't look hard enough'.

So it not only fails to make it clear that the action was correct, it also invites suspicion of a cover up.

Weasel words.