The hypocrisy of Police and mobile phones

Driving whilst being on a mobile phone is dangerous, obviously. Thankfully, my good old 2004 Toyota has a Bluetooth phone, one of the first.

People who are on their phones (I mean holding them) deserve everything that they get but, yet again, the Police target more male drivers than females. Even these women who drive around in their “Chelsea Tractors” are on their phones. If they can afford a Range Rover, they can afford to have Bluetooth. In most cases, it is probably installed in the car anyway. But women know that they will just get a slap on the wrist from the Police

But that is not what I want to talk about; it is the Police.

In many many “crime” programmes, you see a single police person driving at high speed on their radios.

If the Police can afford high performance cars, they can afford to put in some sort of Bluetooth so that the driver does not have to drive one handed, whilst holding the mike in the other hand.

Again, it is one rule for the Police, another for Joe Public

The BIG problem with Crime Programmes

Like I said in my post about the murder of Naomi Smith

https://davidhender.life/2019/11/11/the-murder-of-naomi-smith/

I am very sad about the deaths of these women and girls and the men who carried out those awful crimes should be strung up in my book

BUT

Most of the crime programmes involve men committing murder or men doing other criminal things and that causes a big problem.

You could count on one hand the number of programmes that involve women killing men or doing other criminal activity but there are hundreds of programmes involving men harming women or doing criminal things.

Even on the programmes that document women or girls being killed, it is generally the mother and sisters who are interviewed, as sadly that has a greater impact than interviewing brothers or fathers. And if a woman cries on film, all the better. I am sorry to sound callous but that is the nature of the beast when you start talking about “crime entertainment“.

What this gross imbalance does is to reinforce the fact that men are really bad and women are good or not so bad. As I mentioned in a previous post, even the justice minister said that all women prisons should be shut.

Unless you were born under a rock, we all know that women are just as capable of ANY crime as men are, whether murder, assault or any other crime.

Furthermore, women are very fantastic actresses. They will lie through their teeth, cry at a moment’s notice and blame anyone else apart from themselves. This is something that the Police just do not get

But as soon as a woman turns on the tears, the Police officer of whatever country instantly believes anything that a woman will say, even if she is lying through her teeth.

For a man, it is a case of guilty until proven innocent, whereas

For a woman, it is a case of innocent until proven guilty

That is why when a man enters a court, for say sex abuse allegations, most if not all of the jury decide that he is guilty before a word is spoken.

But, if a woman is on trial, she will initially get the benefit of the doubt and the jurors will think “how could a woman possibly do that?“. It is only if the evidence is overwhelming will the jury find that woman guilty.

That reinforcement of views goes even further, to when the sentence is handed out. For exactly the same crime, a woman will generally get a lighter sentence; the statistics speak for themselves.

Even before you actually watch a crime programme, the channel has already got you into the “right” (or should I say wrong) mindset with their trailers.

Just take a look at these

Certainly the last two seem innocent enough but a man throwing a bag into the canal suggests there is a dead female body in the bag and the ladies shoe suggests that she has been killed by a man.

What all of this does is to continually build up a picture in one’s subconscious and we then all believe that men have to be watched like a hawk and women can be implicitly trusted.

But from my own experiences, I have learned that few women can be trusted; yes, it is a sad statement to make.

Women tend to target rich men so that they can “nest” and then rip those men off in a divorce (first wife) or, during an argument, they pull a 12 inch kitchen knife out of a drawer and threaten you with it and then call the police before then putting away the knife before they arrive (second wife). And of course a daughter accusing her father of sexual abuse and actual bodily harm, for money, treats and favours (yes, my own daughter)

What all of this does is to not only skew Joe Public’s attitudes but also those of the Police. I have illustrated many times as to how the police treat men versus women. They will purposely agitate a man so that he flips, giving the police the excuse for many of them to haul a man to the ground and then 5 or more just jump on him whereas the police will treat a woman with kid gloves, not throw them to the floor and actually treat them with some respect.

Why do you think that advertisers spread as many women and girls across their screens as possible; that is until I spot it, report it on my blog and only then do they change them

And as to Joe Public’s reaction? If there is a missing woman or girl, a whole village will come out to help in the search, time after time (sadly) again but if it is a man or a boy, little effort is made. Just take poor James Bulger. No one came out searching for him, just the Police.

It is sad to say that “simple” example says it all

And to finish, why do you think that Cressida Dick is head of the Metropolitan Police. I am not suggesting that she is not experienced, someone of that level is bound to be but the men that were up against her had no chance. Whoever the group of people who decided on her were, they wanted a woman as the Met are very high profile and it was more “PC” to give her the job. Why do you think that most of the companies’ media representatives are women?

The murder of Naomi Smith

I am, in no way, going to minimise this tragedy; words cannot really describe what happened. She was murdered by Edwin Hopkins.

In the documentary of the investigation, one of the journalists, who followed the case, said that he had psychological problems, most importantly that he could not work out the “barriers” between males and females.

However, Edwin Hopkins had sexually attacked another young woman before he killed Naomi Smith. He gave her a cigarette, which she smoked and then followed her into a field; presumably that was the route that she was taking. He jumped on her and bit her breast but the lady kneed him in the groin and got away.

Hopkins was caught but ONLY GIVEN A CAUTION by the Police.

Call me stupid if you like but that was a serious assault and if he had been sent to youth detention or prison, Naomi Smith would still be alive. Yet again, the Police were at fault but that was brushed over in the programme; of course it was.

It was clear from the first attack that he was not right mentally and especially given what the journalist (Rob Chater), who followed the case, had said, he should have been sent to a mental institution indefinitely and should not have received a life sentence.

This is what Rob Chater said in the documentary, pertaining to Hopkins’ “mental health” 

The trouble is that especially with murders of girls and women, society “bays for blood”.

Quite frankly, I am surprised that his defence did not raise the mental health issue or maybe, as is the norm, the defence barrister was just going through the motions.

As I said at the beginning, this was an awful crime and, yes, he should have been put away but was prison the right place? I do not think so.

If the police did this to me, I would be dead

We all know that the police are thugs and like nothing better than all jumping on a man and slamming him to the pavement.

But, if they did this….

or this

I WOULD BE DEAD

I have a plate in my head that covers a big hole in my skull and it is just secured with screws and that is it. If the plate is damaged, even slightly, I would be dead.

And as to the first clip, you will see that the “officer” has his weight on a knee that is on the man’s neck. That would break my neck and I would be dead

Because the police love to drag men to the ground; they are just thugs, pure and simple

Now, do you think that they would do the same to a woman, especially in the second clip? Of course not

Every time that they deal with some “suspicious” man, they wind the men up until they break and then they have the excuse to assault a man.

And in the second clip, not one, not two but five officers getting into the ruck 

That really says it all about the Police, doesn’t it?