Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

sir craig mackey: and other craven cops

You're probably right that he did it all 'by the book', but, as a human being, wouldn't your first instinct be too try to help (especially a colleague)? And don't you think a little less of him for not doing so? And suspect he thinks less of himself, too?
 
You're probably right that he did it all 'by the book', but, as a human being, wouldn't your first instinct be too try to help (especially a colleague)? And don't you think a little less of him for not doing so? And suspect he thinks less of himself, too?
I’d like to think I’d try to get involved but in reality I reckon I’d probably be too busy shitting myself. For me to take on a bloke who’s going at it with two big knives and possibly explosives whilst I’m unarmed, he’d have to be threatening a family member. No, I don’t think less of him for doing what he did. He did what he should’ve done.
 
I’d like to think I’d try to get involved but in reality I reckon I’d probably be too busy shitting myself. For me to take on a bloke who’s going at it with two big knives and possibly explosives whilst I’m unarmed, he’d have to be threatening a family member. No, I don’t think less of him for doing what he did. He did what he should’ve done.
I think you do yourself down too harshly and can see you using some sort of expedient or improvised missile weapon to distract or injure the jihadi assailant
 
It's still the correct advice. The choice was to stop the car and put himself and everyone in it at risk, or to do his actual job and get away to command the response while allowing properly trained and equipped firearms plod, who were a few seconds away, to do theirs. The comparisons with Lt Col Jones are apt. He was very heavily criticised for his action at Goose Green. No doubt those who are now suggesting that Mackey should've committed suicide at the PoW are the same people who'd be pillorying him had he done so.
By no means, I would laud him as I would any fallen copper
 
He probably does think less of himself - I rather imagine I would - but neither he nor I are paid to pander to our ego's, we are paid to do our jobs regardless of how inconvenient we find them to our image of ourselves.

I, ... of ... do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and according equal respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property; and that while I continue to hold the said office I will to the best of my skill and knowledge discharge all the duties thereof faithfully according to law.
 
I think you do yourself down too harshly and can see you using some sort of expedient or improvised missile weapon to distract or injure the jihadi assailant
Nope. And I reckon all these keyboard heroes are full of shit. It’s fine after the event to ponder getting stuck in with some kind of improvised weapon, or ‘making a distraction’ :facepalm: but the reality is that they’d be confused and scared witless and not know wtf’s going on. This isn’t a pub fight we’re talking about.
 
Nope. And I reckon all these keyboard heroes are full of shit. It’s fine after the event to ponder getting stuck in with some kind of improvised weapon, or ‘making a distraction’ :facepalm: but the reality is that they’d be confused and scared and not know wtf’s going on. This isn’t a pub fight we’re talking about.

And the whole thing was over in 82 seconds - from crashing the car to being shot.

Alex
 
I, ... of ... do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve the Queen in the office of constable, with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and according equal respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause the peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property; and that while I continue to hold the said office I will to the best of my skill and knowledge discharge all the duties thereof faithfully according to law.
No issues there then. I’m pretty sure that “to the best of my power” doesn’t include offering oneself up for slaughter whilst another colleague with a gun is moments away.
 
No issues there then. I’m pretty sure that “to the best of my power” doesn’t include offering oneself up for slaughter whilst another colleague with a gun is moments away.

My point was in response to the suggestion that getting stuck in would have been egotism rather than doing his job; it wouldn't - as the oath makes clear.
 
Nope. And I reckon all these keyboard heroes are full of shit. It’s fine after the event to ponder getting stuck in with some kind of improvised weapon, or ‘making a distraction’ :facepalm: but the reality is that they’d be confused and scared witless and not know wtf’s going on. This isn’t a pub fight we’re talking about.
of course not. we're talking about someone who has a strong record in public order and can therefore be expected to have greater situational awareness than most people here.
 
My point was in response to the suggestion that getting stuck in would have been egotism rather than doing his job; it wouldn't - as the oath makes clear.
Well it could still be egotism despite the oath, and “getting stuck in” in this situation is quite clearly way above and beyond the scope of the pledge.
 
Including, for example, the most senior Police Officer in the lead counter-terrorism agency.

The attacker could have been wearing a suicide vest, his target might have been the Mets' senior command in order to paralyze it's ability to respond to another, much larger, much more elaborate attack - a scenario that is well established in counter-terrorism planning, and an idea well established in terrorist doctrine.

His job was to stay alive in order to command the Met response, and if that means leaving others to do their jobs then so be it - it might not look good, but he's not paid to look good, he's paid to command the Mets' counter-terrorism response to, potentially, a large, geographically spread attack.

The very obvious example of the senior officer getting stuck in was at Goose-Green in the Falklands: 2PARA were a bit bogged down, their CO led a section attack against a machine gun post in order to re-establish momentum, and he was killed. The battalions command and fire-support apparatus was paralyzed for a while and it took casualties it should not have taken while a new command was established.

Lt Col Jones richly earned his VC, but leading section attacks was not his job, and the battle, and his battalion, suffered as a result of him being killed instead of running the battle and using the assets given to him.

If Mackey had got involved, been killed/injured, and then a much larger terrorist attack taken place - the response to which would be more confused as command of it was interrupted - he would be slated for playing the role of a PC, not a Commissioner of the Met.

Of course 'H' should have been shot, all old Etonians need to be shot. Country would be in a much better state if they were all gunned down.

I thought 'H' got shot by his own men who didn't share his enthusiasm for trading their lives for a small bit of metal to be presented to their widows. ViolentPanda ?
 
Well it could still be egotism despite the oath, and “getting stuck in” in this situation is quite clearly way above and beyond the scope of the pledge.

Both running away and trying to help a fellow officer could fall within a range of behaviours consistent with the oath, depending on rationale (which raises the question of cowardice recast ex post facto). Whilst I don't think the oath necessarily required him to help, kebabking's suggestion that helping would necessarily have been egotism inconvenient to (i.e. inconsistent with) his job doesn't hold much water.
 
Both running away and trying to help a fellow officer could fall within a range of behaviours consistent with the oath, depending on rationale (which raises the question of cowardice recast ex post facto). Whilst I don't think the oath necessarily required him to help, kebabking's suggestion that helping would necessarily have been egotism inconvenient to (i.e. inconsistent with) his job doesn't hold much water.
I think what KK means by ‘pander to ego’ is for Mackey to have taken action with the express purpose of alleviating future feelings of inadequacy. That’s reasonable.
 
I think what KK means by ‘pander to ego’ is for Mackey to have taken action with the express purpose of alleviating future feelings inadequacy. That’s reasonable.

Yes, that would be the sort of rationale which would take that course of action outside the scope of his role. If he was going to help, it should've been for proper reasons. Similarly, if he was going to run away. We'll never know his real reasons, and, of course, he's going to say he was following procedures, rather than "I bottled it."
 
Yes, that would be the sort of rationale which would take that course of action outside the scope of his role. If he was going to help, it should've been for proper reasons. Similarly, if he was going to run away. We'll never know his real reasons, and, of course, he's going to say he was following procedures, rather than "I bottled it."
Sure. But given that in this instance ‘bottling it’ was operationally entirely correct, I’m inclined to give him the benefit of doubt if any exists.

I realise of course, that this will not be the majority position of Acab75! :D
 
Sure. But given that in this instance ‘bottling it’ was operationally entirely correct, I’m inclined to give him the benefit of doubt if any exists.

I realise of course, that this will not be the majority position of Acab75! :D

I don't necessarily agree that it was any more "operationally entirely correct" than the alternative course, though.
 
I'm not sure that the 'operational' bit should trump his basic duty to help in some fashion or other, to just get out of the fucking car and make a noise at least. But his problem in the fallout from the incident is that he himself isn't entirely hiding behind his position as a senior anti-terrorism officer. He says he was 'about to' intervene', then a pc reminded him of the overall situation, then he realised they hadn't got stab vests *. All of that sounds like a rationale for saving his own skin, not some heroic attempt to go against his natural instincts because of his role.

Like everybody else here, I can't guarantee what I'd have done. But for me it would have been a clear battle, to decide whether to dive in or save my own skin - exactly and entirely the choices that are in your mind/emotions at the point you see something happening. The stuff about having an 'operational role' would have been irrelevant in the moment - it's just a PR defence. The Police Federation have called for his Knighthood to be stripped. I'm not always in tune with the Police Federation, ;) but they've got a clear grasp on the day to day responsibilities of being a police officer.

Edit: * why would that be an issue if the operational reality was to get the hell out of there as fast as possible. Not having a stab vest is only relevant as a defence of why he didn't intervene.
 
The Police Federation have called for his Knighthood to be stripped.
One copper (who happens to be the chairman of the PF) has suggested this and it looks to be a personal position rather than the official one of the Police Federation.

There’s no doubt though that the media have been wheeling out copper and ex-copper after copper and ex-copper to tell us how brave they would have been in the situation.
 
One copper (who happens to be the chairman of the PF) has suggested this and it looks to be a personal position rather than the official one of the Police Federation.

There’s no doubt though that the media have been wheeling out copper and ex-copper after copper and ex-copper to tell us how brave they would have been in the situation.
Of course, that's what the media do and yes, who amongst us could guarantee they also wouldn't have run away. But then if we did we'd have been liable to the same criticism as Mackey. The bottom line of being a copper is you are supposed to back your mate/colleague/underling up. He didn't.
 
The bottom line of being a copper is you are supposed to back your mate/colleague/underling up.
Is it? At the risk of making the situation far worse when there’s someone far better equipped than you a couple of seconds away? So far everything I’ve read that would support your view in this situation is just retrospective macho nonsense and silly clichés.
 
Back
Top Bottom