It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cambridgeshire Cop Returns to Work After Taking “up-skirt” Pics of Children in Tesco

page: 1
19

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Only now coming to the front page...

Justification? This was years ago and times have changed...This is exactly what I understand from this statement. They make it sound like it wasn't a serious offense in 2005.

Police officer Nick Lidstone was this month jailed for admitting a string of child rape and sex offences but the court heard that he kept his job eight years ago despite being caught taking images using a spy pen. Cambridgeshire chief constable Simon Parr said:

“At the time of the offences in 2005, the case was reviewed and the then-deputy chief constable decided Lidstone be placed on restricted duties. “If we were faced with the same decision today, a more severe sanction would be imposed.”
www.bbc.com...

So it took more serious offenses to bring this POS to justice? If it was done years ago, these other crimes might not have happened:

This month at Norwich Crown Court Judge Bates sentenced Lidstone to 14 and a half years behind bars after the 54 year old confessed to 13 offences that included three counts of rape, three of indecency with a child, various sexual assaults and taking an indecent photograph of a child.

And the public are asked to trust the police departmental style of justice?

“We want the public and our own employees to feel confident about raising concerns about the conduct of our officers and staff. We will always investigate these cases thoroughly and ensure any offenders are brought to justice.”

This is just one more nail in the coffin of what is unfolding in the halls of Govt. with child abuse. Not only in Europe but the US as well.

What would have happened if in 2005 a man was caught taking these up-skirt pics of a juvenile in a public place?

JAIL! No questions asked.

Peace



edit on 30-12-2014 by jude11 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   
This was not acceptable in 2005 and the decision made back then was one purely made to save face of the Constabulary. It didn't go to court, so to dismiss him would have exposed him in public. Remember the FOI act was relatively new and any information relating to dismissed officers would have to be provided.

This was nothing but a cover up, and to say they would have treated things differently nowadays? It's less than 10 years ago, so not buying it one bit. A total cover up in the ranks of Cambridgeshire Constabulary, disgusting, depraved behaviour that should have been dealt with in a criminal court, putting him on the sex offenders register; thereby allowing the Police to keep tabs on where he was at all times and in all likelihood preventing any further incidents occurring.


edit on 30/12/14 by Cobaltic1978 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
This was not acceptable in 2005 and the decision made back then was one purely made to save face of the Constabulary. It didn't go to court, so to dismiss him would have exposed him in public. Remember the FOI act was relatively new and any information relating to dismissed officers would have to be provided.

This was nothing but a cover up, and to say they would have treated differently nowadays? It's less than 10 years ago, so not buying it one bit. A total cover up in the ranks of Cambridgeshire Constabulary, disgusting, depraved behaviour that should have been dealt with in a criminal court, putting him on the sex offenders register, thereby allowing the Police to keep tabs on where he was at all times and in all likelihood preventing any further incidents occurring.



Just a stab here but maybe he had knowledge of something/someone else higher up engaged in some activities?

Maybe not but worth a thought IMO.

Peace



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   
You could be right, maybe if you look into his family connections because that's how many people become Police Officers.

By that I mean some close relation being of influence in the Constabulary, maybe high ranking officers. The shame of such an act, it could cast aspersions on the good family name.

But in all probability, they were preventing the Constabulary's name from being blackened.



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 03:25 PM
link   
The link isn't working for me.



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 03:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: lambros56
The link isn't working for me.


Try this:

www.bbc.com...

Peace


edit on 30-12-2014 by jude11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 04:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: jude11

originally posted by: lambros56
The link isn't working for me.


Try this:

www.bbc.com...

Peace



Have you noticed it hasn't mentioned the 2005 incident in this report. Strange.

Edit - Thinking about it, no it's not so strange being a BBC report.

edit on 30/12/14 by Cobaltic1978 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: jude11

If this individual had been placed on the sex offender's register and dealt with accordingly then others could have been spared rape ffs! it's a repulsive cover up that caused so much more unnecessary pain and suffering. Just horrible but sadly it does not beggar belief anymore.

So effing grim



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: jude11

If this individual had been placed on the sex offender's register and dealt with accordingly then others could have been spared rape ffs! it's a repulsive cover up that caused so much more unnecessary pain and suffering. Just horrible but sadly it does not beggar belief anymore.

So effing grim




So right.

The chief should be accountable as complicit in covering up a crime as well.

Peace



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: jude11

originally posted by: lambros56
The link isn't working for me.


Try this:

www.bbc.com...

Peace



Have you noticed it hasn't mentioned the 2005 incident in this report. Strange.

Edit - Thinking about it, no it's not so strange being a BBC report.


Here it is:

www.cambridge-news.co.uk...

Peace



posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 04:45 AM
link   
a reply to: jude11

Being retired one gets to have seen the different attitudes over a period of time. Back in the 60's, 70's the police were starting to change their attitude to domestic violence. It wasn't only the police though it was men in general, now I am looking back to that era.

Coming up to today men'a attitudes have and are changing dramatically - true we still have the dinosaurs being born with the male supremacy bit slugged into their brains, but men have taken a huge step forward. I only pushed our little ones out when with the wife and as a family unit. Today my son takes his little one out as a matter of course without even thinking about it. It is a leap forward. He changed nappies as a regular no-bigee I rarely did. I didn't appear to be any different in my attitudes or how I saw my role to any other males.

Whilst travelling up to town to work I have noticed the change in in conversations, about what men did and thought about doing and I can honestly say I genuinely think that men are improving in the way they share the family work. OK its stressed at time, but they are taking a far more active role in their kiddies upbringings, which I see as a good thing.

Its because of this change that I think the police institution, although advancing from what it was - virtually neanderthal towards many issues, such as domestic violence, it has come forward as can by shown by the case above. In the past, many men would have had a similar attitude to that taken towards Lidstone in the past - but we have moved well on today and men are more forthright in what they think is OK behaviour and what is today unacceptable. With taking a more involved role within our kiddies upbringings, we see their vulnerablility and are better bonded so we see a male predator who eyes our kids as an enemy and we want to protect.

Hopefully this pressure from the men, joined to the valient fight our women have put up so far, will add to the police and government being forced to yield up the men at the top and their associates. These animals that live such a priviledged life should be given the one priviledge they deserve which is a cage in full view of the public and everyone aware of what they have done, their estates taken to compensate their many victims and where their wives kept quiet about their acts, the wives in jail also. One can only be sorry for their kids.

But times are changing along with attitudes.



new topics

top topics



 
19

log in

join