|
|
Post by mancapollo on Jan 26, 2018 19:46:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 26, 2018 20:07:57 GMT
Wow... gross misconduct surely
|
|
|
|
Post by SOAD on Jan 26, 2018 21:41:27 GMT
But the female officer didn’t enter the cell to take the noose either when she discovered he was in possession, from the outside it looks like a case of passing the book, even if I had finished my shift and was 10 hours over from leaving, I would have still taken the noose had I been the one to know about it, I wouldn’t say to the oncoming officer, “oh and he has a noose”. But we don’t know all the facts sooo???
Unless someone is on a constant watch, even at the maximum of 5 obs an hour, 12 minutes (average at this amount of obs) is more than enough time to end your life if you are hell bent on it.
SOAD
|
|
|
|
Post by bagpuss on Jan 26, 2018 23:13:05 GMT
Exactly the jackanory given "facts" would suggest the female officer would be incriminating herself too saying he had a noose surely!
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 26, 2018 23:27:56 GMT
Both would be to blame, but yeah why would someone tell you that then go off shift? Not like the newspapers to let a lie get in the way of a good story.
|
|
|
|
Post by passionatepoelt on Jan 27, 2018 8:24:25 GMT
Calamity of errors after discovering a noose they said they should of upped his I've to twice hourly should be at least 4 to be safe I'd say ... Why did they not move cell or search him
|
|
|
|
Post by moreDread on Jan 27, 2018 9:42:59 GMT
I'm probably wrong and I'm sure a serving prison officer will correct me but I'm sure I read somewhere that even if a prisoner is know to have something on their person that may cause harm to themselves or others it's against their rights to be searched.
I seriously hope I'm wrong and I've misread or misunderstood what I'd read.
Either way, it sounds like a he said, she said... no action taken til it was to late kinda thing that could have been avoided
|
|
|
|
Post by sgtbush on Jan 27, 2018 10:58:45 GMT
We can search prisoners any time we like. Their are a few issues raised here that do not sit well with me. The female officer"saw" the con tie a bed sheet to the window but she walked away and told the male officer?  She should of stayed with the con and radioed for assistance. 2 obs an hour is quite regular occurrence on an ACCT doc. All of health care in attendance?? That might be two members of healthcare. Cut backs you know. A message on a radio? Prove it. All radio transmissions are recorded. The bereaveds barrister is trying to make the officer a scape goat |
|
|
|
Post by gravey957 on Jan 27, 2018 11:51:32 GMT
I'm probably wrong and I'm sure a serving prison officer will correct me but I'm sure I read somewhere that even if a prisoner is know to have something on their person that may cause harm to themselves or others it's against their rights to be searched. I seriously hope I'm wrong and I've misread or misunderstood what I'd read. Yes there are a series of prison rules that give an officer his power of search 41/yoi 46 search of prisoner 71/ yoi 75 search of those wishing to enter a prison To refuse a search a prisioner woul fave a nicking and loss of privileges And a visitor would have their visiting rights stopped |
|
|
|
Post by moreDread on Jan 27, 2018 11:58:49 GMT
Thanks for correcting my knowledge gravey 🖒
|
|
|
|
Post by julia2501 on Jan 31, 2018 18:30:25 GMT
I’ve just been reading that the officer was found not guilty.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mccudden on Feb 1, 2018 11:30:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by elkins17 on Feb 1, 2018 11:33:03 GMT
And that is why you should join the POA
|
|
