Him wrote:
No it's not. The key aspect of the incident is that a cabinet minister lost it, swore and was abusive toward police officers. If the rest isn't such a big deal why hasn't Andrew Mitchell confirmed what he did say?.
The key aspect is not if "a cabinet minister lost it" it is whether he called th PC a pleb or not. There is no evidence that he lost it or used the word "Pleb" or the other allegations.
Mitchell admits to saying 'I thought you guys were supposed to f***ing help us.' - that is not losing it, nor in this context is it being abusive or swearing at the PC.
The use of what is now an everyday word, that is in most dictionaries and considered at worst 'vulgar slang'. It can be used as a verb, an adverb or an adjective, and as in this case was not as a direct insult as in 'you f'ing b.....d' . This is a word that can be heard on the TV every night and in almost every place and including between policemen. In 2010, U.S. vice president Joe Biden whispered into President Barack Obama's ear, "This is a big f..king deal" when referring to the U.S. health care reform bill. His words were picked up by microphones and video. So let's not get all pompous.
I repeat Mitchell has given a full account of what he said as I reported over a year ago. Mitchell claims the police were being awkward and difficult in preventing him going through the main gate as usual. If the "rest were a big deal" then surely the police log would have said so?
Him wrote:
The police who have allegedly lied are not the police present at the incident. So changes nothing other than those individuals should be prosecuted. .
The policeman who falsely claimed to be witness and fabricated a corrobaration with the police log did not "allegedly lie" he actually did lie because he has admitted to doing so in court and awaits a possible stretch.
The PC (or perhaps WPC) who leaked the confidential police log to the media has yet to appear in court. Two or is it three Chief Constables have publicly apologised to Mitchell because the three Police Federation representatives misled the public on the national TV news. Two of these same officers also misled and didn't tell the truth to the Home Affairs Committee regarding their own personal disciplinary records. They have since aplogised for being confused which was their excuse this time for not telling the truth. Or was it just another lie!!!
We may never know the truth about what was said. But do not forget that Mitchell was not charged with anything and has no case to answer.
My point from the start was not that I believed Mitchell or I disbelieved the police. I objected to the various posters who had Mitchell down as guilty without a shread of evidence. You did not need to be Sherlock to smell a rat as first the police leaked the log to the media. Next the false witness corroboration of the police log , then the CCTV that for most neutrals threw doubt on the police log. Then the campaign by the disgraced 'proud to be Plebs' police federation. Finally the year long police investigation which has failed to find "sufficient evidence" to prove anything.
What is quite clear though is that most, if not all, of those posters on here, including yourself, who chose to take sides against Mitchell, did so for anti-tory reasons with no sense of justice or thought whatsoever of 'innocent until proven guilty'. This lack of common fairness or objectivity means that it will be difficult to take seriously anything else they or you post again.
