PSNI fined for anti-Catholic bias

[Shankill Browser]

but I don't think this is a "just when you thought things were going well" situation.

Of course it isn't. Mr Murphy was on the end of some despicable treatment but it's thanks to the fact that things are going well now that situations like this from the past are coming out into the open.

In fact, if you applied the "just when you thought things were going well" mentality because you thought they were actually getting worse, then you'd never know about this story because it would be covered up.

[Insider2007]

A few points

1. The policing board was only established in November 2001 so his appeal had to be after that date so the results of the actions continued

2. Somebody destroyed evidence to discredit this individual. A criminal act in itself.

3. If the attitudes are "new" then he should have been taken back without having to resort to the Fair Employment Tribunal

4. Somebody stole a wedding gift - again a criminal act (however petty)

I should point out that I am pro PSNI, but the overall conduct here is unacceptable.

Fair points.

The issue arises over the identity of the police officers. If they are still in the force then the Policing Board needs to raise the issue directly.

If any criminal acts took place those responsible must be prescuted. The only issue may be establishing the identity of the thieves. A prosecution can only take place against individuals against whom there is evidence. If the identities of the thieves are unknown then as with so many crimes, there is no way of prosecuting.

[Jemee Hope]

The really remarkable thing about this case is the fact that , DUP MLA Mervyn Storey made the appeal on the man's behalf to the Police Board. A small but positive sign for the future.

[Shankill Browser]

The really remarkable thing about this case is the fact that , DUP MLA Mervyn Storey made the appeal on the man's behalf to the Police Board. A small but positive sign for the future.

Even more remarkable was the role that Paisley jr played. He'd been involved on Mr Murphy's side for some time. (According to a paper this morning. The Mirror, I think.

[Insider2007]

[quote=Shankill Browser]

The really remarkable thing about this case is the fact that , DUP MLA Mervyn Storey made the appeal on the man's behalf to the Police Board. A small but positive sign for the future.

Even more remarkable was the role that Paisley jr played. He'd been involved on Mr Murphy's side for some time. (According to a paper this morning. The Mirror, I think.[/quote:2inxqq26]

I saw that in the Irish Times. The involvement of Storey and Paisley is quite remarkable. If ever there was something that shows how much change is happening in the North of Ireland, it is that. I don't normally have much respect for Ian junior, but hats off to him for this. Who could have imagined seeing the DUP support someone who was victim of discrimination because of his wife's Catholicism, and in doing so oppose the Protestants who had discriminated against him.

[maceochaidh]

Don't suppose there's even the remotest possibility of there being two sides to this story?

If there are two sides to this story, I am sure that most of us would like to hear the other sides to it.

My main interest would be: Are the two guilty, senior men involved still members of the British Crown Police Force?

[Jemee Hope]

As it happened twenty-five years ago, I very much doubt it.

[joel]

As it happened twenty-five years ago, I very much doubt it.

I think it happened six or seven years ago.

[Jemee Hope]

As it happened twenty-five years ago, I very much doubt it.

I think it happened six or seven years ago.

It's possible you are right joel. I just read the BBC report and it's not clear when it happened. I was reading this on another forum and assumed from there it happened in the early 80's.
Either way if those officers are still employed, they should be handed their papers.