Wednesday, February 10, 2010

And he's still employed... Why?

It seems that, a few days ago, a senior police officer—Ali Dizaei—was jailed for four years for abusing his powers as a police officer and using those powers to bully members of the public. In other words, he is an utter cunt who has brought the entirety of the police force into disrepute.

As such, I could hardly believe my ears when this headline was repeated on the radio news this evening.
Police chief Ali Dizaei faces the sack within weeks after receiving four-year term for framing an innocent man

You fucking what?

The man has just been convicted for corruption and he is still a member of the Metropolitan Police force? Why the fucking fuck hasn't he been sacked already? OK, he's innocent until proven guilty but he has now been proven guilty, so what's the fucking delay?

Instead he faces the sack "within weeks"—why the fuck wasn't the P45 posted off as soon as he was convicted?

What are the Met Police afraid of, exactly...?

20 comments:

Mark Wadsworth said...

Yup, I spotted that yesterday.

Anonymous said...

Bit of a non-story. It'll just be a bureaucratic hurdle - ie only some committee has the formal power to sack him, and that's when it next meets, or the earliest it could be convened.

paulo said...

So will the sacking be back-dated or is he still being paid and accruing pension, which I understand is worth £60k p.a even now.

I thought a sacking from public service meant loss of pension?

What's the betting this slimeball holds on to his and in five years is running a Quango.

Anyway he's now a convict and clearly a danger to the public. Why can we not deport him when he finishes his sentence?



paulo

microdave said...

Procedures, dear boy, procedures....

If they don't follow the rules the cnut will take them to yet another tribunal claiming unfair dismissal! Remember the Sharon Shoesmith case?

Arrogant bullies like him won't lie down without a fight, he's had it all his own way for a long time.

Let's hope the sex offenders he's apparently sharing jail with, can't control their urges...

Prodicus said...

OT

Just making sure you've clocked this.
Five leading AGW scientists including the AGW boss at UEA write in Nature that (even) a Wiki could be an improvement on the IPCC which has had its day.


wv: magoo. Heheh.

James Higham said...

The wheels of justice turn excruciatingly slowly for the guilty, swifter for the innocuous.

Surreptitious Evil said...

As microdave said, any dismissal which does not follow the established procedures of the organisation is automatically "unfair dismissal". Having said that, Ali D's chance of getting any compo from that Tribunal are going to be wondrously slim.

Now, why the Met's rules do not include immediate suspension without pay on conviction on indictment, I'm not sure. I'm pretty sure they will include summary dismissal on imprisonment.

The pension is a different problem. Some public pensions used to be non-contributory (Armed Forces in the loosest sense as the AFPR deducted a large %age from the assessed pay scale for the pension benefit) but the police pension has been contributory for some time.

Automatic forfeiture is only for treason and Official Secrets Act offences, but under Section K5(4) of the 1987 Police Pension Regulations the "Secretary of State" (which I assume is the world's postman) can certify an offence "either to have been gravely injurious to the interests of the State or to be liable to lead to serious loss of confidence in the public service". That would allow the Met Police Authority (but not require them) to order his pension to be forfeited. Report on recent cases here. (As an aside, I would note that in commercial cases, the Pensions Act 1995 prevents forfeiture unless the employer has suffered a direct financial loss - so not, in this case.)

You'll note the two "misconduct in public office" cases - and in one, the Home Secretary refused the forfeiture certificate (odd) but, mysteriously, the forfeiture is down as "pending" - they may have mixed the two up in the real or just the web versions.

Surreptitious Evil said...

Oh, sorry - some additional info on police pension forfeiture, which I had missed:

"13. The range of forfeiture available to the Sub-Committee is 0-65%, the remaining 35% being the officer’s own contribution which cannot be forfeit."

Vicola said...

Didn't take that long for the fuzz to process my speeding fine....

I suppose they've got to ensure that they do everything by the book to minimise the chances of the odious little scrote of trying squeeze compo out of the Met.

Roger Thornhill said...

Backdate to when he committed the offence.

Strip him of state contributions to pension.

Use his contribs to repay backdated salary.

This person was guilty all along yet fought it, corrupted evidence. If I were a lag who was shopped by this rozzer, I'd be on to my brief to get my conviction overturned on suspicion of evidence tampering.

It is unfair on twats to call this person a twat.

Lexander said...

I want to see everyone who has been involved in any kind of prosecution by this bastard SUE him. Four years in jug is not sufficient punishment for the corrupt cunt. Let's hope he ends up sharing with a anti-Iranian maniac.

Jamie said...

I'm pretty sure I got pulled over by him when he was working in Henley On Thames years ago. It was at 4am and he gave me a load of grief, even though I hadn't done anything wrong.

john in cheshire said...

I don't suppose there is any chance that he will get a proper punishment while he is languishing in prison? Suppose not. But when do the bad get their comeuppance? And don't say there are too many of them. As Marxist Mao said, every journey starts with the first step.

bewick said...

Actually one report said he would be out in 2 years "on licence". Disgusting. Let's hope he is ravaged daily.

Weekend Yachtsman said...

What are they afraid of?

Accusations of racism at an Employment Tribunal, that's what.

Anonymous said...

Why?

Because you touch yourself at night.

Unsworth said...

Timing is everything. Follow the money.

Surreptitious Evil said...

@Anon 3:49pm

That's a dreadful thing to say about a newly married couple. Shame on you.

Anonymous said...

It's a standard thing the MPS do, must follow procedures etc. See this guy, for example

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8513581.stm

Anonymous said...

Some years ago I had a civil service job. One of the senior managers in the department was a hateful bully. Some years on he was caught exposing himself at a swimming pool. They allowed him to resign rather than sack him so he could retain his pension. I have nothing but contempt for the civil service upper echelons. Full of dysfunctional creeps, bullies and weirdos who retain their position because the culture encourages this. If this clown is allowed to keep his pension because of legal loopholes then they need to bring in retrospective legislation to claw it back.