Rebus would have done the same as Becky-Godden Edwards case detective, says crime writer Ian Rankin

This Is Wiltshire: Ian Rankin Ian Rankin

CRIME writer Ian Rankin has hinted the actions of detective Steve Fulcher in interviewing killer Chris Halliwell were of the kind that his most famous character Inspector Rebus would take.

The 53-year-old Scottish author was speaking about his new novel, Saints of the Shadow Bible, on Radio 4’s Front Row programme, when he alluded to the case involving Sian O’Callagahan and Becky Godden-Edwards, overseen by Det Supt Fulcher in March 2011.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission found DSI Fulcher had a case to answer to over breaches of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act. He now faces a Wiltshire Police internal conduct hearing over actions he took while interviewing Sian’s killer Halliwell at Barbury Castle and later in Uffington, failing to caution the suspect when he offered him ‘another one’.

Halliwell, 49, of Ashbury Avenue, Nythe, was jailed for life for Sian’s murder but a second charge for Becky’s murder was withdrawn due to a lack of evidence.

Responding to a question on Front Row about the ‘old-school’ methods Rebus uses, Rankin revealed he took inspiration from reality.

He said: “Specifically, a true story about a cop in England recently who took a suspect out for a drive, the suspect admitted to murder and said ‘I’ll show you where the body is’. When he got to the site he said ‘do you want another one’.

“This was a second murder the police knew nothing about. They went to the second site but the cop should not have done that, he should’ve followed protocol and everything else so they could not actually charge the guy even though he admitted it.

“I thought ‘that’s what Rebus would do, Rebus would do that’. He would think about getting justice and getting closure first and following the rules later on.”

Becky’s mum Karen Edwards, 52, said she was surprised to hear the author citing her daughter’s case but was pleased it was still in the public eye.

She has been a keen supporter of DSI Fulcher throughout the case and is leading a campaign to change PACE laws around interviewing suspects.

Karen said: “I couldn’t believe it when I heard it, it was amazing. I’ve read some of his books and for him to mention Becky’s case on national radio is great.

“Without Steve Fulcher I would still believe my daughter was alive and out there somewhere. He does not deserve what he is going through now.”

Karen’s petition for changing PACE has reached 30,000 signatures and she has spoken to a host of organisations in the town.

To listen to the podcast visit http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/radio4/frontrow/frontrow_20131128-1335a.mp3. Anyone with petition packs can email justiceforbecky@yahoo.com to arrange for collect.

Comments (21)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:59am Wed 15 Jan 14

anotherimigrant says...

Yes Mrs Edwards your daughter is still in the publics eye.

And it would appear that Ian Rankin,s fictional plod would have acted in the same negligent way that let the murderous scum halliwell of another murder of an innocent girl in our town.

But it's this kind of policing which lets the scum get away with murder.
Like our highly trained, highly skilled police drivers who kill hundreds in high speed chases, Opps forgot about that one.

or the case where it's all dropped and forgotten, like this one.

KNOWN thief robs a car. Witnesses are willing to give statements,, goods tracked and under surveillance of cameras, another witness comes forward to say the NAME of the thief.

Plod says he will deny it, cameras went working, and it's
not theft but you lost your property.

No crime committed, figures look good and every ones happy including the KNOWN thief, except me.

Wiltshire police farce couldn't solve a proper easy crime even when known killers admit to killing someone they still f*kc it up.

What do you think (honestly) the police care about your car, your property, your home, your family.

It starts with Nuu and ends in ing.

Your property you look after it.

Anyway, who ian rankin?
Yes Mrs Edwards your daughter is still in the publics eye. And it would appear that Ian Rankin,s fictional plod would have acted in the same negligent way that let the murderous scum halliwell of another murder of an innocent girl in our town. But it's this kind of policing which lets the scum get away with murder. Like our highly trained, highly skilled police drivers who kill hundreds in high speed chases, Opps forgot about that one. or the case where it's all dropped and forgotten, like this one. KNOWN thief robs a car. Witnesses are willing to give statements,, goods tracked and under surveillance of cameras, another witness comes forward to say the NAME of the thief. Plod says he will deny it, cameras went working, and it's not theft but you lost your property. No crime committed, figures look good and every ones happy including the KNOWN thief, except me. Wiltshire police farce couldn't solve a proper easy crime even when known killers admit to killing someone they still f*kc it up. What do you think (honestly) the police care about your car, your property, your home, your family. It starts with Nuu and ends in ing. Your property you look after it. Anyway, who ian rankin? anotherimigrant

8:52am Wed 15 Jan 14

Hearditallbefore says...

Yes a fictional copper for christs sake.
Yes a fictional copper for christs sake. Hearditallbefore

9:01am Wed 15 Jan 14

Phantom Poster says...

anotherimigrant wrote:
Yes Mrs Edwards your daughter is still in the publics eye.

And it would appear that Ian Rankin,s fictional plod would have acted in the same negligent way that let the murderous scum halliwell of another murder of an innocent girl in our town.

But it's this kind of policing which lets the scum get away with murder.
Like our highly trained, highly skilled police drivers who kill hundreds in high speed chases, Opps forgot about that one.

or the case where it's all dropped and forgotten, like this one.

KNOWN thief robs a car. Witnesses are willing to give statements,, goods tracked and under surveillance of cameras, another witness comes forward to say the NAME of the thief.

Plod says he will deny it, cameras went working, and it's
not theft but you lost your property.

No crime committed, figures look good and every ones happy including the KNOWN thief, except me.

Wiltshire police farce couldn't solve a proper easy crime even when known killers admit to killing someone they still f*kc it up.

What do you think (honestly) the police care about your car, your property, your home, your family.

It starts with Nuu and ends in ing.

Your property you look after it.

Anyway, who ian rankin?
If you are going to bore everyone by repeatedly cutting and pasting the same piece of text then can you at least fix the glaring typos?

Do you mean "weren't working"? Can't think of any word starting with "Nuu"!

Who is Ian Rankin? Didn't you get as far as reading the first two words in the article? Unbelievable!
[quote][p][bold]anotherimigrant[/bold] wrote: Yes Mrs Edwards your daughter is still in the publics eye. And it would appear that Ian Rankin,s fictional plod would have acted in the same negligent way that let the murderous scum halliwell of another murder of an innocent girl in our town. But it's this kind of policing which lets the scum get away with murder. Like our highly trained, highly skilled police drivers who kill hundreds in high speed chases, Opps forgot about that one. or the case where it's all dropped and forgotten, like this one. KNOWN thief robs a car. Witnesses are willing to give statements,, goods tracked and under surveillance of cameras, another witness comes forward to say the NAME of the thief. Plod says he will deny it, cameras went working, and it's not theft but you lost your property. No crime committed, figures look good and every ones happy including the KNOWN thief, except me. Wiltshire police farce couldn't solve a proper easy crime even when known killers admit to killing someone they still f*kc it up. What do you think (honestly) the police care about your car, your property, your home, your family. It starts with Nuu and ends in ing. Your property you look after it. Anyway, who ian rankin?[/p][/quote]If you are going to bore everyone by repeatedly cutting and pasting the same piece of text then can you at least fix the glaring typos? Do you mean "weren't working"? Can't think of any word starting with "Nuu"! Who is Ian Rankin? Didn't you get as far as reading the first two words in the article? Unbelievable! Phantom Poster

10:09am Wed 15 Jan 14

ChannelX says...

Given the horrendous treatment of Det Supt Fulcher (for doing a fantastic job) by the authorities, I'm not sure that this well intentioned piece is entirely appropriate.

However, in this day and age it seems people only become concerned about things when celebrities or fictional characters become involved, and so anything that helps bring about change in the misguided current approach of the police and the authorities should, overall, be welcomed.

Fulcher should have received praise for his work, not derision and opprobrium from the usual suspects who seem to exist purely to protect and care for criminals. In this case, the very worst kind of criminal.
Given the horrendous treatment of Det Supt Fulcher (for doing a fantastic job) by the authorities, I'm not sure that this well intentioned piece is entirely appropriate. However, in this day and age it seems people only become concerned about things when celebrities or fictional characters become involved, and so anything that helps bring about change in the misguided current approach of the police and the authorities should, overall, be welcomed. Fulcher should have received praise for his work, not derision and opprobrium from the usual suspects who seem to exist purely to protect and care for criminals. In this case, the very worst kind of criminal. ChannelX

11:12am Wed 15 Jan 14

Chrisg46 says...

anotherimigrant wrote:
Yes Mrs Edwards your daughter is still in the publics eye.

And it would appear that Ian Rankin,s fictional plod would have acted in the same negligent way that let the murderous scum halliwell of another murder of an innocent girl in our town.

But it's this kind of policing which lets the scum get away with murder.
Like our highly trained, highly skilled police drivers who kill hundreds in high speed chases, Opps forgot about that one.

or the case where it's all dropped and forgotten, like this one.

KNOWN thief robs a car. Witnesses are willing to give statements,, goods tracked and under surveillance of cameras, another witness comes forward to say the NAME of the thief.

Plod says he will deny it, cameras went working, and it's
not theft but you lost your property.

No crime committed, figures look good and every ones happy including the KNOWN thief, except me.

Wiltshire police farce couldn't solve a proper easy crime even when known killers admit to killing someone they still f*kc it up.

What do you think (honestly) the police care about your car, your property, your home, your family.

It starts with Nuu and ends in ing.

Your property you look after it.

Anyway, who ian rankin?
What a moronic comment.
[quote][p][bold]anotherimigrant[/bold] wrote: Yes Mrs Edwards your daughter is still in the publics eye. And it would appear that Ian Rankin,s fictional plod would have acted in the same negligent way that let the murderous scum halliwell of another murder of an innocent girl in our town. But it's this kind of policing which lets the scum get away with murder. Like our highly trained, highly skilled police drivers who kill hundreds in high speed chases, Opps forgot about that one. or the case where it's all dropped and forgotten, like this one. KNOWN thief robs a car. Witnesses are willing to give statements,, goods tracked and under surveillance of cameras, another witness comes forward to say the NAME of the thief. Plod says he will deny it, cameras went working, and it's not theft but you lost your property. No crime committed, figures look good and every ones happy including the KNOWN thief, except me. Wiltshire police farce couldn't solve a proper easy crime even when known killers admit to killing someone they still f*kc it up. What do you think (honestly) the police care about your car, your property, your home, your family. It starts with Nuu and ends in ing. Your property you look after it. Anyway, who ian rankin?[/p][/quote]What a moronic comment. Chrisg46

12:34pm Wed 15 Jan 14

Hmmmf says...

ChennelX wrote:
Fulcher should have received praise for his work, not derision and opprobrium from the usual suspects who seem to exist purely to protect and care for criminals. In this case, the very worst kind of criminal.

Fulcher broke the law, and he knew it. PACE is an Act designed to give criminals and their lawyers less room to squirm about their clients' 'rights', and to protect *anyone* whose liberty is taken by Police, innocent and guilty alike. And that's why Halliwell got away with it.

The fact that some people think it's okay for police officers blatantly to violate that law simply because they're 'well-intentioned' is why a fiction writer has latched on to it yet again. The age-old 'moral dilemma' of the end justifying the means vs working within the constraints of the lsw has been around in crime fiction since the genre's beginnings.

Mr Rankin's publicist is probably delighted with the free advertising by the Adver.
[quote][p][bold]ChennelX[/bold] wrote: Fulcher should have received praise for his work, not derision and opprobrium from the usual suspects who seem to exist purely to protect and care for criminals. In this case, the very worst kind of criminal.[/quote] Fulcher broke the law, and he knew it. PACE is an Act designed to give criminals and their lawyers less room to squirm about their clients' 'rights', and to protect *anyone* whose liberty is taken by Police, innocent and guilty alike. And that's why Halliwell got away with it. The fact that some people think it's okay for police officers blatantly to violate that law simply because they're 'well-intentioned' is why a fiction writer has latched on to it yet again. The age-old 'moral dilemma' of the end justifying the means vs working within the constraints of the lsw has been around in crime fiction since the genre's beginnings. Mr Rankin's publicist is probably delighted with the free advertising by the Adver. Hmmmf

1:32pm Wed 15 Jan 14

Davey Gravey says...

Unfortunately Rebus wasn't the arresting copper and the murder of Becky Godden-Edwards is not fictional.
The fact is errors were made and the murderer has not been brought to justice because of it.
Unfortunately Rebus wasn't the arresting copper and the murder of Becky Godden-Edwards is not fictional. The fact is errors were made and the murderer has not been brought to justice because of it. Davey Gravey

2:11pm Wed 15 Jan 14

ChannelX says...

Hmmmf wrote:
ChennelX wrote:
Fulcher should have received praise for his work, not derision and opprobrium from the usual suspects who seem to exist purely to protect and care for criminals. In this case, the very worst kind of criminal.

Fulcher broke the law, and he knew it. PACE is an Act designed to give criminals and their lawyers less room to squirm about their clients' 'rights', and to protect *anyone* whose liberty is taken by Police, innocent and guilty alike. And that's why Halliwell got away with it.

The fact that some people think it's okay for police officers blatantly to violate that law simply because they're 'well-intentioned' is why a fiction writer has latched on to it yet again. The age-old 'moral dilemma' of the end justifying the means vs working within the constraints of the lsw has been around in crime fiction since the genre's beginnings.

Mr Rankin's publicist is probably delighted with the free advertising by the Adver.
PACE protects criminals and allows murders to get away with murder... as this case highlights.

Even the victim's mother approves of Fulcher's approach, so I don't really think your view of it holds much water.
[quote][p][bold]Hmmmf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChennelX[/bold] wrote: Fulcher should have received praise for his work, not derision and opprobrium from the usual suspects who seem to exist purely to protect and care for criminals. In this case, the very worst kind of criminal.[/quote] Fulcher broke the law, and he knew it. PACE is an Act designed to give criminals and their lawyers less room to squirm about their clients' 'rights', and to protect *anyone* whose liberty is taken by Police, innocent and guilty alike. And that's why Halliwell got away with it. The fact that some people think it's okay for police officers blatantly to violate that law simply because they're 'well-intentioned' is why a fiction writer has latched on to it yet again. The age-old 'moral dilemma' of the end justifying the means vs working within the constraints of the lsw has been around in crime fiction since the genre's beginnings. Mr Rankin's publicist is probably delighted with the free advertising by the Adver.[/p][/quote]PACE protects criminals and allows murders to get away with murder... as this case highlights. Even the victim's mother approves of Fulcher's approach, so I don't really think your view of it holds much water. ChannelX

2:37pm Wed 15 Jan 14

crewcutandnewt says...

Fact is often stranger than fiction, as they say. No doubt Rebus would have got away with it.

The judge's decision to exclude evidence because of Fulcher's breach of PACE makes interesting reading. It wasn't a clear cut case of police negligence as the first post claims. Fulcher may well have been aware of the technical breach of procedure but I think could justifably argue he was acting for a greater good.

Sian O'Callaghan was still considered a missing person at the time of the initial breaches and, after the discovery of her body, and Halliwell's shock second confession, Fulcher was seemingly motivated by the desire to get as much information as possible before Halliwell clammed up (which is exactly what he did when the lawyers arrived).

We all have different views of how "robust" police should be in their questioning of suspects. But this wasn't a case of Fulcher acting like a character out of the Sweeney. In my mind, had he followed PACE to the letter, it is very unlikely that Halliwell would have volunteered enough information to secure a conviction, and it is possible that Becky's body would not have been found.

The real tragedy is that there is no justice for Becky.

PACE needs an overhaul, to balance better the need to protect the rights of the accused and justice for victims. Sadly, this isn't as news worthy as having Rebus on your case. But, in the real world, it could help to prevent the injustice of another case like Becky's.
Fact is often stranger than fiction, as they say. No doubt Rebus would have got away with it. The judge's decision to exclude evidence because of Fulcher's breach of PACE makes interesting reading. It wasn't a clear cut case of police negligence as the first post claims. Fulcher may well have been aware of the technical breach of procedure but I think could justifably argue he was acting for a greater good. Sian O'Callaghan was still considered a missing person at the time of the initial breaches and, after the discovery of her body, and Halliwell's shock second confession, Fulcher was seemingly motivated by the desire to get as much information as possible before Halliwell clammed up (which is exactly what he did when the lawyers arrived). We all have different views of how "robust" police should be in their questioning of suspects. But this wasn't a case of Fulcher acting like a character out of the Sweeney. In my mind, had he followed PACE to the letter, it is very unlikely that Halliwell would have volunteered enough information to secure a conviction, and it is possible that Becky's body would not have been found. The real tragedy is that there is no justice for Becky. PACE needs an overhaul, to balance better the need to protect the rights of the accused and justice for victims. Sadly, this isn't as news worthy as having Rebus on your case. But, in the real world, it could help to prevent the injustice of another case like Becky's. crewcutandnewt

4:27pm Wed 15 Jan 14

Hmmmf says...

ChannelX wrote:
Hmmmf wrote:
ChennelX wrote:
Fulcher should have received praise for his work, not derision and opprobrium from the usual suspects who seem to exist purely to protect and care for criminals. In this case, the very worst kind of criminal.

Fulcher broke the law, and he knew it. PACE is an Act designed to give criminals and their lawyers less room to squirm about their clients' 'rights', and to protect *anyone* whose liberty is taken by Police, innocent and guilty alike. And that's why Halliwell got away with it.

The fact that some people think it's okay for police officers blatantly to violate that law simply because they're 'well-intentioned' is why a fiction writer has latched on to it yet again. The age-old 'moral dilemma' of the end justifying the means vs working within the constraints of the lsw has been around in crime fiction since the genre's beginnings.

Mr Rankin's publicist is probably delighted with the free advertising by the Adver.
PACE protects criminals and allows murders to get away with murder... as this case highlights.

Even the victim's mother approves of Fulcher's approach, so I don't really think your view of it holds much water.
I find it hard to reconcile your frequent protests on the one hand that law-breakers seldom if ever receive the punishment they deserve, with, on the other hand, your assertion that another law-breaker (Fulcher) should not only not receive punishment, but should be praised for his law-breaking by the very judges you decry.

It's as though you've set yourself up as a judge yourself, deciding which criminals should feel the weight of the law and which shouldn't, and in so doing, have become the very thing you hate.
[quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hmmmf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChennelX[/bold] wrote: Fulcher should have received praise for his work, not derision and opprobrium from the usual suspects who seem to exist purely to protect and care for criminals. In this case, the very worst kind of criminal.[/quote] Fulcher broke the law, and he knew it. PACE is an Act designed to give criminals and their lawyers less room to squirm about their clients' 'rights', and to protect *anyone* whose liberty is taken by Police, innocent and guilty alike. And that's why Halliwell got away with it. The fact that some people think it's okay for police officers blatantly to violate that law simply because they're 'well-intentioned' is why a fiction writer has latched on to it yet again. The age-old 'moral dilemma' of the end justifying the means vs working within the constraints of the lsw has been around in crime fiction since the genre's beginnings. Mr Rankin's publicist is probably delighted with the free advertising by the Adver.[/p][/quote]PACE protects criminals and allows murders to get away with murder... as this case highlights. Even the victim's mother approves of Fulcher's approach, so I don't really think your view of it holds much water.[/p][/quote]I find it hard to reconcile your frequent protests on the one hand that law-breakers seldom if ever receive the punishment they deserve, with, on the other hand, your assertion that another law-breaker (Fulcher) should not only not receive punishment, but should be praised for his law-breaking by the very judges you decry. It's as though you've set yourself up as a judge yourself, deciding which criminals should feel the weight of the law and which shouldn't, and in so doing, have become the very thing you hate. Hmmmf

4:58pm Wed 15 Jan 14

ChannelX says...

Hmmmf wrote:
ChannelX wrote:
Hmmmf wrote:
ChennelX wrote:
Fulcher should have received praise for his work, not derision and opprobrium from the usual suspects who seem to exist purely to protect and care for criminals. In this case, the very worst kind of criminal.

Fulcher broke the law, and he knew it. PACE is an Act designed to give criminals and their lawyers less room to squirm about their clients' 'rights', and to protect *anyone* whose liberty is taken by Police, innocent and guilty alike. And that's why Halliwell got away with it.

The fact that some people think it's okay for police officers blatantly to violate that law simply because they're 'well-intentioned' is why a fiction writer has latched on to it yet again. The age-old 'moral dilemma' of the end justifying the means vs working within the constraints of the lsw has been around in crime fiction since the genre's beginnings.

Mr Rankin's publicist is probably delighted with the free advertising by the Adver.
PACE protects criminals and allows murders to get away with murder... as this case highlights.

Even the victim's mother approves of Fulcher's approach, so I don't really think your view of it holds much water.
I find it hard to reconcile your frequent protests on the one hand that law-breakers seldom if ever receive the punishment they deserve, with, on the other hand, your assertion that another law-breaker (Fulcher) should not only not receive punishment, but should be praised for his law-breaking by the very judges you decry.

It's as though you've set yourself up as a judge yourself, deciding which criminals should feel the weight of the law and which shouldn't, and in so doing, have become the very thing you hate.
Fulcher did not 'break the law'. He is not a criminal.
[quote][p][bold]Hmmmf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChannelX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hmmmf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ChennelX[/bold] wrote: Fulcher should have received praise for his work, not derision and opprobrium from the usual suspects who seem to exist purely to protect and care for criminals. In this case, the very worst kind of criminal.[/quote] Fulcher broke the law, and he knew it. PACE is an Act designed to give criminals and their lawyers less room to squirm about their clients' 'rights', and to protect *anyone* whose liberty is taken by Police, innocent and guilty alike. And that's why Halliwell got away with it. The fact that some people think it's okay for police officers blatantly to violate that law simply because they're 'well-intentioned' is why a fiction writer has latched on to it yet again. The age-old 'moral dilemma' of the end justifying the means vs working within the constraints of the lsw has been around in crime fiction since the genre's beginnings. Mr Rankin's publicist is probably delighted with the free advertising by the Adver.[/p][/quote]PACE protects criminals and allows murders to get away with murder... as this case highlights. Even the victim's mother approves of Fulcher's approach, so I don't really think your view of it holds much water.[/p][/quote]I find it hard to reconcile your frequent protests on the one hand that law-breakers seldom if ever receive the punishment they deserve, with, on the other hand, your assertion that another law-breaker (Fulcher) should not only not receive punishment, but should be praised for his law-breaking by the very judges you decry. It's as though you've set yourself up as a judge yourself, deciding which criminals should feel the weight of the law and which shouldn't, and in so doing, have become the very thing you hate.[/p][/quote]Fulcher did not 'break the law'. He is not a criminal. ChannelX

6:45pm Wed 15 Jan 14

anotherimigrant says...

You are right Fulcher didn't break the law, he simply got overtaken by probably derision with the fact that the scum hail well was going to show him something of massive importance.

The reason we have PACE is to prevent over exuberant plods from making up storys.

Remember the Guildford five, and Stefan Kisco, who were all FITTED up by plod. And dozens of others. Google miscarriages of justice. Oh sorry you don't understand what fitting up means.

The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live..
You are right Fulcher didn't break the law, he simply got overtaken by probably derision with the fact that the scum hail well was going to show him something of massive importance. The reason we have PACE is to prevent over exuberant plods from making up storys. Remember the Guildford five, and Stefan Kisco, who were all FITTED up by plod. And dozens of others. Google miscarriages of justice. Oh sorry you don't understand what fitting up means. The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live.. anotherimigrant

8:23pm Wed 15 Jan 14

Always Grumpy says...

anotherimigrant wrote:
You are right Fulcher didn't break the law, he simply got overtaken by probably derision with the fact that the scum hail well was going to show him something of massive importance.

The reason we have PACE is to prevent over exuberant plods from making up storys.

Remember the Guildford five, and Stefan Kisco, who were all FITTED up by plod. And dozens of others. Google miscarriages of justice. Oh sorry you don't understand what fitting up means.

The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live..
"The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live."

That sounds like libel to me.
Got a good lawyer?
[quote][p][bold]anotherimigrant[/bold] wrote: You are right Fulcher didn't break the law, he simply got overtaken by probably derision with the fact that the scum hail well was going to show him something of massive importance. The reason we have PACE is to prevent over exuberant plods from making up storys. Remember the Guildford five, and Stefan Kisco, who were all FITTED up by plod. And dozens of others. Google miscarriages of justice. Oh sorry you don't understand what fitting up means. The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live..[/p][/quote]"The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live." That sounds like libel to me. Got a good lawyer? Always Grumpy

10:19pm Wed 15 Jan 14

anotherimigrant says...

Always Grumpy wrote:
anotherimigrant wrote:
You are right Fulcher didn't break the law, he simply got overtaken by probably derision with the fact that the scum hail well was going to show him something of massive importance.

The reason we have PACE is to prevent over exuberant plods from making up storys.

Remember the Guildford five, and Stefan Kisco, who were all FITTED up by plod. And dozens of others. Google miscarriages of justice. Oh sorry you don't understand what fitting up means.

The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live.."The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live.Yes excellent one. But not from round here. Can you imagine Ross,y defending you with a spliff in his mouth.

No if you need a good lawyer, Lundun matey boy
[quote][p][bold]Always Grumpy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anotherimigrant[/bold] wrote: You are right Fulcher didn't break the law, he simply got overtaken by probably derision with the fact that the scum hail well was going to show him something of massive importance. The reason we have PACE is to prevent over exuberant plods from making up storys. Remember the Guildford five, and Stefan Kisco, who were all FITTED up by plod. And dozens of others. Google miscarriages of justice. Oh sorry you don't understand what fitting up means. The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live..[/p][/quote]"The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live.Yes excellent one. But not from round here. Can you imagine Ross,y defending you with a spliff in his mouth. No if you need a good lawyer, Lundun matey boy anotherimigrant

10:21pm Wed 15 Jan 14

anotherimigrant says...

Always Grumpy wrote:
anotherimigrant wrote:
You are right Fulcher didn't break the law, he simply got overtaken by probably derision with the fact that the scum hail well was going to show him something of massive importance.

The reason we have PACE is to prevent over exuberant plods from making up storys.

Remember the Guildford five, and Stefan Kisco, who were all FITTED up by plod. And dozens of others. Google miscarriages of justice. Oh sorry you don't understand what fitting up means.

The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live..
"The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live."

That sounds like libel to me.
Got a good lawyer?
Ooooo your not going to sue me are you.... Scary
[quote][p][bold]Always Grumpy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anotherimigrant[/bold] wrote: You are right Fulcher didn't break the law, he simply got overtaken by probably derision with the fact that the scum hail well was going to show him something of massive importance. The reason we have PACE is to prevent over exuberant plods from making up storys. Remember the Guildford five, and Stefan Kisco, who were all FITTED up by plod. And dozens of others. Google miscarriages of justice. Oh sorry you don't understand what fitting up means. The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live..[/p][/quote]"The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live." That sounds like libel to me. Got a good lawyer?[/p][/quote]Ooooo your not going to sue me are you.... Scary anotherimigrant

10:44pm Wed 15 Jan 14

Always Grumpy says...

anotherimigrant wrote:
Always Grumpy wrote:
anotherimigrant wrote:
You are right Fulcher didn't break the law, he simply got overtaken by probably derision with the fact that the scum hail well was going to show him something of massive importance.

The reason we have PACE is to prevent over exuberant plods from making up storys.

Remember the Guildford five, and Stefan Kisco, who were all FITTED up by plod. And dozens of others. Google miscarriages of justice. Oh sorry you don't understand what fitting up means.

The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live..
"The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live."

That sounds like libel to me.
Got a good lawyer?
Ooooo your not going to sue me are you.... Scary
No, because you haven't libeled me.
Other people might however, but you appear far too thick to realize the possible consequences of statements you have made.
Clearly you're not very bright.
[quote][p][bold]anotherimigrant[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Always Grumpy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anotherimigrant[/bold] wrote: You are right Fulcher didn't break the law, he simply got overtaken by probably derision with the fact that the scum hail well was going to show him something of massive importance. The reason we have PACE is to prevent over exuberant plods from making up storys. Remember the Guildford five, and Stefan Kisco, who were all FITTED up by plod. And dozens of others. Google miscarriages of justice. Oh sorry you don't understand what fitting up means. The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live..[/p][/quote]"The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live." That sounds like libel to me. Got a good lawyer?[/p][/quote]Ooooo your not going to sue me are you.... Scary[/p][/quote]No, because you haven't libeled me. Other people might however, but you appear far too thick to realize the possible consequences of statements you have made. Clearly you're not very bright. Always Grumpy

10:54pm Wed 15 Jan 14

anotherimigrant says...

Always Grumpy wrote:
anotherimigrant wrote:
Always Grumpy wrote:
anotherimigrant wrote:
You are right Fulcher didn't break the law, he simply got overtaken by probably derision with the fact that the scum hail well was going to show him something of massive importance.

The reason we have PACE is to prevent over exuberant plods from making up storys.

Remember the Guildford five, and Stefan Kisco, who were all FITTED up by plod. And dozens of others. Google miscarriages of justice. Oh sorry you don't understand what fitting up means.

The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live..
"The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live."

That sounds like libel to me.
Got a good lawyer?
Ooooo your not going to sue me are you.... Scary
No, because you haven't libeled me.
Other people might however, but you appear far too thick to realize the possible consequences of statements you have made.
Clearly you're not very bright.
Dim as a coppers torch.

But hers something to cheer you up you miserable.

That's libel, you only have to prove your a happy intelligent invisible blogger and you could get rob Ross to sue me.LOL.


It's official: Crime numbers can NOT be trusted as statistics watchdog strips police data of its seal of aproval

Police records cannot be trusted because crimes hundreds of thousands of crimes are not properly recorded, the statistics watchdog warned today.
The data has been stripped of the official seal of approval which showed they were an accurate account of what was happening on Britain’s streets.
It throws into doubt government boasts about the extent to which crime is falling and follows claims from whistleblowers that police were deliberately fiddling.

There you have it strait from the horses mouth.

The police can have as many gong giving parties as they want. But they were paid, very we'll to do the job they said they could do.

They didn't, they lied, and they lied.
[quote][p][bold]Always Grumpy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anotherimigrant[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Always Grumpy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]anotherimigrant[/bold] wrote: You are right Fulcher didn't break the law, he simply got overtaken by probably derision with the fact that the scum hail well was going to show him something of massive importance. The reason we have PACE is to prevent over exuberant plods from making up storys. Remember the Guildford five, and Stefan Kisco, who were all FITTED up by plod. And dozens of others. Google miscarriages of justice. Oh sorry you don't understand what fitting up means. The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live..[/p][/quote]"The tu'rd fulcher used to pester my daughter to give her a lift home after work. She didn't like him and her instincts let her live." That sounds like libel to me. Got a good lawyer?[/p][/quote]Ooooo your not going to sue me are you.... Scary[/p][/quote]No, because you haven't libeled me. Other people might however, but you appear far too thick to realize the possible consequences of statements you have made. Clearly you're not very bright.[/p][/quote]Dim as a coppers torch. But hers something to cheer you up you miserable. That's libel, you only have to prove your a happy intelligent invisible blogger and you could get rob Ross to sue me.LOL. It's official: Crime numbers can NOT be trusted as statistics watchdog strips police data of its seal of aproval Police records cannot be trusted because crimes hundreds of thousands of crimes are not properly recorded, the statistics watchdog warned today. The data has been stripped of the official seal of approval which showed they were an accurate account of what was happening on Britain’s streets. It throws into doubt government boasts about the extent to which crime is falling and follows claims from whistleblowers that police were deliberately fiddling. There you have it strait from the horses mouth. The police can have as many gong giving parties as they want. But they were paid, very we'll to do the job they said they could do. They didn't, they lied, and they lied. anotherimigrant

10:57pm Wed 15 Jan 14

anotherimigrant says...

Who the f@rck is Ian rankin, is he local or wot.

Someone must know, because some of youLOL purport to be able to read.
Who the f@rck is Ian rankin, is he local or wot. Someone must know, because some of youLOL purport to be able to read. anotherimigrant

10:59pm Wed 15 Jan 14

anotherimigrant says...

Is rankings fictional plod as corrupt as they are in real life, or does he pretend there honest? LoL
Is rankings fictional plod as corrupt as they are in real life, or does he pretend there honest? LoL anotherimigrant

11:14pm Wed 15 Jan 14

Chrisg46 says...

This site attracts all kinds of people but i don't think i have ever seen anyone as genuinely unpleasant as anotherimmigrant appears to be - probably just a troll though one that seems very bitter about the loss of a car.
This site attracts all kinds of people but i don't think i have ever seen anyone as genuinely unpleasant as anotherimmigrant appears to be - probably just a troll though one that seems very bitter about the loss of a car. Chrisg46

8:25am Thu 16 Jan 14

Always Grumpy says...

Chrisg46 wrote:
This site attracts all kinds of people but i don't think i have ever seen anyone as genuinely unpleasant as anotherimmigrant appears to be - probably just a troll though one that seems very bitter about the loss of a car.
And the loss of all his marbles as well!
[quote][p][bold]Chrisg46[/bold] wrote: This site attracts all kinds of people but i don't think i have ever seen anyone as genuinely unpleasant as anotherimmigrant appears to be - probably just a troll though one that seems very bitter about the loss of a car.[/p][/quote]And the loss of all his marbles as well! Always Grumpy

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree