In recent years it seems that the police have taken a real battering; first the allegations of a police cover up at Hillsborough and the controversy surrounding the Plebgate row. But now Home Secretary Theresa May has told MPs about "shocking" findings of an inquiry into the aftermath of the Stephen Lawrence murder over 20 years ago.
It is common knowledge the police handling of the Stephen Lawrence case following his murder in 1993 was an absolute disaster; the Macpherson inquiry told us that. It took just under 20 years for any form of justice to be delivered to his family, however tenuous it may have been - after all, only 2 of the 4 men accused of successfully been prosecuted. Since 1999 and the outcome of the Macpherson inquiry the police force have been tainted with the image of "institutional racism" and has long struggled to come out from under that shadow.
Early last month it was further alleged that the police also tried to cover up the mistakes that they made slandering the Lawrence family name and destroying essential evidence. A recent review from Mark Ellison QC revealed that a police undercover officer attached to the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS) was working closely within the Lawrence family over the duration of the Macpherson inquiry, but this had been kept a secret. Ellison argues "the mere presence of an undercover Metropolitan police officer in the wider Lawrence family camp in such circumstances is highly questionable in terms of the appearance it creates of the police having a spy in the family's camp".
May has stated the review was "deeply troubling" and has now ordered another judge-led inquiry into the activities of the, now non-existent, SDS.
But is another judicial inquiry actually going to make a significant difference? It's questionable whether another public inquiry is actually going to reveal anything new; there can be little more evidence of police corruption from the original murder investigation. Especially since the SDS is no longer existence (having been disbanded in 2008) any further inquiry into their corruption is going to prove what has long been known; the 1993 Stephen Lawrence murder trial was inherently racist.
This begs the question whether it would be far more beneficial to actually begin charging officers in court for a suspected offence if there is a sufficient level of evidence to corruption. Currently the Home Secretary proposes introducing a new offence of "police corruption" because it is not possible to rely on the outdated offence of misconduct in public office regarding such cases. It's hard to believe there are not already laws against this kind of behaviour that could be used instead. Perhaps the sheer volume of money that is going to need to be spent on launching another inquiry would be far better spent prosecuting those have already been found to be corrupt. Surely this sends a better message? Be found to be corrupt and you will be prosecuted rather than be found to be corrupt and all you will receive is encouragement to resign.
Lawrence's family on the other hand fully support the "final nail in the coffin". For the family "the long fight for truth and justice continues" and this investigation is just a further factor confirming that the police cannot be "trusted". For this family their son's memory has been increasingly tainted by further revelations of police corruption. Arguably, these further revelations have become far more than the original trial, but has spawned into something far more important; the beginning of the end of police corruption.
At every turn it seems that the reputation of the police is taking a significant battering. The Hillsborough and Macpherson inquiries have left a lasting legacy of police corruption that the police have long found difficult to shake, even though huge leaps have been made to transform the police force since. It is hard to see what else another inquiry would do now the damage has already been done.
Alice
No comments:
Post a Comment