Amanda Martin

It's motherhood statements from people who either don't understand what they're doing or, like Cllr Price, "Don't give a sh*t"; built with money the Authority and central Government couldn't spare and with promises that can't be delivered on. I've seen this before in many towns and cities and I don't need a crystal ball of the future to predict that, at best, we may get around five years of marginal congestion relief before the problems resurface. In reality, there probably won't be a noticeable difference because the extra capacity will just liberate demand that was suppressed by congestion. I'm not making this up: it's a well established transport planning phenomenon that, in congested networks, the more road space you build, the more traffic you get. It's just that politicians are generally too craven to front up to the motoring lobby.

Colin, I believe the Magistrates' hearing on 23rd April will take his "Not Guilty" plea and the matter will be adjourned for jury trial in the Crown Court.

I've taken your point, Ubique. I've had mixed feelings, myself, about going as public as I have and therefore confined my comments about the detail to this forum and my own Facebook page. On balance, I did not consider it in anyone's interest to say nothing but I also see the danger of setting hares running before the dust has settled if you'll forgive the mixed metaphors. I did a first draft of Julian's statement of complaint yesterday and he corrected a number of details I had misunderstood as follows: 1. Julian made it clear that it was the lead officer and not his colleague who had been officious and hostile; the second officer was, in fact, courteous and explained why it was that the officers were not required to give a reason for stopping him. At that point, Julian was ready to cooperate fully and give details and only asked for the first officer's name; it was when he reached for pen and paper to make a note that he was handcuffed. He has no recollection at all of being cautioned and was taken to the station without being told why or what he was supposed to have done; 2. Julian corrected my understanding that he had been "dragged" out of the car. In fact, he said he was ordered out and physically "assisted" but this was probably short of dragging; 3. During the threatened strip search, it was clearly the custody sergeant who was leading events and Julian's complaints centre on the conduct of this individual . He did not feel the same hostility from the other three who surrounded him in the cell, although the situation was, by definition, threatening but it was clear that they took their lead from the sergeant and were ready to follow orders. Julian corrected my understanding that although there was an exaggerated display of "gloving up" there were no "jokes and sarcasm" . He told me that the threats were all serious and all officers made it clear that they were ready to use force if given the slightest provocation but, in the case of the custody sergeant, Julian felt that it had become personal; I have also reflected on my telephone conversation with the arresting officer, whom I rang when Julian had not appeared some hour after the officer's visit to me at home. At one point I said to him "Arguably you shouldn't have stopped him in the first place" and I am sure that his response was that no reason was required. There is a subtle but important distinction between not needing a reason and not being required to give that reason. If it is really the case that officers need have no reason whatever for stopping us in the street, and there is inadequate redress for us when officers do it arbitrarily, then we really are well down the road towards a police state. Bobby47 has made some good points about reputation management. I think the arresting officer in this instance just miscalculated and then dug the hole deeper by using force and fabricating some spurious ex post facto justifications for his actions. There's no doubt that this constitutes a bad attitude but Julian didn't feel the militaristic aggression and sheer vicious latent brutality from him that he observed in the custody sergeant during his detention at the station and there's no doubt in our minds that the latter is not fit to be a police officer. It only takes a small number of key individuals in authority to create a sense that a bad culture is pervasive and this is why the monitoring authorities need to act swiftly and decisively to protect not only the public but, crucially, the credibility and reputation of other officers who are out there dealing with the consequences of growing mistrust and resentment. Julian's not Raif Badawi, and we're keeping it in perspective, but an experience like this, not to mention the prospect of picking up a criminal record in your mid fifties, is surprisingly unsettling. You have to go through it, really, to understand the impact but we're lucky: we at least have the resources to make our case. As Greenknight says: it has generated thought and debate and this can only be a good thing.

I couldn't have put that better than Bobby47 and I'm not going to try. In addition, I would say that along with State mission creep has come a raft of new powers that give the Police an armoury of charges that can be deployed against us. With those powers comes responsibility to use them proportionately and a degree of exposure to officers to taking the consequences if they fail to do so. I have not identified the officers concerned in this incident but if anyone is suggesting that Julian and I somehow have a duty of care to them to keep quiet pending the outcome of the official investigation of our complaint, then I'm afraid I can't agree. As well growing dismay at the culture of militaristic detachment, latent menace and occasional overt abuse referred to, there is a concern that formal channels of complaint will not bring redress and I have no intention of writing a letter of complaint only for it to languish in someone's in tray until the red flag has no wind behind it. We're not talking here about trivialities: these are matters that have serious implications for civil liberties and it's in the public interest to expose what happened to us, and what is undoubtedly happening to others, to the fresh air of public scrutiny.

It may be thrown out. The fact remains that the custody sergeant involved is not a fit individual and, in the public interest, should be removed from his post.

I read the post before it was deleted. It's fine - it was a reasonable point and I'm always prepared to accommodate opposing points of view. That is the nature of debate. It prompts me to add that I still have enough faith in our police forces to be sure that the vast majority of officers do a hard, dangerous and stressful job and do it in a way that we can all be proud of .

Thanks Ubique and everyone who has posted. Apparently the matter will be adjourned to the Crown Court when J pleads "Not Guilty". What a waste of public money.

Wirral PC thank you very much - that is much appreciated. When my feet touch the ground, I will settle down and read his posts. It takes enormous courage to stand up to the State in this way. Grid Knocker, again thank you. Sometimes these things can be serendipitous. I already have emails coming in from people who have suffered similar experiences. What do you do if you are friendless and without the means to make a case?

Have they considered a career in West Mercia Police? I don't even know where to start with this but it does illustrate what I was saying about property versus persons crimes when it comes to sentencing. It's as though the Establishment doesn't really care what society gets up to as long as corporate and vested interests are not threatened.

Thanks. Yes we're prepared for this. Just took a look at Ian Puddick's Twitter page - crikey. Roger, on the dog point, I think that's exactly what should have happened. Had the officer who banged on my front door at around 2.00am mentioned that Monty was locked in a car in Berrington Street and had been for more than an hour, I would have had an opportunity to go and collect him. The fact is they couldn't have cared less and I'm sure that if he had been taken they still wouldn't have cared less. Am I a "'GREENS' type person?" I'm not a crystal gazing tree hugger and I don't have a beard but I do believe that the old agenda of "Jobs 'n growth" at any price is stale, discredited and on borrowed time and that we need to start developing more thoughtfully very soon. Economic growth basically consists of asset stripping the planet and despoiling it with our waste and being competitive means doing it faster than anyone else. As a rationalist this makes no sense to me. I think it's time we grew past our cognitive dissonance about the consequences of our current priorities and started taking environmental issues more seriously instead of scoffing at those who can see the melting iceberg straight ahead and are trying to raise the alarm. I think we should be developing more thoughtfully with a new economic model that damages less, wastes less and places more emphasis on quality of life instead of the crude indicator of GDP and I think we should be supporting people like the messianic Polly Higgins who is gaining traction in her campaign to put "Ecocide" on the international criminal statute book. I'm not anti-capitalism, anti-enterprise, anti-development or anti-change but the consequences of growth as we have it - ravaged ecosystems, rising temperatures, destroyed habitats, abused and extinct creatures, dwindling resources, impoverished living spaces, polarised societies, fractured communities and isolated people - don't look much like progress to me. They are, however, the inevitable consequences of the kind of model we still cling on to because we don't have the right priorities. It's not as if we have a choice about changing how we live. If we don't come up with some fresh ideas soon, our abused planet will do it for us. It seems to me that it's the shiny, suited casuists with their ironically named "long term economic plan" who are the really naive ones in this debate. If I'm elected you won't hear me supporting road schemes, tree felling, banal housing estates or soulless shopping centres and you won't see me voting for the destruction of historic buildings or carousing on the local government gravy train. Neither do I expect my It's Our County colleagues to think the way I do but do see that the one thing we have in common is a sense of wanting to be part of something uncorrupted and fresh and a desire to bring some decency back into local politics- that was what attracted me. Green type people are surprisingly rational and sensible but of course the Establishment doesn't want you to know that.

Julian has just told me that he was cuffed without being cautioned or told why he was being arrested and even at the station he was not told. J didn't think to mention this because he didn't realise its relevance and the only reason I knew was that a friend and former officer with the Met emailed me earlier with advice. It shouldn't be up to members of the public to swot up on the PACE and work out for themselves how they should have been treated.

Yes, this is the drift. I spent a lot of the Nineties chained to a bulldozer. The right to protest might have been a pain in the arse of people's routines but it was generally tolerated as a price worth paying for freedom and democracy. Then came the criminalisation of trespass and a raft of New Labour public order legislation which, as Cambo says, has legislated away our rights one by one; insidiously and incrementally the bills were passed and all in the name of public protection. Suddenly State mission creep wasn't just a concern for civil liberties groups and campaigners; it started to impinge on everyday life by empowering State agencies to interrupt, monitor and restrict our lives in ways we didn't anticipate. This is wandering off the point a bit but I won't be the only one to have noticed the prioritising of trivial property and "anti-Establishment" crimes over crimes of violence committed against individuals. You can abuse your neighbour with virtual impunity but I wonder how long it would take for me to get my collar felt if I decided to stand outside Cargill Meats with an animal welfare placard. Our right to protest, to criticise and to enjoy free and lawful movement free of arbitrary harassment from the State is fundamental and must be protected before, as Megilleland has said, the corporations are dictating not only what we buy but what we think and how we can behave. They say it's an ill wind that blows no-one any good and at least this incident has ignited a wider concern that I hope to pursue if I am elected in May.

Hi Alex, I assumed that a dog would have been taken to a police kennel in those circumstances not abandoned at the site of the arrest; with or without ventilation this was disgraceful in my view. With regard to your second point, I'm not sure any stereotyping was necessary. I can't speak for the whole of Hereford but Julian saw the behaviour in front of him - maybe they all happened to be in Berrington Street at that point. Interestingly though it wasn't so much the younger officers who were the problem: it was the older, more dominant and senior sergeant who was setting the tone for the others - like a "red zone" dog destabilising the pack (yes I am addicted to Cesar Millan).

"The suspicious part of my nature also thinks...... this is very close to the local elections, it couldn't possibly be an attempt to smear those closest to you, but then...... no. That couldn't possibly happen. Could it????" Dippy, it's odd you should say that. One of my fellow candidates told me the other day that she's had a sequence of odd events: vehicle and other damage in a short period of time. I made the "horse's head" quip but she wasn't smiling. J said it was odd. There was plenty of anti social behaviour going on - mostly alcohol fuelled noise - but the patrol car came from nowhere. It wasn't following him - it must have been parked. Stranger things have happened and I can think of a few guys I haven't been very complimentary about in the media but I'm not seeing a conspiracy - yet. Thanks for the encouragement everyone. Flam: I've read the article and, Roger, you appear to be right about this so it becomes a case of disproportionate use of the power. We're in the process of instructing a solicitor and will also make a complaint as advised. From the various accounts you've given, there's a picture emerging and we do, indeed, seem to be moving towards a more quasi-military police service concerned with protecting vested and corporate interests. If I'm elected, I can see this becoming an area of interest to me. It will make a change from hearing me droning on about cycling.

It was around midnight when my partner, Julian, was driving up Berrington Street on his way home after a hard day's carpentry at our Rotherwas workshop, and was stopped by a patrol car. It surprised him: there was nothing wrong with the car and he was well within the speed limit. Two officers approached. The first was officious and discourteous, greeting him with "What's your name?" and asking for vehicle documents. Those who know Julian will know that he is always calm and composed and he told me that this was the manner with which he suggested to the officers that before giving his name, they could give him theirs, along with an explanation for why he had been stopped; he told me that he would have been more than happy to provide details had he been given an explanation and treated with some civility. The lead officer told Julian that he had full power to stop him and that it was unnecessary for him to give a reason. He did eventually give his name but when Julian reached forward for a pen and paper the officer leaned in, handcuffed him, ordered him out of the car and took him to Bath Street police station, ignoring Julian's concerns about leaving our dog in the car in Berrington Street where he remained, initially without an open window and surrounded by drunks and addicts, for around four hours without water. At the police station Julian said he saw, for himself, what the ugly underbelly of our police force looks like. On arrival, he was interviewed by the abusive, foul mouthed custody sergeant who responded to Julian's attempt to express concern about the way he was being treated with "I don't give a ****" and he told me he witnessed this same response to others; a lad in the waiting room who was sobbing, distressed and in need of support was told to keep quiet or he would be put into a cell and would stay there all night. Julian's possessions were confiscated and bagged up and he was asked to validate the list with a signature. He declined to do so as he had no clear idea of how much money he had arrived with or what other possessions he had been carrying. This, and his other observations that the way he was being dealt with was abusive and unprofessional, appeared to infuriate and frustrate the custody sergeant who directed that he be taken to a cell for a strip search for being unco-operative. The arresting officer was, in fact, asked by the custody sergeant to give a reason why Julian had been stopped and replied that he had been "out of place" and had had a misted windscreen, in spite of Julian already having driven from Rotherwas with the heater on when he was stopped. Julian attempted to interject and was told aggressively to be quiet and "stay out of it. " Still handcuffed, Julian was escorted to a cell where his belt and shoes were then removed. He told me he was careful to offer no resistance because of the threatening dynamic and the sense that one or more officers were looking for an excuse to assault him. After being shown in, Julian was interviewed by the custody sergeant and three other officers including the two who had stopped him. He describes the atmosphere as "menacing" and the custody sergeant as "out of control" and deploying classic bullying behaviour to compel him to use submissive language. He told me he was surrounded by the four booted, black clad officers with weapons fully on show and the sergeant clearly in charge. The other officers looked less certain but were taking their lead from him, although the officer who had originally accompanied the arresting officer was civil and Julian felt he was uncomfortable with the situation. At the sergeant's direction, the officers began to make a display of gloving-up with jokes and sarcasm accompanying threats to do the strip search. There was nothing in the cell except a mat and no other equipment except the gloves. At no point did he suggest that he would resist the search but was still telling them calmly that they were abusing their powers and that their behaviour was unprofessional and unacceptable. The response was: "How do you want to do this: the hard way or the easy way?". Julian is quietly articulate and this clearly annoyed them. He said he felt the sergeant was wanting him to step over the line. The intimidation continued as they indicated that he should remove his clothes an article of clothing at a time. There was no record of offending, no offence to investigate and no purpose to the exercise: the threatened strip search was clearly intended as a punishment for his earlier lack of compliance. The objective seemed to be to humiliate Julian by compelling him to repeat words or answer as the sergeant directed. By the time he was standing in his vest, trousers and socks, the sergeant had decided that he had shown sufficient compliance to satisfy the purpose of what can only be described as a "beasting". After the strip search incident, Julian was taken back to the desk and subjected to further questioning including: "Would you describe yourself as White British?" Julian responded that he would not. He said the sergeant replied "Let me give you a clue; I would describe myself as White British". Julian said that he replied "Well that is up to you" which annoyed the sergeant further. Other questions included: "Do you take drugs?"; "Do you consider yourself an addict?" "Do you have any mental disorders?" Julian did not decline to answer the questions but also continued to protest at his treatment. Julian had, since his arrival, been remonstrating with officers about the abandonment of our dog and he continued to do so after he had been put back into the cell. He pointed out that leaving a dog in a locked unventilated car was itself an offence and at some point, an officer went to Berrington St to open a window, making him vulnerable to theft from passers by, many of whom were drunk, anti-social and out of control. Julian remain in the cell for around three hours during which he asked for, but was not given, a chance to call me. Despite having no criminal record and having committed no offence, he was offered a caution. Rejecting the admission of guilt implied in this, he declined and was photographed, DNA sampled charged, refused a chance to see a senior officer to make a complaint and then escorted out and left to walk back to Berrington Street at 4.00am where the dog was still in the car. In spite of an officer having visited me with a partial account of events, no mention of the dog was made and it did not occur to me that he would have been abandoned at the site of Julian's arrest. Julian will appear before Hereford Magistrates on 23rd April charged with obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duty; This has been a wake up call for both of us. I'm starting to realise just how naive and complacent the white middle classes can be about these things. Just asking questions or questioning the right to elicit information can lead you into confrontation with authority and, in this scenario, power is undoubtedly being abused through a lack of proper training, a lack of monitoring, a reluctance to reject unsuitable candidates and a determination by the courts to back prosecutions however spurious and unreasonable. These weren't officers acting professionally in the course of their duty: these were men using the props of public office to abuse power and dominate. Julian may have done nothing wrong but his non compliance was a challenge and it didn't go unpunished. I doubt if Julian's treatment is an isolated case and we would like it fully investigated, ideally culminating in a full apology, charges dropped, the expulsion of the custody sergeant involved from West Mercia Police and disciplinary action with follow up training for the other officers involved. I am inviting others in Hereford with independent accounts that can be corroborated, to come forward. Meanwhile, out canvassing yesterday, I got chatting to a former police officer who told me he'd left the police because prominent, influential men were avoiding prosecution for serious offences due to their Freemasonry connections. I think we have some work to do here. Like · Comment · Share

Coming together isn't it? 1. Lights out; 2. Poynton style traffic management and street decluttering; 3. Cycle improvements; 4. Light rapid transit; Hereford could be a beacon of good transport planning for the whole UK.

That sounded OK in my head :-)

Thanks Dippy. I'm sure It's Our County has a good person in your ward too.

Thanks Dippy. I have my tin hat ready. :-) If anyone is in Widemarsh ward would they like to nominate me?

Yep - well we would need a feasibility study in any event. The PPM travels at speeds between 5mph and 25mph and is designed for town and city centres including through covered shopping malls. It works best in short loops with a central interchange for example between the station and city centre. If it travelled straight through Commercial Street and High Town or down Blueschool Street and into WIdemarsh Street and then High Town, it would breathe new life into that area of the city particularly if High Town was opened up to cyclists (with designated paths of course - I don't go in for this shared space stuff in areas of high pedestrian/vehicle conflict).

I've seen and used the Essen bus. It's a really comfortable ride: completely accessible to bikes, pushchairs and wheelchairs and speeding down the dedicated track past the traffic is almost surreal. We could definitely do this in Hereford but we would have to have the courage of our convictions and reallocated road space away from private motor vehicles and that would be controversial.

These bus/ tram hybrids are designed to deliver maximum accessibility right into town and city centres which means people can travel in comfort right to the shops they want to visit rather than parking on the periphery and walking in. You have to give public transport a cost and/or time advantage though, and make it frequent and completely reliable - otherwise people won't use it as we know. The objective is to get over the cultural stigma we have in this country - the idea that anyone "over 30" on a bus has somehow failed in life. On the Continent, everyone uses the buses and trams including smart suited executives.

Thanks Bill. Now I know who you are I'll accept you on Facebook!

You're welcome. A word of caution: I think we do need to be careful about depriving already poor communities of amenity space but, on the other hand, trams are not like trains: they don't need elaborate infrastructure and shouldn't take up much room. One solution might be to go with a kerb guided tram/bus hybrid like one I went to see in Essen, Germany. It's a conventional bus that charges on a fly wheel along the inside of the kerb but can also run on the road. It looks like a bus but runs like a tram or a bus; takes up very little space and is a lot cheaper to build and run than a conventional tram systems and because it's electric you don't get the air quality issue you do with conventional diesel buses. Take a look. http://www.citytransport.info/OBahn.htm

Definitely worth exploring