Un­der cover op

The Peterborough Evening Telegraph - - Your VIews -

If I was fac­ing a work dis­ci­plinary hear­ing (don’t count your

chick­ens – Ed.) I wouldn’t want the de­tails splashed all over the news­pa­per. But there again I’m not a po­lice of­fi­cer and I haven’t had an al­leged re­la­tion­ship with a crim­i­nal and, again al­legedly, checked his de­tails on the po­lice com­puter for no “po­lice rea­son’’. Like it or not, such scru­tiny goes with the ter­ri­tory. Cam­bridgeshire cop­per DC Nina Bartlett faced just such a sit­u­a­tion. Her hear­ing was due to be in public and in­vi­ta­tions to at­tend were sent to mem­bers of the press. How­ever, the con­sta­ble’s lawyer suc­cess­fully ar­gued that the hear­ing should be be­hind closed doors. Whether you agree with that de­ci­son or not – and in clas­sic Catch 22 style we the public are not given the in­for­ma­tion needed to form an opin­ion – it’s about as trans­par­ent as a house brick.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.