Tommy Elphick talking about his ordeal front page of Argus

[GreersElbow]

Coordinate the arrests for sure (not that they were) just go down the Amex/Traing Ground at 11.00 and get 'em all together but they could have done it at a more civilised time ... looks like they wanted to cause maximum distress

No doubt, almost certain the 12 hour waits in the cells is to cause distress and try to get 'confessions'...

But I think some people forget this is Sussex police. They tend to be a bit slow on response. I remember being down the level, and a guy who was off his nut on some drug was threatening people. Took 40 minutes for police to come down, they have a police station 5 minutes away.....when they got down, the bloke was already gone....

 

[SI 4 BHA]

I expect a bit of common decency and common sense from them. So it took the OB 6 months to find out he wasn't there. Of course the police have a right to interview anyone they suspect may have been involved, but it you read Tommy's comments they treated him like sh*t. Siezed his computer, demanded passwords, locked him in a cell, passed his name to the media before they had interviewed him, when he was totally innocent. Would you be happy if this had happened to you or would you say, oh well, it's just the police doing their job so whatever they have done to me and my reputation, that's ok! Clueless!

 

[ifuhatepalacestandup]

I really don't get this "Boycott The Argus" nonsense. I imagine the Albion wanted that list of names in the public arena as otherwise all Brighton players were under suspicion. The names were also on the BBC News website, so I assume that's being boycotted too?

You realy are a propper bellend, try reading this thred we are Not angry they printed the names, we are angry about a full page picture of the amex, and 3 pictures of the brighton badge on the front page . As allready stated if this was a supermarket employee would the argus have put a half page picture of asda and three asda logos on the front page

 

[Danny-Boy]

Why is he even talking to the rag

When I saw this there was a caption to the right "So are these women". I would have thought they were more likely to be ON the rag, to be honest.

 

[Danny-Boy]

I expect a bit of common decency and common sense from them. So it took the OB 6 months to find out he wasn't there. Of course the police have a right to interview anyone they suspect may have been involved, but it you read Tommy's comments they treated him like sh*t. Siezed his computer, demanded passwords, locked him in a cell, passed his name to the media before they had interviewed him, when he was totally innocent. Would you be happy if this had happened to you or would you say, oh well, it's just the police doing their job so whatever they have done to me and my reputation, that's ok! Clueless!

Afraid after what happened at Crawley and elsewhere, they're keen to find evidence of debasing views of women. And homosexuals.

Not surprising when both the Police Minister and the Prisons Minister are based in Sussex constituencies and not afraid to drop the soap, apparently.

 

[Twinkle Toes]

I hope it doesn't ruin him , you will need to rally behind him . Such a shame , he comes across as a good lad in this .

Nice words there Dougie. Respect to you.

 

[severnside gull]

I dont understand this quote from the article :- A spokeswoman for the
Jurys Inn said yesterday: “An
incident did happen at the hotel
which we have just become
aware of. "
if the incident was reported in July, why didnt the Police go to the hotel as soon as it was reported?

very much this - it rather undermines the police statement that they have been undertaking a thorough investigation over the last 6 months and reinforces the possibility that they are now reacting to a complaint about their inaction

 

[Tricky Dicky]

I expect a bit of common decency and common sense from them. So it took the OB 6 months to find out he wasn't there. Of course the police have a right to interview anyone they suspect may have been involved, but it you read Tommy's comments they treated him like sh*t. Siezed his computer, demanded passwords, locked him in a cell, passed his name to the media before they had interviewed him, when he was totally innocent. Would you be happy if this had happened to you or would you say, oh well, it's just the police doing their job so whatever they have done to me and my reputation, that's ok! Clueless!

If you're going to be so aggressive about it :
a) TE says they treated him like sh*t - well, maybe - maybe not only got his word for it
b) Seized computers - probably standard procedure
c) Passwords - likewise
d) Locked in a cell - where else are they going to put him
e) Released his name - I don't know how this happens, but I imagine most peoples names would get out, but most people are not famous.

I have no idea whether the police behaved well or not, but I equally am not assuming one way or the other. I probably would be annoyed if it happened to me, but that doesn't make them wrong - I'd be annoyed if I was stopped and searched in the street, but it's not necessarily wrong. A serious allegation has been made and they have to investigate.

 

[One4the.road]

If the woman in question reported at the time DNA would have been taken for sure so it shouldn't take till march to sort out .

 

[Doc Lynam]

This makes for interesting reading

Your rights - Police detention

 

[symyjym]

If the woman in question reported at the time DNA would have been taken for sure so it shouldn't take till march to sort out .

Unless they already have the dna in their databanks they would have nothing to compare it to until they identified, arrested and swabbed them.

 

[Deleted member 18477]

'They told him not to talk about it'? So they get him up at 07.20, arrest him and question him for what sounds like a day and then, when they realise its clearly rubbish, tell him not to talk abouit it. You couldn't make it up!

probably a load of coppers in on f***ing overtime as well. wankers!

 

[SI 4 BHA]

If you're going to be so aggressive about it :
a) TE says they treated him like sh*t - well, maybe - maybe not only got his word for it
b) Seized computers - probably standard procedure
c) Passwords - likewise
d) Locked in a cell - where else are they going to put him
e) Released his name - I don't know how this happens, but I imagine most peoples names would get out, but most people are not famous.

I have no idea whether the police behaved well or not, but I equally am not assuming one way or the other. I probably would be annoyed if it happened to me, but that doesn't make them wrong - I'd be annoyed if I was stopped and searched in the street, but it's not necessarily wrong. A serious allegation has been made and they have to investigate.

Sorry, wasn't being aggressive, the "clueless" comment was directed at the police, not to you TD.
The police seem to operate on a guilty until proven innocent basis rather than the other way round.
Neither Tommy, nor the others involved, had been charged with any offence, and everyone involved is still innocent at this moment in time. Until the lads had been interviewed, there was no need to release the names to the media. Had they waited a few hours, Tommy would not have been front page news, and if I was him I would be looking at every avenue I could for compensation.

My point was that they treated Tommy like a criminal before they had established the facts. I would have thought a couple of questions to Tommy would have very quickly established the fact he wasn't there at the time, and there was therefore no need to take dna samples and sieze his possessions. This was pretty basic stuff and it really does sound as if the police had done f**k all investigating into the alleged incident. Just the police thinking they are above the law and not giving a toss how their actions affect ordinary innocent people?

Btw, before I tar all police officers with the same brush, there are obviously very many individual officers doing a fantastic job, and I certainly don't want to offend particular serving officers who post on NSC, but it's the institution of the Police that is the problem. Maybe because it's such a results based "business", getting a conviction by any means, seems more important than finding out what actually happened?

 

[Tricky Dicky]

Sorry, wasn't being aggressive, the "clueless" comment was directed at the police, not to you TD.
The police seem to operate on a guilty until proven innocent basis rather than the other way round.
Neither Tommy, nor the others involved, had been charged with any offence, and everyone involved is still innocent at this moment in time. Until the lads had been interviewed, there was no need to release the names to the media. Had they waited a few hours, Tommy would not have been front page news, and if I was him I would be looking at every avenue I could for compensation.

My point was that they treated Tommy like a criminal before they had established the facts. I would have thought a couple of questions to Tommy would have very quickly established the fact he wasn't there at the time, and there was therefore no need to take dna samples and sieze his possessions. This was pretty basic stuff and it really does sound as if the police had done f**k all investigating into the alleged incident. Just the police thinking they are above the law and not giving a toss how their actions affect ordinary innocent people?

Btw, before I tar all police officers with the same brush, there are obviously very many individual officers doing a fantastic job, and I certainly don't want to offend particular serving officers who post on NSC, but it's the institution of the Police that is the problem. Maybe because it's such a results based "business", getting a conviction by any means, seems more important than finding out what actually happened?

Apology accepted, sorry maybe I was just in the mood for an argument. I really don't know how much this differs from their usual procedures - and I suspect most people commenting don't either, though I know many are automatically anti-police with or without good reason. It does sound simple to us, but I would think if they're doing things by the book that it really isn't that simple, I'm sure Edna can give us the low-down.

 

[Bobby's Gull]

Inside page is too big as a pdf but here's the text.
Reyes story to follow too.

Thanks for that

Really feel sorry for the guy.

 

[Working class pride]

If you're going to be so aggressive about it :
a) TE says they treated him like sh*t - well, maybe - maybe not only got his word for it
b) Seized computers - probably standard procedure
c) Passwords - likewise
d) Locked in a cell - where else are they going to put him
e) Released his name - I don't know how this happens, but I imagine most peoples names would get out, but most people are not famous.

I have no idea whether the police behaved well or not, but I equally am not assuming one way or the other. I probably would be annoyed if it happened to me, but that doesn't make them wrong - I'd be annoyed if I was stopped and searched in the street, but it's not necessarily wrong. A serious allegation has been made and they have to investigate.

I agree and understand a to d but e? Those of us that have followed the scandal of policemen selling information to journalists will have raised an eyebrow. If this has happened in this case then as Ian Hislop quite rightly pointed out, then I expect to see a policeman:-

a. arrested
b have computer seized
c. have passwords taken
d. locked in a cell

But so far there have been a lack of policemen arrested for selling information about a child murder victim and so excuse my cynicism if I think it unlikely that anyone at the police in Brighton will investigate how information may or may not have been leaked in this case. For the reputation of the police and to stop corruption however, they darn well should investigate and where evidence is found, bring charges.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

I agree and understand a to d but e? Those of us that have followed the scandal of policemen selling information to journalists will have raised an eyebrow. If this has happened in this case then as Ian Hislop quite rightly pointed out, then I expect to see a policeman:-

a. arrested
b have computer seized
c. have passwords taken
d. locked in a cell

But so far there have been a lack of policemen arrested for selling information about a child murder victim and so excuse my cynicism if I think it unlikely that anyone at the police in Brighton will investigate how information may or may not have been leaked in this case. For the reputation of the police and to stop corruption however, they darn well should investigate and where evidence is found, bring charges.

Having followed most of Leveson, Hislop was absolutely right, there are laws against most of the things that went wrong in the press, in their relations with the Police and with politicians - and the failure of those laws to be upheld and investigated is truly criminal. Of course, no-one from the police will be prosecuted (although if Rebecca Brooks end up in Gaol, it's not a total waste).

 

[Working class pride]

Having followed most of Leveson, Hislop was absolutely right, there are laws against most of the things that went wrong in the press, in their relations with the Police and with politicians - and the failure of those laws to be upheld and investigated is truly criminal. Of course, no-one from the police will be prosecuted (although if Rebecca Brooks end up in Gaol, it's not a total waste).

There are many people that will not accept a situation where a policeman is not arrested. OK the charges might fail as a result of a bungled enquiry as per the scandal in Cardiff but ultimately the police work for us and rightly expect them to understand that they are civil servants, who are meant to uphold the law, not break it. Perhaps I am a bit naive but I do hope there are enough policemen that understand that.

 

[Mr Banana]

I'm glad he's been cleared. I used to see Tommy clubbing on a Saturday night fairly regularly, and he was always friendly and unassuming. He liked having a chat about the Albion. I never saw him drinking/pissed either.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

You know what? Normally on here I'd attempt to add a few salient points to a debate where I feel someone really has got the wrong end of the stick, whether through (understandable) lack of knowledge or just because they have a problem with the police for whatever reason.

But there are SO many points being made on this thread that are so badly wrong, I just can't be bothered to go through them all. It's driving me nuts just reading it. Is there really nobody on here actually able to grasp why arrests might only just have been made, for example??