Before there is massive jumping to conclusions the gist is this.

A PC Manning in a police car at 2 am in Bristol tried to stop Ibrahim Nur who was riding a bicycle. Mr Nur had previous convictions for drug offences and PC Manning thought he was carrying. Mr Nur did not stop and PC Manning called for assistance. PC Duncan Verel responded and caught up with Nur in his unmarked police car.Mr Nur ended up underneath PC Verel’s car and suffered leg injuries. The PC said that Nur had lost his balance and fell under the car, Nur maintains that Verel had rammed the bicycle three times causing him to fall off.

Mr Nur suffered leg injuries and needed skin grafts.

The collision expert, Sergeant David Loat dismissed Mr Nur’s version of events using damage evidence as well as CCTV footage. Mr Nur, despite claiming debilitating injuries, was later seen playing a rather vigorous game of soccer scoring four goals in a game between some Somali youths and wait for it …….a police XI.

The IPCC (no, not the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, the Independent Police Complaints Commission) brought the case against PC Verel and gained the ire of the police federation as well as the Judge overseeing the case in the process.


At first glance this seems to be a rather curious over-reaction by the IPCC. Why are they pursuing PC Verel? But the IPCC response does serve the purpose of improving public confidence in the police if these sorts of cases can be put in the view of the public. This is the reason why the IPCC investigate every incidence of firearms use by the police.

The worrying thing though is that the IPCC feel the need to boost public confidence in the police in this way. Dragging a dedicated public servant though the courts may make them look good to us, but it makes the system look decidedly nasty to the guys and gals who patrol the streets day and night trying to keep the rest of us safe from the likes of Mr Nur.



Comment Here!

comments