Coffee House

Under questioning, the Plebgate police stick to their lines

5 November 2013

All the best apologies these days are celebrated with a nice autotune session on YouTube. But this afternoon’s apologies, if you can call them that, from Detective Sergeant Stuart Hinton and Sergeant Chris Jones didn’t quite deserve that sort of treatment. In fact, the two men, appearing separately, had managed to tune their own evidence rather well.

They both said that they ‘cannot apologise for something I haven’t done’, when asked to apologise for lying about the meeting. Hinton said he regretted ‘any distress caused’ to Mr Mitchell and his family. Keith Vaz pressed Jones on whether he wanted to apologise to Mitchell and his family, saying ‘you don’t believe you had anything to do with any distress that was caused?’ There was a long, awkward pause, and then Jones said: ‘I come back to the point that I can’t apologise for something I haven’t done.’

Claim your gift

Neither man wanted to to apologise for anything more specific beyond the circumstances that Mitchell found himself in around the time of the meeting, although Hinton apologised for previously telling the committee that he had not refried to Theresa May as ‘this woman’ or ‘that woman’ when talking to Mitchell. He said: ‘I appear to have failed to bring the Home Secretary’s name to mind, I fully accept that this does not excuse the form of expression I used in the meeting with Mr Mitchell and I apologise for that accordingly.’ They both also said they hoped this row would be concluded soon.

The only impressive thing about this session was that both men stuck so rigidly to the line that they seem to have agreed on. Jones in particular did not do his profession a great service, with Vaz telling him at one point that he wanted to get the facts right on the number of complaints made against him so that he didn’t have to come back before the committee yet again to explain himself. Then he apologised to the committee for inadvertently misleading it because he’d misunderstood a question. Keith Vaz was magnificent today, grilling and drilling until each witness looked rather uncomfortable.

But what is impressive is that an incident at the Downing Street gates that lasted less than a minute has spun out into a lengthy row that undermines the integrity of the police force. Which has an irony to it, given the ‘Plebgate’ row was all about the integrity of a Cabinet minister.

Give the perfect gift this Christmas. Buy a subscription for a friend for just £75 and you’ll receive a free gift too. Buy now.

Show comments
  • Christopher Plowman

    The entire situation is rather farcical. Their despicable actions have proven the police officers more than worthy of the derogitory title ‘Plebeian’, it’s beautifully ironic.

  • terence patrick hewett

    The police have achieved the almost impossible: a large percentage of us now regard them as a semi-criminal sub-class to be avoided at all costs.

    • john p reid

      It’s alright ,with Tory cuts there won’t be any left soon,

  • The Blue Baron

    There is a typo in the main headline. You wrote that the police officers stuck to their ‘lines’. You have clearly included one letter too many.

  • anneallan

    Redundant letter ‘n’ in the ninth word of the headline.

  • La Fold

    Dibble making stuff up and colluding to get a result?! Well I never.
    News just in, Disraeli repeals corn laws.

  • Radford_NG

    Virtually nobody until last week had even heard of these three officers and hence their statement.I doubt most people in the street would have remembered who Andrew Mitchell was.If their remories where jogged they would recall some plonker with a bike having a spate with the police to the general amusement of the public.——-And I remind Mitchell’s fan club here;this is the man guilty of giving £MILLIONS in aid to foreign dictators.

  • Radford_NG

    Two week ago Vaz’s Committee was told POLICE AND POLITICIANS in the Pennine towns were aware for over a decade white girls as young as ten were being raped and used as sex-slaves by males of Pakistan heritage and nothing was done because it would damage `community cohesion`.There is no outcry over this;no demands for an enquiry;no police or politicians called by the committee to answer questions.Just as they ignored for years reports on this by Ann Cryer MP.I only read of this in newspapers published in India,and that was some five years ago.[ Neither did they listern when told by N.Griffin MEP–and why do you think people in those towns voted for him? He has said:Twice I told`them`;and twice `they`tried to have me put in prison.]This is what undermines confidence in police and politicians.

    • Nick

      True words Radford.And how that odious creature Keith Vaz is allowed to sit in any government committee is beyond me.

  • Nick

    The three federation officers concerned are no doubt decent officers who in their time have served their communities well.However,now they have completely f—-d up and it is plain to see.

    Unfortunately for them,the dumb members of society will think that everything that those officers have ever done was corrupt,which simply isn’t true and anyone with half a brain knows that.

    Additionally,the same dumb members of society will tar all police officers with the same brush and again,anyone with half a brain will understand that not all coppers are bent.

    One of the problems with our once great and in some areas STILL great police force,is that many of the officers themselves have become politicized and do not concentrate on their core job of being a police officer……ie catching the baddies and promoting road safety.
    Because those are the things that I want to see police officers doing ……catching baddies and promoting road safety and not hanging around with the press or telling me how good muslims are.

    Too often,we see them on TV sanctimoniously rubbing their hands together as they promote some weird ‘Getting to know muslims’scheme.Or in Cornwall recently,some police Inspector was telling the local press how the eastern European invasion down here is great and that all of the benefit claiming Poles and Latvians are really appreciated by the local community…..When in fact we f ing well hate them.

    But I still admire and trust the majority of our police but wish that they would get back to core policing and keep away from the press,in particularly the likes of the Murdochs,Brookes and Coulsons.

  • Don Logan

    I am a nicely educated middle class professional family man…..well I think you get the picture…have next to nothing to do with the police but yet utterly despise them; if the police can’t get people like me to support them then I guess they’re pretty well fucked.

    • telemachus

      So it is alright for a Cabinet Minister to swear at them?

      • Don Logan

        No not really, but they’re just reaping what they’ve sown over many years of very poor behaviour and lying etc etc

      • Colonel Mustard

        So if a Cabinet Minister swears in the presence of the police (not AT them) it is ok to falsify records, tell lies and fabricate witnesses to fit him up? I realise that as a keen Stalinist you subscribe to the OGPU model of state policing but this is still Britain. You haven’t established your Soviet “paradise” here yet, you nasty little commie.

      • DrCoxon

        Yes, if they are obstructing a minister of the crown. They are there to facilitate.

      • Blazeaway

        Swearing at a police officer was been deemed – by Justice Bean, I believe – to not be an offence, albeit many police are unaware of the legal position.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Plod needs to be kept on side, because come the revolution, that`s all that will stand between MPs and the mob. You really think the Army will ride to the rescue after the way Authority failed to adequately respond to the murder of Lee Rigby? Don`t bet the farm on it.

  • FairBobby

    They are certainly liars BUT they are not as good at lying as MPs are.

  • jmjm208

    These two individuals are typical of the arrogant fascists that make up the Police “service” today.

    I was once falsely accused of a crime I didn’t commit. The plods even altered a statement to infer my guilt. In court a Det. Sgt. lied but all to no avail – the jury acquitted me and my reputation was saved (not to mention my liberty!).

    The arrogant lying fascists are NOT on our side, they are a law unto themselves.

  • Blazeaway

    It is entirely right that these misleading coppers are held to account. Andrew Mitchell was nearly destroyed.

    Mr Mitchell, of course, has powerful friends who have pursued the matter.

    What about everyone else? What about the ordinary man or woman on the street who has become the victim of police ‘misleading’?

    All complaints about the police used to be referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission so that we didn’t have the injustice of police covering up for their fellow officers.

    Since April last year (possibly April 2010) the IPCC role has changed: all complaints except the most serious such as death in custody and senior officers’ corruption are now investigated by the police themselves. Usually by coppers from the same police station as the officers being complained about.

    The results have been predictable and predicted and one police officer protecting another is the default position.

    Good luck to Mr Mitchell who has been treated foully. But let’s not lose sight of the thousands of other citizens whose lives are being ruined at this very moment.

    The law must change to once more put the IPCC in charge of investigations – and all complaints since April 2012 must be reopened.

    • James Healey

      This is simply not true. Complaints against police officers are investigated in the first instance by the department for professional standards, a dedicated unit whose sole job is to investigate and prosecute other officers (how many other professions are accountable in this way!) and who work in their own stations and do not know officers they are investigating. If the complainant is not happy with the result of the dps investigation, they can then refer it to the IPCC, who will look into the complaint AND the way it was investigated. Most complaints come to nothing because, as per my comments below, they are nonsense. Think about it……you’re the kind of person who is prepared to break into an elderly woman’s home, steal her week’s pension, then fight with a police officer who spots you sneaking out – why wouldn’t you then allege he used unreasonable force? What have you got to lose? The worst that can happen is nothing at all! And if it just happens to make a jury feel sorry for you, so much the better! Nevertheless, numerous officers are kicked out or disciplined every year, contrary to Blazeaway’s suggestion that “the results have been predictable…..” Incidentally, the dps have investigated complaints as long as I’ve been in the police, which is since 2004, so I don’t know what the “since April last year” thing is all about.

      • Blazeaway

        If you are an officer – and I’m sure you are – you will know that the Department for Professional Standards is within the HQ of the constabulary being complained about.

        It beggars belief that you would not know this.

        Further, and you will also know this, the Department for Professional Standards is composed of police officers from that constabulary.

        Further, and again you will know this, the Department of Professional Standards then assigns a police officer from the same station as the one being complained about to investigate the allegation. They know and work with the officer(s) being complained about.

        You say you are unaware that, since April last year (possibly April 2010), the role of the IPCC changed. The change took investigations from the IPCC and gave them to the police themselves. I suggest you check the IPCC’s literature. It is on the internet.

        You say most complaints are nonsense. That may be true – but you should not let that blind you to the fact that many claims can be substantiated.

        • James Healey

          Yes, the same constabulary, not, as you said “Usually by coppers from the same police station as the officers being complained about”.
          And no, the DPS do not assign an officer from the same station as the one being complained about. When I received a spurious complaint by a total scumbag, exactly a year after the incident (when there was no chance of recovering CCTV or independent witnesses) the first I knew about it was when I received formal notice of investigation. I had to attend a DPS office miles away, to be interviewed on tape, under caution, by an experienced detective sergeant from the dps, whom I didn’t know and had never met.
          I honestly don’t know what changes may have happened within the IPCC. I do know that all my complaints have been prior to 2010 and they were all investigated by the DPS and not the IPCC, which is contrary to your assertion. Of course some claims can be substantiated, but the main thrust of your original post seemed to be that the police don’t investigate themselves properly and complaints are generally brushed off. I would suggest that in this day of CCTV on every corner, video cameras on every phone, CCTV in custody and many police cars, and general public cynicism, the police have probably never been more accountable, or more “by the book” than they are now.

          • Blazeaway

            You say yourself that you don’t know what changes have happened since April 2010 – and that the allegations against you (which were before 2010 – were properly investigated.

            The procedure has changed since you were investigated – and it has been to the detriment of the citizen who feels misrepresented and aggrieved.

            Even so, you say yourself that you were investigated by your constabulary’s Department of Professional Standards. They are fellow officers – so it is the police investigating themselves which you can’t deny.

            The spurious allegations against you were before 2010 – and the investigating officers ARE now from the same police station as the accused officers.

            You assert, undoubtedly correctly, that many allegations are false and are made by scumbags. But that shouldn’t colour your perception: ALL citizens are entitled to proper investigation. The case of Mr Mitchell (albeit his powerful friends have now forced progress on the matter) shows that proper investigation is not the default position.

          • Colonel Mustard

            There are scumbags in the police too.

      • ButcombeMan

        James, your bleating that many Police Officers get spurious complaints made against them (WHILE VERY TRUE) is still a side issue compared to the corrupt nature of the national Police culture exposed by PlodGate.

        Many people will think that Mitchell did not behave too well but nothing at all can excuse the leaking of the Police log and the fitting up by the Federation idiots.

        Was Mitchell “verballed”? I have always thought so, and have said so here. We may never find out.

        The corruption in the heart of the DPG is though, very serious indeed.

        All that said, consistent complaints of the same kind, made against any individual Officer, are, proved or not, indicative intelligence that Constabularies should act upon and consider

      • Nick

        An excellent and truthful post James.

  • swatnan

    Mitch has no alternative but to bring charges against them and they can answer in Court. But, let him foot the legal costs, if any.

  • sunnydayrider

    If there are any Coppers out there reading this article, can any of them explain how someone with 13 complaints against him survives 28 years in the force and ends up a Sergeant? (Apart from the fact he’s a shop steward of course). It’s a mystrey that would challenge any good detective.

    • James Healey

      Because 99.9% of all complaints are farcical, and made by deeply unpleasant people with nothing to lose – i.e. thieves, robbers or drug dealers, who the officer has arrested. Unlike the general public, for whom a criminal record requires a conviction, police complaints remain on file, even when they are shown to be malicious…….I have several, all laughable.

      • Ciaron Goggins

        Put ’em on here. Give us a laugh.

    • john p reid

      It never occurred to you criminals put complaints in against police, so they can try to have their convictions over turned,

  • terence patrick hewett

    It is clear the police have a problem with corruption within their ranks and are accountable to nobody. MP’s at least are accountable to the electorate. These two need to face a court of law and the whole Mitchell saga needs to be investigated by independent jurists.

  • Impartial Spectator

    13 Complaints, with NONE leading to misconduct for a front line officer with over 28 years of service seems a much better record than most MP’s could muster.

    • DrCoxon

      Except there are plenty of officers with a better record.
      And they do not prevaricate and misunderstand when asked about the number of complaints.

      • Impartial Spectator

        I am sure you will correct me if I am wrong, but I do not believe that he was originally asked if there had been any complaints against him, but if he had been disciplined for misconduct. I am merely trying to point out that the nature of the job is likely to attract complaints, much as would that of an MP.

        • DrCoxon

          Thank you for your response. I agree with your last statement.

      • john p reid

        I depends, someone complying against you, and having a record which you cannot read. That has complaints on them, it would be difficult you know how many complaints one would have

  • Russell

    The police searched Tory MP Damian Greens parliament office and Tory MP Daniel Kawczynski’s office as well as obviously Tory MP Nigel Evans office…spot the common thread here! Remember crooked lying Met boss Blair (made a Lord by Labour)..mmmmmm

    • Andy

      Which they had no right to do: Parliament is within a Royal Palace and the Mets writ does not run there unless they have permission or are invited.

      • Russell

        The National Socialist Labour Party in government at the time simply asked their chums in the police to do it, after all they believe the law is only for their use to smear the opposition and keep them in power.
        Labour are rotten to the core, along with the Labour placemen in every area of the public sector (Quangos, Police, NHS, Education, Military).

        • john p reid

          Calling labour nazis,pathetic , yes labour had the right to ask the police to investigate stolen information,I take it you think it was right, for those who revealed Thatcher lied about the belgrano. Sailing away from the Falklands, when they were arrested for leaking that,

      • john p reid

        Er it was portcullis house

    • john p reid

      Ther police didn’t search Daniel Kawczynskis office, he received gate mail, called the police, they called his office back saying they were going to turn up to his office in 10 minutes to collect the hate mail, Kawczynski, had to apologise for falsely saying his office had been raided m why was Ian Blair a crook, as for being made a lord, as was Peter Imbert, John Stevens,and Paul condone as for Nigel eva she has been arrested on allegations, and Damian green lawfully had his office searched for stolen data, after he had been arrested, searching someone’s place of work for. Elegant things, became legal after Pace, 1984 act,

  • Rossspeak

    Until and unless the majority of honest Police admit that there are an influential minority of Policemen who consider themselves “above the law” then this situation can only get worse – as with the NUT who refuse to accept that their actions have downgraded education – the “influential and vociferous” minorities are doing great disservice to the well meaning majority.

  • Val Horan

    Surely trying to topple a Government minister amounts to treason. I think treason is still a hangable offence.

    • Andy

      You need to read the Treason Act of 1351. And, unfortunately, Capital Punishment for Treason was abolished in 1998. However, not with standing the Council of Europe, we could restore the rope for Treason.

  • James Strong

    Neither of these men can ever again give effective evidence for the prosecution in any criminal trial. Defence counsel would destroy them.
    Worse than that, in any trial involving the police forces that they are in any police officer’s evidence will be called into question because these men’s commanders have not taken action against their lies. This lack of action by the commanders taints their other decisions.
    Can any of their officers be trusted if it is known that untrustworthy officers remain in post?
    This is very serious.

  • Holly

    As a member of the public I DO NOT want people like these two anywhere near power.
    They are an utter disgrace, and should be booted out of the force with BIG black marks against their names…immediately!

    This is yet another unpleasant residue from Labour…These liars are used to ‘getting their own way’, no questions asked, and so arrogant it beggars belief.
    The other top brass where not much better.

    What should put the wind up everyone is, these are all high ranking officers…Anyone from the police front line reading this…You must be amazing people to have to work under these low life’s.
    I also would like to know, how was CCTV footage ‘mislaid’, who sent him to ‘retrieve it’, and more importantly what did it show?

    Any investigative journo’s out there????

  • In2minds

    But they are the police, what did you expect?

  • Fergus Pickering

    Time the plods were dragged away in chains. Do it now.

  • Russell

    I’d like to see a group of voters grilling Vaz about all his dodgy dealings and see him uncomfortable (something he has never been while troughing at the taxpayers expense) and squirm as he is presented with a long list of his spinning the truth.
    He as least on this occasion not simply followed the Miliband/Labour line that Mitchell was the liar and should resign as called for by Miliband, numerous Labour MP’s along with these corrupt policemen.
    The Police Federation are held in the same esteem as Unite now.

  • Faceless Bureaucrat

    These lying scumbags have to be sacked, with a full loss of Pension Rights. Their visceral hatred of the Conservative Party is so obvious that the word ‘sorry’ sticks in their throat.
    What is even more worrying is that any Police Commissioner worthy of the name would have seen the long-term damage being done to their respective Forces and have intervened to oust these two malignant elements before the issue ever got to this stage.
    One wonders what has stayed their hands, unless of course they share the same visceral hatred of the Conservative Party as Hinton and Jones. In which case, Theresa May needs to ‘cut hard and cut deep’ to remove these high-level political agitators in Uniform and replace them with the decent, honest and impartial Coppers we expect…

    • toco10

      Not only sacked but given custodial sentences for wasting taxpayers’ money and causing the wrongful removal of a senior Government Minister if it is proven they misled Parliament and told porkies to the media.Funny Red Ed and his buddies at Unite have kept quiet on this one now and only now that it is going against them politically but given the goings-on in Falkirk they must have extremely red faces.If Red Ed continues to refuse to disclose on Unite and Falkirk then what else is to be found under the Labour mattress.

      • Russell

        Miliband was demanding the sacking of Mitchell at PMQ’s at the time! No wonder he is silent as the scheme to get a Conservative Cabinet Minister sacked was carried out by Labours very own Police Federation (Union) whose support is to Labour.

        • MirthaTidville

          `Whose support is to Labour`..Never used to be until `Dave` turned up..The Conservatives always could regard the Police and their extended families as natural supporters..ditto the Armed forces..not now…I`m not saying this is right but wouldnt have happend before `Dave…facts people

          • Russell

            The police were under the control of Blair & Labour..remember Damian Green?

            • john p reid

              When both Peter Hain and the cash for peerages scandal, also 2 of the expenses claims, happened before 2010′ what ever the facts of the Damian green case, he did encourage someone to illegally leak data on immigration figures,

      • john p reid

        It was Cameron who got rid of Mitchell,

    • jazz606

      I would be very surprised if these “lying scumbags” and/or the Police Federation haven’t got some leverage.
      I’ll leave it to the jury to decide what I mean by ‘leverage’.

  • Smithersjones2013

    These two disreputable individuals are about as convincing as that absurd period during the expenses scandal when all Labour MP’s could bleat was “It was within the rules” (even when it wasn’t). It changed nothing. They were still thoroughly unworthy and discredited. These disgraceful employees of HM constabulary hopefully can be dismissed for bringing the force into disrepute.

    • Russell

      Those MP’s from the expenses scandal are still thoroughly untrustworthy and discreditied (Vaz being one such MP).

      More the pity no MP’s can be fired (I seem to remember something about MP’s being recalled as part of the cleaning up exercise following the expenses scandal, and the only thing that has happened is they are at it again with their constituency office rents)

      • Fergus Pickering

        What on earth have MPs got to do with it? We are talking about lying, corrupt policemen. Stay focussed. They should be summarily beheaded and their heads exhibited on spikes.

        • MirthaTidville

          Oh you do talk drivel..Russell is focused..Vaz, the expenses cheat is passing himself off as the upholder of standards and is laughingly referred to as `magnificent` by the 10 year old who wrote this piece…Dear God

        • Russell

          Do pay attention Feergus….The article is about two lying scheming rotten policemen (assisting the equally rotten Police Federation) and their performance at a select committee chaired by the rotten Vaz and other rotten members of parliament! So any comments about rotten police or rotten MP’s is appropriate.In terms of honesty, there is nothing to choose between the lack of it with either of them, police or MP’s (particularly Vaz).

          • Fergus Pickering

            Lying politicians we have always with us. Vaz is no bettter and no worse than the usual breed. Though he is pretty sharp. Lying corrupt policemen who are as thick as pigshit we ought not to have to put up with. As I said before, drag them away in chains, whip them with scorpions, cut their heads off with chainsaws.

  • HookesLaw

    W ]e have the recording and the police represemntation of that recording. It ought to be simple.

    It is important because the whole underpinings of the polkice force is in question. And it is topical when we consider the current trial that dare not speak its name.

    • Russell

      I think it is the Police Federation not the Police Force that is in question for assisting the Labour party.

      • Holly

        Correct, but the two dubious pilgrims are also police officers.
        In a poll the other day, the majority of police polled believe the Police Federation NEEDS reforming.
        Surprised Miliband hasn’t STFU about energy prices he helped to raise, and jumped on this bandwagon….Demanding Cameron ‘gets a grip’ and does something.

        And while I’m at it…Where is Coop, the shadow Home Secretary????
        What does she suggest?
        Not a peep.

  • kyalami

    Surely even the most ultra-loyal police commissioner can see that these people have to be fired?

    • telemachus


      For not apologising for distress to one who swore at their colleagues


      Mr Mitchell’s own account of the words he used during Wednesday’s incident emerged for the first time last night. The Sunday Telegraph understands that the Chief Whip’s version of events is that after asking officers to open the main gates to Downing Street for his bicycle, and being refused, he said: “You guys are supposed to f***ing help us.”

      • neotelemachus

        Well Idiot #1, we shall see what the juries have to say when the useless, politicised CPS finally get round to laying charges against the police. Even the egregious Owen Jones had the good grace to apologise to Andrew Mitchell on last Sunday’s a Politics Show. Will you and your fellow idiots be so gracious? Somehow I think not, which is why you are worse than the poo on a tramp’s shoes.

      • Fergus Pickering

        But we knew that weeks ago. Do keep up.

      • kyalami

        Fired for making up “evidence” and lying about it.

      • Holly

        Because, in their own words, they ‘fitted up’ a cabinet member of our government, because they were ‘piss@d’ at police cuts.

        Mitchell swore in within hearing distance of police officers, not a crime, and IF it was as ‘heated’ as the bogus witness, (who just happened to be another police officer, who just happened NOT to be there) implied, why wasn’t Mitchell arrested?

        This is not the first incident of police lying, and no doubt it will not be the last, but WHEN some crim uses ‘he said’, ‘she said’ as their defence, and sites the ever growing examples of police falsifying evidence/statements, or lying we will have bigger problems.

        This is no longer about Mitchell, it is about unfit people, with dubious character flaws, who have somehow climbed up the ranks of our police forces….Some with DOUBLE FIGURE disciplinary investigations on their work records.
        How the heck is he still in post?

        • Andy

          Probably a Labour Party member.

        • HookesLaw

          As the ITV reporter said on tonight’s news, the police do not seem to realise the mess they are in.

          • ButcombeMan

            They do They do. Note how quiet Bernard Hogan Howe has been since his massive error of judgement.

            The one good thing to have come out of the whole incident is the exposure of the Police culture to public gaze.

            It is just fact that a lot of Police Officers, even some at very high rank are sadly very thick. They live in a permanent state of siege, outside the public, not OF the public. the canteen culture is very difficult for any Officer to ignore if he wants to be one of the boys (or girls). Recruitment is overwhelmingly from social classes C1 and C2. the culture captures most on the way up. If not caught by that, they get captured, neutered and roboticised by “Common Purpose” courses.

            The whole thing becomes dysfunctional. What one cop thinks they all think.

            The Police Service needs different blood and better leaders.

            It probably needs something like the Sandhurst system for producing its leaders from raw recruits. the Army has always been very good at training and producing leaders

      • Colonel Mustard

        You’d be singing a different tune if it had been Balls or Burnham. We all know it and even you know it.

        • telemachus

          Balls and Burnham have respect for their fellow man and for public servants

          • Colonel Mustard

            Burnham didn’t seem to have much respect for those dying of dehydration and neglect in his hospitals. . .


      • Russell

        They are supposed to f***ing help them!

        • john p reid

          By letting Mitchell break the law, and cycle his bike on the pavement?

          • Ciaron Goggins

            It is more than about allowing Mitchell the use a bike on pavement, even those who despise Tories now believe Mitchell not plod.

      • Hexhamgeezer

        He didn’t swear at them he swore in their presence you filth

    • 2trueblue

      They do not see it like that. I love the headline…..” stick to their’.

Can't find your Web ID? Click here