Pants On Fire
The House of Commons home affairs select committee got its teeth into certain aspects of the 'Plebgate' affair and - for some - the experience must have been about as enjoyable as being bitten on the arse - by a big, snarling police dog.
Poetic justice if you ask me, but here are some of the highlights and lowlights of an very eventful day.
The IPCC came across - to me at least - as reasonable, professional and telling the truth.
The three officers who met Andrew Mitchell MP in October 2012 - Inspector Ken MacKaill, Detective Sergeant Stuart Hinton and Sergeant Chris Jones - came across as shifty, self-serving and unreliable witnesses.
Unbelievably, Ken MacKaill - who was the main spokesperson on the day on behalf of the Police Federation (police trade union) told the committee:
“I gave what I believed was an accurate account of the meeting to the media…"
Stuart Hinton told the committee:
"We showed poor judgment in speaking to the media immediately following the meeting with Mr Mitchell. I think we are all happy to take the criticism on the chin for that." - before adding - "We certainly didn’t lie intentionally.”
Chris Jones told the committee that he did not believe that they have done anything wrong and said:
"I’m firmly of the opinion that we did represent that meeting correctly when we emerged from that meeting. At the moment I’m not convinced that we have done anything wrong."
Meanwhile, the chief constable of West Mercia Police, David Shaw, cut the ground from all three - by announcing that he had asked for an independent review into the investigation of the behaviour of the three officers - which had previously cleared them of any misconduct.
Earlier in the day, the deputy Chair of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) said that she believed the evidence against the men suggested that they should have been charged with gross misconduct.
David Shaw also revealed that he had personally written to Mr Mitchell this week and had offered the MP a "profound and unreserved apology" - leaving his three junior colleagues from the Police Federation looking even more ridiculous.
Finally, after their ordeal was over, the three officers were warned by Keith Vaz, the committtee chairman, that they would be in contempt of Parliament if it turned out they had given false testimony, before dismissing the men with the following rebuke:
"Can I say, on behalf of this committee, that we have found your evidence most unsatisfactory."\
For perhaps the first and only time in his life - I would have no hesitation in saying that Keith Vaz MP spoke for the whole nation.
The three officers who met Andrew Mitchell MP in October 2012 - Inspector Ken MacKaill, Detective Sergeant Stuart Hinton and Sergeant Chris Jones - came across as shifty, self-serving and unreliable witnesses.
Unbelievably, Ken MacKaill - who was the main spokesperson on the day on behalf of the Police Federation (police trade union) told the committee:
“I gave what I believed was an accurate account of the meeting to the media…"
Stuart Hinton told the committee:
"We showed poor judgment in speaking to the media immediately following the meeting with Mr Mitchell. I think we are all happy to take the criticism on the chin for that." - before adding - "We certainly didn’t lie intentionally.”
Chris Jones told the committee that he did not believe that they have done anything wrong and said:
"I’m firmly of the opinion that we did represent that meeting correctly when we emerged from that meeting. At the moment I’m not convinced that we have done anything wrong."
Meanwhile, the chief constable of West Mercia Police, David Shaw, cut the ground from all three - by announcing that he had asked for an independent review into the investigation of the behaviour of the three officers - which had previously cleared them of any misconduct.
Earlier in the day, the deputy Chair of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) said that she believed the evidence against the men suggested that they should have been charged with gross misconduct.
David Shaw also revealed that he had personally written to Mr Mitchell this week and had offered the MP a "profound and unreserved apology" - leaving his three junior colleagues from the Police Federation looking even more ridiculous.
Finally, after their ordeal was over, the three officers were warned by Keith Vaz, the committtee chairman, that they would be in contempt of Parliament if it turned out they had given false testimony, before dismissing the men with the following rebuke:
"Can I say, on behalf of this committee, that we have found your evidence most unsatisfactory."\
For perhaps the first and only time in his life - I would have no hesitation in saying that Keith Vaz MP spoke for the whole nation.
