I always read these with a large pinch of salt. Firstly, its disgusting behaviour if it happened as stated in the story and they deserve all they get. But I also believe that there will be more behind it. Firstly an investigation already found it in favour of the officers involved (not unusual to come to that conclusion for right or wrong reasons though). This would have been by someone higher in power due to the nature of it and wouldn't have been done lightly. Secondly a newspaper likes nothing more than a story discrediting the police and often miss out pieces of information on purpose. Thirdly is a police officer going to risk a 36 grand a year job on doing something like this that they know they shouldn't be and knowing it will all be filmed? Never mind 4 or 5 police at the same time and knowing that they could also go to jail for it. As for being told she may be kept in for longer if she wants a legal rep, well that is true in most cases. Firstly the legal rep wont come if the person is drunk. The legal rep doesnt work from the police station so will have to get there which could take 30 minutes or 3 hours or more (depending on the legal rep). They may be able to be dealt with quicker before fully sober and released quicker if a legal rep isn't involved. It is still up to the person though. They can still seek help/advice after being released.
Well that's it then, we can now close the thread I am glad the law and policing s like that, who needs all the facts when the news story is good enough.OldMasterThere is actually only one way of looking at this. There is no grey area. She was stripped naked by one wpc and 5 male police present. She was "filmed" so front desk could enjoy the view.The police are not denying anything and as far as I am aware only female "officers" should be present...but hey guys why not get your jollies stripping off a girl who may have had her drink spiked. ...or even if she was drunk the issue is the same. Lets guess she was probably quite attractive?