Would you want policemen like these anywhere near a crime scene?

As if the malodorous muddle of Plebgate weren’t bad enough, we’re now told that a cabal of Downing Street policemen may have been whiling away their lonely hours on night duty by swapping pornography.
Three officers were arrested in December and a fourth questioned last month after “obscene images” were found on the men’s smartphones, examined as part of the Plebgate inquiry.
Obviously, given everything else that was going on, no one at Scotland Yard actually got round to telling us that armed police officers from an elite unit had been arrested, their homes raided and the men either suspended, or put on restricted duties.
Then, late last Friday, after questions from The Times, Scotland Yard issued this statement:
“On December 19, 2013, officers from the Directorate of Professional Standards arrested three police constables from the DPG (Diplomatic Protection Squad) on suspicion of being involved in the possession and distribution of obscene images via mobile phones. This is contrary to both the Obscene Publications Act 1959 and also the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.
“The images identified by the investigation are of an extreme sexual nature, but do not involve children… A file has now been passed to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for consideration.”
Less than 24 hours later, the Metropolitan Police announced that the three officers wouldn’t face charges. Presumably, Scotland Yard already knew this when it released its original statement, unless it had somehow persuaded the CPS to make an overnight decision. Or maybe the swift resolution was just one of those happy coincidences life throws up every so often.
Let’s accept that there wasn’t enough evidence to charge these three police officers with crimes. Still, the Met will now hold a “misconduct investigation” to examine whether the porn picture trading took place while the men were on duty.
Some might think this was nothing more serious than a few bored policemen texting one another salacious pictures to help keep out the cold. Distasteful, certainly, but hardly criminal.
But let’s not be too quick to do what the Met would like – and simply move along now because there’s nothing to see here. Instead, let’s take a look at the law on “extreme images” under which, Scotland Yard has told us, these police officers were arrested. It’s chilling stuff.
According to legislation, an “extreme image” is one which is “grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character” and portrays “in an explicit and realistic way”:
“an act which threatens a person’s life,
“an act which results, or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or genitals,
“an act which involves sexual interference with a human corpse, or
“a person performing an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),
“and a reasonable person looking at the image would think that any such person or animal was real.”
It makes pretty gruesome reading, so let’s be blunt. Based entirely on the information provided by Scotland Yard, and without jumping to conclusions, it seems possible that several armed police officers, charged with guarding the Prime Minister, were handing around violent pornographic images that may have included mutilated bodies and the corpses of dead people and animals.
No wonder the Met was so eager to tell us the suspected offences didn’t involve children.
I know the CPS has decided not to press charges, and I’ll even suspend my skepticism and bow to its judgment on this. Still, the fact remains that these men were exchanging pornography so disturbing that fellow officers in the anti-corruption unit had them arrested and their homes searched.
Now, ask yourself this: Would you want these policemen anywhere near a crime that involved any kind of violence – let alone a rape or a sexual assault?
Not me.