Policing-A profession where one day you’re smeared and the next day you’re a hero.

Former Metropolitan Police Officer Chris Hobbs writes in the Havering Daily on the challenges of policing our capital today.

So, two days after the Mail on Sunday collectively smeared the Met and it’s officers by accusing them not only of being ‘cowed,’ which needs no translation to cowards and ludicrously ‘covering up the holocaust,’ several of those Met officers were seen running towards a horrendous incident in Hainault; an incident that resulted in heartbreaking tragedy and serious injury to two police officers caused by them trying to apprehend a male armed with a sword who has now been charged with murder.

If police officers who, perhaps even those who rushed to the above call, had been performing duty at the previous Saturday’s pro-Palestinian protest and pro-Israel counter-protest, expected to wake up on Sunday morning to media approbation in respect of a relatively trouble-free day, they were to be disappointed.

To state the blindingly obvious and ignored by most of the media, this particular protest ended with a mass rally in Hyde Park and the Holocaust memorial in question is in…….Hyde Park, therefore prudent crime prevention would perhaps suggest that additional precautions were necessary.

Over recent weeks we have seen guerilla action, away from the protests, by groups such as Palestinian Action and Youth Demand, which has involved daubing with red paint; one example being the Ministry of Defence. Since the crisis began this very vulnerable and indeed sacrosanct memorial has remained untouched. Sadly, the current publicity could perhaps attract one or more loathsome individuals to carry out an attack knowing the divisive furore such an attack would cause.

It wasn’t just the tarpaulin covering the memorial that was the issue. At the top of the Mail’s headline is a reference to the incident some two weeks previously where a highly respected Met sergeant was involved in a confrontation with an individual who, as Jewish and wearing a kippah (skull-cap), demanded the right to walk amongst pro-Palestinian protesters. A clip appeared on social media but that was superseded by Sky News commendably showing a much fuller version of the encounter which considerably changed the narrative and resulted in Commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, praising his officer.

“Walking where we want.”

This individual’s organisation then stated that they had recruited 1,500 individuals, to exercise their right to be free to walk where they wished on the street of London. This ‘right’ included walking amongst rival pro-Palestinian demonstrators during yet another national march in London.

The prospect of pro-Israel counter-protesting activists deliberately walking amongst thousands of pro-Palestinian protesters clearly sent a shudder through the Met’s public order branch and would have called into question the eminently sensible tactic, backed-up by the Public Order Act, of keeping rival groups apart regardless of whether the event is a football match or a political demonstration.

It’s hard not to escape the conclusion that if pro-Israel activists wish to ‘openly walk amongst their rivals, or indeed vice-versa, the ultimate aim is to create the kind of disorder that we are now seeing in New York and elsewhere in the United States. Hopefully common sense will prevail here and the fact that pro-Israel organisations have made it clear that practical support from the UK’s far right is not welcome can only reduce that possibility; but the danger of serious and divisive disorder remains.

Interestingly the highly respected Jewish security group; the Community Safety Trust (CST), issued a statement which acknowledged the difficulties faced by the Met and approved the tactic of ‘segregating,’ rival groups. It also expressed the organisation’s disapproval of ‘hate’ marches.

It may have been this statement that prompted the announcement that the 1,500 ‘we’ll walk where we like’ protesters would stand down but the last few lines appeared ambiguous and there was still concern that some would still take to the streets thus triggering a potentially difficult situation for officers. This would explain the precaution last Saturday, of ensuring that officers were properly equipped and thus ‘kitted,’ appropriately.

The Mail however failed to mention this potentially explosive, ‘mingle and walk amongst rival’s’ tactic. They simply said that this pro-Israeli march was called off due to the concerns for the safety of the participants which clearly was a distortion of the facts. The agreed static pro-Israeli counter-protest however went ahead.

The Mail also omitted to state that pro-Palestinian activists also cannot ‘walk as they please,’ amongst pro-Israeli rallies and protests. Police have ejected a number where either they or pro-Israeli activists have detected them. At the conclusion of the first Israeli rally in Trafalgar Square, three youths were detained after attempting to unfurl a Palestinian flag to the fury of the departing crowd.

The pro-Palestinian march last Saturday set off from Parliament Square and was, as is the case with most that are organised by the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign, concluded without any major incident. It went past a pro-Israel counter-protest and, separated by barriers and police officers, the two sides, as with previous protests, exchanged insults.

There were just a handful of arrests and again, the Met had officers who were looking for actionable placards, posters and banners which, over the previous few months, have been mercifully few.

These huge ‘national,’ marches in London are, understandably, conflated with guerilla type actions by small leftist pro-Palestinian groups such as those mentioned above. In fact, despite media references to ‘hate marches,’ and ‘mobs,’ these major events, considering the huge numbers involved, are remarkably incident free.

Before Christmas, in the aftermath of the dreadful events of the 7th of October, the marches were slightly more problematic in that there was a greater presence of truculent youths; fireworks had been thrown and at the end of these marches, the troublesome elements frequently went on a ‘walkabout,’ which occasionally resulted in arrests. Having said that on a disorder scale (albeit mine) of between 1 and 10, these incidents would register around a 3. Protests after Christmas would barely register a 2; 10 would be the level of life-threatening disorder seen during the riots of 2011.

The lack of disorder, should, it could be argued, result in praise for the Met and its generally successful public order tactics. Praise, however, has been noticeably absent.

So, do police ‘oppress’ opposition to Palestinian marches?

Last Sunday, in the aftermath of Saturday’s events and in the wake of the Mail on Sunday’s front page, a former police superintendent, whilst appearing on GB News accused Sir Mark Rowley and ‘Rowley’s robots,’ of ‘oppressing,’ any opposition to these marches. He went on to say that that the Met had ‘chosen a side.’

In relation to the ‘oppression’ of opposition there was visible opposition to the first major pro-Palestinian march. A small group complete with Union and St. George flags ‘protected,’ the Cenotaph and were guarded by a handful of officers. There was predictable exchange of insults between some pro-Palestinian youths and this group but most of the marchers, encouraged by stewards, simply carried on walking.
There was little sign of oppression on Armistice Day when hundreds of ‘patriots’ were fighting with police before 11am on the grounds they were protecting the Cenotaph from a pro-Palestinian march whose route took them no-where near Whitehall.

After the ceremony, counter-protesters tried to attack the march as it passed over Vauxhall Bridge but were prevented by large numbers of police. Another group threw missiles at police in Soho while several hundred remained in Parliament Square and periodically clashed with police. As darkness fell, pro-Palestinian marchers returning from their own rally, began to return via Parliament Square unaware of the situation. Police had to run to intervene on numerous occasions as young girls with Palestinian flags were abused and even attacked with flags being snatched. The term fcking Pki could frequently be heard.

Photo-Parliament Square, Armistice Day
More recently, two smaller counter-protests took place in Whitehall by a group described as ‘far-right,’ by those on the left. There were no issues.
Although there have been pro-Israel, ‘bring the hostages home,’ rallies, only in March did pro-Israeli counter protests under the banner, ‘Enough is enough,’ take place. These were static affairs on the routes taken by pro-Palestinian marchers. Carefully planned police operations have kept the two factions within sight of each other but apart and only once has there been an attempt to breach the police cordon; that was by a powerfully built individual who attempted to reach the pro-Israeli counter-protesters but was arrested, with some difficulty, by several police officers. (arrest shown below).

Twice, at the conclusion of pro-Israeli counter-protests, the police have been given a round of applause. Those who have actually attended protests and rallies to see for themselves as opposed to relying on distorted hearsay, have noticed that despite the tensions, the relationship between marchers/protesters on both sides and police is, considering the circumstances, generally cordial.

The above- mentioned retired Superintendent was, however, correct in stating that the frequency of these protests is draining the Met of resources and having an impact upon local policing. The Commissioner is being blamed by politicians, who should know better, for not banning the marches. However, as Sir Mark has explained on more than one occasion, he can only set the ‘wheels in motion’ if very serious levels of violence are anticipated. This would be violence that posed a risk to life and extensive damage of property on a level which was seen in 2011. An intervention by the Commissioner which involved banning these major marches, would, in any event, be challenged in the courts. If politicians wish to ban these marches, then the issue is a simple one; ensure that appropriate legislation is passed.
It’s interesting that whilst the police are criticised for soft, ‘two tier,’ policing in respect of these situations, this view isn’t shared by the Islamic Human Rights Commission as can be seen from this extract of a letter to the Met’s Commissioner.

The fact is that the same officers who deal with these complex and emotive protests also deal with more than 12,000 knife and bladed/pointed incidents every year. When answering a weapon related 999 calls, they have no idea whether they will be facing a violent life-threatening situation or will be battling to save the life of an unfortunate victim as officers are frequently on the scene of such emergencies before paramedics. Just last month a Met officer was stabbed in Enfield. Shown is the knife allegedly used.

The simple fact is that during each and every 24-hour period Met officers and indeed police officers across the country will perform numerous acts of bravery, kindness and compassion that will largely be unheralded by a national media more interested in unbalanced, denigratory headlines.

Support Local Journalism
We at The Havering Daily appreciate your support of quality journalism. Your generous donation, no matter the size, allows us to continue bringing unbiased and informative news to the community. Your contribution helps us maintain our independence and allows us to continue providing high-quality journalism. Thank you for valuing the work we do and for supporting our mission

Thank you

Stay up to date with all of our latest updates and content by following us on our social media accounts!

We have created community pages where we will share our up-to-date stories happening in the area. Add the area closest to where you live.