A TERRIFIED 80-year-old had to wait 24 HOURS for cops after a hammer fiend smashed her windows and threatened to kill her...It was not until the next day that a policeman finally turned up.As Cryptic Subterranean notes:
A spokesman for Thames Valley Police said: “We have to prioritise our calls in order of seriousness.”
Yeah, like one of their own complaining about a kid kicking a ball against a fence.It doesn't matter where in the world you go, you'll always find "The Only Ones."
UPDATE: I just sent the following email to the reporter and the Thames Valley Police. I'll post any responses I get:
In re:I mean, somebody's got to tell the "authorized journalists" how to do their job...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007080092,00.html
Mr. Pyatt, assuming the facts of your story are correct, you are in a unique position to complete a needed investigation. The police say they had to prioritize their calls, but a scan of news stories from that area doesn’t really show enough urgent response activity to warrant a 24-hour tie-up of all emergency resources, does it?
I mean, we see:Ex-landlady buys police drugs dog
Police set Shining example with in-car computers
Sara Thornton appointed top cop
Workshop Offer To Driving Mobile Phone Offenders –
Police get cash
Etc. But we don’t really see anything you or I would consider more of a priority if it were our mother being attacked, do we? Do you think emergencies warranting a 24-hour delay for a 999 call could have happened without being picked up by the news?
It seems fair to ask if the spokesman was merely covering up for failure.
Please press the Thames Valley police for their log to show what they considered more important than a defenseless old woman being terrorized with a lethal weapon—and please press them to give you their written policy on how such prioritization is determined. Please publish that you are doing this, and please keep your readers posted on whether or not satisfactory answers are forthcoming.
Sincerely,
David Codrea