anyone wondering about the trayvon martin case

[GOOD GRIEF]

well.. @Jason (Correct me if im wrong) is arguing that when you look at crime statistics (and statistics in general) you cant blame someone that much for assuming something about a group of people based on those statistics, the fact we dont know what kinda mindset or psychological reason why Zim might of done it, the right everyone has to be suspicious of something sticking out of someones pocket/in their hand, and the fact that we dont know all the facts so maybe Trayvon had some fault in this situation.

@Gurp Da God is arguing (i think) that its wrong for Jason/any human being to assume something based on statistics, especially crime statistis cuz u dont completely know the reasons the person did the crime. Also Gurp might be a lil peeved at Jason cuz Jason hasnt really recognized that fact that Zimmerman lied about being attacked by Trayvon, disobeyed orders, carried an illegal firearm, and etc. in other words it seems Jason aint recognizin the fact this Zimmerman dude is most likely fucked up in the head. the fact that he's racist, was/wasn't instigated by Treyvon, and if Treyvon made a move on him period is a subject that is either hard/impossible to prove. (though i do want to say it was reported that Trey was screaming for help so a guy that was "actin thug" wouldnt do that would he? plus if Trey was kickin ass he wouldnt scream for help would he?) Gurp may also be pissed that Jason isnt recognizing the fact that Zim should be in jail without a question. when u shoot a nigga u need to be in custody... period. all that court and bail shit might let u go free but as soon as it happened he should have been in custody.

this is getting a bit long. but im kinda siding wit Gurp on this. the fact that we dont know all the facts is important.. but to deny the opinion of Gurp (which was made with the evidence currently presented and would prob be changed accordingly with any updates of it) is a bit stupid dont you think? id like to elaborate more but i know how yall hate reading. (yes it is ironic how texters hate reading aint it?)

[GOOD GRIEF]

well.. @Jason (Correct me if im wrong) is arguing that when you look at crime statistics (and statistics in general) you cant blame someone that much for assuming something about a group of people based on those statistics, the fact we dont know what kinda mindset or psychological reason why Zim might of done it, the right everyone has to be suspicious of something sticking out of someones pocket/in their hand, and the fact that we dont know all the facts so maybe Trayvon had some fault in this situation.

@Gurp Da God is arguing (i think) that its wrong for Jason/any human being to assume something based on statistics, especially crime statistis cuz u dont completely know the reasons the person did the crime. Also Gurp might be a lil peeved at Jason cuz Jason hasnt really recognized that fact that Zimmerman lied about being attacked by Trayvon, disobeyed orders, carried an illegal firearm, and etc. in other words it seems Jason aint recognizin the fact this Zimmerman dude is most likely fucked up in the head. the fact that he's racist, was/wasn't instigated by Treyvon, and if Treyvon made a move on him period is a subject that is either hard/impossible to prove. (though i do want to say it was reported that Trey was screaming for help so a guy that was "actin thug" wouldnt do that would he? plus if Trey was kickin ass he wouldnt scream for help would he?) Gurp may also be pissed that Jason isnt recognizing the fact that Zim should be in jail without a question. when u shoot a nigga u need to be in custody... period. all that court and bail shit might let u go free but as soon as it happened he should have been in custody.

this is getting a bit long. but im kinda siding wit Gurp on this. the fact that we dont know all the facts is important.. but to deny the opinion of Gurp (which was made with the evidence currently presented and would prob be changed accordingly with any updates of it) is a bit stupid dont you think? id like to elaborate more but i know how yall hate reading. (yes it is ironic how texters hate reading aint it?)

i never said assuming or not assuming is the right way to go.

im saying jason is wrong to assume anything based on black crime rates if he isnt going to assume zimmerman is guilty of murder based on parole violations, direct disobedience of authority, and video of no visible physical injury. If STATISTICS are enough for you to assume blacks are more likely to commit a crime, then the evidence at hand should be more than enough for you too assume zimmermans guilty. but you choose not to, in this situation.. and im wondering why. you have to choose, are you one to assume the motives of another human being on limited/interpretted evidence (misc. object in a mans pocket/black crime rates) or are you one of equal and just fairness in all scenarios

i never said assuming or not assuming is the right way to go.

im saying jason is wrong to assume anything based on black crime rates if he isnt going to assume zimmerman is guilty of murder based on parole violations, direct disobedience of authority, and video of no visible physical injury. If STATISTICS are enough for you to assume blacks are more likely to commit a crime, then the evidence at hand should be more than enough for you too assume zimmermans guilty. but you choose not to, in this situation.. and im wondering why. you have to choose, are you one to assume the motives of another human being on limited/interpretted evidence (misc. object in a mans pocket/black crime rates) or are you one of equal and just fairness in all scenarios

[Just C]

Originally Posted by Jason

really?
tell me more?
haha

alot of these statistics are handled by OCED who are not part of any "party" and will not benefit in any way by skewing numbers

why do you have any reason to suspect that stats are skewed to suit someones needs?

And does OCED use people to gather and oversee these Stats? You're not seriously telling me this isn't open to error and even manipulation?

You have no Idea what the OCED has to gain as a whole and MAINLY the head(s) by doctoring stats. Because there is no way for you to prove these stats to be fact or fiction due to the simple fact that we're talking about something on such a wide, untraceable scale as something like say, 'crimes committed by black people'

Hence why I said grain of salt. That's all I'm saying.

[Just C]

Originally Posted by Jason

really?
tell me more?
haha

alot of these statistics are handled by OCED who are not part of any "party" and will not benefit in any way by skewing numbers

why do you have any reason to suspect that stats are skewed to suit someones needs?

And does OCED use people to gather and oversee these Stats? You're not seriously telling me this isn't open to error and even manipulation?

You have no Idea what the OCED has to gain as a whole and MAINLY the head(s) by doctoring stats. Because there is no way for you to prove these stats to be fact or fiction due to the simple fact that we're talking about something on such a wide, untraceable scale as something like say, 'crimes committed by black people'

Hence why I said grain of salt. That's all I'm saying.

theres plenty of reasons jason. Remember that more and more prisons in the US are becoming privately owned. the majority of black prisoners in these prisons is alarming, but more prisoners = more profit. So lets doctor some statistics to show that its not the judicial systems fault, its the black communities fault. Or for example cops have quotas they need to fill. arrests, busts, etc. They see a car full of black guys in beverly hills, they pull it over and search for anything to bust them on. Statistics arent being doctored in this sense, but they are being effected by judgement calls of police. Statistics have been taken showing black automobilests are pulled over much more than white automobilests.


im not going to continue telling u how statistics of black crime rates can be skewed, it just seems really obvious to me

---------- Post added at 11:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:24 AM ----------

"There are lies, there are damn lies, and then there are statistics"

theres plenty of reasons jason. Remember that more and more prisons in the US are becoming privately owned. the majority of black prisoners in these prisons is alarming, but more prisoners = more profit. So lets doctor some statistics to show that its not the judicial systems fault, its the black communities fault. Or for example cops have quotas they need to fill. arrests, busts, etc. They see a car full of black guys in beverly hills, they pull it over and search for anything to bust them on. Statistics arent being doctored in this sense, but they are being effected by judgement calls of police. Statistics have been taken showing black automobilests are pulled over much more than white automobilests.


im not going to continue telling u how statistics of black crime rates can be skewed, it just seems really obvious to me

---------- Post added at 11:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:24 AM ----------

"There are lies, there are damn lies, and then there are statistics"

[Just C]

[quote=Jason;774303]but like
the fact still remains that theres no real reason why stats would be altered

do you have a reason?

---------- Post added at 03:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:19 PM ----------



i think you sorta got what i said mixed up

my remark about stats / crime had nothin to do w/ this particular incident
it was just in response to what skrillex said

---------- Post added at 03:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:20 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Jason

but like
the fact still remains that theres no real reason why stats would be altered

do you have a reason?[COLOR="Silver"]

Money? Influence? Power?

See for people who take stats presented as the gospel truth they are openly displaying that they are open to manipulation. Done intelligently it's a powerful tool. It's called politics. And with that come plenty of disadvantages and mainly
Advantages to gain, depending on how Savvy and shrude you are.

---------- Post added at 03:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:27 PM ----------

Infact it isn't only called politics, it's called Propaganda.

[Just C]

[quote=Jason;774303]but like
the fact still remains that theres no real reason why stats would be altered

do you have a reason?

---------- Post added at 03:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:19 PM ----------



i think you sorta got what i said mixed up

my remark about stats / crime had nothin to do w/ this particular incident
it was just in response to what skrillex said

---------- Post added at 03:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:20 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Jason

but like
the fact still remains that theres no real reason why stats would be altered

do you have a reason?[COLOR="Silver"]

Money? Influence? Power?

See for people who take stats presented as the gospel truth they are openly displaying that they are open to manipulation. Done intelligently it's a powerful tool. It's called politics. And with that come plenty of disadvantages and mainly
Advantages to gain, depending on how Savvy and shrude you are.

---------- Post added at 03:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:27 PM ----------

Infact it isn't only called politics, it's called Propaganda.

Jason do you live in the US?


if you do, i think you are playing yourself by putting way to much confidence into your system of government. Like i said/stated examples of earlier. the government of the US today is to the point of treason. its becoming more and more under handed as the election draws closer and tbh not too make sentiments can be trusted with unrefutable evidence at this point. dont be the sucker who buys into it because guy with a badge says so

Jason do you live in the US?


if you do, i think you are playing yourself by putting way to much confidence into your system of government. Like i said/stated examples of earlier. the government of the US today is to the point of treason. its becoming more and more under handed as the election draws closer and tbh not too make sentiments can be trusted with unrefutable evidence at this point. dont be the sucker who buys into it because guy with a badge says so

well if you want to go by statistics. im sure a statistic could be created about the amount of politicians who lie outright with knowledge of the truth throughout the history of the united states. and that statistic, would lead me to assume that i can no longer trust reported information without irrefutable evidence. That statistic doesnt exist though... i wonder why. BUT somehow theres always been statistics taken of black crime rates through the years so that everyone can have 'evidence' to be scared of black people. So that makes me think, whos taking the stats? people that want you to know the truth? i doubt it

I grew up in the states and went to a pretty intense school where i took honors and AP US history and learned way too much about this kinda stuff.

---------- Post added at 11:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:35 AM ----------

Originally Posted by Jason

its not so much that i buy into it
i just dont really have a reason not to assume that reported info is false

but you have reason to assume based on statistics of black crime rates, that blacks are more threatening than whites?

well if you want to go by statistics. im sure a statistic could be created about the amount of politicians who lie outright with knowledge of the truth throughout the history of the united states. and that statistic, would lead me to assume that i can no longer trust reported information without irrefutable evidence. That statistic doesnt exist though... i wonder why. BUT somehow theres always been statistics taken of black crime rates through the years so that everyone can have 'evidence' to be scared of black people. So that makes me think, whos taking the stats? people that want you to know the truth? i doubt it

I grew up in the states and went to a pretty intense school where i took honors and AP US history and learned way too much about this kinda stuff.

---------- Post added at 11:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:35 AM ----------

Originally Posted by Jason

its not so much that i buy into it
i just dont really have a reason not to assume that reported info is false

but you have reason to assume based on statistics of black crime rates, that blacks are more threatening than whites?

[Just C]

I was thinking profit from prisons but I didn't want to touch on it as I wasn't 100% up on it.

But you know there was a case In Scotland where officers were classifying more major crimes as minor crimes? Thus lowering the crime rate in the upper tier. That's just 1 incident and the political ripples it has are huge. Keep him in power. Major crime is down. You get my point.

[Just C]

I was thinking profit from prisons but I didn't want to touch on it as I wasn't 100% up on it.

But you know there was a case In Scotland where officers were classifying more major crimes as minor crimes? Thus lowering the crime rate in the upper tier. That's just 1 incident and the political ripples it has are huge. Keep him in power. Major crime is down. You get my point.

[Just C]

Who's to say that come the time these officers doctored crime rates that there wasn't an election. The opposition of the man is proposing job cuts for police. While the man already in charge is proposing for funding and an increase in officers. You make the guy backing your cause look better. I know it's slightly extreme but you're talking bout peoples livelihoods here.

[Just C]

Who's to say that come the time these officers doctored crime rates that there wasn't an election. The opposition of the man is proposing job cuts for police. While the man already in charge is proposing for funding and an increase in officers. You make the guy backing your cause look better. I know it's slightly extreme but you're talking bout peoples livelihoods here.

[Just C]

Originally Posted by Jason

slightly??

Published on Thursday 20 June 2002 01:00 CRIMES across Edinburgh and the Lothians are being kept off official statistics, an internal police report has revealed. An investigation found that almost 50 per cent of crimes, mainly vandalism and minor street offences, but some as serious as assault, robbery and fire-raising, are not appearing in the force’s figures because they are being wrongly labelled more minor "suspicious occurrences." It also found there was under-recording of crime, serious assaults were wrongly being classified as minor and that crimes were being labelled "no crimes". The report of the investigation, carried out by four senior officers and obtained by the Evening News, says "an inference might be drawn from these results that crime figures are being hidden as suspicious occurrences to reduce their impact on overall crime figures." The audit’s primary finding was that there was "under-recording, non- recording, and improper recording" of crime. Lothian and Borders Chief Constable Paddy Tomkins today admitted deficiencies had been identified in the way figures were collected but said the force had already acted on key recommendations." "Nothing in the report undermines our position as one of the most effective police forces in the United Kingdom nor does it suggest any unethical conduct. It was an issue of interpretation which is now being addressed." Government inspectors raised concerns that the level of crime in Lothian and Borders was being under-reported as long ago as 1999. There were also questions raised about the figures’ accuracy internally and inquiries at the time backed this up. Then, earlier this year, alarm bells were triggered again when Lothian and Borders Police recorded an overall detection rate of 44.9 per cent - their highest in 25 years. Aware that the figures could be open to public scrutiny, Tom Wood, who has overall responsibility for crime within the force, ordered a thorough investigation into the way crime is recorded. The investigation, carried out by four officers from Lothian and Borders’ own Force Inspectorate has revealed a damning picture that certain categories of crime are being improperly recorded and do not appear in crime figures, that crimes are going un-recorded, and other crimes are being categorised as less serious than they were or being wrongly classified as "no crime". The report, a copy of which has been seen by the Evening News, admits it could be inferred that these practices are to keep crime figures down overall. The investigation showed that up to 50 per cent of crimes, some as serious as assault, robbery and fire-raising, are not appearing in figures because they are being wrongly labelled more minor "suspicious occurrences" and thus don’t appear in annual figures. Where crimes have clearly taken place they have been logged as "suspicious occurrences". It is thought a high volume of those crimes logged as "suspicious occurrences" are crimes of vandalism and malicious damage. However, crimes of serious assault, in some cases where victims have been stabbed and hospitalised, officers have downgraded those to "minor assaults". The inspection team picked the month of October last year at random and looked at the 1038 incidents classified as suspicious occurrences. It found an astounding 491, or 47.3 per cent, were "without question" crimes which had been effectively removed from statistics for no good reason. The report says: "Whilst many of these incidents related to vandalism or malicious mischief, either to vehicles or property, this was not always the case and a number of other crimes types, some serious, were identified, including cases of theft by housebreaking, assault and robbery, fire-raising and assaulting someone in their own home." It goes on: "An inference which might be drawn from these results is that crimes are being hidden as suspicious occurrences to reduce their impact on overall crime figures. This [evidence] may suggest that attempts have been made to reduce the overall level of some crimes, particularly ‘volume’ crimes such as vandalism." In the divisions that recorded the highest proportion of crimes as suspicious occurrences, it was discovered the trend was directly attributed to guidance from crime managers, who instructed officers to consider aspects of criminal intent when investigating damage to property . The "guidance" stated that in the absence of an intention to damage, there should either be no crime reports, and in cases where there is doubt about the cause of damage, or the reported circumstances cannot be confirmed, a suspicious occurrence report should be created. A memo sent out by one divisional crime manager stated a crime report must not be submitted where there is "no evidence of malicious intent". One police officer quoted in the report said: "It’s got to a ridiculous stage. I was dealing with a broken window the other day. It’s been recorded as a suspicious occurrence, because those are the instructions. What do they think happened, that the window broke itself?" The report recommends that the "suspicious occurrence" practice be removed as a matter of priority. Ironically, the report has also highlighted the fact that, at the same time while crime is being under-reported generally, pressure is being put on junior police recruits by supervisors and more experienced officer to report as many assaults on fellow officers as possible - even when they have not actually been injured - and particularly in cases where it is believed an accused person is likely to make a complaint against the force. The report states: "It is assumed that this would place officers, subject to a complaint, in a stronger position to defend the allegations made against them." In addition, a number of cases have been logged as serious police assaults when in fact it is a member of the public who has been injured, and there are cases of duplicate recording. The report also found that 22 complaints of minor assault were examined by the Crime Strategy and Central Input Section using the current Scottish Executive definition of crime recording, and more than half of those were re-classified to "serious." In one example found by the team one victim who suffered serious lacerations and was admitted to hospital was recorded as a minor instead of serious assault. In another a victim was stabbed then slashed with a knife - again it was recorded as a minor assault. It was also discovered that thefts of mobile phones had been classified as "no crime" without further explanation as to why. The decision to classify the thefts as "no crime" is at odds with the policy of Lothian and Borders Police. The report says a "crime champion" should be appointed from within the force’s executive. At the moment the Tom Wood currently has overall responsibility for crime management. The inspection team has also said the force would benefit from a published crime strategy that would lay the path for future development of effective crime management. The inspection team recommend the changes be implemented as soon as possible. In response Chief Constable Paddy Tomkins told the Evening News: "We identified deficiencies in the recording system earlier this year and appointed one of our most senior and experienced officers to examine the process and recommend a course of action to rectify matters. This was part of our effort to continually improve the effectiveness of what we do. "The report pinpointed difficulties in interpretation of the guidelines for recording crime in Scotland. This was particularly evident over definitions in some areas of crime for example the boundary between a minor assault and serious assault and the line between less serious crimes of malicious damage. "Accurate crime recording is as essential to effective policing as is good quality intelligence. We therefore place great emphasis on making sure our systems are both rigorous and will bear close scrutiny. "We immediately shared our findings with the HMI for Scotland and other forces and have revised procedures in Lothian and Borders Police in line with the recommendations of the report. "These include issuing clear and unequivocal guidance on recording practices, appointing one executive officer to be a Registrar to guarantee quality standards and, through ACPOS and the HMI, suggesting the establishment of a National Crime Recording Standard, similar to that which operates in England and Wales. "The guidelines for the recording of crime are broadly structured and are open to professional interpretation.

If the severity of crimes are open to 'professional Interpretation' how can you fully trust the stats? You can't.

---------- Post added at 04:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:01 PM ----------

Propaganda, the coordinated attempt to influence public opinion through the use of media,

Propaganda is a form of communication that is aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position. Propaganda is usually repeated ...

Propaganda, the coordinated attempt to influence public opinion through the use of media, was skillfully used by the NSDAP in the years leading up to and during Adolf Hitler's leadership of Germany (1933–1945). National Socialist propaganda provided a crucial instrument for acquiring and maintaining power, and for the implementation of their policies, including the pursuit of total war and the extermination of millions of people in the Holocaust.
The pervasive use of propaganda by the Nazis is largely responsible for the word "propaganda" itself acquiring its present negative connotations.[1]

Statistics are mainly used through the media. Papers, Radio, Daily News "Figures show today that there are 3 million unemployed in the uk"

The Nazi regime realised that if they pushed it enough that they could use the media to better suit there cause.

This is nothing new. I don't want to get too deep into it but I would have thought history would have taught all of us to take anything GOV produced with the grain of salt it deserves. I'm not even saying crime rates ect are doctored on a large scale. I'm just saying it is possible.

[Just C]

Originally Posted by Jason

slightly??

Published on Thursday 20 June 2002 01:00 CRIMES across Edinburgh and the Lothians are being kept off official statistics, an internal police report has revealed. An investigation found that almost 50 per cent of crimes, mainly vandalism and minor street offences, but some as serious as assault, robbery and fire-raising, are not appearing in the force’s figures because they are being wrongly labelled more minor "suspicious occurrences." It also found there was under-recording of crime, serious assaults were wrongly being classified as minor and that crimes were being labelled "no crimes". The report of the investigation, carried out by four senior officers and obtained by the Evening News, says "an inference might be drawn from these results that crime figures are being hidden as suspicious occurrences to reduce their impact on overall crime figures." The audit’s primary finding was that there was "under-recording, non- recording, and improper recording" of crime. Lothian and Borders Chief Constable Paddy Tomkins today admitted deficiencies had been identified in the way figures were collected but said the force had already acted on key recommendations." "Nothing in the report undermines our position as one of the most effective police forces in the United Kingdom nor does it suggest any unethical conduct. It was an issue of interpretation which is now being addressed." Government inspectors raised concerns that the level of crime in Lothian and Borders was being under-reported as long ago as 1999. There were also questions raised about the figures’ accuracy internally and inquiries at the time backed this up. Then, earlier this year, alarm bells were triggered again when Lothian and Borders Police recorded an overall detection rate of 44.9 per cent - their highest in 25 years. Aware that the figures could be open to public scrutiny, Tom Wood, who has overall responsibility for crime within the force, ordered a thorough investigation into the way crime is recorded. The investigation, carried out by four officers from Lothian and Borders’ own Force Inspectorate has revealed a damning picture that certain categories of crime are being improperly recorded and do not appear in crime figures, that crimes are going un-recorded, and other crimes are being categorised as less serious than they were or being wrongly classified as "no crime". The report, a copy of which has been seen by the Evening News, admits it could be inferred that these practices are to keep crime figures down overall. The investigation showed that up to 50 per cent of crimes, some as serious as assault, robbery and fire-raising, are not appearing in figures because they are being wrongly labelled more minor "suspicious occurrences" and thus don’t appear in annual figures. Where crimes have clearly taken place they have been logged as "suspicious occurrences". It is thought a high volume of those crimes logged as "suspicious occurrences" are crimes of vandalism and malicious damage. However, crimes of serious assault, in some cases where victims have been stabbed and hospitalised, officers have downgraded those to "minor assaults". The inspection team picked the month of October last year at random and looked at the 1038 incidents classified as suspicious occurrences. It found an astounding 491, or 47.3 per cent, were "without question" crimes which had been effectively removed from statistics for no good reason. The report says: "Whilst many of these incidents related to vandalism or malicious mischief, either to vehicles or property, this was not always the case and a number of other crimes types, some serious, were identified, including cases of theft by housebreaking, assault and robbery, fire-raising and assaulting someone in their own home." It goes on: "An inference which might be drawn from these results is that crimes are being hidden as suspicious occurrences to reduce their impact on overall crime figures. This [evidence] may suggest that attempts have been made to reduce the overall level of some crimes, particularly ‘volume’ crimes such as vandalism." In the divisions that recorded the highest proportion of crimes as suspicious occurrences, it was discovered the trend was directly attributed to guidance from crime managers, who instructed officers to consider aspects of criminal intent when investigating damage to property . The "guidance" stated that in the absence of an intention to damage, there should either be no crime reports, and in cases where there is doubt about the cause of damage, or the reported circumstances cannot be confirmed, a suspicious occurrence report should be created. A memo sent out by one divisional crime manager stated a crime report must not be submitted where there is "no evidence of malicious intent". One police officer quoted in the report said: "It’s got to a ridiculous stage. I was dealing with a broken window the other day. It’s been recorded as a suspicious occurrence, because those are the instructions. What do they think happened, that the window broke itself?" The report recommends that the "suspicious occurrence" practice be removed as a matter of priority. Ironically, the report has also highlighted the fact that, at the same time while crime is being under-reported generally, pressure is being put on junior police recruits by supervisors and more experienced officer to report as many assaults on fellow officers as possible - even when they have not actually been injured - and particularly in cases where it is believed an accused person is likely to make a complaint against the force. The report states: "It is assumed that this would place officers, subject to a complaint, in a stronger position to defend the allegations made against them." In addition, a number of cases have been logged as serious police assaults when in fact it is a member of the public who has been injured, and there are cases of duplicate recording. The report also found that 22 complaints of minor assault were examined by the Crime Strategy and Central Input Section using the current Scottish Executive definition of crime recording, and more than half of those were re-classified to "serious." In one example found by the team one victim who suffered serious lacerations and was admitted to hospital was recorded as a minor instead of serious assault. In another a victim was stabbed then slashed with a knife - again it was recorded as a minor assault. It was also discovered that thefts of mobile phones had been classified as "no crime" without further explanation as to why. The decision to classify the thefts as "no crime" is at odds with the policy of Lothian and Borders Police. The report says a "crime champion" should be appointed from within the force’s executive. At the moment the Tom Wood currently has overall responsibility for crime management. The inspection team has also said the force would benefit from a published crime strategy that would lay the path for future development of effective crime management. The inspection team recommend the changes be implemented as soon as possible. In response Chief Constable Paddy Tomkins told the Evening News: "We identified deficiencies in the recording system earlier this year and appointed one of our most senior and experienced officers to examine the process and recommend a course of action to rectify matters. This was part of our effort to continually improve the effectiveness of what we do. "The report pinpointed difficulties in interpretation of the guidelines for recording crime in Scotland. This was particularly evident over definitions in some areas of crime for example the boundary between a minor assault and serious assault and the line between less serious crimes of malicious damage. "Accurate crime recording is as essential to effective policing as is good quality intelligence. We therefore place great emphasis on making sure our systems are both rigorous and will bear close scrutiny. "We immediately shared our findings with the HMI for Scotland and other forces and have revised procedures in Lothian and Borders Police in line with the recommendations of the report. "These include issuing clear and unequivocal guidance on recording practices, appointing one executive officer to be a Registrar to guarantee quality standards and, through ACPOS and the HMI, suggesting the establishment of a National Crime Recording Standard, similar to that which operates in England and Wales. "The guidelines for the recording of crime are broadly structured and are open to professional interpretation.

If the severity of crimes are open to 'professional Interpretation' how can you fully trust the stats? You can't.

---------- Post added at 04:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:01 PM ----------

Propaganda, the coordinated attempt to influence public opinion through the use of media,

Propaganda is a form of communication that is aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position. Propaganda is usually repeated ...

Propaganda, the coordinated attempt to influence public opinion through the use of media, was skillfully used by the NSDAP in the years leading up to and during Adolf Hitler's leadership of Germany (1933–1945). National Socialist propaganda provided a crucial instrument for acquiring and maintaining power, and for the implementation of their policies, including the pursuit of total war and the extermination of millions of people in the Holocaust.
The pervasive use of propaganda by the Nazis is largely responsible for the word "propaganda" itself acquiring its present negative connotations.[1]

Statistics are mainly used through the media. Papers, Radio, Daily News "Figures show today that there are 3 million unemployed in the uk"

The Nazi regime realised that if they pushed it enough that they could use the media to better suit there cause.

This is nothing new. I don't want to get too deep into it but I would have thought history would have taught all of us to take anything GOV produced with the grain of salt it deserves. I'm not even saying crime rates ect are doctored on a large scale. I'm just saying it is possible.