Comments on: UPDATE On The “Cannabis Odour Is Carcinogenic” Story

By: Frazer GreenThumb Giles

Frazer GreenThumb Giles — Mon, 06 Aug 2012 14:57:00 +0000

I had a police officer say the exact same thing to me when i was busted with a plant. I was told by him in a matter of fact way, that it could cause skin problems when you touch it and spores can cause breathing problems.

I couldn’t help but laugh. As soon as i got out the station
I looked it up and just as i thought complete BS.
He was an alright officer, nice enough bloke but i think he learn’t more from me that day, than he taught me.

By: Focusonpeace

Focusonpeace — Thu, 03 May 2012 13:26:00 +0000

LOL made me laugh

By: Maharg Smith

Maharg Smith — Wed, 02 May 2012 22:49:00 +0000

Police in Northampton discover 72500 cannabis plants.

Acting Detective Superintendent-Inspector Chief Whoopee Longname said
“The plants with a street value of 6.4 billion pounds were discovered as part of Operation Album a combined operation with the School Dinners Service to maintain the integrity of the force after the “carcinogenic cancer smells” debacle”
Two small children and a babysitter were taken into custody and a siamese cat was questioned at the scene.
Acting Detective Superintendent-Inspector Chief Whoopee Longname said”The plants were hidden in a 4″by 3″ black and white photograph,a common ruse that babysitting gangs in increasing numbers employed to avoid detection imprisonment and loss of earnings.The discovery of the photograph sends out a message to the people of Northamptonshire that
pictures of large amounts of cannabis can give off musty odours which arent very harmful”
A neighbour who didnt want to be named said “I live directly across the road and have seen the curtains move sometimes twice a day”
Operation Album has been running for 8 months and these latest arrests bring the total to three.Police sources say that the total may be six if they test positive for schizophrenia.
The cat,who cannot be named for non collar reasons,refused to comment but did ask for a fish.

By: steve a

steve a — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:15:00 +0000

I don’t see why you should apologise for the police telling lies.

However I do understand the need to do it by the rules and by this means from a rope of their own making shall they hang.

Other than it delaying the telling of the truth I really don’t have much of a problem with keeping to the rules. As any Old Skool Trades Unionist will tell you; “working to rule” can cost the company 10 times more than a strike. Not as dramatic or newsworthy perhaps but much more effective if handled right and you don’t have to stand on a cold wet picket line with no wages to make it happen ether.

If you can somehow manage to change your apology into a complaint for being put in that position by them telling lies in the first place so much the better.

Bollox are always considered to be a delicacy, we should dine on theirs everyday of the week.

By: Peter Reynolds

Peter Reynolds — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 08:34:00 +0000

I have had to apologise to both the PCC and the police for the publication of links to Ben Goldacre’s article on the CLEAR site.

They have accepted that this was done by commenters and not by CLEAR.

It is just no way to behave to publish private correspondence in any circumstances. It breaches every rule of etiquette, procedure and manners. I’m amazed that a Guardian journalist would behave in such a way.

Ben Goldacre was fed this story by Phil Stovell who quite openly said that he was referring our story to him. CLEAR has been following official complaints procedures throughout and we will continue to deal with this is an appropriate and responsible way.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 23:50:00 +0000

Thanks Peter. But is what Dr Goldacre put online actual official correspondence relating to a specific registered complaint which would /should follow any rules set out by either the IPCC or PCC?
I didn’t think that he had made an official complaint, just asking the people involved what they had to say. If there is no official complaint that is being addressed by the correspondence then surely no rules have been breeched.

If what was published was part of an ongoing investigation into an official complaint then I would agree. But as the corespondence was not part of an official complaint at that time then surely it makes little difference to any future complaint made by another party on the same topic other than this non-official correspondence but which then could then be used as evidence?

Everything so far has been pre-official complaint. If Dr G were to make an official complaint, could the e-mails from the police and the newspapers be used? or would (because of them being published) they not be allowed?

By: Peter Reynolds

Peter Reynolds — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 23:06:00 +0000

I’m simply relating the terms and conditions which apply to all such complaints procedures. There are rules of engagement common to both PCC and IPCC which are based on common courtesy.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 22:38:00 +0000

Surely if anything it has done nothing more than to show the ins and outs of how a query/complaint is dealt with and in what manner? How has the fact that certain people involved have had their correspondence published damaged the overall complaints process? The police complaints or the press complaints process?

By: Peter Reynolds

Peter Reynolds — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:08:00 +0000

CLEAR dealt with another similar complaint here:

http://clear-uk.org/pcc-complaint-herts-and-essex-observer-17th-may-2011/

By: Peter Reynolds

Peter Reynolds — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:07:00 +0000

I’m fully aware of the content of the private correspondence between the police and the newspapers. That it has been published has helped not at all. In fact such indiscretion has seriously damaged the complaints process.

Private correspondence should not be published by anyone who wants to see these sort of events properly dealt with.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:29:00 +0000

I still have a sneaking suspicion that this is being promulgated on a police training course somewhere. I saw a comment somewhere else last week from someone who had been busted saying that the policewoman had warned him about dangerous spores from cannabis getting into skin and lungs. Can’t remember where I read it :^(

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:22:00 +0000

Just imagine how many lies they would get away with if it weren’t for you Peter!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:21:00 +0000

“The information was provided in good faith”
If supplying known bullshit/wrong information is seen as “good faith”, I’d hate to see bad faith.

“Once cannabis plants reach their final stages of maturity, apparently the odour they give out has carcinogenic properties and officers – who deal with these plants using ventilation masks and protective suits – want to advise of the health risks of having these plants in properties, especially where young children may be present

(if you go with this line, an expert opinion from someone on the health side would be expedient).”

Source: http://bengoldacre.posterous.com/police-are-warning-that-the-smell-of-cannabis