Anorak News | Specials Investigation: The Mail Points The Finger At Nisha Patel

Specials Investigation: The Mail Points The Finger At Nisha Patel

by | 7th, June 2008

nisha-patel.jpgA PICTURE of “MURDERED WPC” Nisha Patel and the question: “Why wasn’t she fired for running vice girl agency?”

Murdered on her husband’s orders, this WPC [a special constable] was lauded by Met boss Ian Blair. But as a chilling Mail investigation reveals, she was a vice madam with a criminal record. Worse, the police knew all about it. So why WAS Nisha Patel unsackable?

Let’s investigate. Exchanging participation in sexual activities for money or other goods in the UK is not illegal, so even if she was a “vice madam” why should she have been sacked?
Her younger brother, Katen, tells us: “There is no evidence whatsoever that Nisha was directly involved in the escort agency.”

But the Mail investigates. It says: “The fact is that there is little doubt that she was involved with the vice ring while serving as a special constable in the Met.”

But some doubt. And she can’t defend herself because she was murdered on the orders of her husband Fadi Nasri.

A Met spokesman said last night: “Following a Department of Professional Standards investigation, no criminality was identified.”

So was she unsackable? The Mail says that “in multi-cultural Britain”, the police had a reason to keep her in the force”.

The Mail’s investigation sees it speak with one detective who worked on her case. Says he: “As a woman of Asian origin, Nisha ticked all the boxes for police recruitment policy, so a blind eye was turned to her obvious wrongdoing. Politically, she was just too valuable to sack.”

Says the Mail: “For, as we shall see, the evidence of laxity – if not rule-bending – to suit the Met’s politically correct agenda and accommodate a clearly unsuitable officer seems irrefutable.”

If? Seems?

At least one member of her family believes Nasri pushed her into becoming a special constable precisely so he would have privileged access to police intelligence.

Believes? At least one, or just one?

And now the crux of the Mail’s argument:

In the Metropolitan Police, a recruitment drive has seen the percentage of specials from ethnic minorities almost double in recent years. Yet still more are wanted to meet the Met’s diversity targets.

Judging by the extraordinary case of Nisha Patel, the question must be asked: Will senior officers overlook unpalatable truths to achieve those targets?

What these unpalatable truths are remains uncertain…

Posted: 7th, June 2008 | In: Tabloids Comment | TrackBack | Permalink