This is a story which is unclear.
The police are saying that training was needed. The problem is that if the evidence is that someone is somewhere under the water but the location is unclear then that would be the argument - not an absence of training.
I think this is something which needs a bit of clarification. The initial story implied that common sense was being squeezed out. It is now unclear, but the statements issued by Greater Manchester Police do not properly stack up.
The police are saying that training was needed. The problem is that if the evidence is that someone is somewhere under the water but the location is unclear then that would be the argument - not an absence of training.
I think this is something which needs a bit of clarification. The initial story implied that common sense was being squeezed out. It is now unclear, but the statements issued by Greater Manchester Police do not properly stack up.
Comments