"Evening All............."

Kent Walton

In the late 1950s  Saturday night in the little terraced  house where I lived tended to follow a similar format. Our little black and white TV standing in the corner would be the centre of attraction and I can remember, with considerable nostalgia, the warm cosy feelings (especially on a winter’s night) as my mother, dad and I gathered round the coal fire to watch some of our favourite programmes. I can remember, too, that at about  7 o’clock I would be dispatched to the local fish and chip shop to buy fish and chips which we would all eat as we watched the flickering black and white screen – TV was still a very wonderful thing to ordinary people in those far off days!

Billy Two Rivers

Two programmes, in particular, I can remember looking forward to.  At about 8 o’clock there was wrestling – commentated on by someone called Kent Walton. Kent Walton had, to my young ears, an exotic voice – sounding very trendy and American – I was wrong, having just looked him up on Google he was oft mistaken for an American but in reality was English born and bred!

And again!

 I would sit there on the floor, in front of the fire, eating my fish and chips and get very excited as I watched strange looking men with strange sounding names grapple and wrestle with each other – the crowd in the background howling their approval as Kent Walton dispensed knowing comments about this particular wrestling hold or tactic that was being employed. Of all the wrestlers I watched, my favourite was one who gloried in the name of Billy Two Rivers - a red Indian. And, indeed, he was a member of the Mohawk nation. He would appear before the bout dressed in full Red Indian regalia and when he stripped down to his shorts would display an exotic Mohawk haircut. Billy was my favourite – he was always portrayed as the “good guy” – he never wrestled “dirty”, never got into scraps with the referee or abused the crowd. One of his adversaries was the famous Jackie Pallo, another was Mick McManus, these two always took on the “bad guys” role – and as Billy  wrestled I would be wrestling with him, and hoping against hope that he would overcome these evil “bad guys” to win! All very contrived, of course, but to me (and, I suspect, much of the nation in those innocent times) it was exciting stuff and important too – the good guy always wins – that is right and proper. It was, to young minds, a life lesson, an example - to use modern terms a positive role model.

Jackie Pallo
One of the "bad guys"

Another "bad guy" - Mick McManus

The other programme that we all enjoyed was before the fish and chips! – and much of the nation tuned into it.  Even today, when I hear its theme tune, I am transported back to those nights around the fire and the fish and chips and Billy Two Rivers! I see in my mind’s eye a dark, official looking doorway with a lamp over it. And out of the door steps a policeman, his helmet smartly on his head, his hands clasped behinds his back. He looks into the camera, smiles, nods his head and says “Evening All.........”,  and then launches into a little explanation of what he has been up to during the past week.  And as his words and picture faded  we were shown his week by actors acting out the story. “Dixon of Dock Green” - as the words of the theme tune reminded us -  was “An ordinary copper patrolling his beat around Dock Green, ‘Hello, Mister Dixon!' shout the kids in the street, Around Dock Green.........” George Dixon (the actor Jack Warner) played the role of Dixon for many years. Each week’s episode told of the happenings in fictional Dock Green, London. It told of George’s family and how George had been involved in some way in foiling the evil intentions of some bad guys or perhaps helped someone in difficulty. It was all very low key stuff – old ladies who had had their handbag snatched, cats stuck up trees, incompetent local criminals, shop assistants who had stolen from the till because they had no money to feed their children and the like. And George would always be there to sort out the mess, restore order, provide a kind word and ensure that it all ended with a smile. At the end of each half hour programme, reassuring George would stand on the police station doorstep again and bid us all good night and sleep safely.  He would provide a short homily to remind us of the moral of the story and to behave, do well, look out for old folk and the like and then touch his helmet in salute to us, the audience – to me and millions of others around the nation - and say  “Evening all - be good”. Dixon left everybody, including me, with a feeling that all was well with the world, the good guys will win, the bad guys will get their just deserts.  He passed on positive values, he stood for respect and manners. He was a policeman – a man to be trusted - gentle, mature, professional. He was to be respected and listened to – because throughout the episode these were the qualities that he had displayed to the victims of crime, the tearaways and the hardened criminals – and these qualities always seemed to win through – damage was repaired, the victim of crime made happy, the old lady’s handbag safely recovered intact, the shop lifter who stole to feed her children pardoned and George would find a way of helping her, the criminal caught and punished but at the same time reformed. The good guy won.  The world was a very innocent place – and we all learned something about goodness!

"Evening All....be good"
Jack Warner as PC Dixon

All these memories flashed through my mind over the weekend when I read a comment by a senior police officer.  He said that senior policemen are concerned that there are far fewer young policemen being recruited – there has been a dramatic down turn in the last few years. There are a number of well established reasons for this but, it was suggested, a significant and worrying  consequence was that it would impact upon the police’s relationships with the young.  Young policemen (in their early twenties) had, I read, an important role – they could relate to the gang culture of teenagers, they spoke the same language, they “understood”, they could win the confidence of potential young offenders. I am not an expert but I’m sure, in today’s world, this is true.

How far we have come from the world of George Dixon – he spoke benignly to young offenders and tearaways rather like a father figure. It all sounds very “naff” today.  I know this was only TV – maybe in real life it was not so. - but the image portrayed was of the young and the potentially criminal being guided to something better by the wisdom and kindness of those in charge – be it policeman, teacher, doctor, parent or grandparent. Today, sadly this seems not so true – if the Chief Policeman  mentioned above is correct, then the way to win the hearts and minds of the young and violent today is to meet them at their level – to talk their language.

Modern policing

This is reflected in police programmes and films - gratuitous violence is the theme – both by the criminal and sadly, the police. Nor is this limited to films and TV. Read virtually any of the top police crime writers – Ian Rankin, John Harvey, Stuart Macbride and many others and you will soon believe that not only do the police have to deal with violent criminals capable of the most macabre crimes but are themselves characterised by hard drinking, foul language, violent behaviour, in fighting between policemen and police departments,  broken marriages, sexism, racist or many other questionable motives. There are, of course exceptions to this – watch a TV police drama like “Morse” or “Lewis” and we return again to good guy/bad guy world but sadly, so far has the agenda moved, that these – like Dixon of Dock Green - look increasingly old fashioned and out of touch.

I’m sure that the reality of the police world is not as the TV, Hollywood scriptwriters and authors of best selling crime fiction would have us believe. But, I’m equally sure that the world has changed and gone are the days of George Dixon when the bad guy said “All right Mr Dixon, it’s a fair cop – lock me up”. But for me, it is sad that they are portrayed in this negative way. And what is, I feel, especially unfortunate is that the police seem to allow themselves to be portrayed in such a manner and maybe add to it. Over the past few years we have had what seems a non-step series of “exposures” about alleged police brutality, doubtful convictions, sexism and racism operating in the police force, “bent coppers”, aggressive policing and other police scandals. In recent months the policing of the  Hillsborough disaster, the fallout from the Steven Lawrence murder, the various police failures related to the News International   affair, the continuing recent disagreements about the Andrew Mitchell “plebgate” affair which cast doubts on the veracity of police evidence and,  waiting on the horizon, the policing of the 1980s miner’s strike. These  have all lowered the esteem that the public have for the police.

Dixon's policing

Times, indeed, have changed. Policing, I am sure, is infinitely more complex and demanding than it was in the 1950s. I am, undeniably, looking back through rose coloured glasses – it was probably never like I imagine it or remember it. Society has changed and seems to have become more violent and demanding. Our expectations have changed – once, popular culture has it, policemen would reprimand youngsters with “a clip around the ear” – clearly any officer trying that today would soon be himself in the dock for child abuse!  Equally, whatever my anxieties about modern policing, it is not a job that I would wish to do. I only have to walk through Nottingham’s city centre on any evening of the week to feel threatened and uncomfortable at the levels of drunkenness, the huge numbers of milling youngsters oblivious to other people, the casual aggression that can suddenly flare up or the constant sound of police sirens as every few hundred yards it seems flashing blue lights herald some problem.  It is the police that have to clear up society’s ills. It is they too, who every day, put themselves on the line and of whom we have great – probably totally unreasonable - expectations when we are in dire need.  Clearly, WS Gilbert was not wrong almost a century and a half ago when he wrote his song for the Pirates of Penzance  “A policeman’s lot is not a happy one.......” – it could not be more true today. No, good old George Dixon could not today dispense his little homilies or benignly pat some young villain on the head and tell him not to do it again and all would be well.  It simply wouldn’t work.

But, I reflected, as I pondered all this when, all those years ago I sat as a ten year old and watched PC Dixon, I knew that if I was in trouble I would, and indeed should, turn to a policeman for help because rightly or wrongly he was perceived as a caring and upright professional who would act on my behalf and always act in my interest. He would be the good guy.  If I were a ten year old today I’m not sure that what I see on TV or on the news would fill me with the same confidence to seek help from what I might perceive as a violent, aggressive, hard drinking and swearing officer. Sad, but for me, true.

Slightly intimidating? I'd think twice before I would want
 to approach this man for help - for me, he oozes aggression.

What is for me sadder is that over the years the police seem to have done little or nothing to redress this negative perception.  I have never heard the police complain about them being portrayed as aggressive in police crime programmes or in books by an author like  Ian Rankin – indeed, I read recently a Rankin book being recommended by a police officer as being “a good read”. When I watch the occasional TV “fly on the wall” documentary about police work, all too often I see policemen with shaven heads and sporting tattoos.  Only, it seems, their uniform distinguishes them from the violent people they are pursuing. When I walk around the airport I see heavily armed  men in jack boots, short sleeved shirts displaying tattooed arms and wearing  baseball caps on their often shaven heads. I presume this is to intimidate any would be terrorist – well it certainly intimidates me and gives me a very negative view of the police force. Whenever I see this I am instantly reminded of a meeting that Pat and I attended about twenty years ago. Our village “bobby” – yes, we had one in those days - was giving a talk to interested residents about home security and helping to prevent crime in the village. During his talk he outlined things that we ought to be aware of – and one of them, I remember, was youngsters wearing baseball caps – especially wearing them back to front! This, he suggested, was a common trend amongst wayward youngsters. Even in those days this was an outrageous statement and although as a teacher dealing with youngsters I knew he had a point, I was uncomfortable with his stereotyping of young people. Nowadays, of course, the wearing of baseball caps is high fashion – on the cat walks, amongst the jet set, among young royalty and sadly, even prime ministers and Presidents of America sport them.  But, so too, do gangland drug dealers and others identified as young criminals.  Presumably this is why it is now not uncommon to see heavily armed police officers wearing them – it’s a statement of toughness and intimidation. Maybe it’s part of that same policy that the police chief was referring to over the weekend - to “communicate with the young on their terms”, talking to the young in a language they understand.  Sadly, I prefer to call it sinking to the lowest level. It seems to me perverse and totally the wrong message to send out - to reassure the bad guy that although the police are on the opposite side of the fence they will compete on equal terms with the bad guy – we can be as aggressive, as intimidating or as objectionable as you. It reminds me of the old schoolboy taunt “My brother is bigger than your brother........”- a constant escalation of potential aggression and violence which feeds on itself.

Bernard Hogan-Howe

On the plus side I was heartened to read a few weeks ago an announcement by the the policeman in charge of the London Met. Unfortunately, he also opened a hornet’s nest.  He announced that policemen should not display tattoos – because, he said, “they damaged the professional image” of policemen.  Metropolitan Police Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe said policemen must register details of any body art with line managers, or risk being thrown out of the force. It was good to feel that he was anxious to portray a more positive image – an image built upon being a mature and responsible member of society, a sort of modern day George Dixon, rather than a tough bruiser in uniform. 

Policing Nottingham

Sadly, police representatives didn’t agree with him – the Chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation described the policy as a "heavy handed" and there was much criticism from enraged journalists and readers in the press. Now, maybe it is a bit heavy handed and maybe it does offend the senses and the personal liberties of policemen. Maybe it won’t help one jot in making the met more efficient and able to solve more crimes – but it just might make children and many in society a bit more willing to respect and look up to a more positive role model for that is what it is. If the Police Federation can’t see this then not only are they blinkered but they are also doing their professional image a grave disservice. Ask any psychologist or sociologist, watch any teacher dealing with a class of potentially disruptive children, ask any paediatrician and the message that you will get back is the same – violence and aggression breeds violence and aggression. The abused child can easily become the child abuser; the teacher who stands in front of the class and shouts or beats children virtually always has a noisy and aggressive class; violent criminals have all too frequently been the product of violent families and home life.......the spiral continues. By the same token those same people, the psychologist, the teacher, the sociologist will tell you that positive role models, inspire confidence, participation and positive behaviour. It may seem very idealistic and far removed from the drunken brawls that I have no doubt will be kicking off on Nottingham’s city centre streets this snowy evening and which some poor police officer will have to try to sort out – but it is an ideal to aim for and which, sadly, I don’t see too often happening.

Very intimidating - baseball caps, guns
and look carefully and you'll see the tattoo

George Dixon and Billy Two Rivers were the “good guys” from a world now, sadly, long gone. Their methods, I accept, wouldn’t work today. Ten year old boys are far more street wise and cynical than I ever was, criminals probably intrinsically more violent, society as a whole possibly more aggressive and demanding. But at the moment we seem to be sinking into a morass of increasing aggression and the policy seems to be one of lowering ourselves to be like the bad guys in order to defeat them. The bad guy carries a gun  and  so will we, the bad guy looks like a thug – and we will too, the bad guy sports his tattoo just as we can,  the bad guy puts his baseball cap onto his shaven, bull necked head and so can we. And so the aggressive posturing  escalates. Rather than being something for youngsters and society to look up to the goalposts are being moved inexorably downwards.

Dock Green Police - the "good guys"

Billy Two Rivers, I remember, defeated the "evil" Mick McManus by fair means – he didn’t stoop to the nasty tricks of McManus. Yes, wrestling  was a con and we were all naive  – but  he and it, together with PC Dixon, reminded me every Saturday night, as I ate my fish and chips and sat by the blazing coal fire of the truth, of the ideal - that good can overcome evil, that the good guy wins because he has the better ideas and right on his side. And we, and I, loved good old George and Billy for it. Maybe our modern policing, TV script writers, crime fiction writers and Hollywood producers should remember that!