OT EVACUATED | Device signed as having been recovered, could NOT be detected by sniffer dogs

Zoo said:
Facts would indicate that the external company contractor majorly blundered.
Click to expand...
Of course they did, but as we've been discussing for 20 pages, United should have found it in the intervening 4 days

Now if it doesn't contain anything that can be found by sniffer dogs, and was in a place that no one was likely to find it... Well maybe United are truly blameless.
 
pcaming said:
Wasn't the reason behind reaching late for the spurs game due to police redirecting the coach?
Click to expand...
Yes, they redirected us to a road with a bridge our coach couldn't pass under.
 
Well i think that security firm will no longer be used. G4S may be available though.
 
Gatti33 said:
I don't think you can insure against stupidity!
Click to expand...
Insurance companies do sell insurance against negligence and employee misconduct as well as many other things that could fall into the stupid category. It's just a question of whether you want to pay for it. I run an IT service business and have insurance to protect against data loss whether it came from hardware failure or something an employee did. I'd imagine a security firm would need pretty substantial coverages due to the nature of their work. Any business that hires another business will also require proof of insurance or a certificate of insurance with coverage levels. It protects both the client and the business because shit happens, just like Sunday.
 
Media are awfully quiet on Woody's statement.

All gutted that it absolves us of any blame.
 
So the security company made and planted a device that

a) their own team of experts whose job it is to find and disarm devices couldn't find and
b) sniffer dogs couldn't find cause technically it wasn't actually an explosive device of any sort

I feel like they're not really getting the point of the whole 'security test' thing.
 
Will Absolute said:
I imagine in future such devices will be clearly labelled as bogus, and display a serial number and phone number of the contractor to enable a quick check. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Click to expand...

What if a terrorist sticks a similar sign on their device?
 
Will Absolute said:
I imagine in future such devices will be clearly labelled as bogus, and display a serial number and phone number of the contractor to enable a quick check. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Click to expand...
Would be easy enough for terrorists to do similar. People aren't going to check a device like that until a controlled explosion has taken place. Too risky.
 
Will Absolute said:
I imagine in future such devices will be clearly labelled as bogus, and display a serial number and phone number of the contractor to enable a quick check. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Click to expand...
"ORDINARY NON EXPLOSIVE DEVICE, PLEASE IGNORE"

Seems legit.
 
Why just not use something that is obviously not a bomb? It seems ridiculous that they used such a life like object. A packet of Monster Munch would have done the job, the people who being trained know its all pretend anyway, so why does the bomb need to look like a bomb.
 
Drifter said:
Well i think that security firm will no longer be used. G4S may be available though.
Click to expand...

The MD of the company used in the training exercise previously worked for G4S 'where he was responsible for training guards involved in search and screening'.
 
Shamwow said:
What if a terrorist sticks a similar sign on their device?
Click to expand...

That's where the serial number comes in. When contacted on the phone the contractor would have a list of legit serial numbers. Or the club itself might have the list. No one would have to touch the 'bomb'. Just read a number.
 
Judas said:
Why just not use something that is obviously not a bomb? It seems ridiculous that they used such a life like object. A packet of Monster Munch would have done the job, the people who being trained know its all pretend anyway, so why does the bomb need to look like a bomb.
Click to expand...

What if terrorists start using explosive packets of monster munch?
 
Cina said:
So the security company made and planted a device that

a) their own team of experts whose job it is to find and disarm devices couldn't find and
b) sniffer dogs couldn't find cause technically it wasn't actually an explosive device of any sort

I feel like they're not really getting the point of the whole 'security test' thing.
Click to expand...

a) Well shows they need some extra training on where to look.
b) Funny how that works.

Remember reading once about some drug enforcement officers using drug sniffing dogs at a school as a training exercise. They used some actual packets of drugs (from evidence locker or old cases or something) and hid them around the school (it was during summer while school was out). But did the same thing the security company did, forgot one of the packages, which was hidden in one of the lockers. Come the fall when school was back in session, kid gets assigned a locker and finds a bag of drugs in it. The kid alerted the nearest teacher of his find.
 
Judas said:
Why just not use something that is obviously not a bomb? It seems ridiculous that they used such a life like object. A packet of Monster Munch would have done the job, the people who being trained know its all pretend anyway, so why does the bomb need to look like a bomb.
Click to expand...


they know it is a drill, but the issue with training is that you are actually trying to train them on what to look for, so you use something realistic looking.
 
I can't help but :lol: at this security agency.

How the hell do you manage to

1. Run a training for your personnel/handlers where they don't find all the items placed for them to find
2. Forget about the above item that wasn't found and walk off giving zero fecks
3. Let 2. happen knowing fully well that it wasn't the sort of item sniffer dogs will find on the routine pre match check
 
No wonder the sniffer dogs didn't detect the device if they're constantly sniffing for packets of Monster Munch.
 
JustAFan said:
they know it is a drill, but the issue with training is that you are actually trying to train them on what to look for.
Click to expand...

It's not like there 5 different designs for a bomb though, is it? They can literally come in all shapes and sizes, and look a hundred different ways. It isn't a Bugs Bunny cartoon where its just that classic textbook bomb look.
 
DomesticTadpole said:
What about when you ring the number on the device which is now labelled as harmless and that actually detonates it.?
Click to expand...

rcoobc said:
THIS IS A DUMMY DEVICE - IF FOUND PLEASE PHONE 0732532662 ... and the bomb explodes when you ring it.
Click to expand...

Surely they could have an official number for all things bombs, with a redirectory function for companies that are licensed to deal with such things. So the number on the bomb would be a familiar short number, similar to 999, and then if the service is digital, it would also have a company number that you enter after you've called the first number.

i.e. you dial the number (let's say 777, and then when you're connected, you enter the second number listed on the device, say "051", which is also registered in the call-up service, and can then connect you to the company.
 
I think it's not beyond the ingenuity of man to safely ring the security contractor - perhaps the club might have the number or directory inquiries might be employed?:smirk: - and say: 'We found a device at OT. It's labelled ***** and has serial number *****. Is it one of yours?
 
I still find it impossible to believe that nobody at the club would request to know where these devices were placed.

Surely, at some point this would have come up in conversation?
 
I'd like all the posters who were crying SHAMBLES and EMBARRASSING to come in here and apologise to the normal people.
 
Will Absolute said:
I think it's not beyond the ingenuity of man to safely ring the security contractor - perhaps the club might have the number or directory inquiries might be employed?:smirk: - and say: 'We found a device at OT. It's labelled ***** and has serial number *****. Is it one of yours?
Click to expand...

Though in fairness, the security company did sign a piece of paper saying they had taken all 13, with 75,000 people in the stadium, would you then trust someones word if they said 'Ah shit, yep, sorry, I will collect it tomorrow'.

Once they found the device it was almost impossible not to order an evacuation.
 
It's just two times human error

First human error - Device was forgotten about
Second human error - Device was not discovered in checks.

In future: GPS Tracking on all similar devices, a unique identifying code so that if they are discovered, staff can quickly establish it's just a fake, and obviously more god damned checks.
 
Badunk said:
I'd like all the posters who were crying SHAMBLES and EMBARRASSING to come in here and apologise to the normal people.
Click to expand...

We have heard one side of the story, and I have previously mentioned the club showed negligence by not knowing where these devices were in the 1st place.
 
Judas said:
Why just not use something that is obviously not a bomb? It seems ridiculous that they used such a life like object. A packet of Monster Munch would have done the job, the people who being trained know its all pretend anyway, so why does the bomb need to look like a bomb.
Click to expand...
They're trained to recognize a suspicious device among a number of non-suspicious devices. That's a distinction one has to be able to make, I believe. Training them to just "find something" is hardly a great preparation.
 
Uniquim said:
Surely they could have an official number for all things bombs, with a redirectory function for companies that are licensed to deal with such things. So the number on the bomb would be a familiar short number, similar to 999, and then if the service is digital, it would also have a company number that you enter after you've called the first number.

i.e. you dial the number (let's say 777, and then when you're connected, you enter the second number listed on the device, say "051", which is also registered in the call-up service, and can then connect you to the company.
Click to expand...

Nope, it's too much fuss and cost to set it up for very few incidents like this. Just don't leave these items behind.
 
Badunk said:
I'd like all the posters who were crying SHAMBLES and EMBARRASSING to come in here and apologise to the normal people.
Click to expand...
I wasn't one of those posters and think it's a bit silly to try and link this to the inept way the football team has been run in recent years but does this statement really clarify how a random member of the public spotted this device when no one within the club did within 4 days?
 
SammyUnited_83 said:
We have heard one side of the story, and I have previously mentioned the club showed negligence by not knowing where these devices were in the 1st place.
Click to expand...
Why would the club care? It was a test ran by outside services company that did not interest the club. They allowed them to use the stadium trusting them to do their job half properly.
 
Badunk said:
I'd like all the posters who were crying SHAMBLES and EMBARRASSING to come in here and apologise to the normal people.
Click to expand...
You are on a forum where people say it's a "disgrace" when a team only manages a 2-2 draw.
 
Sarni said:
Nope, it's too much fuss and cost to set it up for very few incidents like this. Just don't leave these items behind.
Click to expand...

Then put the directory on the internet. That wouldn't cost much. One extra page on a .gov website.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.