Plod brutality

[lou]

Well that witness was talking out of their arse then, because the video contradicts most of what they said.

Whilst there no real reason to push so hard, he didn't exactly seem to be trying to get out of their way. In fact he looked like he was going slow on purpose.

It's not an isolated incident this kind of thing, i've had it happen twice. Once when in town and another time at football. When dealing with the public in certain situations, the police believe they can use what force they like and don't care if someone is an innocent bystander.

Ive SEEN such things many times..... Leicester train station after the Peterboro game being the most recent.. Very heavy handed a lot of police.... not all I hasten to add.

[Babylon]

The witness was referring to events before and after the video footage.

Really? Becuase...

The officer didn't pick him up as stated, a guy in a green top with his hood up did (in the video). The police were several feet away from him, so unless they threw the baton at him he didn't get hit again when on the ground. Unless he got knocked over a second time, the "witness" has a very active imagination.

[James.]

Just going on what the Guardian article says:

One witness, Anna Branthwaite, a photographer, described how, in the minutes before the video was shot, she saw Tomlinson walking towards Cornhill Street.

[Ultra]

I am doing a mini-project on abuse of police power and corruption. It's amazing the things that they think that they can get away with.

Here's one for you.

Find out the last case where a British copper was convicted after a death in police custody.

[Finnegan]

Any excuse...

[Sparky]

Mines, white with 2 sugars, thanks Babes!!!

Racist

After what i witnessed the other week on the return from Peterborough absolutly nothing suprises me now , my respect for the plod in general has gone

[Guest]

Here's one for you.

Find out the last case where a British copper was convicted after a death in police custody.

Inquest, who campaign on the issue, say that there has not been a successful conviction since 1991. They have no data before then. It is interesting that despite the coroner's verdict of unlawful killing that a trial can collapse.

Their figures only show deaths where a verdict of unlawful killing is given. A quick search on Google shows that the vast majority do not.

[Thracian]

Inquest, who campaign on the issue, say that there has not been a successful conviction since 1991. They have no data before then. It is interesting that despite the coroner's verdict of unlawful killing that a trial can collapse.

Their figures only show deaths where a verdict of unlawful killing is given. A quick search on Google shows that the vast majority do not.

So do you think the lack of convictions is down to any reason you could comment about and still have a promising career to look forward to? .

[Shrenchel]

In the film Injustice it stated that over a thousand people died in police custody between 1969 and 1999 and not one police officer was ever convicted for any of the deaths.

Amazing but pretty harrowing documentary btw.

http://www.injusticefilm.co.uk/

Think they're still doing screenings round the country where they can. Go along if you see it advertised.

[Guest]

So do you think the lack of convictions is down to any reason you could comment about and still have a promising career to look forward to? .

Ha ha, Inquest is made up of lawyers, from students through to experienced practitioners, so I think I am safe.

I would suspect that the system, first of all, protects its own. Those incidents that do go to trial, from the brief look I had, either collapse or the officers are acquitted. This suggests to me that the problems are evidential. You have to prove beyond reasonable doubt, and these are trials that would have gone in front of a jury. From what I have seen, the average member of the public is not going to disbelieve the police, and the most important witness is not able to say anything.

[Thracian]

Ha ha, Inquest is made up of lawyers, from students through to experienced practitioners, so I think I am safe.

I would suspect that the system, first of all, protects its own. Those incidents that do go to trial, from the brief look I had, either collapse or the officers are acquitted. This suggests to me that the problems are evidential. You have to prove beyond reasonable doubt, and these are trials that would have gone in front of a jury. From what I have seen, the average member of the public is not going to disbelieve the police, and the most important witness is not able to say anything.

So effective the Sound of Silence!

[Samilktray]

Fuck tha police comin straight from the underground!

[Matt]

Fooking Scum.

But it'll be a slap of the wrist, Don't do it again, On you way.

We all know how it would turn out should he have abused and attacked the Police, Fooking Scum.

[Fosse Boy]

Ive SEEN such things many times..... Leicester train station after the Peterboro game being the most recent.. Very heavy handed a lot of police.... not all I hasten to add.

Yep, I witnessed that. When some old lady started saying it was "out of order" (or something similar) a cop brandished a baton at her. The rozzers on duty that day were quick on the draw with those things.

[Samilktray]

To the police I'm sayin fuck you punk

Readin my rights and shit, it's all junk!

[TrickyTrev]

Well that witness was talking out of their arse then, because the video contradicts most of what they said.

Whilst there no real reason to push so hard, he didn't exactly seem to be trying to get out of their way. In fact he looked like he was going slow on purpose.

It's not an isolated incident this kind of thing, i've had it happen twice. Once when in town and another time at football. When dealing with the public in certain situations, the police believe they can use what force they like and don't care if someone is an innocent bystander.

Yeah the fact of the matter is the police officer was behaving how police officers do, if people are not doing as they want they use force in order to make them. I mean the police officer obviously pushed the guy over on purpose because he was annoying him, didn't mean to cause him any serious harm. In fact if the guy had a heart attack in reaction to that push, you can be fairly sure that one was just round the corner.

The worrying part of this story is that a) it shows the way that police officers think they can break the law if someone is annoying them. b) that the police force have no interest in honesty in their own enquiries.

None of this is new, but it has reared its ugly head again.

[ozleicester]

Horrendous situation, and yes...the assault leading to the death of an apparently innocent man is undoubtably "brutality"

I just hope that those fools who peddle the line "if youve done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear" might at least stop and think.

This man, not to mention Menendez (sp) had done nothing wrong and is now DEAD.

Condolences to the mans family.

[Guest]

The strength of the code of silence was evident during the Commission

hearings. Almost without exception officers approached by the Commission

initially denied ever witnessing or engaging in any form of corrupt activity. Even

with an undertaking that police would not be disciplined for failing to report

certain forms of corruption, the offer of amnesty and the availability of

protection against self-incrimination, officer after officer maintained this stand

until presented with irrefutable evidence to the contrary. Each knew the truth,

yet the strength of the code, and the blind hope that no one would break it,

prevailed.

[Matt]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7999007.stm

[Thracian]

So because a woman mouths a few obscenities a huge great copper appears to whack her with a baton. What a fecking hero. Once again I'd ask how is that in any way proportionate and what possible threat was the tiny lady presenting other than one of protest?

If proved, not only was the officer a disgrace to himself, his colleagues and the police force - men just don't hit women in the household I was brought up in - but that police force was representing the government and I'd like to hear the Prime Minister explain on what basis that action was taken.

I've no sympathy with the woman either. If they expect to be treated with civility they can also be expected to behave with some dignity and respect. Human rights require human responsibility.

If it's proved she was being blatantly disrespectful by mouthing obscenities at a police officer in a situation that might become inflamed to the detriment of public safety she should be banged up. And that goes for anyone else.

There is no excuse for people behaving like animals while protesting, quite the contrary. But one day action like that policeman's is going to provoke some co-ordinated reaction and I wonder how bully boy would feel then?

[Sly]

So because a woman mouths a few obscenities a huge great copper appears to whack her with a baton. What a fecking hero. Once again I'd ask how is that in any way proportionate and what possible threat was the tiny lady presenting other than one of protest?

If proved, not only was the officer a disgrace to himself, his colleagues and the police force - men just don't hit women in the household I was brought up in - but that police force was representing the government and I'd like to hear the Prime Minister explain on what basis that action was taken.

I've no sympathy with the woman either. If they expect to be treated with civility they can also be expected to behave with some dignity and respect. Human rights require human responsibility.

If it's proved she was being blatantly disrespectful by mouthing obscenities at a police officer in a situation that might become inflamed to the detriment of public safety she should be banged up. And that goes for anyone else.

There is no excuse for people behaving like animals while protesting, quite the contrary. But one day action like that policeman's is going to provoke some co-ordinated reaction and I wonder how bully boy would feel then?

Everything you say above is correct. People believe that by using obscenities they are better able to put across the message they are trying to convey. Unfortunately, without respect and dignity, the message will always fall on deaf ears.

[Zingari]

The police are always in a tricky situation with crowd control .

I noticed on the news yesterday that this story and the Hillsborough tradgedy were aired close together , and the police were given much blame in both cases .

But ( just a thought ), maybe if the police had have been tougher with the crowd outside the ground at Hillsborough , and batonned a few people , the day would have turned out differently . who knows ?

easy to sit at home after an event and say what should have been done

[Ultra]

The police are always in a tricky situation with crowd control .

I noticed on the news yesterday that this story and the Hillsborough tradgedy were aired close together , and the police were given much blame in both cases .

On the evidence presented, rightly so.

But ( just a thought ), maybe if the police had have been tougher with the crowd outside the ground at Hillsborough , and batonned a few people , the day would have turned out differently . who knows ?

It would have made the situation infinitely worse. If I'd watched people die before my eyes, in part because (allegedly) plod stopped ambulance crews from entering the stadium to treat the injured, I wouldn't respond too kindly to cowardly thugs wading in with batons.

In any case, the police didn't have the numbers to be as aggressive as that. It might be appropriate when dealing with a few hundred Millwall yobs. But a crowd of 50000 is a different matter entirely.

[Legend_in_blue]

The footage of the woman is all over the BBC this morning.

Both parties are in the wrong.

The policeman should be showing professionalism and restraint when dealing with such people.

On the other hand, if you are making a protest, why goad the policeman and swear right in his face?

Both acts are a disgrace.

[Daggers]

<they were both being wankers>

More or less.

Trouble is - he'll be the only one who has anything come of it whereas she will still be receiving her trust fund and smearing excrement on the door handles of Daddy's friends' 4x4s.