RonnieTodger Posted 6 February 2014 Posted 6 February 2014 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fc7_1391532479 Did extremely well to keep his nerve.
Webbo Posted 6 February 2014 Posted 6 February 2014 Doesn't prove he hadn't drunk and drove he was certainly slurring a bit. That said it wouldn't surprise me at all, if the cops can lie about a cabinet minister they wouldn't think twice about the rest of us.
Craig Posted 6 February 2014 Posted 6 February 2014 I don't think the officers at the end can be blamed too much. They had been told that by the original **** of an officer that the guy had been suspected of drink driving and therefore they asked him to provide a specimen of breath on that basis, he wouldn't, and you'll always be arrested for that. It was the officer that instigated it that appears on the face of it to have been the problem. He clearly lied about him saying that he'd had two drinks. That said, he probably had had a drink or two, and he may well have driven there, we don't know. But yeah, the officer was a ****.
Larry_LCFC Posted 6 February 2014 Posted 6 February 2014 They're all pigs, most of them are *****.You are exactly what is wrong with today's society.
DennisNedry Posted 6 February 2014 Posted 6 February 2014 You are exactly what is wrong with today's society. I'd say the state of today's police force is more indicative of what's wrong with today's society.
Out Foxed Posted 6 February 2014 Posted 6 February 2014 You are exactly what is wrong with today's society. maybe, but not because of that comment. police apologists are far worse.
Lamby Posted 6 February 2014 Posted 6 February 2014 You are exactly what is wrong with today's society. I once got told by one copper that I along with about 9 others threw one glass at a barmaid, when I asked him how 10 people can throw one glass he told me to shut up. Got a section 27 for having a piss in the pub toilet too. Also almost got nicked for asking a policeman for directions during a bomb scare.
Vardinhio Posted 6 February 2014 Posted 6 February 2014 There are all kinds of things wrong with that, he would never ever be convicted at court. The officers would have to somehow try and prove that he was over the limit whilst in control of the vehicle...once he steps out of the vehicle and is way up a footpath its realistically a non starter. He could simply say he was drinking after leaving the vehicle. Also you can blame the other officers. Any Police Officer that makes decisions of taking away someone's liberty through arrest needs to know why, not just because someone told them to. I doubt any of them really understood what they were doing, the full situation re his car, or even whether he did indeed drive there which is why they were not responding to his statements.
Larry_LCFC Posted 7 February 2014 Posted 7 February 2014 I once got told by one copper that I along with about 9 others threw one glass at a barmaid, when I asked him how 10 people can throw one glass he told me to shut up. Got a section 27 for having a piss in the pub toilet too. Also almost got nicked for asking a policeman for directions during a bomb scare. So that makes ALL police officers pigs and what ever other shit you want to call them does it? You are no better than someone that calls all Muslims terrorists or all travellers thieves. Pathetic stereotyping and generalizing for the sake of it, just because of a couple of bad experiences. Get a grip.
chuck'em Posted 7 February 2014 Posted 7 February 2014 Until they prove otherwise, yes. Guilty until proven innocent, what a great way of judging people.
Jimothy Posted 7 February 2014 Posted 7 February 2014 All Charlton supporters are lazy feckless work shy irritating pricks, who never leave despite persistent requests to do so.
Carl the Llama Posted 7 February 2014 Posted 7 February 2014 All Charlton supporters are lazy feckless work shy irritating pricks, who never leave despite persistent requests to do so. This easy jab was being paraded around over a year ago. Admittedly I don't follow the Lamby roadshow, but I'd be surprised if he hasn't got a job by now.
morris1234 Posted 7 February 2014 Posted 7 February 2014 Guilty until proven innocent, what a great way of judging people.Without agreeing with the comment that lamby made, on the face if it, isn't this the attitude this police officer has towards the gentlemen holding the camera?Essentially tries to throw the book at him without ascertaining what he had actually done!
Merging Cultures Posted 7 February 2014 Posted 7 February 2014 What I heard was: "Have you been drinking this morning? No I've not.. Have you been drinking this morning? No I've not. Have you been drinking this morning? I've had two. Have you been drinking this morning? No I've not. You just said you had two." Then he gets arrested for not consenting to a breathalyzer. Not sure how the PC is framing the citizen. It certainly sounds like he said he's had two. It looks like the guy was being a bit of a dick at some protest. Nothing wrong with giving him a bit of hassle. I am sure people who were just at the protest and not being dicks were not hassled. Personally, I've never been hassled by police in any of the countries I've lived in, because (outside of FT) I don't act like a dick.
Merging Cultures Posted 7 February 2014 Posted 7 February 2014 This easy jab was being paraded around over a year ago. Admittedly I don't follow the Lamby roadshow, but I'd be surprised if he hasn't got a job by now. I believe he managed to get a job at a bar during the busy holiday period. I think he is now considering signing on again because the hours are not enough now it is no longer the holiday period.
Steven Posted 7 February 2014 Posted 7 February 2014 What I heard was: "Have you been drinking this morning? No I've not.. Have you been drinking this morning? No I've not. Have you been drinking this morning? I've had two. Have you been drinking this morning? No I've not. You just said you had two." Then he gets arrested for not consenting to a breathalyzer. Not sure how the PC is framing the citizen. It certainly sounds like he said he's had two. It looks like the guy was being a bit of a dick at some protest. Nothing wrong with giving him a bit of hassle. I am sure people who were just at the protest and not being dicks were not hassled. Personally, I've never been hassled by police in any of the countries I've lived in, because (outside of FT) I don't act like a dick. He says I have had tea.
Carl the Llama Posted 7 February 2014 Posted 7 February 2014 He says I have had tea. Exactly. The officer starts making the accusation out of nowhere, though to be fair it is conceivable that he misheard tea as two. That said, the fact he doesn't consent to a breathalyser is either suspicious or pure dickery.
sphericalfox Posted 7 February 2014 Posted 7 February 2014 What I heard was: "Have you been drinking this morning? No I've not.. Have you been drinking this morning? No I've not. Have you been drinking this morning? I've had two. Have you been drinking this morning? No I've not. You just said you had two." Then he gets arrested for not consenting to a breathalyzer. Not sure how the PC is framing the citizen. It certainly sounds like he said he's had two. It looks like the guy was being a bit of a dick at some protest. Nothing wrong with giving him a bit of hassle. I am sure people who were just at the protest and not being dicks were not hassled. Personally, I've never been hassled by police in any of the countries I've lived in, because (outside of FT) I don't act like a dick. Sorry Balts, but you've had a mare there. He clearly says 'tea' on at least three occasions, twice to specifically correct the fibbing police officer.
Merging Cultures Posted 7 February 2014 Posted 7 February 2014 I heard two the first time. I think the guy changes it after. I'm sure he did say tea. The first time. Just not what I heard, and clearly not what the officer heard. Deny that I heard the word two. It is what I heard. Might not have been what he said but prove it wasn't what I heard.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.