Heavy handling of protesters by police

[lazymanc]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jun/21/kingsnorth-protester-arrests-video-complaint

That's pretty shocking treatment for two people who's only crime seems to be that they were an irritant to the police.

Why are protesters being grouped in with "terrorists" and treated under the same legislation?

[Spiderman]

That is just outrageous and disgusting bully boy behaviour imo.
The police seem to have a real problem with being identified yet they dont have a problem pumping a shed load of bullets into an innocent mans head when they failed to clearly identify him before he got on a tube. :roll:

The powers given to police in these sort of demonsatrtions are unjust and imo illegal. If they can film people for their reasons then those same people can film them back for their own reasons. All the woman did was aks for his shoulder number, a piece of info he shuld have had clearly dispalyed and infomation he should make available when it is requested.
but oh no, lets not do whats legaly expected of us, lets just attack them and arrest them for obstruction when they were doing no such thing. And i heard women police voices too, so why are they arrested women being man handled by male officers f there are females present?
Just disgusts me when i see this kind of behavour displayed by an police officer.
Worst part is that its clealry sanctioned from higher up otherwise the indvidualt officers would not act this way of their own accord.

[SoulKiss]

That is just outrageous and disgusting bully boy behaviour imo.
The police seem to have a real problem with being identified yet they dont have a problem pumping a shed load of bullets into an innocent mans head when they failed to clearly identify him before he got on a tube. :roll:

The powers given to police in these sort of demonsatrtions are unjust and imo illegal. If they can film people for their reasons then those same people can film them back for their own reasons. All the woman did was aks for his shoulder number, a piece of info he shuld have had clearly dispalyed and infomation he should make available when it is requested.
but oh no, lets not do whats legaly expected of us, lets just attack them and arrest them for obstruction when they were doing no such thing. And i heard women police voices too, so why are they arrested women being man handled by male officers f there are females present?
Just disgusts me when i see this kind of behavour displayed by an police officer.
Worst part is that its clealry sanctioned from higher up otherwise the indvidualt officers would not act this way of their own accord.

I know I gave the TSU stand @ Hendon a wide berth yesterday...........

[plowsie]

last year's climate camp demonstration
:rolleyes:

[Spiderman]

:rolleyes:

Does it make it acceptable that it happened a while ago? I didn't hear or see this at the time and following the police behaviour at the recent G20 demo its good to know that the IPCC have previous complaints to look at too.

Or is it OK in your opinion cos it was a while ago? i dont get the :rolleyes: you see.

[Spiderman]

duplicated.

[plowsie]

Does it make it acceptable that it happened a while ago? I didn't hear or see this at the time and following the police behaviour at the recent G20 demo its good to know that the IPCC have previous complaints to look at too.

Or is it OK in your opinion cos it was a while ago? i dont get the :rolleyes: you see.
Neither acceptable nor not acceptable I don't wanna really air my views because my judgement is often wrong. The :rolleyes: was that it was a year ago and has only surfaced now, just after stuff has slightly calmed down from the G20 happenings.

[GeneticBubble]

police officers - the greatest people some days, complete :smt013 the next.

but yeah that behavior is completely out of order for something as simple as taking a picture

[Spiderman]

N I don't wanna really air my views because my judgement is often wrong.

but its not a right or wrong issue, its your view of what you see happening and weather YOU as an individual agree or accept it. Its not a conformist thing where your view has to be the same as anyone elses.
Anyway thanks for clarifying that.
I'd imagine we only see this now as it had to be kept confidential due to the IPCC investigation.... or the police knwo they have something to be ashamed of an didnt want it out in the open before now.

[Bluewolf]

.

[lazymanc]

Sorry, is that an important part of the report..? :rolleyes:

It shouldn't affect the situation or the behaviour of the police but I think it was mentioned to make it clear they weren't the militant style protester, just normal people who were airing their grievances in a peaceful and legal way.

[SoulKiss]

Sorry, is that an important part of the report..? :rolleyes:

It shouldn't affect the situation or the behaviour of the police but I think it was mentioned to make it clear they weren't the militant style protester, just normal people who were airing their grievances in a peaceful and legal way.

I dont see what having had kids has anything to do with things........

A "normal" protester wouldn't have gotten all in the cops face about his number - they were deliberately stirring things up, makes them pretty militant to me.

However that doesnt warrant the way they were treated for trying to get the police to follow procedures - ie show their number.

So no, the police DIDN'T do the right thing, either with respects to uniform or actions, but the women WERE not just bystanders,

[Samurai Penguin]

Police have been using anti-terrorist powers against peaceful protesters for a while now. On the occasions they do get caught on camera it seems to be the case that a 'thorough' investigation is carried out by the IPCC...and then nothing happens.

The police officers that murdered Jean Charles de Menezes are still on the street carrying guns to protect the public (if it wasn't so tragic it would be funny).

Police officers can run you down, push you around, shoot you in the head, and otherwise act in ways that we expect to see on news reports from Zimbabwe and Iran. And what happens? They get suspended on full pay until the media decides to move on to another story and then they are back on the street.

This is not a new phenomena. Those here who are interested in social history will no doubt have heard of the Peterloo Massacre, Siege of Sidney Street, Battle of Orgreave, Battle of the Beanfield etc.

From the peasants revolt of 1381 to the present day our history of full of repression of the masses by the brutal henchmen of the elite. I see no reason why this will change in the future.

[Spiderman]

I dont see what having had kids has anything to do with things........

A "normal" protester wouldn't have gotten all in the cops face about his number - they were deliberately stirring things up, makes them pretty militant to me.

....

but the women WERE not just bystanders,

I think they mention the kids to set the mindset that they were not part of the "campers" at the protest and by having young kids they had responsibilites to return to, so they were not of the mindset that they can go out, cause as much trouble as they like and happily spend a night in the cells for it knowing they have nowhere better to be.

Aso SK i dont see either of them "all up in the cops face" at any point. No more than i get up in PCIAATP face when i'm challenging him about his beahviour (sorry PCIAATP, for those not in the know is the local PC who shows up at Soho Massive meets from time to time claiming he's had calls complaining about us) and the agressive manner he tries to deal with us in. Do you really think it would be justified for him and a bunch of his mates to jump me too then? For simply asking what i am leagly entitle to ask of him...his badge/shoulder number?
Thats all these women were doing, one officer refuses and lies that he doesnt have to give this info so she says i want a pic of this person - who otherwise cant be identified - to make a complaint about him. Its the police who then obstruct them, not the other way round.

As for "stirring things up"...how? They were there to do exactly what the police were doing, film people and make sure any inappropriate behaviour is caught and recored on tape. Now if thats stirring things up then the cops were doing the same so just as guilty of stirring things up, no?
Its clear from the cops pwn video that they are aware of who these people are and set out to target them and find some pathetic reason to either confiscate their cameras or arrest them.

And i dont think anyone said the women were just bystanders either did they????

[SoulKiss]

I think they mention the kids to set the mindset that they were not part of the "campers" at the protest and by having young kids they had responsibilites to return to, so they were not of the mindset that they can go out, cause as much trouble as they like and happily spend a night in the cells for it knowing they have nowhere better to be.

Aso SK i dont see either of them "all up in the cops face" at any point. No more than i get up in PCIAATP face when i'm challenging him about his beahviour (sorry PCIAATP, for those not in the know is the local PC who shows up at Soho Massive meets from time to time claiming he's had calls complaining about us) and the agressive manner he tries to deal with us in. Do you really think it would be justified for him and a bunch of his mates to jump me too then? For simply asking what i am leagly entitle to ask of him...his badge/shoulder number?
Thats all these women were doing, one officer refuses and lies that he doesnt have to give this info so she says i want a pic of this person - who otherwise cant be identified - to make a complaint about him. Its the police who then obstruct them, not the other way round.

As for "stirring things up"...how? They were there to do exactly what the police were doing, film people and make sure any inappropriate behaviour is caught and recored on tape. Now if thats stirring things up then the cops were doing the same so just as guilty of stirring things up, no?
Its clear from the cops pwn video that they are aware of who these people are and set out to target them and find some pathetic reason to either confiscate their cameras or arrest them.

And i dont think anyone said the women were just bystanders either did they????

I knew I had worded that badly.........

What I was trying to get across is that they fact that they challenged the cops authority, which is a sure-fire way to get things to kick off with the police these days.

PCIAATP is on best behaviour these days - its not so long ago he was physically pulling people to the ground with their bikes on top of them.

I am not saying that the women did anything that is wrong, or that their actions should have been take or should be accepted as provocation.

What I AM saying is that they were not standing meekly on the sidelines and got jumped on by the cops, they got into a confrontation over badge number, the cops went mental

[Spiderman]

What I was trying to get across is that they fact that they challenged the cops authority, which is a sure-fire way to get things to kick off with the police these days.
They did nothing of the sort did they? Asking someone who should have his identity prominently on display to provide you with those details is in no way challenging their authority is it?


What I AM saying is that they were not standing meekly on the sidelines and got jumped on by the cops, they got into a confrontation over badge number, the cops went mental
But where are you getting this idea that the story somehow says they were merely bystanders? They admit why they were there, to film the police and ensure their behaviour is up to scratch and reasonable. At least one of them was not in full uniform (no shoulder numbers) and was not having his authority challenged by simply asking for his number. He LIED to someone who he knows is better informed than most of the general public and she was attempting to hold him accountable for his lies and clearly intentional hiding of his number and was subsequently unjuslty attacked and arrested.
The cops didn't "go mental", they employed every dirty little trick at their disposal by arresting them for no good reason, telling lies that they were obstructiing police, having them put in prison on remand for 4 days before all charges against them were dropped.
Thats far from going "mental" its a sanctioned plan to attempt to put these people off doing what they are doing...attempting to hold the police accountable for their illegal behaviour.

[BanditPat]

I dont see what having had kids has anything to do with things........

A "normal" protester wouldn't have gotten all in the cops face about his number - they were deliberately stirring things up, makes them pretty militant to me.



+1

I would have said that neither party conducted them selves how they should have done. I know I would have gotten fairly angry if the woman had spoke to me like that I dont know about any one else.

[SoulKiss]

I am NOT getting my point across at all well here - It like Spidey is on the A41 heading north and I'm on the M1, heading in the same direction but not on the same track.

So I am going to just leave it at the following.

1) The women did not do anything that warranted what happened.

2) This is a great example of why every bit of open-ended legislation that the current government has introduced needs to be thrown in the bin rather than left open to interpretation.

[Jamiebridges123]

I am NOT getting my point across at all well here - It like Spidey is on the A41 heading north and I'm on the M1, heading in the same direction but not on the same track.

So I am going to just leave it at the following.

1) The women did not do anything that warranted what happened.

2) This is a great example of why every bit of open-ended legislation that the current government has introduced needs to be thrown in the bin rather than left open to interpretation.

Hmm, sense has been spoken! :notworthy:

[Samurai Penguin]

SOCPA is another great bit of legislation. Designed to stop 'serious organised criminal' members of the public standing outside the mother of parliaments and having a peaceful protest. I joined just such a protest and we were surrounded by police, FIT's with zoom lenses taking our pictures, totally over the top.

"We don’t want to impose our solutions by force, we want to create a democratic space. We don’t see armed struggle in the classic sense of previous guerrilla wars, that is as the only way and the only all-powerful truth around which everything is organized. In a war, the decisive thing is not the military confrontation but the politics at stake in the confrontation. We didn’t go to war to kill or be killed. We went to war in order to be heard."

— Subcomandante Marcos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subcomandante_Marcos)

[lazymanc]

+1

I would have said that neither party conducted them selves how they should have done. I know I would have gotten fairly angry if the woman had spoke to me like that I dont know about any one else.

The problem is, cops are not just normal members of the public that can get upset when someone is a bit blunt with them. We give them special powers and in return they're supposed to use those powers with restraint and without getting emotional. If they can't do that then they should not be doing the job. I'm not saying they should put up with verbal abuse, but they should be thick-skinned enough to deal with a little shortness from someone.

The women were within their rights to ask for a badge number, especially as it's supposed to be a legal requirement that they're on display. It seems any attempt to question a police officer about their duties is automatically deemed inappropriate and liable to get you thrown in the back of a van.

The worst bit is the complete over-reaction to subduing the women - using pressure points and other pain-inducing techniques on someone who is not actually struggling against you is despicable, as was strapping one of the women like an animal.

I'd really like to hear an actual police officer's view on this, because I'd hope that the majority of them find it as unpalatable as I do.

[embee]

I trust the Police about as far as they could throw me.

[Ch00]

Well that does not look good!!!

Based on that video it the police looked like they have over reacted. However like always what happened before or after we will never know.

Ch00

[Bluepete]

If anyone wants my collar number and asked me like that, I would have no problem giving it - then again, it's always hanging out there for all to see of yu are tall enough!

At ALL "events" like the one in the video I've ever worked, it's drummed into us to make sure our collar numbers are on display. Thay had no reason to refuse what was, after all, a polite request (from what we see in the edited video)

Pete

[yorkie_chris]

I feel some respect for you lot who are in the job for having the patience to be in the same profession as thugs like that. That sort of behaviour is just asking for people to become violent, are they trying to create 70s NI on the mainland? Do they like snipers, IEDs?

Pete you don't count, I know you're only there to thrash the cars...

[yorkie_chris]

I do have to laugh about it being the police evidence gatherers camera and note with interest someone saying "cameras on" in the initial struggle. Mostly like when I've done bits of jobs in pubs and clubs, learning where the CCTV cover is. The difference is I've never had a punch up with someone who didn't deserve or cause it.

[Red Herring]

I trust the Police about as far as they could throw me.

Judging by the video that could be quite a long way....

I'm with BluePete on this one, there are some things worth fighting over, your badge number isn't one of them. The problem with events of this kind is that they drag cops in from all over the country who are then left guarding some piece of wire fence for hours on end, and when they do finally get to go hands on with the "opposition" there seems to be some pent up frustration to release. Shame really that one or two incidents like this undermine the thousands of other "confrontations" that were resolved peacefully.

[Spiderman]

Pleased to se that some of our police contignet on here are as opposed to this behaviour as the rest of us and that no one has yet come in here screaming at me that i'm "anti police" as has been said about me in other threads.

[gettin2dizzy]

*Paging Orwell*


The IPCC shouldn't be run by cops, in the same way a prisoner shouldn't be a judge. The clue is in the frickin 'I'.

[Spiderman]

I knw what you're getting at there Dizzy but i think its sometimes required as only they know of all the dirty underhanded techniques serving cops use, whereas you or I may not know them all.

For example the pressure point pain delivery shown by one of the cops. If i was to tell 100 people that cops do this so as to deliver pain but not leave marks and thus open them up to allegations of beatings i would image 85 or so wouldn't believe me and would assume i'm making it up.
If a serving or ex-cop said it then it'd carry far more weight for those same people.
Even someone seeing that vid would not spot it unless they knew what to look for, and so if an "investigator" didn't know to look for those things they'd go uncovered.

However this of course leave the IPCC open to all kinds of allegations of corruption. However i think its still from hih=gher up that the whitewash decisions are made. The IPCC were very scathing about the police and the operation that led to the killing of JC DeMenezes, yet the inquiry was a complete whitewash that ended with the family walking out before the final day. Even the jury at the enquiry said they found the way the police colluded and lied about the events to be shocking but the enquiry was not allowing them to return a decision of "unlawfull killing" which i belive the IPCC had been pushing for.

[Samurai Penguin]

You mean the way that senior police officers blocked access to the IPCC, and by the time they got access it was found that the CCYC camera system that would have shown the shooting was *cough* not recording *cough*.

[grh1904]

The cops didn't "go mental", they employed every dirty little trick at their disposal by arresting them for no good reason, telling lies that they were obstructiing police, having them put in prison on remand for 4 days before all charges against them were dropped.
Thats far from going "mental" its a sanctioned plan to attempt to put these people off doing what they are doing...attempting to hold the police accountable for their illegal behaviour.

Hmmm, oddly the last time I've put anyone up before a court on remand (ohh dear that'll be twice in the last 3 days) they always get let out by the courts, because oddly enough it's (an independent bench of) Magistrates who after listening to the case against and representations by defence solicitors decide who goes on reman, NOT the Police, but I suppose as we are on yet ANOTHER "ACAB" forum (yawn), then it's quite convenient to climb on ye olde bandwagon and have a go.

[yorkie_chris]

THOSE cops are b@stards, I don't believe anyone has said ALL...

Why so defensive? Was it you warning them that cameras were rolling before the tazers came out :-P

[grh1904]

Haven't watched the video, don't want to watch the video, not going to watch the video.......................

But this thread, (like the ones before) start off with a general swipe at the Police, then (probably someoine like me) says something about the usual "most are good, trying to do a difficult job etc, why balme all for just one bad apple etc etc etc".

Then those that initially had the general swipe come back with "oh yes I didn't mean all, I blame..................." then go on to blame one mindless thug or "senior" officers for orders that they obviously gave etc.

It reminds of the fast show from the 90's, you know the sketch where Paul Whitehouse plays a guy in a pub that just agrees with whatever the person taking before him said. They start taking about the greatest footballer ever in such n such a position/team and the character just cannot disagree, he's just a little sheep following the person before him.

[Jamiebridges123]

Haven't watched the video, don't want to watch the video, not going to watch the video.......................


Then you should watch the video! Just a small piece of advice, 6 minutes of your life is too much to spare? :thumbdown:

[yorkie_chris]

But this thread, (like the ones before) start off with a general swipe at the Police,

Or a specific case of abuse of their power. Hardly a general "ACAB!" is it?

[MiniMatt]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8112812.stm

Watch the second smaller video and compare to the original OP posted Kingsnorth video.

Both show police arresting protestors. One is in a civilised western democracy. One is in a tin pot dictatorship pretending to be a democracy. In complete honesty and without a whiff of hype, it really is hard to tell which is which.

[Spiderman]

Hmmm, oddly the last time I've put anyone up before a court on remand (ohh dear that'll be twice in the last 3 days) they always get let out by the courts, because oddly enough it's (an independent bench of) Magistrates who after listening to the case against and representations by defence solicitors decide who goes on reman, NOT the Police, but I suppose as we are on yet ANOTHER "ACAB" forum (yawn), then it's quite convenient to climb on ye olde bandwagon and have a go.

Which makes their remand even more baffling to me. Its not like they are of any danger to the public in any way are they? Yet the Magistartes "decide" they need to be in jail for 4 days? For a case that then goes no-where? Yet the ones you put up for remand i assume were in fact a danger to the general public or certain members/sections of it?

Haven't watched the video, don't want to watch the video, not going to watch the video.......................


Mate i really dont think you are in any position to make judgments on the posts in this thread or generalise about comments made unless you watch the video and judge it from your own point of view.

And i'll show my ignorance by sating i had to go to google to find out what ACAB is and the first answer it gave me was this, lol. The A.C.A.B. is a Malaysian rock band. The band was formerly known as A.C.A.B. from 1994 to 2003 which popularized streetpunk/oi! in the Malaysian ...

So i must be far from your average ACAB-er / ist (?) if i didnt even know what it meant.

[Lozzo]

Sorry, is that an important part of the report..? :rolleyes:

Yes, the fact they are apparently responsible citizens with children shows they ought to know better than to antagonise the police.

[Lozzo]

I trust the Police about as far as they could throw me.

So don't go attending pathetic demonstrations that you know will upset them.

Interesting to note that the fit-watch demonstrators were all wearing black hoodies and sunglasses to conceal their identities from the cameras.

[rob13]

Just out of interest, Spiderman - what is your profession?

[Spiderman]

Web slinging crime fighter extrodinairre...obviously.

TBH what i do to earn money is no representation of my life experiences or views. But if it helps i'm not at either end of the spectrum either, i mean i'm not police nor am i an active protestor.

I'm now curious what you may think it is i do.

[yorkie_chris]

So don't go attending pathetic demonstrations that you know will upset them.

Interesting to note that the fit-watch demonstrators were all wearing black hoodies and sunglasses to conceal their identities from the cameras.

They have no right to get upset by people asking them to, you know, obey the rules.
Neither is it illegal to wear a hooded jacket and shades.

Whether you agree with the protest or not is completely immaterial, they're whinging about the environment (the rest of them, not the fit-watchers), which makes them smelly hippies. HOWEVER if Sheriff Bubba there is allowed to make people respect his authoritah at one demonstration then there is nothing to stop such behaviour at a protest which might actually mean something.

If you found something worth whinging about then I'm fairly sure you wouldn't be too happy about being nicked for it, and almost certainly getting a good kicking if nobody shouted "cameras on".

[Samurai Penguin]

So don't go attending pathetic demonstrations that you know will upset them.

Interesting to note that the fit-watch demonstrators were all wearing black hoodies and sunglasses to conceal their identities from the cameras.

We are fortunate that previous generations did not take this advice. Without public protest by citizens we would have no universal suffrage, no workers rights, and would be living under a feudal regime.

Let us not forget the sacrifice made by John Ashton (killed at the Battle of Peterloo on 16th August 1819), the Tolpuddle Martyrs (transported to australia in 1834 for trying to for a trades union), The Levellers murdered at Burford in 1649, and countless others who stood up to the oppression of the state.

[husky03]

let us not forget the sacrifice made by john ashton (killed at the battle of peterloo on 16th august 1819), the tolpuddle martyrs (transported to australia in 1834 for trying to for a trades union), the levellers murdered at burford in 1649, and countless others who stood up to the oppression of the state.


wtf-you on drugs

[Bluewolf]

.

[Spiderman]

wtf-you on drugs

I think you'll find he's refering to something called "history" :roll:

If you got nothing constructive to add to this discussion then what you're doing is the equivalent of ringing someones doorbell and runnning away. Childish and pointless.

Lozzo, i really dont understand why you continualy say protestors "upset" the police by attending demonstrations. Do you not understand the right of proptest that we have in this country and that its the police's job to maintain law and order at such demos, not attack people who they simply dont like the look of or attitude of.

I think you would be quite happy living in a police state. Not that we are far from that here.

[husky03]

spidey-you forgot to take a humour pill today mate?-glad i took mine for i wouldn't want to take offence at being called childish eh?.
your policing this place like the coppers on the video-if you don't like whats happening you then "police" whats been said as you seem fit.
bringing up events from hundreds of years ago and relating them to incidents nowadays that makes sense-not.

[Messie]

bringing up events from hundreds of years ago and relating them to incidents nowadays that makes sense-not.

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it" George Santayana

[Spiderman]

spidey-you forgot to take a humour pill today mate?-glad i took mine for i wouldn't want to take offence at being called childish eh?.
your policing this place like the coppers on the video-if you don't like whats happening you then "police" whats been said as you seem fit.
bringing up events from hundreds of years ago and relating them to incidents nowadays that makes sense-not.

I see nothing funny in this debate at all.

And how am i policing it exactly? Did i come round your house and physicaly man handle you for making your comment? No, so nothing at all like the police in the video.

Did i ask a mod to delete your pointless post? no. I simply commented that your post was not in anyway futhering the debate going on here

And i'm glad Messie said it before me, we need to learn from histroy. Others gave their lives for what they belived in, not for future generations to forget them and their sacrifices and laugh them off like they mean nothing. As i and others said in another thread i really do think those who faought in wars for this conrty would be turning in their graves if they saw the freedom they gave so much for being torn and tattered by the likes of theses cops who feel they are above the law.

[yorkie_chris]

bringing up events from hundreds of years ago and relating them to incidents nowadays that makes sense-not.

Care to pick one more recent then? Sayyy a certain square in China... Or disappearing people in Argentina?

Events which are the foundation for the society we have today are perfectly relevant. Despite them being hundreds of years ago.

[husky03]

1-I don't see the relation of events three hundred years ago to the way this was policed, so I find it funny that was posted-you don't like it thats your problem

2-You decided that my point was childish and pointless-maybe so, but you came to that decision and also posted it, so you are policing it.(And if you did come round my house and tried to man handle me like the police did on the vid i'm afraid your more than likely end up like Mr Hawkins;))

3-Delete the post - couldn't give two flying f's-everything must be so serious eh?

4- Learn from history -yep your right, but ask the majority of people on here who john ashton,the tolpuddle martyrs and the levellers (not the singers i take it) are i'll reckon they haven't a scooby doo.

husky

[Spiderman]

I'm not going to get into a pointless circular deabte about this woth you but let me just say this...

....I find it funny that was posted-you don't like it thats your problem

....you came to that decision and also posted it, so you are policing it.

So if you post something that i or someone else doesnt like or agree with it our problem, yet if i post something thats somehow "policing" is it?
Please.

Point i was attempting to make is that this has been a good debate so far without resorting to mick taking or offensive posts and to simly laugh at a post someone made was not very constructive of you. That was all.

[Stig]

Take it outside gentlemen otherwise the thread will be closed.

[Spiderman]

Sorry Stig, i was gonna add this to the bottom of my last post .... Anyway can we keep this on topic please cos i dont want an IB mod to lock this thread cos its getting way off topic... but i didn't wanna leave myself open to more accusations of "policing" the thread.

[Grant66]

It would be interesting to see the full video, unedited, on which to form an opinion as to police over reaction.

If taken at face value then I agree completely that this is not the way the police should be upholding the law. I do not want to live in a country where peacefull demonstrators actions are treated in this way, if I wanted that I'd move to Burma.
Voltaire said "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." and he was French.
I could see nothing in the video that constitutes 'obstruction', if anybody has watched 'street wars' on sky they will see a lot higher levels of abuse towards officers go completely unpunished.

What did the parts of the video that got edited out show? Maybe the evidence they were arrested for i.e. the obstruction didn't fit in with the story they wanted to report. Maybe the reason for subduing the women in this manor hit the cutting room floor. Maybe the reason the policeman stood on the woman's feet was because he was sick of being kicked in the shins.

The judge deciding to remand them will have seen all the evidence, we haven't. He refused bail.

We shouldn't accept that they were scum bag protesters and deserved it and we shouldn't assume the police on duty were thugs over reacting.

The most disturbing part of the report for me was that they claim they weren't allowed legal representation. Now that is the action of a tin pot dictatorship.

Sorry for the long post, but after 6 pages or reading I thought I might as well make it 7 :)

[Samurai Penguin]

1-I don't see the relation of events three hundred years ago to the way this was policed, so I find it funny that was posted-you don't like it thats your problem

4- Learn from history -yep your right, but ask the majority of people on here who john ashton,the tolpuddle martyrs and the levellers (not the singers i take it) are i'll reckon they haven't a scooby doo.

husky

I will try and answer your points;

1 - It was my intention to raise the possibility that our 'right' to demonstrate is not a gift from the state but a hard won right for which other people in the past have died for.

4 - If you are not aware of these people/groups then you may wish to read up about them. English history is a rather interesting subject for me (and maybe others here) and I find it somewhat disappointing that we are (or at least were when I was at school) teaching kids only about Kings and Battles and ignoring the rich experiences of the vast majority of those that lived before us.

"By a free country, I mean a country where people are allowed, As long as they do not hurt their neighbours, To do as they like. I do not mean a country where six men may make five men do exactly as they like." - Lord Salisbury (1830 - 1903)

[rob13]

Web slinging crime fighter extrodinairre...obviously.

TBH what i do to earn money is no representation of my life experiences or views. But if it helps i'm not at either end of the spectrum either, i mean i'm not police nor am i an active protestor.

I'm now curious what you may think it is i do.


I dont have any idea what you do, (although in a previous thread did you mention you were a solicitor?) its just interesting because in all walks of life you have people who are good and bad at their job.

A second point to make is that you have looked a piece which has been modelled by the media for a story, given a one sided account and have based your opinions upon it. None of us were at that demonstration so none of us know what has went on prior to the footage being rolled. Im not saying whether the officer was right or wrong as I dont know all the facts.

[Luckypants]

A second point to make is that you have looked a piece which has been modelled by the media for a story, given a one sided account and have based your opinions upon it. None of us were at that demonstration so none of us know what has went on prior to the footage being rolled. Im not saying whether the officer was right or wrong as I dont know all the facts.

Yes Rob that is true, we don't know how the film has been edited by the media. However, the cynical amongst us can level the exact same charge against the Police ;) - it is police video footage and who knows what was cut out of it before it was released to the media? Also who knows what footage of other incidents has not been released, perhaps where the cameraman forgot to say 'Camera is recording'? You can't play the "you don't know the whole story" card, because we never will. We can only judge on the evidence put before us, much the way a jury does.

As I'm sure you are aware, securing a conviction or acquittal depends entirely on the evidence put before the jury. One of the skills of the barrister is to ensure only the 'right' evidence is heard.

So on the basis of the evidence available, it does look like excessive use of force against someone who made a perfectly valid request for an officer to identify himself.

[Spiderman]

(although in a previous thread did you mention you were a solicitor?)

Nope, not one of those either, tho i do have a strong interest in the law, hence i hate seeing those who are supposed to uphold it, abuse it to their own ideals.

Luckpants has given a great answer to the validity of the edited tape. One further thing i need to point out... no matter what else had occured at the scene that we do not see on the video evidence, the police officer holding the woman round the throat and forcing her face up for the camera to film, then following that up with a pressure point technique is just outrageous and uncalled for. The woman is already handcuffed and clealy not any threat to anyone. She is not resisting in any way so the application of the pressure point is simply a punishment one individual officer feels like giving out to her.
IMO he should be held accountable for assault as his actions in no way were reasonable force that was required to carry out the arrest.

[Ed]

The history that someone cites up above is entirely relevant.

This is just a quick post as I'm about to go to Court, and no doubt Matt will be along soon and be far more eloquent than me.

You might think it corny if I say that we should all be vigilant about erosion of civil liberies: the fact that this is a 'free' country has been fought for for centuries, against foreign enemies and domestic repression, and it is no exaggeration to say that it defines the people we are. The modern starting point is Magna Carta, designed to stop oppression from King John. The State and those who wield the power naturally have a self-interest in stifling democratic debate because they wish to impose their will and then to cover it up when it goes tits up. Like Iraq. Secret inquiries. And they rely on apathy and inertia, and the intrinsic trust and respect that British people generally have for politicians.

Someone else also says that there are good and bad people in every role, and that this applies to police officers as much as to everyone else. That is entirely true. I think the police generally do a good job, often in extremely difficult circumstances.

But I can't help but feel that this government - like many before it in modern times - have led a head on attack on civil liberties. You can't say anything or do anything without someone snooping on you - look at all the CCTV cameras we have. There is no such thing as peaceful protest any more because you will be labelled an anarchist, demonised, end up on a Special Branch list. And the rotten eggs in the police barrel will beat you up.

Look at the extraordinary lengths the State has gone to to cover up the G20 protests - although, some of the demonstrators were far from peaceful and were obviously spoiling for a fight. Look at the refusal of the United Kingdom Government to implement the recent ruling on the DNA database. Secret inquests. Local councils using terrorism powers to snoop on people who overfill their wheelie bins.

And if that isn't enough - ID cards, anyone?

No I'm not being melodramatic, all this is happening.

[yorkie_chris]

You can only form an opinion based on the evidence you have at the time, nothing wrong with that... so long as you are happy to change your opinion then if further evidence comes to light.

[yorkie_chris]

And if that isn't enough - ID cards, anyone?

No I'm not being melodramatic, all this is happening.

Magna Carta also allows us to keep and bear arms... and we have no freedom to do that! So I am dubious it has any relevance these days.

Got to love David Camerons quote about ID cards... "your papers please" in a German accent... took the whingers ages to pick up on that one. Hehehe.

[Spiderman]

No I'm not being melodramatic, all this is happening.

Good post Ed, especially from one in your position who can see the realities of the laws being imposed...and unfairly used against the general public just cos they choose to excercise their democratic rights.

[ArtyLady]

The history that someone cites up above is entirely relevant.

This is just a quick post as I'm about to go to Court, and no doubt Matt will be along soon and be far more eloquent than me.

You might think it corny if I say that we should all be vigilant about erosion of civil liberies: the fact that this is a 'free' country has been fought for for centuries, against foreign enemies and domestic repression, and it is no exaggeration to say that it defines the people we are. The modern starting point is Magna Carta, designed to stop oppression from King John. The State and those who wield the power naturally have a self-interest in stifling democratic debate because they wish to impose their will and then to cover it up when it goes tits up. Like Iraq. Secret inquiries. And they rely on apathy and inertia, and the intrinsic trust and respect that British people generally have for politicians.

Someone else also says that there are good and bad people in every role, and that this applies to police officers as much as to everyone else. That is entirely true. I think the police generally do a good job, often in extremely difficult circumstances.

But I can't help but feel that this government - like many before it in modern times - have led a head on attack on civil liberties. You can't say anything or do anything without someone snooping on you - look at all the CCTV cameras we have. There is no such thing as peaceful protest any more because you will be labelled an anarchist, demonised, end up on a Special Branch list. And the rotten eggs in the police barrel will beat you up.

Look at the extraordinary lengths the State has gone to to cover up the G20 protests - although, some of the demonstrators were far from peaceful and were obviously spoiling for a fight. Look at the refusal of the United Kingdom Government to implement the recent ruling on the DNA database. Secret inquests. Local councils using terrorism powers to snoop on people who overfill their wheelie bins.

And if that isn't enough - ID cards, anyone?

No I'm not being melodramatic, all this is happening.

I absolutely agree Ed, and I find all the big brother/nanny state etc quite disturbing :(

[Swin]

snip. The modern starting point is Magna Carta, designed to stop oppression from King John. .

Agree with everything you say Ed, except perhaps the Magna Carta was a bunch of Barons wanting a bigger slice of the pie :)

[Swin]

Magna Carta also allows us to keep and bear arms... and we have no freedom to do that! So I am dubious it has any relevance these days.


Isn't that the US 2nd amendment and the English Bill of Rights? I didn't know it was in Magna Carta