Heavy handling of protesters by police

[lazymanc]

Originally Posted by Bluewolf

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

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]

Originally Posted by Bluewolf

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

Originally Posted by lazymanc

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,

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]

Originally Posted by SoulKiss

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]

Originally Posted by Spiderman

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]

Originally Posted by SoulKiss

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?

Originally Posted by SoulKiss

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.

Originally Posted by SoulKiss

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.

Originally Posted by 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.

Hmm, sense has been spoken!

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