[News] The police.. and not the one with Sting in it

Mellor 3 Ward 4 said:

OK - let's leave it there.

You gave your opinion that 'maybe' the police officer instigated the trouble, and had her nose broken without knowing the full facts.

Click to expand...

jcdenton08 said:

You’ll agree some of the comments early in the thread by allegedly respected posters were absolutely horrifying and disgraceful.

Click to expand...

marlowe said:

It was precisely because he wasn't aware of the full facts that he used the term "maybe". He wasn't making a statement of fact, he was merely speculating on the possibilities in the absence of the knowledge of those facts.

Even those who were speaking in support of the police before the second video was released were speculating on the possibilities without knowledge of any facts.

There is therefore no moral highground to be claimed by anyone despite what the second video subsequently revealed.

Click to expand...

Mellor 3 Ward 4 said:

OK - let's leave it there.

You gave your opinion that 'maybe' the police officer instigated the trouble, and had her nose broken without knowing the full facts.

Click to expand...

1. Would the use of force have a lawful objective (e.g. the prevention of injury to others or damage to property, or the effecting of a lawful arrest) and, if so, how immediate and grave is the threat posed?
2. Are there any means, short of the use of force, capable of attaining the lawful objective identified?
3. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the threat, and the potential for adverse consequences to arise from the use of force (including the risk of escalation and the exposure of others to harm), what is the minimum level of force required to attain the objective identified, and would the use of that level of force be proportionate or excessive?”

Zeberdi said:

22 pages of arguments over an incident that will be judged by standards set in law, not opinion but guess that’s never stopped trial by internet before.

‘Reasonable force’ and what may be considered as such, is governed by PACE 1984, S3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967, S76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.

From the College of Policing guidelines on what determining (un) reasonable force:

“The three core questions for police (as to when force may be used, and to what extent)

1. Would the use of force have a lawful objective (e.g. the prevention of injury to others or damage to property, or the effecting of a lawful arrest) and, if so, how immediate and grave is the threat posed?
2. Are there any means, short of the use of force, capable of attaining the lawful objective identified?
3. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the threat, and the potential for adverse consequences to arise from the use of force (including the risk of escalation and the exposure of others to harm), what is the minimum level of force required to attain the objective identified, and would the use of that level of force be proportionate or excessive?”

I would suggest, on prima facia evidence based on one or two short videos, the police acted beyond reasonable force by kicking a bloke in the head when he was tasered and lying face down BUT until the full context and facts of the situation have been investigated for their legality and the IOPC have examined all videos and interviewed the officers involved, that can’t be determined as a matter of fact. It certainly can’t be determined by football fans on a fan site who are NOT in possession of the full facts and lacking apparently an understanding of the law.

Until then the Officer remains rightly suspended while an investigation is made. If unreasonable force was determined to be used, then the police officer is not immune from a charge of criminal assault.

Either way, moral outrage or political opinion/what we think of chavs/the police etc does not decide whether the Police acted with unreasonable force, the law does.

https://library.college.police.uk/docs/APPref/use-of-force-briefing.pdf

Click to expand...

Kinky Gerbil said:

He hadn't been cuffed and restrained, how do you know or more importantly the police there know he wasn't going to get back up?

Our police don't just boot prisoners, we have had some tragic incidents over the years that involve the police, but they are very rare.

What shit and giggles did the police officers get from the incident?

Click to expand...

Baldseagull said:

The officer didn't know that he wouldn't try and get back up, but he wasnt trying to get back up, if he had tried to get back up then he should have pulled the trigger on his taser again.
If the guy getting back up was a massive worry, I am surprised he left him laying there, uncuffed, and went over to boot the other guy.

Click to expand...

Cotton Socks said:

Take away uniforms. If these videos were of a fight in West Street on a Saturday night, would you think that stamping on someones head when they are already on the floor reasonable?
I've always been taught, and have taught my kids, never to kick someone when they're down, metaphorically and physically. Admittedly we've never been in that kind of situation but if someone's on the floor and you're standing upright, you have the upper hand.
There was no need for it and in my eyes it's wrong, no matter what the situation and who did what before.
He had more justification for shooting him instead of tasering him & then kicking him.
It's the fact that he kicked him when he was already on the floor that's annoying most people.

Click to expand...

Zeberdi said:

22 pages of arguments over an incident that will be judged by standards set in law, not opinion but guess that’s never stopped trial by internet before.

‘Reasonable force’ and what may be considered as such, is governed by PACE 1984, S3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967, S76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.

From the College of Policing guidelines on what determining (un) reasonable force:

“The three core questions for police (as to when force may be used, and to what extent)

1. Would the use of force have a lawful objective (e.g. the prevention of injury to others or damage to property, or the effecting of a lawful arrest) and, if so, how immediate and grave is the threat posed?
2. Are there any means, short of the use of force, capable of attaining the lawful objective identified?
3. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the threat, and the potential for adverse consequences to arise from the use of force (including the risk of escalation and the exposure of others to harm), what is the minimum level of force required to attain the objective identified, and would the use of that level of force be proportionate or excessive?”

I would suggest, on prima facia evidence based on one or two short videos, the police acted beyond reasonable force by kicking a bloke in the head when he was tasered and lying face down BUT until the full context and facts of the situation have been investigated for their legality and the IOPC have examined all videos and interviewed the officers involved, that can’t be determined as a matter of fact. It certainly can’t be determined by football fans on a fan site who are NOT in possession of the full facts and lacking apparently an understanding of the law.

Until then the Officer remains rightly suspended while an investigation is made. If unreasonable force was determined to be used, then the police officer is not immune from a charge of criminal assault.

Either way, moral outrage or political opinion/what we think of chavs/the police etc does not decide whether the Police acted with unreasonable force, the law does.

https://library.college.police.uk/docs/APPref/use-of-force-briefing.pdf

Click to expand...

Mellor 3 Ward 4 said:

Says it all.

Click to expand...

marlowe said:

No, what says it all is my entire post, not just the parts of a sentence you have chosen to break down and selectively highlight. That merely represents a distortion of what I said.

Click to expand...

Mellor 3 Ward 4 said:

I quoted your whole post........

Click to expand...

HillBarnTillIDie said:

It’s a fair point and reasonable in the situation you describe. Say the chap on the floor in your scenario has a weapon, a machete, and your with children and no way to escape…?
Do you wait for the chap to get up or keep the upper hand?

Im sure if the chap had followed the police’s directions and behaved in the correct manner then neither the taser or kick would have occurred. But he didn’t and In other countries, maybe he would have been shot in such a high security location being any airport.

Click to expand...

Baldseagull said:

Proportionate force.
See Tony Martin, and many others who have gone OTT, the law applies to coppers too.

Click to expand...

Zeberdi said:

22 pages of arguments over an incident that will be judged by standards set in law, not opinion but guess that’s never stopped trial by internet before.

‘Reasonable force’ and what may be considered as such, is governed by PACE 1984, S3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967, S76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.

From the College of Policing guidelines on what determining (un) reasonable force:

“The three core questions for police (as to when force may be used, and to what extent)

1. Would the use of force have a lawful objective (e.g. the prevention of injury to others or damage to property, or the effecting of a lawful arrest) and, if so, how immediate and grave is the threat posed?
2. Are there any means, short of the use of force, capable of attaining the lawful objective identified?
3. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the threat, and the potential for adverse consequences to arise from the use of force (including the risk of escalation and the exposure of others to harm), what is the minimum level of force required to attain the objective identified, and would the use of that level of force be proportionate or excessive?”

I would suggest, on prima facia evidence based on one or two short videos, the police acted beyond reasonable force by kicking a bloke in the head when he was tasered and lying face down BUT until the full context and facts of the situation have been investigated for their legality and the IOPC have examined all videos and interviewed the officers involved, that can’t be determined as a matter of fact. It certainly can’t be determined by football fans on a fan site who are NOT in possession of the full facts and lacking apparently an understanding of the law.

Until then the Officer remains rightly suspended while an investigation is made. If unreasonable force was determined to be used, then the police officer is not immune from a charge of criminal assault.

Either way, moral outrage or political opinion/what we think of chavs/the police etc does not decide whether the Police acted with unreasonable force, the law does.

https://library.college.police.uk/docs/APPref/use-of-force-briefing.pdf

Click to expand...

Vin said:

What lies are you referring to?

Click to expand...

Kinky Gerbil said:

I've seen this a few times, I don't see the comparison

A fight on West Street between a couple of chavs is not the same as an arrest, police are allowed to use force to arrest, which can include kicking and stamping.

Click to expand...

HillBarnTillIDie said:

It’s a fair point and reasonable in the situation you describe. Say the chap on the floor in your scenario has a weapon, a machete, and your with children and no way to escape…?
Do you wait for the chap to get up or keep the upper hand?

Im sure if the chap had followed the police’s directions and behaved in the correct manner then neither the taser or kick would have occurred. But he didn’t and In other countries, maybe he would have been shot in such a high security location being any airport.

Click to expand...

Berty23 said:

Just so I can be clear. Do the Tommy crew on here think the police should be dishing out their own justice tonight with the EDL thugs ruining the vigil and burning the police vans. I assume Farage, tice, Anderson etc have all condemned the mob taking on the police who bravely ran towards danger yesterday?

Click to expand...

Pretty Plnk Fairy said:

Tipical lefty. It’s okay to break a coppers nose as we saw last night in Southport IF YOU LOVE YOUR COUNTRY. Do I have to spel it out for you

Regards

DF

Click to expand...