Met Police Again ...

[Talk Wrench]

If I am right,and I might not be, the number on the helmet is a squad or team number only and not the collar number. And being on the back is not mutch good if they are coming from the front at you.Although saying that you can see small numbers on the front on some.

Is this really that relevant?

Wether the police officers were wearing numbers or not, wether they were wearing fire protective clothing or not, the fact is that a man died minutes after the altercation with the police.................... and it was caught on camera.

The presumption from the police fraternity is that Mr Tomlinson HAD to be in the wrong in some way shape or form for the officer involved to act in the way that he did, where as the the rest of us lesser and untrained armchair barristers are wrong to presume that the police are capable of wrongdoing.

TW

 

[GD on Wheels]

Is this really that relevant?

Wether the police officers were wearing numbers or not, wether they were wearing fire protective clothing or not, the fact is that a man died minutes after the altercation with the police.................... and it was caught on camera.

The presumption from the police fraternity is that Mr Tomlinson HAD to be in the wrong in some way shape or form for the officer involved to act in the way that he did, where as the the rest of us lesser and untrained armchair barristers are wrong to presume that the police are capable of wrongdoing.

TW

The question was asked so I replied. The number is relevent because it is the only way a person can ID a police officer in those circumstances and he wasn't quick in coming forward was he?
Was he right to act that way? who knows only time will tell As you see from my previous posts on this thread I have I think kept a fairly neutral stance when others have condemed the officer already.

 

[Webbo]

Is this really that relevant?

Wether the police officers were wearing numbers or not, wether they were wearing fire protective clothing or not, the fact is that a man died minutes after the altercation with the police.................... and it was caught on camera.


TW

I didn't see any man die on camera, just some lazt tw@t getting what was needed, we really need to get over ourselves and let the IPCC deal with the issue.

 

[Talk Wrench]

I didn't see any man die on camera, just some lazt tw@t getting what was needed, we really need to get over ourselves and let the IPCC deal with the issue.

Apologies. Having re-read my post, I should clarify my writings that the altercation was caught on camera and not the mans death.

TW

 

[Dave-exfairy]

Did the video show him with a weapon? No. It showed him with his hands in his pockets. BUT HE COULD HAVE HAD HIS HAND ON A WEAPON and unless you've x-ray vision then there's no way of knowing, is there?) The best anyone can do in that situation is to speculate a concealed weapon. (And that's exactly what we do when dealing with people who have their hands in their pocket, I get them to remove their hands and keep them in plain sight) There’s no report that any police officer asked him to remove his hands out of his pockets. So obviously caution is always advised, which is precisely part of the training police go through for that type of situation. So nowhere does it state “attack people with their hands in their pockets ‘just in case’”.

Courage? There’s nothing courageous about someone who has made their own informed decision to take it upon themselves to have a career in the armed forces or the police. There hasn’t been any conscription. Both police and armed service personnel know the dangers of their careers before they choose to join. No matter how you spin this with your rhetoric and juvenile name-calling of others on here, there’s no justification for any type of action such as we have seen from the policeman in that video.

I think anyone who joins any Armed Force or Emergency Service has courage, it takes courage to go into a burning building, to treat a person at an incident who is clearly dying, it takes courage to go into an explosive situation and calm it down, see what i'm trying to get at? The Police Memorial Roll is full of Officers who've gone into work expecting to see their families at the end of a shift, but who have been killed by some low life when they were expecting a routine job, Sharon Beshenivsky and Ian Broadhurst being just 2 examples. That's what I meant by courage.

 

[DymondDude]

Did the video show him with a weapon? No. It showed him with his hands in his pockets.

BUT HE COULD HAVE HAD HIS HAND ON A WEAPON and unless you've x-ray vision then there's no way of knowing, is there?)

I’m sorry but “but he could have” is not an excuse for anyone in the police force to assault a member of the public on the mere assumption that they may or may not have a concealed weapon. What’s to stop any copper prolifically using that excuse to kill someone? If the guy was acting in anyway deemed arrest-worthy, there were plenty of police on hand who could have coordinated a proper arrest procedure regardless if the guy actually had a concealed weapon or not.

Is barging a man to the floor (where you can see just off-frame that he quite clearly bounced off the floor from the impact) considered proper police procedure?

The best anyone can do in that situation is to speculate a concealed weapon.

(And that's exactly what we do when dealing with people who have their hands in their pocket, I get them to remove their hands and keep them in plain sight)

And did the police actually order him to do that? The policeman in question is quite clearly an agent provocateur.

I think anyone who joins any Armed Force or Emergency Service has courage, it takes courage to go into a burning building, to treat a person at an incident who is clearly dying, it takes courage to go into an explosive situation and calm it down, see what i'm trying to get at?

I know exactly what you’re getting at. You assume that people who make their own conscious choice to join any of these types of service should be given some sort of special regard. The only time when I give anyone from the armed forces regard are the normal everyday folk who were made to fight in the two world wars because it wasn’t their choice to do so but went and fought anyway without much complaint. That’s what demands respect. A fireman chooses to endanger his life and it does take balls to do it, but not the type that should require me to revere a person in such a profession.

The Police Memorial Roll is full of Officers who've gone into work expecting to see their families at the end of a shift, but who have been killed by some low life when they were expecting a routine job, Sharon Beshenivsky and Ian Broadhurst being just 2 examples. That's what I meant by courage.

It takes an awful lot of courage for someone to strap a bomb to their chest and kill themselves for a cause as well. Does it still make it right, though, to go ahead and kill many people en masse? No, it doesn't.
Does it make it right, therefore, for a policeman to pre-emptively assault someone on the mere assumption that a person of the public is armed with some weapon that may or may not exist?

Your appeals here are dishonest and a blatant use of propaganda to bias this specific problem with this specific officer who abused his position as someone employed by the public to protect said public but who then goes and harms someone of said public under the pretence of it being to uphold the law.

(Theft is also breaking the law. Why are the police bothering to keep the peace with these protesters when they instead should be arresting the idiots who caused the financial meltdown of other peoples money which invariably has led to the protests?)

----------

Like I said, before people embark on any type of career in the armed or police forces they are made quite aware of the dangers inherent in that profession. I do have sympathy with those who die, of course, if it does come to that.

 

[Plumber]

Sorry to all you guys out for blood, but I can justify the coppers actions in my mind completely. This innocent man on the way home crap just doesn't wash. But then again I wasn't there so have no real basis to form an opinion other than one and a half minutes of video footage pretty much like the rest of you.

 

[Vushtrri]

This discussion ..if that is what it can be called was started with the words

Met Police Again
Oh Dear Oh Dear oh Dear...................and an assumption that whatever is printed in the tabloid press is Gospel truth and must be believed without question

Followed by

Seen it on GMTV this morning, it's disgraceful. Surely he is looking at a manslaugher hearing..............A comment made by someone who obviously has no understanding of the law and what constitutes a particular offence.

Followed by

Numerous comments over the past few days from barrack room lawyers who wish to be judge and jury..and who invariably have no experience of situations such as the officers found them selves on that day.

Unfortunately the issues that have arisen as I see it are:

The immediate assumption by some that all that is written in the press is the gospel truth and therefore the officer is guilty...and anyone who says otherwise such as stating that all may not be as it seems is immediately closing ranks. Dave the Fairy, I and others have simply said that we will make our minds up once ALL the details are known.

The inevitable comments about why don't the police go and catch the proper criminals!!! if only I had a quid for every time I heard that one!

Comments made by people who really don't have a clue as to what they are talking about with regards police procedures when dealing with incidents and numerous generalisations about the Police.

I do recall quite some time ago when all the debacle was going on about the mistreatment of Iraqis one or two voicing their opinions that the servicemen concerned should be hung drawn and quartered whilst the majority stated that they would wait till the full facts come out. I would hardly call that closing ranks

The death of anyone..well almost anyone... is unfortunate. Day in day out other 'members of the public' are assisted on their way by officers ...some cooperate ...others do not. The vast majority end up going on their way and suffer no ill fortune as a result. Unfortunately it may well be that this fellow may have had an underlying medical condition and subsequently died...a death waiting to happen.


..and on a final note I recall back in the 80's a report in the press stating that service men at Greenham comon had been given orders to shoot unarmed protestors if they had attacked the fence and were then walking away. Luckily most people had the common sense to realise what a crock of ****e that report was.

Officers on the outside of the fence who in those days had very little if any protection during demonstartions and were given the bulk standard order to use their hands to push away any protestors should the need arise.

One can only wonder what the respose would be from our chums in the RAF in those days if one of the poor old dears was then to collapse and die of a heart attack....."Oh he's facing a manslaughter charge".............I think not!

I think I would rather be policing Greenham Common than a G20 summit

 

[Talk Wrench]

The last 5 pages or so of this thread have proved several things.

1. Anyone who isn't a member of a Police force are simply armchair barristers and not entitled to pass opinion or as such criticise the Police for any possible malpractice.

2. Anyone who is a member of a Police force looks upon any opinion, comment or criticism made by a civilian as an innapropriate attack on themselves and their respective forces.

3. If you are not a Policeman, you are now in effect guilty until proven innocent. The presumption that everyone is guilty until proven to be innocent seems to be the new flavour of todays policing methods

4. The police seem to think that they cannot do any wrong and they do a difficult job etc etc and anyone who says different can speak with mr Nightstick. (Okay, I made that last bit up).


CLOCKWORK ORANGE IS HERE PEOPLE.


And this thread is going round in circles.



TW

 

[FeedTheYak]

[FONT=&quot]

The last 5 pages or so of this thread have proved several things.

1. Anyone who isn't a member of a Police force is simply armchair barristers and not entitled to pass opinion or as such criticise the Police for any possible malpractice.

2. Anyone who is a member of a Police force looks upon any opinion, comment or criticism made by a civilian as an inappropriate attack on themselves and their respective forces.

3. If you are not a Policeman, you are now in effect guilty until proven innocent. The presumption that everyone is guilty until proven to be innocent seems to be the new flavour of today’s policing methods

4. The police seem to think that they cannot do any wrong and they do a difficult job etc etc and anyone who says different can speak with mr Nightstick. (Okay, I made that last bit up).


CLOCKWORK ORANGE IS HERE PEOPLE.


And this thread is going round in circles.



TW

totally agree, with your post. The distain and contempt that the policemen on this forum show is nothing short of disgraceful.
They constantly HIDE behind phrases like, "Joe Public doesn’t understand", "Joe Public haven’t got all the facts" etc etc......
I DON’T NEED to be a BARRISTER to know an ASSAULT when I see one!!
And just for the record, A POLICE OFFICER is a LONG LONG LONG way from being a Solicitor or a Barrister!!!!! (No formal qualifications needed tell its own story I feel!!!!)
Jumped up little Hitlers, who think that once they get their warrant cards, they can do as they please.
Once again a story breaks of Police Brutality, and once again the police are looking very unprofessional!!!![/FONT]

• [FONT=&quot]Assaulting a man with his hands in his pockets.[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]Baton striking a man from behind (smells of a cowardly action to me)[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]Officer has decided to not wear his number. (pre-meditated to me)[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]Officers initially claim they had NO CONTACT with the man. (soon changed their story when the tape showed up)[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]Officer fails to ID himself for 1 week!!!. (am sure that the police would judge this as a sign of guilt if a suspect in one of their cases did this !!)[/FONT]

• [FONT=&quot]Am sure there is more stuff, but this is enough for me to start questioning the people who SERVE ME.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]
Oh and let’s not forget that a SENIOR POLICE OFFICER, on seeing the tape and incident, pretty much questions the OFFICERS actions!!!!!!!

Oh and let’s not forget that this innocent OFFICER has been SUSPENDED!!!!
(I’m sure that the police do this lightly!!)

I AM NOT ANTI POLICE; I have supported police officers previously and have no fewer than 10 close friends who are coppers, one being a Chief Super!!
I AM ANTI anyone who is violent, abuses their powers etc etc. If that makes me a bad person then I can live with that.
If as a Police Officer you go around thinking everyone outside the job is potentially a criminal, and that then gives you the right to administer some instant justice, then I’m afraid it’s YOU, who has a serious problem.
And I am seriously worried that there is so many members of the Police Force, who think this OFFICERS action, were ok.[/FONT]

 

[firestorm]

I've been watching this thread with interest.

From what I've seen in the media it would appear to be a heavy handed copper has gone overboard but thats just my initial opinion. I'm waiting for the IPCC investigation to hear the full details though.
Whatever the investigations outcome is there will be people with polarised opinions on both sides who won't be satisfied though.

 

[firestorm]

I know exactly what you’re getting at. You assume that people who make their own conscious choice to join any of these types of service should be given some sort of special regard. The only time when I give anyone from the armed forces regard are the normal everyday folk who were made to fight in the two world wars because it wasn’t their choice to do so but went and fought anyway without much complaint. That’s what demands respect. A fireman chooses to endanger his life and it does take balls to do it, but not the type that should require me to revere a person in such a profession.

Shouldn't they be given some sort of regard as they've chosen this profession, as opposed to being told to do it? They've done it by choice.

 

[chiprafp]

[FONT=&quot]totally agree, with your post. The distain and contempt that the policemen on this forum show is nothing short of disgraceful.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]They constantly HIDE behind phrases like, "Joe Public doesn’t understand", "Joe Public haven’t got all the facts" etc etc......[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I DON’T NEED to be a BARRISTER to know an ASSAULT when I see one!![/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]And just for the record, A POLICE OFFICER is a LONG LONG LONG way from being a Solicitor or a Barrister!!!!! (No formal qualifications needed tell its own story I feel!!!!)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Jumped up little Hitlers, who think that once they get their warrant cards, they can do as they please.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Once again a story breaks of Police Brutality, and once again the police are looking very unprofessional!!!![/FONT]

• [FONT=&quot]Assaulting a man with his hands in his pockets.[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]Baton striking a man from behind (smells of a cowardly action to me)[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]Officer has decided to not wear his number. (pre-meditated to me)[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]Officers initially claim they had NO CONTACT with the man. (soon changed their story when the tape showed up)[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]Officer fails to ID himself for 1 week!!!. (am sure that the police would judge this as a sign of guilt if a suspect in one of their cases did this !!)[/FONT]

• [FONT=&quot]Am sure there is more stuff, but this is enough for me to start questioning the people who SERVE ME.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Oh and let’s not forget that a SENIOR POLICE OFFICER, on seeing the tape and incident, pretty much questions the OFFICERS actions!!!!!!![/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Oh and let’s not forget that this innocent OFFICER has been SUSPENDED!!!![/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](I’m sure that the police do this lightly!!)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I AM NOT ANTI POLICE; I have supported police officers previously and have no fewer than 10 close friends who are coppers, one being a Chief Super!![/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I AM ANTI anyone who is violent, abuses their powers etc etc. If that makes me a bad person then I can live with that.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]If as a Police Officer you go around thinking everyone outside the job is potentially a criminal, and that then gives you the right to administer some instant justice, then I’m afraid it’s YOU, who has a serious problem.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]And I am seriously worried that there is so many members of the Police Force, who think this OFFICERS action, were ok.[/FONT]

I love what you do with capital letters it really brightens up your posts DT_Xtremez_14:

Your not anti police yet:

A POLICE OFFICER is a LONG LONG LONG way from being a Solicitor or a Barrister!!!!! (No formal qualifications needed tell its own story I feel!!!!)
[FONT=&quot]Jumped up little Hitlers, who think that once they get their warrant cards, they can do as they please.[/FONT]

and have no fewer than 10 close friends who are coppers, one being a Chief Super!!

Imaginary friends to back up your diatribe dont count.

[FONT=&quot]

[FONT=&quot]Oh and let’s not forget that this innocent OFFICER has been SUSPENDED!!!![/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](I’m sure that the police do this lightly!!)[/FONT]

Standard for an officer under investigation, until they have a verdict.

I am seriously worried that there is so many members of the Police Force, who think this OFFICERS action, were ok.

As far as I can see most have stated they are awaiting the results of the investigation?

Why dont you pop off back under your bridge.[/FONT]

 

[FeedTheYak]

CHIPRAFP,

I can understand your need to have a personal attack on my views, hence you are justifying my previous posts.
You are ONLY an RAFP, YOU certainly haven’t got a clue what a Met Coppers job entails, so your opinion is just as plastic as anyone else’s on here, (except the proper PC's). To make out you have any idea about Met SOP's is fraudulent in the least!!
You keep using the word "diatribe", like a little boy, who has found a word that he thinks is clever!! (its not, it’s rather sad).
Based on your responses to this original post, I think you are ANTI-Members of the public!! How else can you be so blinkered, as to come out with some of the "diatribe" you have written???
Your signature block tells a complete story, you are one of the Police types I am talking about, you want to do as you wish, AND NEVER BE QUESTIONED, because you believe your right!!
Well thankfully, you are only an RAFP, who has very limited powers and certainly if YOU tried handing out some Met Police justice, I’m sure a member of the Armed Forces wouldn't just walk away with their hands in their pockets.
In truth, YOU have NO more knowledge or insider understanding of this case, than anyone else on here, so to try and claim you have is a little pathetic.
But thank you for proving my point about a small number of Police Types, (cant really class you as a Police Officer), and their narrow minded attitudes.
Have you ever actually arrested anyone??? I think probably not.

 

[chiprafp]

Ahhh yes and your posts in this thread show exactly the kind of self important person you are, with your FRIENDS in high places and your supposed qualifications in Law. I think people have enough of an idea on the kind of troll you are now so I need not say anymore on your ****e

Although you must tell me where you get the creativeness with the capital letters, is it random or is there a method to the madness?

Have you ever actually arrested anyone??? I think probably not.

Ahh you see theres your problem, you thought.

 

[FeedTheYak]

Ahhh yes and your posts in this thread show exactly the kind of self important person you are, with your FRIENDS in high places and your supposed qualifications in Law. I think people have enough of an idea on the kind of troll you are now so I need not say anymore on your ****e

You havnt got a clue if Im lying or not, I will say that I havn't said anything in my posts that are inacurrate. I’m not going to answer to you. My freinds in the Police are NOT the types of Officers I have a problem with. Certainly, NOTHING like you. I never said I had qualifications in Law, so once again you are twisting the facts, in a way that only a Police type can.

Oh, and I am willing to bet, that you are currently on duty somewhere insignificant, replying to Egoat, when you should in fact be doing your job !!!
(But hey, that’s just me guessing of course!!)

Just because you are a Police Type, doesn’t make you right all the time. As soon as you can learn to accept and understand that, your life will be a lot more rewarding.

Just for the record, my mate who is a Chief Super, has previously asked me why I don’t join as a PC. Fact is, a) I wouldn’t take the pay cut. b) I couldn’t take working alongside people like you CHIPRAFP.

You call me a lot of things, which in truth apply to you much more appropriately.

I’m not going to carry this on anymore, I have an opinion of you now, and I’m sure you have an opinion of me, don’t think either of us will be that bothered about the others opinion. Can’t say that you do your Police Type colleagues any favours though.

 

[chiprafp]

I’m not going to carry this on anymore,

Result! DT_Xtremez_14:

 

[burglar]

I have had a glegg at some of the posts on this thread with interest (as an ex cop with over 12 years experience on riot duty etc) and it has proper made me chuckle.
my view is that it is well suss that there was such a good number of photogs and vids to see this bloke get hit behind the legs with a baton (which is a standard procedure), then pushed(again a standard procedure) and then fall. Had the cop in question been "over the top" do you think he would have stopped there?

Unfortunately when policing protests these things happen (I don't mean the death side before anyone goes off on one!).
With regards to the cop not wearing his collar number, there is nothing untoward in that in my old force we stopped wearing collar numbers on riot kit in the mid 90's due to the H+S factor of having metal numbers on our shoulders. The guys number or identifier would be on his helmet!!

He would have been automatically suspended on being issued with a reg 9 notice informing him that he was subject of a complaint beacuse the matter involves a death following a police interaction--- again standard stuff!!
There is nothing out of the ordinary in any of this it would appear that both parties in this (cop and victim) have been well unlucky and both in the wrong place at the wrong time.
As for senior officers reviewing the tapes and thinking it's wrong---thats what they do and are paid to do (thats why they are called the shoulda squad), also the further up the promotion ladder you get the less of a cop you become. from inspector onwards you are not a cop more a political manager.

leave it for the IPCC to sort out.
We all go on about the forces not getting enough support----- you lot want to try doing a job where nobody wants you around until the wheel comes off and then they all come running (please Mr policeman look what this nasty man has done!!).
ask yourself the question from the adverts "policing---- could you do it?"

Rant over!!

 

[GD on Wheels]

I have had a glegg at some of the posts on this thread with interest (as an ex cop with over 12 years experience on riot duty etc) and it has proper made me chuckle.
my view is that it is well suss that there was such a good number of photogs and vids to see this bloke get hit behind the legs with a baton (which is a standard procedure), then pushed(again a standard procedure) and then fall. Had the cop in question been "over the top" do you think he would have stopped there?

Unfortunately when policing protests these things happen (I don't mean the death side before anyone goes off on one!).
With regards to the cop not wearing his collar number, there is nothing untoward in that in my old force we stopped wearing collar numbers on riot kit in the mid 90's due to the H+S factor of having metal numbers on our shoulders. The guys number or identifier would be on his helmet!!

He would have been automatically suspended on being issued with a reg 9 notice informing him that he was subject of a complaint beacuse the matter involves a death following a police interaction--- again standard stuff!!
There is nothing out of the ordinary in any of this it would appear that both parties in this (cop and victim) have been well unlucky and both in the wrong place at the wrong time.
As for senior officers reviewing the tapes and thinking it's wrong---thats what they do and are paid to do (thats why they are called the shoulda squad), also the further up the promotion ladder you get the less of a cop you become. from inspector onwards you are not a cop more a political manager.

leave it for the IPCC to sort out.
We all go on about the forces not getting enough support----- you lot want to try doing a job where nobody wants you around until the wheel comes off and then they all come running (please Mr policeman look what this nasty man has done!!).
ask yourself the question from the adverts "policing---- could you do it?"

Rant over!!

A realy good post, but one thing if Google the G20 riot for police photos you will see the riot police and beat coppers are wearing metal collar mumbers on their shoulders, and they are getting stuck in.

 

[burglar]

A realy good post, but one thing if Google the G20 riot for police photos you will see the riot police and beat coppers are wearing metal collar mumbers on their shoulders, and they are getting stuck in.

Can't speak for the met but my old force stopped the use of metal numbers in about 1998 and started disciplining cops for wearing the old metal ones instead of the new embroidered epaulettes with their names on them.
What needs to be undertood about the met is that is is totally different in every way to every other force in the UK--- from it's funding to its command structure.
Also in the met the officers "collar number" is not unique to that officer. In smaller forces the collar number can be properley called a force number ( it is the same as your service number) and stays with you until you retire, however in the met it is a Divisional number and changes with postings and tends to get recycled throughout your service.