Police to probe 'woman assault'
Oh dear.
So, it seems that the posturing and tough talk before, and the heavy-handed intimidatory and inflamatory tactics employed by the police have somewhat backfired. One man dead, now this. Bit of an own goal by the Babylonians.
Time for a shake-up. The police can't be used as a tool to oppress public expression. They are there to uphold the Law, not break it as their leaders see fit.
She was clearly a threat to national security.
policeman moving away - him telling her to get back, firm shove in chest,
her repeatedly in his face, shouting, swearing, aggressive, pushing, jostling along with other members of crowd
she approaches again, cuffed (across the face) and told clearly again to get back
she once again aggressively approaches a police officer trying to keep order, and gets felled with a safe and proportionate strike in a safe target area.
I see no comparison with the bloke killed, who was offering only passive resistance to a police officer and not acting in an aggressive or inflammatory manner.
cobblers.
people forget that the police have a right to use force - not too sure about the blow to the head being proportionate but the rest was.
What I found interesting is that the cop had no number visible. So what happened? He was provoked, and in the heat of the moment concealed his number and then beat the woman? Or did he conceal his number as a premeditated act, fully intending that he should be difficult to identify? And his superiors didn't see that his number was concealed? Or did they see it very well, and give their tacit approval to this behaviour? This is not "one bad apple" - this is an institutional policy of thuggery.
Interesting analysis Zulu-Eleven. Allow me to offer mine.
Violent bully loses self control, slaps woman in face, thus inticing crowd. When ( very small ) lady points out that what he has done is wrong, same coward bends down ( yes, she's that much of a physical threat ) to club lady with stick, inviting further unrest.
I see direct comparison with " the bloke killed ". Mindless thug uses excessive force.
Trailmonkey - if you look around you'll see a longer video which includes the chest shove and run up to the incident, including the police officer trying to move back a group of photographers among whom the girl was standing who were crowding in to photograph another arrest (or what seemed to be)
If she'd done something wrong, she should have been arrested at the time, not slapped across the face and then clubbed, sometime after the event.
From what I saw on the TV tonight she was insulting him and tempers where running high at the time.
He should haven't have taken his numbers off his lapel, it's that that will cost him his job not the force he used.
From the article, quote :
A statement from the Met on the new video said: "The apparent actions of this officer raise immediate concerns.
"Once we were notified of this footage by a media agency this afternoon we began to take steps to identify this officer and are currently in the process of referring the incident to the IPCC.
Perhaps Zulu-Eleven you could get in touch with the Met and tell them not to bother, and that they have no reason to be "concerned" ?
As you clearly have the whole thing wrapped up.
Zulu-Eleven: whatever the woman said, whatever her manner, there is no excuse whatsoever for the physical violence offered by the cop."Sticks and stones" - and of course, police batons ...
He should haven't have taken his numbers off his lapel, it's that that will cost him his job not the force he used.
It should cost the job of him, of every other cop that did likewise, and of their superiors that knew they were doing that.
From what I saw on the TV tonight she was insulting him and tempers where running high at the time.
Oh, that's ok then. Probably didn't use enough force 
He should haven't have taken his numbers off his lapel, it's that that will cost him his job not the force he used.
Either way, society will be a better place for it.
Ernie - The job of the IPCC would be to investigate whether in all the circumstances the use of force was reasonable and proportionate to the situation as the police officer believed it at the time. Theres two sides to every story
perhaps, Ernie, you should tell them there's no need to investigate, as you've seen the video and can tell everything from that (makes as much sense as your comment!)
Looks to me like his lapels were attached to his riot suit, but partly obscured by the high viz vest he was wearing, most of the other officers around him seem to be wearing proper jackets with the lapels therefore visible.
Ernie - The job of the IPCC........
I know what the job of IPCC is. And so does the Met.
According to the Met "The apparent actions of this officer raise immediate concerns". That is why they are referring it to the IPCC.
According you, everything seemed just tickety boo.
I haven't given my opinion about the video, but the Met have. And it seems to be at odds with yours.
policeman moving away - him telling her to get back, firm shove in chest,her repeatedly in his face, shouting, swearing, aggressive, pushing, jostling along with other members of crowd
she approaches again, cuffed (across the face) and told clearly again to get back
she once again aggressively approaches a police officer trying to keep order, and gets felled with a safe and proportionate strike in a safe target area.
Amazing. You should get a job as PR person for the Met.
What I saw in the video is a non-violent, non-volatile situation being turned into one by the police, again. The guy's body language is that of a thug on night out, not a professional.
None of this is new. The proliferation of cameras is. Thankfully.
The interesting thing about the full version of the video vimto, is that the copper at the end of the clip who keeps saying "move back please" in a non-provocative manner, and using non-provocative body language, actually seems to calm the protesters down and they end up doing what he wants the them to do, ie 'move back'.
Contrast that with how things kick-off when the other copper is aggressive, shouts, and strikes out with his hand and baton, and provokes a hostile reaction from the crowd.
Surprise, surprise ...... people respond well when being treated in a reasonable manner, and respond badly when treated like sh1t.
Seems you cant even talk to the Police any more without getting ****ted.
They should have mobbed him. 
Zulu-Eleven - Member
policeman moving away - him telling her to get back, firm shove in chest,
So first he assaults her without provocation.
Zulu-Elevenshe approaches again, cuffed (across the face) and told clearly again to get back
Then he assaults her again.
Zulu-Eleven
she once again aggressively approaches a police officer trying to keep order, and gets felled with a safe and proportionate strike in a safe target area.
Felled? Proportionate? How is violence proportionate to non violence? If being struck with a baton is proportionate to to shouting at a policeman what is the proportionate response for assaulting a policeman? Oh wait, I already know the answer to that one.
What sort of training do the police receive with regards to subduing or controlling people? Even the most cack handed idiot could have controlled subdued or arrested the woman for breach of the peace with minimal difficulty given the size difference.
A blow like that could break or fracture bones. I hope he loses his job, his house and he goes through hell. But he wont.
Just had another look at the video and the most brilliant thing about it all, is the girl's reaction to the slap on the face 
Not for her to walk away hands in face crying, to the nearest tube station. Although she's only tiny and has no means of defending herself, and the big burly copper towers over her and has all the menace of an SS officer strutting along platform 2 of Auschwitz-Birkenau railway station, she isn't going to let a Gestapo-style back-of-the-hand slap across the face put her off.
Oh no, it doesn't make the slightest little bit of difference to her ...... she's still determined to give him a piece of her mind
LOL ! Absolutely brilliant !
We need more like her to stand up for our rights 
what an idiot, looks the type who would start a fight with anything that moves!! You can see him prowling around throughout the video.... do they not train the police in how to diffuse situations?
Looks like casual violence to me - another bully.
I think what we are seeing with all of this is a bubbling hatred of both sides..... finally meeting.
The passionate protestors who lets face it 'hate the police' and use the G20 as a forum to vent those deep running feelings - 'face to face' with a silenced stranger in uniform.
YOU ARE A **** **** ****.....repeatedly shouted at you!
The TSG police who are trained to 'challenge' violence, not to be shrinking violets. Verbal abuse is difficult for a baton wielding armour clad policeman to take...personal traits take over and boom...flashpoint.
Now it's not right...but we sofa politicians should STOP and think....would I want to do that?
Should we all be so shocked that this sort of thing has happened?
If I ever found myself as a protester at the front of an angry mob, facing the riot police....would I be shocked to receive anything less than a slap or a stick around my ankles??
Of course not...and I am sure that the vast majority of people in the UK feel the same.
As a paramedic who has been assaulted twice myself ( and I'm a big bloke), funny how I didn't receive ANY support when I was clocked.
Now....I ask you....if I thumped the thugs...I really wonder what would have happened!!!!?
Looks to me like his lapels were attached to his riot suit, but partly obscured by the high viz vest he was wearing,
Must have your special Cop-Goggles (patent pending) on, as the papers describe his numbers as being "obscured by strips of grey material".
Much as with the media-stoked "outrage" that ignored the distinction between bankers and banking, in this case there is an over-looked distinction between "policeman" and "The Police" (as was reiterated in the Met statement: "Every officer is accountable under law, and fully aware of the scrutiny that their actions can be held open to,")
"The Police" have a very difficult job treading the line between policing protest and criminality. "The Police" do that through policy, protocol, rules of engagement and training. I certainly dont think the Police are corrupt, brutal, power-mad or violent. I do think, however, that Home Office policy is often power-mad, inequitable, disproportionate or overbearing. I also think it's inevitable that a "Policeman" can be brutal, a bully, lack self-control, be stupid or corrupt. But there are 140,000 so it's pretty inevitable.
Individual officer get's book thrown at him is not the same as demanding the police stand back and let anarchy commence.
They've got an interview with the policeman online now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxMZZK0ol-E
This epaulette business.....
When they're wearing public order overalls, they don't have numbered epaulettes on the shoulder like they normally would. The white ones show he is a sergeant, red ones identify an inspector, and I think it's blue for really important people but you rarely see them. No one wears numbers there. I don't know why that is, but they don't. So when you see a policeman in public order overalls without numbers on his shoulder that's because they were never there in the first place, not because he's removed them. Different forces display numbers differently with public order kit, I have seen some with it one the front of their body armour, some with big stickers on the back of their helmets. Not all the police officers at the G20 protests were in public order kit so that is why you can see plenty with the normal numbered epaulettes and normal hats as well as the 'riot' police.
i can see why folk think he used reasonable force, tempers running high etc lots of pressure and why folk think he was a nutter-he is on video thumping a woman twice in quick sucession.
but how many referees hear dogs abuse every single game, get screamed at by tens of thousands of folk every week and dont react? surely we need better training if its a case of high pressure resulting in that sort of reaction and as said, the majority of police in these videos are doing their job ie keeping the peace rather than letting rip.
These incidents were not isolated cases on 1st & 2nd of April. There are dozens of reports of assaults by the police on protesters.
Stoner is right, the police have a very difficult job at these kind of demos. What is becoming apparent is the tactics that were used were agreed and planned way in advance by politicians and senior officers.
Having been on quite a few demonstrations in my time I can tell you that the manner in which the police approached this protest was markedly different to previous times. They had clearly been told to stamp out any potential trouble immediately rather than diffuse any growing issues. The problem is that that order translated to indescriminate attacks on protesters and (ahem) people walking home from work. The use of the kettle to pen people in is always going to raise tensions on both sides and has now been proved to be totally counter-productive.
Heads should roll for what happened but blaiming the grunts on the frontline is missing the point.
yossarian, I would suggest that the kettle policy has been proven to be effective. If you go back to riots historically in which police policy would be to have running pitched battles with groups of criminal protestors (as a distinction from just protesters) there was far more damage, public order offences and injuries to both police and protesters.
They had clearly been told to stamp out any potential trouble immediately rather than diffuse any growing issues. The problem is that that order translated to indescriminate attacks on protesters
I dont think that is neccessarily unique to the kettle policy. Indescriminate attackes on protesters would be far more prevalent in a full on running street battle where adrenalin and lack of discipline is likely to be far higher. As I said above, I dont think "The Police" are going to always be able to control 100% the behaviour of every officer, but their policy (kettle) probably does limit the opportunity for illegality on both sides during a protest/riot.
If I ever found myself as a protester at the front of an angry mob, facing the riot police....would I be shocked to receive anything less than a slap or a stick around my ankles??
But if you watch that video there is no sign of an angry mob, nor on the climate camp clearing video, or even the Ian Tomlinson video - most of the aggression is from the police or reaction to police aggression.
Seeing the climate camp video, it seems quite clear that the aggression must result from policy not just 'rogue' officers.
nah Stoner, got to disagree with you. The thing about 'running' battles is that the only people involved are the ones who actually want to be there, everybody else buggers off quickly or gets out of the way. The hardcore lot who want a confrontation (police 
and demonstrators) can then get their kicks.
The kettle is indesciminate. EVERYBODY gets penned. This means that the 99% of people who don't want a scrap get pushed together with the 1% that do and held for as long as the police want to play the game for. The single biggest outcome of this is that EVERYBODY gets pissed off, including those that didn't come for a fight. Tensions rise, police get abused, lash out and the temperature rises and we see the kinds of things now on our TV screens.
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
