[Closed] More G20 disproportionate police actions.

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 :

[i]A statement from the Met on the new video said: "The apparent actions of this officer [u]raise immediate concerns[/u].

"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.[/i]

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 ...

[i]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. [/i]

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.

longer version of video [url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/davehillblog/2009/apr/14/boris-g20-police-assault-ian-tomlinson ]here[/url] kind of makes it look even worse

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-Eleven

she 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 [i]still[/i] 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!!!!?

[i]Looks to me like his lapels were attached to his riot suit, but partly obscured by the high viz vest he was wearing, [/i]

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: [i]"Every officer is accountable under law, and fully aware of the scrutiny that their actions can be held open to,"[/i])

"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.
[url]

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.

Brack
Verbal abuse is difficult for a baton wielding armour clad policeman to take

You are sh***ing me? Have you heard of "professionalism" or even "doing your job"?

yossarian, maybe they should advertise a two-tier protest. Jumper-knitting middle-class middle-aged women and WPCs with flowers in the helmets on tuesdsay lunchtimes, then crusty thugs with knuckle dusters and PCs with small-willy syndrome on friday evenings. Now that's service! 🙂

ernie - Full marks for bringing SS concentration camp guards into it. If you think the fear of the very worst that this officer dealt out is akin to the threat of being shot, beaten to death, strangled, hung, "just" gassed or any one of a thousand other ways of being killed, I think a sense of proportion is in order.

At the risk of sounding like a tin-foil hat nutter (too late!), does anyone else suspect that possibly the Met might have not been too unhappy about creating a little localized trouble. Kind of justifies their massive police deployment.

And (puts thicker tin-foil hat on) how about the convenient timing of 'terror' raids just after all the Ian Tomlinson stuff kicked off. I saw a funny report in one paper yesterday saying that they had found sugar in some of the houses raided, which is often used in bomb-making. ERRR - shit they had better lock us all up then! (presumably it was in big quantities but still...)

(presumably it was in big quantities but still...

Anyway back to topic once again this is what happen when you hire a thug. And as for beating someone because he insults you it's illegal.
In the case of policemen (all in my opinion) **** is more a rather accurate description than an insult.
Plus as pointed above what about "professionalism"?

Come on, she was obviously asking for it!

RB you need to try harder, its not working!

[i]In the case of policemen (all in my opinion) **** is more a rather accurate description than an insult[/i]

Riiiiiighht....all 140,000 of them.
Including the WPCs.

eejit. 🙄

The police have always handed out indiscriminate violence when they thought they could get away with it - they're no different now

[img] [/img]

She was blatantly asking for it, Hippy!

🙂

She

Well edited Stoner 🙂

While I think the respose was disproportionate to the cause, maybe if people on both sides were a little more respectful of each other instead of screaming and swearing at each other there wouldnt be such problems. Cops wouldnt go out hyped for a clash and protesters didnt go out hyped to yell and swear and insult them until they respond. Having been at one of these protests in my student days (just to see what it was like as a mate was heavily into his socialist workers stuff) I saw that the entire build-up on the part of the protesters was to go under the guise of quiet protest but expecting to provoke a response from the police. It's almost as though they WANT the police to respond violently so that they can claim how poorly they're treated when just protesting. On many occasions my mate returned from protests feeling cheated as the police had allowed the protest to go un-touched, and he truly did believe in the cause - he just enjoyed the group hysteria and sense of power when the crowd surged on people trying to stop them.

Maybe its an unfair judgement cast on all protesters caused by past experience, but I now only ever "see" the protesters provoking the police by shouting and swearing in their face and purposefully trying to be awkward in order to trigger something. After all, as they said, it's not much of a protest if it doesnt get serious media coverage due to an incident.

She deserved some form of controlling response, but slapping her across the face was plain stupid and clearly not the correct response. I guess the problem may be that if he tried a hand pushed into the chest to keep her back then he would now be accused of sexual harrassment or something.

from watching the video on the news, I felt sorry for the other police there as that could have gone very very wrong, as the ****tard that caused the trouble legged it once he realised what he had done, and left his mates to deal with the potential kicking that was about to ensue.

However due to their professionalism it actually calmed down a bit.

As for she asked for it, she asked to be arrested yes, asked to be smacked around the face, and then beaten with a baton, no.

[i]As for she asked for it, she asked to be arrested yes, asked to be smacked around the face, and then beaten with a baton, no. [/i]

She new what she was doing, as for the slap, it was a controled responce I though, not too hard to leave dammage, but with enough force to to warn any normal person to BACK OFF.

uplink - amazing picture - where's that from?

scratch that - just read the image details 🙂