Forum menu
Brizzle Babylon manage to taser their own race relations advisor, in the face, because they mistook him for a wanted man!
You couldn't make it up:
Full unedited video at the bottom of this page:
How bloody stupid can some of our plod be.
I'm the first to back them up when they are in the right, but this is just utter incompetence. If they thought he was the wanted bloke, all they had to do was arrest him - they didn't, they instead chose to harass him because he wouldn't tell them who he was (and he was under no duty to do so) then assault him when he tried to walk off.
This sort of crap, is why the decent police aren't allowed the tools they need to protect themselves!
So - how much compo do we reckon he is going to get?
This sort of crap, is why the decent police aren't allowed the tools they need to protect themselves!
What kit is that then?
So - how much compo do we reckon he is going to get?
Probably a bit more than the last time they mistook him for the exact same guy.
Turn that around - he knew all he had to do was engage with them, tell them who/what he was and that was that.
He CHOSE to be obstructive - yes he legally didn't HAVE to tell them anything but he went out of his way to not tell them and be difficult.
Ergo it bit him on the arse.
I'm sure that a 63 year old white man would similarly have been tasered in the face for refusing to give his name to the police and I am pleased to note that charges of assaulting a police officer have been dropped. Something very wrong here.
That's pretty embarrassing. She'll not get away with it I wouldn't have thought. I mean, fire a taser in someone's face and [i]then[/i] say "tazer tazer. You've been tazered"! Baffling.
yes he legally didn't HAVE to tell them anything
Ends there doesn't it?
[img] 
[/img]
What kit is that then?
Phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range
Both sides could've handled that better.
If it's a case of mistaken identity I guess t would be annoying if it kept happening but it was only the second time it happened. If I was mistaken for a dangerous criminal I certainly wouldn't be getting aggro with the rozzers, and I I did is be fairly happy if I'd only got tazered.
Black or white, if the cops think you're dangerous, and you start being obstructive and agressive then they're not going to calm down are they.
Both sides could've handled that better.
Black or white, if the cops think you're dangerous, and you start being obstructive and agressive then they're not going to calm down are they.
I'll go with that.
If they thought he was the wanted bloke, all they had to do was arrest him - they didn't
Pretty certain that's exactly what they were trying to do and he was doing a game job or resisting it, hence the taser. To the face as I guess the jacket was too thick for it to work.
I'll stop short of he was asking for it and we have no idea what happened prior to the start of the clip but not being helpful certainly escalated the incident. But I'm white middle class, brought up to trust the police and with no experiences to make me think otherwise. I might well think differently if I was black.
"Hullo. Are you Tom?"
"Afraid not Officer. I'm Bill"
"Ah, righto. Have a nice afternoon"
The use of Taser might seem disproportionate to the layman, but wouldn't it have been easier to talk to the Officers? Particularly if you were in an influential position and trying to improve relations?
"you've been tasered" really? I think he might have bloody well guessed that after being, you know, tasered in the face. Still, police being helpful I s'pose.
In all seriousness why couldn't they have attempted to calm or restrain him. Not a very good clip as there is no indication as to how things escalated. Tasered in the face seems a tad extreme though.
Small point... He's not the Police's race relations officer... he sat on a panel a few times looking at ways of helping the police engage better with the BAME community in Bristol. Bit like saying I'm a doctor as I go to meetings with doctors.
But anyway, disproportionate force from the police. The victim was being stand offish and obstructive, and could have handled it better, but the thing is, he is legally entitles to be stand offish, obstructive and a bit of dick. none of those things are illegal. Annoying for officers who are trying to do a job,but not actually illegal. Police officers in the UK are better than most in the world, and part of the not being armed thing is that they develop people skills and learn to handle situations without resorting to the "do as i say or I'll shoot" approach that some American officers have.
I guess the concern is, with tasers becoming increasingly wider issued, its easier to reach for a weapon when your people skills are exceeded, as in this case.
funkmasterp - Member
"you've been tasered"
It's the follow up to the old South East Regional Crime Squad's "You've been framed" 😉
Could have worked out very differently if it wasn't for the bystandard with the camera, too.
Well, I suppose they probably wouldn't have dropped the assault charge.
In the vid it sounds like in WPC thinks she's playing a game of "taser-taser"
Ninfan - I thought you had to tell the police who you are when asked? Are you sure you don't?
Ok, I'll have a bite on this one....
The taseree could have not been an idiot and it would have been over, without incident in seconds.
The use of force is justified by the individual officer- we don't know who the person they thought he was is, if he was outstanding for murder or something then it would not be entirely unreasonable due to his capability...
The wording regarding arrest could have been a bit clearer...
Regarding the barb in the face, I wouldn't have thought that was intentional, as far as I am aware it is usually aimed at the torso.
Sweetest dog ever!
Without the video the police would have encountered the gentleman who was acting suspiciously, when questioned he became aggressive and lashed out injuring both officers. The officers tried to restrain him but he was too violent and a taser was required. Utterly incompetent individuals reacting out of fear.
Leigh2612
The taseree could have not been an idiot and it would have been over, without incident in seconds.
What if he didn't have ID? What if he had somewhere to go or something to do? The Police in question aren't the Gestapo are they?
The use of force is justified by the individual officer
Please elaborate how it's justifiable to shoot metal hooks into someone and electrocute them because they don't want to be manhandled by you?
yes he legally didn't HAVE to tell them anything but he went out of his way to not tell them and be difficult.
what an odd attitude to take..
he's perfectly entitled to be difficult, the cops, however aren't entitled to assault him because of it.
@TJ, there's no general requirement to give details to the Police, only if under a specific legal requirement to do so (Rice v Connelly). It's not an S50 stop so none of that stuff applies.
According to Avon and Somerset Police guidelines "you do not have to give your name, address or date of birth to the police if you're stopped and searched unless you are being reported for an offence.'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-38691162
Two officers, one grandfather (obviously older than the two police officers). What happened to the skill of negotiation, or if that fails and is felt absolutely necessary then the use physical force. (i.e. thump him!).
he's perfectly entitled to be difficult
Always a great attitude to take with everyone you meet in officialdom or just other members of the public. I find it just smooths the way and makes my life easier and less full of hassle. I'm entitled to be which makes it the right thing to do.
The wording regarding arrest could have been a bit clearer...
From watching the full (nine minute) vid I would argue that at no point was he under a lawful arrest until he was lying on the ground after being tasered.
Up to that point there was a lot of asking of name, and physically obstructing his route to try and bully him into giving his name, but they had plenty of chance to arrest and entirely failed to do so - when he walked through the gate, he wasn't under arrest, he had a right to do so, and they were both trespassing and committing an assault and battery
You could of course be technical and point out that they were guilty of a technical assault at several points before that, both in pointing the taser at him, and threatening to cuff him despite not having arrested him. In a bad mood you could probably stretch that out to armed trespass (since they were no longer acting in the course of their duty) and aggravated GBH.
like the shoot first warning later, good advert for not arming the bobby on the beat. 😯 🙄
So what was the kit you alluded to in your o.p
The way I see that is...
1 ) Police thought they'd spotted someone who was wanted.
2 ) They tried to confirm whether he was who they thought he was.
3 ) He didn't cooperate with their efforts to confirm who he was (or wasn't), as is his right.
4 ) Although he isn't obliged to cooperate, doing so may have helped them quickly decide he wasn't the wanted man.
5 ) Conversely, choosing not to cooperate is unlikely to reduce their suspicion that he was the wanted person.
6 ) It appears they concluded he was the wanted man and tried to arrest him.
7 ) He resisted this by pulling away and trying to walk away.
8 ) I haven't got a clue why she tasered him.
There's no reason to conclude that he was tasered because he didn't give his name, as if it were some sort of summary punishment for being unhelpful. It seems to me that they decided that he was the wanted man and went to arrest him, and then he was tasered during that arrest because he was resisting arrest (which is a broad term in this context). The issue, to my mind, is whether or not use of the taser was justified or proportionate for that arrest - and on the basis of just one viewing of that video I'm not seeing how it was.
4 ) Although he isn't obliged to cooperate, doing so may have helped them quickly decide he wasn't the wanted man.
do you really think if he told them his name they would have stopped harassing him ?
Great ape - can you identify the point of arrest though?
They were asking him his name
He made to leave
They didn't know who he was
They didn't arrest him, despite more than adequate opportunity.
They instead blocked his way and then assaulted him
It's clear that at that point they were still in clear doubt as to his identity (they didn't think he was, they thought he might be, but were still very clear that they didn't know)
See Fraser Wood v DPP for case law - to quote: "at no stage before the defendant struggled to free himself did he assert that he was arresting the defendant."
I agree that the police were technically wrong, but it's not a race thing is it. Just like my nan used to say, you ack like a dick, you gets tasered in the face. Gawd bless her.
do you really think if he told them his name they would have stopped harassing him ?
Well it would have let them quickly establish he wasn't the wanted man, so more than likely yes.
Great ape - can you identify the point of arrest though?
Not categorically, but when the footage cuts and restarts with them in the gateway, that looks to me like the male officer is trying to arrest him. We can't be sure what was or wasn't said to him during the bit we don't see (I.e arresting him, but for that matter, we don't know what he said or did during that period either).
Or perhaps...
They were asking him his name
He made to leave
They didn't know [b]for certain[/b] who he was
They didn't arrest him [b]straight away, they tried to persuade him to cooperate[/b]
They [s]instead blocked his way[/s] [b]eventually arrested him[/b] and then assaulted him - [b]taking hold of him is part of arresting him. I've already said I can't see from that footage why on earth she tasered him[/b]
It's clear that at [s]that point[/s] the start they were [s]still[/s] in [s]clear[/s] doubt as to his identity (they didn't think he was, they thought he might be, but were still very clear that they didn't know) but in due course decided to arrest him - which he mildly resisted. And then tasered him
?
Anyway, that's just one of many ways of looking at it - I'm not saying it's correct as I'm not a mind reader 🙂
We'll be needing a internet mashup remix of that bristolian accent 'Taser taser taser! You've been tazered, ok'
Well it would have let them quickly establish he wasn't the wanted man, so more than likely yes.
Really, it wouldn't have mattered what name he gave as all the they would have heard is Joe Bloggs and kept on with the harassment, they were so convinced it was the man they were looking for they already had the tazer out and trained on him.
Tasered in the ****ing face!!!! 😯 😯
The only way I'd have a happy resolution to that would be for her to tasered in the face for no reason too. She'd think before doing it to someone again.
Hopefully she is sacked for this. One good effect from everyone having camera phones now - there is evidence of this sort of wrongdoing
Really, it wouldn't have mattered what name he gave as all the they would have heard is Joe Bloggs and kept on with the harassment, they were so convinced it was the man they were looking for
We'll, as I said before, [i]I'm[/i] not a mind reader.
All he had to do was to get the id out that in the first place that was in the wallet he was pointing to after he was tasered.
Would have completely diffused the situation straight away.
Why would any reasonable person try to waste police time like that?
Police time that technically we are paying for through taxes, so wasting our time as well.
And wasting the time of someone who might actually be needing their help as well.
No sympathy for him at all.
The policewoman was pretty pathetic though, shouldn't be in charge of a taser at all. Maybe should be relegated to sitting behind a desk.
I've been stopped by the police when out running because they had reports of a white guy in a white t-shirt legging it from a burglery.
Never crossed my mind that that was racial profiling/harassment.
Only white middle - class dicks could display the level of ignorance of police racial profiling displayed on this thread.
https://greenandblackcross.org
Greatape - the 8:55 video at the bottom of the Bristol post page is unedited, no jumps in it
2:18 - "are you royston maclenna" (sp.)
2.21 - "are you royston maclenna"
2.25: "what is your name"
2:28 "what is your name"
2.30 - turns physical as they try to force their way into the gate (armed trespass 😉 )
Nothing that can constitute an arrest (and an admission that they were still uncertain of his identity at the point where it turned physical - they had more than adequate opportunity to arrest if they thought it was him)
The Taser Officer looks to be a Sergeant, unless I have misread her eppaulettes from the video.
I've been stopped by the police when out running because they had reports of a white guy in a white t-shirt legging it from a burglery.Never crossed my mind that that was racial profiling/harassment.
were they pointing a tazer at you when they stopped you ?
Well it would have let them quickly establish he wasn't the wanted man, so more than likely yes.
Police: "We think you're Bob, and Bob's wanted. Are you Bob"
Tasered: " I'm not Bob"
P:"Who are you then?"
T: "Bill"
Would the next line be
P: "Oh, okay, sorry to bother you"
Or
P: "I don't believe you"
?
I don't see the situation as a threat to the officers, at worst he appears to be trying to get away from, so the taser seems excessive. Especially the quickdraw firing of it with no warning or apparent aiming!