Copper who hit woman gets off.

What a lot of people forget is that the Police are allowed to use force up to injury and to control people with by causing them pain. It must be proportional and reasonable however.

I think he probably did just step over that line – but not a long way over it and her not giving evidence will never go down well.

Not guilty is fair enough. He didn't hit her on the head several times with his baton did he?

tron – Member

I think the entire thing is disgusting. The police act like tossers – they seem to think their role includes suppressing any vaguely political protest.

I think you will find this is political decision made far up the tree – a long way from the individual copper. Also after the events of the last year or two I think a lot of the tactics will be reviewed.

The police act like tossers – they seem to think their role includes suppressing any vaguely political protest.

No they don't. They are there to protect the public. SEE HERE

mr smellie. ha ha

WTF does her being a woman have anything to do with it? Are you advocating sexism?

I saw the video on the news. The woman confronts the copper – he shoves her, she comes back for more, he slaps her in the face with the back of his hand (which is apparently procedure), then she comes back again and screams in his face for a bit, then he whacks her on the leg, causing a small bruise.

To be honest, I was on the side of the protester until I saw that video. Now I think she deserved all she got and the copper's actions were entirely justified.

First she thinks she's bloody Che Guevara or something then she whines about having a small bruise as soon as she gets a very innocuous whack off a copper she's abusing. Dear me.

Political? why wasn't she charged with assault for throwing stuff at him? I wonder how many other cases would get to court if the main witness refuses to turn up and give evidence against the person they are accusing, what happened to contempt laws?

One of my mates joined the police because he loves to fight and he wanted to beat up the bad guys and not get into trouble. He's quite good too…

she got £26000 and didnt bother going to court? Right decision made imo

Hmmm…he's spent 47 yrs going by the name of Delroy Smellie…reckon his parents have a lot to answer for!!!

LOL! I think that might have quite a bit to do with it, tbh. He was probably bullied mercilessly at school, grew up bitter and angry, and then pursued a career that allowed him to bully others. He was probably turned down by a girl he fancied, for being 'Smellie', and has had a grudge ever since! 😀

Right, for those of you who seem to have little grasp of the Law; The police are of course allowed to carry weapons for personal defence, and to use proportionately, and with reasonable force, to uphold the Law.

Forget your personal prejudices, and knee-jerk reactions toward those you consider 'workshy wasters', and try to consider what Law and Order actually mean.

In this situation, people exercising their Democratic Right to protest, were forcibly detained by police using the tactic commonly known as Kettling, which is specifically designed to subdue a crowd. This tactic has been widely condemned as disproportionate in this particular instance, and those in charge found to be at fault and guilty of making poor decisions.

The crowd at that protest had been antagonised by police tactics, which then led to anger and violence spilling over. The police clearly provoked this response, as this can then be used as a case to ban public protests. Which is probably what the police want. Regardless of wether or not you personally agree or disagree with the reasons behind any protests, the right to protest is something we should expect to enjoy in a Democratic Society. I don't agree with the sentiments of the Countryside alliance, the EDL, or the BNP, but I respect their right, as citizens of this country, to protest publicly. Of course, all groups must themselves respect the Law, and act accordingly.

From the video footage, I can see that the woman is being loud and disruptive, but I didn't see her behave in a threatening manner towards the Smellie one. Come on; a 5 foot something, 8 stone woman, against a 6 foot plus, body armoured up bloke twice her weight?? And he felt 'threatened'? Do me a favour! Stick him up against some tooled up football hooligans, and then see how free he is with his baton. The bloke's a coward and a bully, little more than a hired thug.

Citizens have the legal right to resist unreasonable 'force', be it from the police or anyone. The police are subject to the same laws as all citizens. Shame this thug wasn't dealt the Justice he deserved.

Let's not forget, an innocent man was kiled that day, because of police actions. I sadly doubt his killer/s will ever see true justice. 🙁

The police have a very difficult job to do. They are damned if they do, and damned if they don't. But there are serious flaws within our police force, that need addressing. This verdict does little to promote the police as protectors of society.

she got £26000 and didnt bother going to court?

Pity she hadn't been charged with a public order offence then that odious turd Max Clifford wouldn't have been able to get in on the act.

Talkemeda were you there? You cannot judge the copper's actions from what you see on that CCTV footage, you do not have a full view of what was going on around him, numbers of protestors, verbals, events from earlier in the protest that will contribute. I am not even going to make a decision or thought process as to whether he was in the right or wrong since I wasn't there and can't fully judge (nor do we have the full facts as we haven't attended the court case).

hOwever I can saying having spent 5 years doing public order training and having had to put tactics into practice I can say that unless you have been in a similar situation you can not even begin to imagine what goes on in your mind and how you deal with it/how it appears to outside eyes who haven't seen the full incident.

If she really cared about the fact she had been assaulted then she should have attended court. In any other situation, more often than not if the victim won't attend court then the case will be dropped, but as it was a copper who was the defendant they will say "in the public interest" to run the case (and with the CCTV).

I knew he'd get off. They are just thugs and know they can get away with it as the people who investigate them are on their side. They get away with murder. When we really need them they are are not there…too busy protecting the rich.

I have been many in similar situations, and must say I've been quite disturbed and saddened by the actions of some police officers. At one demonstration, I saw a big burly copper in full riot gear smack a woman, who was sitting on the ground singing some peace protest song, round the head with a truncheon. Definitely disproportionate force. She wasn't at any time, being 'threatening'. That was one of the nastiest and most cowardly acts I've ever witnessed.

As for the video footage, I suppose it's open to subjective interpretation. I see a big thug hit a small woman, without sufficient justification. Is being lippy to a police officer illegal? Does it warrant violent assault?

Being contained in a 'kettle', by a bunch of well-armed aggressive police, is quite intimidating. So yes, I can imagine what it's like. Especially when I'm potentially a target for violence, for doing nothing wrong.

Talkemada

Your general point may be OK and certainly the kettling is wrong and counterproductive. I think its use will be reviewed after the incidents this year.

However in that particular incident the only disproportionate force is maybe the baton strike. Even then its not that much – he didn't hit her on the head with it a number of times.

The police are allowed to use force.

Is being lippy to a police officer illegal?

Police officers (and indeed many others on here) don't much care. It is provocative, and therefore it is predictable that if you are lippy they will hit you. They are there for your protection and have a very difficult job to do. Doing their job makes them angry. They need the release.That is what they do, and you should learn to deal with it. Back away from them with your hands visible. Don't make eye contact. Call them "Sir". Or take the consequences. 😉

Or take the consequences

Sorry B'wana. 😳

He should have knocked the shit out of her the annoying little shite that she is.

Right, for those of you who seem to have little grasp of the Law; The police are of course allowed to carry weapons for personal defence, and to use proportionately, and with reasonable force, to uphold the Law.

I will be equally patronising and point out that he has been found to have acted using proportionate, reasonable force in a court of law, consisting of at least several people who presumably have a greater grasp of the law than yourself.

She refused to give evidence at Trail, so I don't see the problem. Clearly there is more to this than meets the eye.

having been on receiving end of the police on a power trip many times, I'm more than happy to believe the worst of the lot them. However in this instance although a bit OTT at least he was held to account for his actions it was investigated. If it hadn't been caught on camera though with the subsequent press coverage it would have gone nowhere and it's interesting to see the use of "snatch squads" in these situations to remove protesters with cameras that are filming these events to suppress any evidence if they do get a bit heavy handed. 😕

Sorry B'wana.

Oh dear. Racist as well as blinkered. I'm surprised you missed out the fact that the officer is black in your 'reasons for him being bullied'

Many of the responses on here appear to be the result of blinkered prejudice, and are therefore mostly not worth considering. As for the officer's colour, how exactly is that relevant? It's only you who have mentioned it…

Totally justified IMO.
Glad he was found not guilty.
If people protest violently they're going to get a whack and that's what happened here. I just hope that this does not damage his career.

That decision was right, we need to back the police. The cop has used force under common law with a pre-emptive strike. Anyone of us can use force under common law if the circumstances permit.

I watched that YouTube clip and you can see the situation getting out of hand and the officer getting overwhelmed. His other officers (called a serial, normally 6 PC's and 1 PS)are clearly out of position due to the volume of protesters. I would say he has acted first to stop that female attacking him, and secondly to show other protesters that he is in charge.

Right decision.

Is he black? I'm sorry, I hadn't noticed. I just saw a uniformed thug…

Hmmm – that ties in quite appropriately with your 'selective' observation skills 🙄

If people protest violently

Can you provide evidence of this woman's 'violent behaviour'? the only violence I see is from PC Smellie.

Woody, I'll ask again; what has his colour got to do with anything? As I said, I only noticed a uniformed thug. Whatever colour he is is irrelevant.

I think she lost all credibility when she refused to give evidence. Why? Because her lifestyle might be in question? What have you got to hide love? That & running off to Max **** Clifford!

Coppers have a tough job to do. By & large if you do alright by them then they will do alright by you..There are ways & means of getting your point across – her choice wasnt the smart one..

oops little edit. It looks bad cos hes a big guy & shes a little woman & smacking her across the back of the legs makes it look worse. But I wasnt there so I cant say for sure how I would have reacted. Sadly she blew any sympathy from me by not giving evidence & involving Max Clifford..

Are you honestly saying that looked peaceful to you?
I'm all for the right to protest but this was nothing more than an excuse for idiots to have a pop at the police (who I am not necessarily the biggest fan of). They knew it and the coppers knew it.

I'll also repeat – your observations are very selective if you failed to notice. His colour is irrelevant. It was you who used the terminology B'wana, which I found inappropriate given that this word is derived from swahili and in common parlance has strongly pejorative connotations.

Hmm. Personally I think he overstepped the mark but I don't think it was the end of the world… But the description of the judge's comments say that he:

"had just seven seconds to decide how to react when Ms Fisher charged at him on his blind side. She was carrying items in her hands — a carton of orange juice and a camera — which might have been weapons, the judge added, and the officer was entitled to use force to defend himself. "

Some of this is contradicted by the video- she doesn't "charge him" and she's not "on his blind side", he's standing square and looking straight at her. And yes, she was carrying items but they couldn't reasonably be taken as weapons- and he had plenty of time to appraise that. She's standing perfectly still, pointing away from him (and gobbing off no doubt), for about 4 seconds while he decides to hit her, so claiming that it was some instant reaction is just nonsense. Maybe the first slap but not drawing and using the baton.

So, I'm a bit bummed about that- if the case was there to be made that the level of force was reasonable and that he was under provocation and that the long shifts and exhaustion played the part, that's fine, but this part is just a whitewash. I think even if you totally agree with the decision it's quite hard to credit the judge's comments.

What I thought was more interesting was this:

"who had been on duty for 28 hours with just three hours rest during last year's protests"

Am I the only person wondering why he was put in that position in the first place? Seems to me that the question here is why you would put your officers in that position in the first place, and why you think it's appropriate to give over protecting the public to people who're so knackered they can't think straight.

Just to throw my 2 pence worth in. That woman had previously thrown items at police officers and spat on them as well. In addition she was part of a larger crowd conveniently situated behind the camera. I've been hit with an asp and I came out in a much bigger bruise than she did. The other thing I would add is that numerous protestors at G20 came with masks and weapons specifically for the purpose of fighting officers and trying to injure them, including rocks, spark plugs and glass bottles full of piss. Violent protest is never nice and unpleasant things happen on both sides of the fence. Suggesting that all the police do is go around whacking perfectly innocent little ladies is ignorance of the highest order.

How did this ever get to court?

A bruised leg?

The main witness / victim doesn't even turn up on the day.

Were they trying to set precedent or make case law etc? Did PPS bring this or was it private. The police need sorting out IMO but this looks like a pretty poor case to me.

I'll also repeat – your observations are very selective if you failed to notice. His colour is irrelevant. It was you who used the terminology B'wana, which I found inappropriate given that this word is derived from swahili and in common parlance has strongly pejorative connotations.

So, because I used a term associated with oppression of Black people (in an ironic manner, in response to BigDummy's post), you've brought up the issue of the officer's colour (which I hadn't considered relevant in any way whatsoever), put 2 and 2 together, and come up with the conclusion that I'm a 'racist'? 😯 🙄 ❓

WTF does her being a woman have anything to do with it?

At last someone said it.

HH45 CPS brought the prosecution they obviously decided that despite the victim not attending court, i imagine as the defendant was a copper it was still in the public interest (their words not mine) to run it backed up with the CCTV. But that is just my take on things.

Talkemada if you're going to acuse people of being racist try not to sound culturally-ignorant at the same time. The irony is just too much…

The word is bwana.

Can't see why she needed to give evidence when the whole thing was on film FFS,and don't think it would have gotten this far if it wasn't. Look at the initial versions of events from the police in the Tomlinson case.

The same guy has been subject to other complaints for dishing out violence to women down backallys.

I agree that it's time the public started standing up to bullies uniform or not, clearly the courts won't.

Talkemada if you're going to acuse people of being racist try not to sound culturally-ignorant at the same time. The irony is just too much…

The word is bwana.

What on Earth are you wibbling on about? Where have I accused anyone of being racist?? It was me who Woody called a racist! Ok, I called Barnsleymitch a racist on another thread, but that's different.

If you read BigDummy's post just above my 'offending' one, then maybe you'll 'get' it. I'm sure BigDummy did…

I apologise profusely for the errant apostrophe, however. I have no idea how it got there. Honest, ossifer…

Just watched the footage on the Beeb and in my opinion the officer over steps the mark, yes a volatile situation but he didn't need to hit her with his baton. Why does he just walk off after doing it, it is not the job of the police to randomly hit someone and walk away or is it?

Interesting to see so many of us supporting the copper, when we know that a minority of officers, and some of their tactics, are not up to the mark.

Maybe if more of us supported the Police when they use their powers lawfully – as he has been found to have done – then a lot of the lower level aggro and anti-social behaviour that a lot on here complain about would get nipped in the bud. Instead, too many snipe at front-line Police officers, assume they are all the same as the lowest common denominator, and ignore the fact that it is the politicians who control and guide the law, the Police and their tactics and priorities. And I bet a lot who are so quick to criticise are also those who don't bother to vote for a "better" system.

As far as this case is concerned, the victim seemed intent – according to witnesses who were there – on winding up a copper as part of a crowd some of whom were intent on violent disorder rather than lawful protest. The protesters knew the Police would use kettling – rightly or wrongly, and that riot officers would be there. IMHO, he used reasonable force to take control of the situation – which is what I pay my taxes for the Police to do – and any "damage" he did to the victim was no worse than falling of a bike.

Her gender and his colour are just totally irrelevant.