UK Policing

Duafc said:
Time to leave this very depressing thread.
Click to expand...

Camilo said:
I think it's pretty much right in this case. Act like a dick, get a wee kicking. Seems reasonable to me. The original video made it seem far more like police brutality than it actually was.

If the police kills him then that's obviously murder. Dumb thing to ask.
Click to expand...

We had a much more minor example of this happening down the road from my footy club a few years ago.

A yob fan who had got in the habit of abusing players from the safety of his mates decided to abuse the player outside the local Tesco and got a swift headbutt to the face.
Very similar sort of debate to the one being held on here.
 
fergies coat said:
Plenty of protesters seemed to think so, and the family are to traumatised to go out according to thier upstanding solicitor.
Click to expand...

But also didn't their MP stress they had no desire to politicise this, or to do any interviews / make themselves known?
 
Duafc said:
Any dividing of the incident for what’s relevant and what isn’t is totally daft and everyone in the thread is discussing before/after/the thing in it’s very short entirety.

If you want to only discuss the element that doesn’t include police doing illegal things and call people out on their views re police actions (only about the non illegal stuff) go for it, though I would suggest that’s fairly transparent.

Posts before this clip: 2

Posts after this clip (but not discussing head kicking): 10+
Click to expand...

I was commenting on the video posted tonight hence that being the focus of the discussion. I’m guessing I’m not allowed to do that because I didn’t post anything specific the other day?

I have not said I only want to discuss this or that as you suggest.

Stop being so petty.
 
Camilo said:
I think it's pretty much right in this case. Act like a dick, get a wee kicking. Seems reasonable to me. The original video made it seem far more like police brutality than it actually was.

If the police kills him then that's obviously murder. Dumb thing to ask.
Click to expand...

We want police to hand out violent justice live time, but we don’t want brutality. Tough line to walk, that.
 
NotThatSoph said:
It's a bit strange that a bunch of guys on here who evidently like violent criminals, like the cop, get so angry at other violent criminals.
Click to expand...

Please show me where I’ve justified any of the violence in this by the way. I’m still waiting to see the irony.
 
RedSky said:
I'm questioning why Stamper escalated the situation like he did, I also clearly stated that both Teal and Chair lad should be reprimanded with the law in my opening post. Which you seem to have ignored completely and got upset, I mean surely it's obvious to anyone with eyes that they're both going to be in the shit for what they did and rightly so.

When i'm watching the footage in slow motion, Stamper walks up and grabs Teals arm. Blonde female Officer is directly behind him. Teal guy turns to the left, at this point Stamper puts his hand on the back of the neck and forces his head down towards the ticket machine. So my original question, is there any reason why they're allowed to act like that, when from the footage Teal guy isn't exactly pushing back or making it hard for the Officers to arrest him no? It's not like he's being physical, if anything it all looks relatively calm. Is there something you're seeing that i'm not?

Obviously, once Chair Guy got involved (after the 5 second mark) it escalated. So clearly all three, Stamper, Teal and Chair Guy should get some serious shit thrown at them.

I just don't understand why Stamper behaved like that initially? If you've got three Officers all armed, why wouldn't one of them have a taser out just in case? Or is procedure to only get the taser out when things get physical? You seem to think i'm attacking the Officers involved and giving a pass to the civis when obviously i'm not.
Click to expand...

Teal guy is without a doubt resisting arrest, stamper is attempting to restrain him against his will using force which is perfectly legal.

The reason why a tazer wasn't out initially is because as you quite rightly point out the situation looks calm and pointing weapons at people has a habit of escalating situations.

At it is the situation escalated anyway because big brother clearly didn't like that little bro was getting forcibly restrained.
 
RedSky said:
My question, as a civilian. Which goes over your head because you know procedures etc that we don't. Why does an Officer immediately switch from being casual to being aggressive when attempting to arrest someone being passive? Would you say Teal was being passive in that video? (obviously he isn't passive after 8 seconds, im talking about the initial arrest attempt). Do you not think that sometimes when Police react in an agressive way it can escalate the situation further? I can understand resorting to that if someone is resisting for like 20 seconds odd. But he went from a normal arm arrest to grabbing the neck in 2 seconds.

Would you say that Stamper was following protocal? Feel free to not answer that if you think it could cause issues with work etc. I'm not trying to get you into trouble.
Click to expand...

I think it’s impossible to say, based on that footage, how much someone was resisting or if the officer escalated things as you imply. The body worn video would give a better idea.

What I think is pretty obvious though is the guy in the teal was already a suspect in a violent incident and he didn’t want to be arrested by the officers and was non compliant.

If he had been compliant the video stops a few seconds in and we wouldn’t be discussing any of what followed.
 
TheReligion said:
I think it’s impossible to say, based on that footage, how much someone was resisting or if the officer escalated things as you imply. The body worn video would give a better idea.

What I think it pretty obvious though is the guy in the teal was already a suspect in a violent incident and he didn’t want to be arrested by the officers and was non compliant.

If he can been compliant the video stops a few seconds in and we wouldn’t be discussing any of what followed.
Click to expand...

Aren't you contradicting yourself here though?
 
Like almost every thread on the Caf (football, politics, policing, etc), we always seem to fall into two polarised camps. Lots of things can be true at the same time.

That lad resisting arrest was wrong…
The policeman banging the lads head twice against a cupboard (?) was wrong…
The lad(s) attacking the police were wrong and …
The policeman booting a tasered lad in the head twice while on the floor was wrong.

Those lads need charging/prison time (of varying lengths). That policeman needs sacking (and possibly prison time too).

I’ve had two family members in the police, one still is… it’s a tough job and got tougher. They both think that modern policing (talking more, trying to prevent not react) has its place but maybe some people in society have lost respect for the police/the law as a result. When I was younger (and a bit of a lad), I was partly scared of the police but respected them. I don’t think a lot of people are now and we need to find the balance… people should listen to police as long as polite/clear/fair and police need to use reasonable force and be accountable. Not an easy task…
 
To the surprise of no one, the alleged victim is a piece of shit...

But this isn't really the story is it? Regardless of the guy coming out with his compo face lawyer..the real story is a police officer needlessly kicking a guy in the head when he's on the floor.

Even if the guy deserves a hiding, I'd rather it wasn't dished out by our police who are supposed to remain professional and use proportionate force.

Both parties should be prosecuted.
 
Duafc said:
We want police to hand out violent justice live time, but we don’t want brutality. Tough line to walk, that.
Click to expand...

We also want the police to protect the general public and have the ability to defend themselves and us the general public from the worst of society and particuly violent criminals.

Sometimes that means fighting fire with fire and using force. Sometimes In heat of the moment that force will cross a line. But as long as there is fair context for that force I don't really see a problem with it. Ultimately for alleged victims of police brutality in this case it was very much a case of feck around and find out.

Police officers when dealing with extremely violent situations are reacting on instinct alone, and because they are human if they are feel threatened they will lash out, it's human nature and with the blood pumping and adrenaline rushing it's incredibly difficult to control especially if you have just been punched in the head about 10 times.

We can't really expect the police or be able to protect us or themselves if we are going to throw the book at them because one officer who was very nearly compromised and had just been violently attacked and injured momentarily let the red mist takeover.

He shouldn't of kicked him, no doubt and he should face some form disciplinary action. But criminal charges and prosecution? Absolutely not.
 
Can't just be me who thinks being kicked in the head (which I believe was wrong and the officer has rightly been charged) would have been a favourable outcome for the guy on the floor elsewhere in the world.

You're in an airport. You try take a weapon from police. Its never ending well and if you are able to come away breathing, you've been very lucky
 
Sandikan said:
We had a much more minor example of this happening down the road from my footy club a few years ago.

A yob fan who had got in the habit of abusing players from the safety of his mates decided to abuse the player outside the local Tesco and got a swift headbutt to the face.
Very similar sort of debate to the one being held on here.
Click to expand...

Not really though, as the yob you cite hadn’t been tasered beforehand, and you didn’t qualify who headbutted him.
 
TheReligion said:
It’s not impossible to say he was non compliant is it because he ends up punching three officers in the face and resisting arrest?

Where are we going with this.
Click to expand...

Let me write it down in bullet point form:

1. I have clearly stated both suspects should have the book thrown at them. I mean that's just common sense and obvious.
2. Is it protocal for Stamper to grab Teal by the neck after 2 seconds.
3. Would you consider 2 seconds enough time to determine whether a suspect is being compliant or not.
4. Would you consider grabbing someones neck in an attempt to arrest someone aggressive?
5. Are the Police allowed to be aggressive in arresting someone within 2 seconds of approaching?
6. Would the three Officers talk before hand on how they were going to approach the arrest?
7. Is kicking someone when they've been tasered allowed?

I have been trying to get out of you for the past hour whether he was following protocal and he is allowed to act in that way or whether he was heavy handed in the arrest in the first place. If he's following Police procedure and he's allowed to grab someone by the neck immediately to arrest them then fair enough, I don't agree that Police should be allowed to do that immediatly but that's just my opinion. But if he isn't allowed then surely you can understand why I think he escalated that whole incident? I don't know Police procedure, you do, hence me asking questions. You seem to think i'm trying to attack the Police force, when all anyone has done in this thread is attack Stamper. The Police can and do have bad apples in the Force, that doesn't mean that we're attacking them all.

It's also fair to analysis and discuss a situation where a Policeman royally fecks up without you personally going after people who may question what the Police were doing.
 
africanspur said:
They're on bail aren't they?

The police will be coming for them soon enough I'm sure don't worry.

I'm pretty sure the police officer wasn't thinking about their bail status when kicking him in the head though.
Click to expand...


No he was probably thinking I've just been suckered punched, my female colleague has had her nose broke and I'm carrying a lethal weapon.

I'm not sure if they're on bail or not buy now this new cctv has come out then they should be thrown in jail.
 
JagUTD said:
Can't just be me who thinks being kicked in the head (which I believe was wrong and the officer has rightly been charged) would have been a favourable outcome for the guy on the floor elsewhere in the world.

You're in an airport. You try take a weapon from police. Its never ending well and if you are able to come away breathing, you've been very lucky
Click to expand...


This would've been the reaction of most if not all police units worldwide.

Except America these 2 would've been riddled with bullets.
 
Jericholyte2 said:
Not really though, as the yob you cite hadn’t been tasered beforehand, and you didn’t qualify who headbutted him.
Click to expand...

Headbutt from the player he abused.
And yes, clearly not tasered, or being on the floor. But a minor example of the "in a position of authority" should be expected to be absolutely above reproach with their behaviour etc
 
dannyrhinos89 said:
No he was probably thinking I've just been suckered punched, my female colleague has had her nose broke and I'm carrying a lethal weapon.

I'm not sure if they're on bail or not buy now this new cctv has come out then they should be thrown in jail.
Click to expand...

What should they be in jail for, violence?
 
dannyrhinos89 said:
This would've been the reaction of most if not all police units worldwide.

Except America these 2 would've been riddled with bullets.
Click to expand...

Read it as wouldn't bother would've*


In an airport? It absolutely would. You aren't going to let a highly aggressive person loose in such a setting with any sort of weapon. In the US the first contact would have been the police shooting. Questions to follow. But around Europe and beyond, at the point the situation had escalated to such a point the risk level increased from an arrest gone wrong to a potential threat to the public. You're getting shot.

Even in the UK there are examples of a person trying to take a police officers weapon and lethal force being justified at that point. The UK is fairly reserved compared to even our closest neighbours when it comes to firearms so I've no doubt at all that the end restikt would have been worse for the guy elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
RedSky said:
Let me write it down in bullet point form:

1. I have clearly stated both suspects should have the book thrown at them. I mean that's just common sense and obvious.
2. Is it protocal for Stamper to grab Teal by the neck after 2 seconds.
3. Would you consider 2 seconds enough time to determine whether a suspect is being compliant or not.
4. Would you consider grabbing someones neck in an attempt to arrest someone aggressive?
5. Are the Police allowed to be aggressive in arresting someone within 2 seconds of approaching?
6. Would the three Officers talk before hand on how they were going to approach the arrest?
7. Is kicking someone when they've been tasered allowed?

I have been trying to get out of you for the past hour whether he was following protocal and he is allowed to act in that way or whether he was heavy handed in the arrest in the first place. If he's following Police procedure and he's allowed to grab someone by the neck immediately to arrest them then fair enough, I don't agree that Police should be allowed to do that immediatly but that's just my opinion. But if he isn't allowed then surely you can understand why I think he escalated that whole incident? I don't know Police procedure, you do, hence me asking questions. You seem to think i'm trying to attack the Police force, when all anyone has done in this thread is attack Stamper. The Police can and do have bad apples in the Force, that doesn't mean that we're attacking them all.

It's also fair to analysis and discuss a situation where a Policeman royally fecks up without you personally going after people who may question what the Police were doing.
Click to expand...

We don't know how long the officer had been attempting to arrest the man. So most are your question are compleatly pointless.

For all we know they may have been there ten minutes already attempting to get the man to come peacefully.

How long would you say is long enough before a certain amount of force cam be used to detain a non complaint suspect?
 
RedSky said:
Let me write it down in bullet point form:

1. I have clearly stated both suspects should have the book thrown at them. I mean that's just common sense and obvious.
2. Is it protocal for Stamper to grab Teal by the neck after 2 seconds.
3. Would you consider 2 seconds enough time to determine whether a suspect is being compliant or not.
4. Would you consider grabbing someones neck in an attempt to arrest someone aggressive?
5. Are the Police allowed to be aggressive in arresting someone within 2 seconds of approaching?
6. Would the three Officers talk before hand on how they were going to approach the arrest?
7. Is kicking someone when they've been tasered allowed?

I have been trying to get out of you for the past hour whether he was following protocal and he is allowed to act in that way or whether he was heavy handed in the arrest in the first place. If he's following Police procedure and he's allowed to grab someone by the neck immediately to arrest them then fair enough, I don't agree that Police should be allowed to do that immediatly but that's just my opinion. But if he isn't allowed then surely you can understand why I think he escalated that whole incident? I don't know Police procedure, you do, hence me asking questions. You seem to think i'm trying to attack the Police force, when all anyone has done in this thread is attack Stamper. The Police can and do have bad apples in the Force, that doesn't mean that we're attacking them all.

It's also fair to analysis and discuss a situation where a Policeman royally fecks up without you personally going after people who may question what the Police were doing.
Click to expand...

With all due respect not everything is in black and white so what you’re asking is impossible to answer.

It’s all about if the use of force was lawful, proportionate, reasonable and necessary and explaining that based on the circumstances, including any impact factors, at the time.

Can you grab someone by the neck? Yes. There’s no time limit on things either. It’s about justifying it as above.

A quick example is you may be justified in being ultra aggressive and proactive in arresting someone if the circumstances allow for it. You don’t need to say ‘excuse me Sir can you come with me’ to each individual as you can probably imagine there are certain people who will simply not respond.

I feel as though you need to have very clear yes or no answers when it is not always possible to give them.
 
dannyrhinos89 said:
This would've been the reaction of most if not all police units worldwide.

Except America these 2 would've been riddled with bullets.
Click to expand...
Agreed, attack an armed officer most anywhere else they'd very likely been shot dead ….game over.
 
JagUTD said:
Violence is a pretty solid way to get yourself some thinking time tbh
Click to expand...

You would think so, but a bunch of people are cheering on potential lethal violence against a defenseless person, so with that paradigm in mind I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with it.
 
NotThatSoph said:
You would think so, but a bunch of people are cheering on potential violence against a defenseless person, so with that paradigm in mind I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with it.
Click to expand...

Defenceless is a bit of a stretch. Its possible to criticise the officers actions while also not excusing the behaviour of the others involved. Which TBF is how most seem to be looking at the situation.
 
Longshanks said:
We also want the police to protect the general public and have the ability to defend themselves and us the general public from the worst of society and particuly violent criminals.

Sometimes that means fighting fire with fire and using force. Sometimes In heat of the moment that force will cross a line. But as long as there is fair context for that force I don't really see a problem with it. Ultimately for alleged victims of police brutality in this case it was very much a case of feck around and find out.

Police officers when dealing with extremely violent situations are reacting on instinct alone, and because they are human if they are feel threatened they will lash out, it's human nature and with the blood pumping and adrenaline rushing it's incredibly difficult to control especially if you have just been punched in the head about 10 times.

We can't really expect the police or be able to protect us or themselves if we are going to throw the book at them because one officer who was very nearly compromised and had just been violently attacked and injured momentarily let the red mist takeover.

He shouldn't of kicked him, no doubt and he should face some form disciplinary action. But criminal charges and prosecution? Absolutely not.
Click to expand...

It sounds good and in this particular instance you might think all that is a perfect system but it is not. The line will then move, not every case will be covered with cctv and the message you are sending is that it is okay, red mist is okay, extra violence is okay, hurting people who at that point can’t defend themselves and pose no threat is okay.

It just isn’t and it’s such a slippery slope, the training and policy is completely clear for very good reason. He was clear enough in his thinking to draw a taser, fire effective shots, engage in a takedown, get back up, realise the person on the floor had been tasered, cover him with his own taser, take a pause - and then he decides to kick him in the head and stamp on him for a twitch of the neck.

You and seemingly lots of other people may think feck around and find out is a great old life maxim, and for 2 civilians or certain situations, maybe. But it has no business whatsoever in responsible policing and there will be instance after instance where you do not like the outcome, or the kind of police service you have, one bit.
 
Longshanks said:
We don't know how long the officer had been attempting to arrest the man. So most are your question are compleatly pointless.

For all we know they may have been there ten minutes already attempting to get the man to come peacefully.

How long would you say is long enough before a certain amount of force cam be used to detain a non complaint suspect?
Click to expand...

That may be the case, but we don't know that. That's just speculation which makes your post completely pointless.
 
JagUTD said:
Defenceless is a bit of a stretch. Its possible to criticise the officers actions while also not excusing the behaviour of the others involved. Which TBF is how most seem to be looking at the situation.
Click to expand...

Laying prone on the ground, with his arms to his side, after getting tased, is pretty much the definition of defenseless.

If he wasn't defenseless, why didn't he try to defend himself? He was certainly doing so before.
 
TheReligion said:
With all due respect not everything is in black and white so what you’re asking is impossible to answer.

It’s all about if the use of force was lawful, proportionate, reasonable and necessary and explaining that based on the circumstances, including any impact factors, at the time.

Can you grab someone by the neck? Yes. There’s no time limit on things either. It’s about justifying it as above.

A quick example is you may be justified in being ultra aggressive and proactive in arresting someone if the circumstances allow for it. You don’t need to say ‘excuse me Sir can you come with me’ to each individual as you can probably imagine there are certain people who will simply not respond.

I feel as though you need to have very clear yes or no answers when it is not always possible to give them.
Click to expand...

I understand levels of force.

I agree with the bolded, but kicking someone's face and then stamping on their head while they're downed is inexcusable. No matter what they have done to fellow Police Officers. Or do you think he can justify those actions?
 
NotThatSoph said:
Laying prone on the ground, with his arms to his side, after getting tased, is pretty much the definition of defenseless.

If he wasn't defenseless, why didn't he try to defend himself? He was certainly doing so before.
Click to expand...

Prior to this he was an aggressor, not defending himself. And defenceless Vs neutralised? Given what went before, how a restrained suspect was able to get free and engaged in attacking police officers the bar for what counts as defenceless is debatable.
 
RedSky said:
I understand levels of force.

I agree with the bolded, but kicking someone's face and then stamping on their head while they're downed is inexcusable. No matter what they have done to fellow Police Officers. Or do you think he can justify those actions?
Click to expand...

I think on the face of it, it’s difficult to foresee a situation where that level of force can be justified.

The IOPC investigation is fully independent though so the public should have confidence in its findings when they are released.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.