Thank god our police aren't armed

bluethrunthru said:
If he isn't being detained he is under no obligation to give his details to the officer. Once they indicate they intend to detain him I believe he is obliged to tell them either at the roadside or down at the station. However as a well know advocate for race relations who works with the Police AND who has been detained for this mistaken identity before I think this is a crass mistake by these Police officers and Avon and Somerset Police in general - one would have thought officers on patrol in the area where this guy lives - a known "friend" of the Police should be aware he looks a bit like a known villain and could act accordingly.

I agree though notwithstanding all the above a quick proof of i.d would have prevented all this.

The lass who discharged the taser is in bother though. She clearly shouts " Taser, taser " after she has pulled the trigger - that is done as much to warn the colleague so he can get out of the line of fire. Which he wasn't able to and she definitely fired too close to him too.
Click to expand...
And yes youre right. when the police have to discharge that CS spray stuff from canisters they shout 'CS', so as to make colleagues aware, so they dont get cross contaminated by it. because then there would be problems, if everyone was suffering the effects. why do you see a problem in them shouting out what they are trained to do for a good practical reason?
 
Uncle Wally One Ball said:
You are thinking of 'the police' or 'Avon and Somerset Police' though. What it really comes down to though is one particular police officer, a himan being, who may not know that. He was also in a hood and not being particularly helpful about his identity or appearance. If there is a failure here in not recognising something, it is not on the behalf of the poor bird working doing an hard job, it is on the behalf of the bloke who could easily have said 'Im not that bloke, I am the bloke who has in the past done race relations stuff'. The lass who pulled the tazer thing is only doing what she is trained to do, and that is the whole point of training. Every time she would have pulled that thing in training she will have been instructed to shout 'taser. taser!' That is the whole point of training, so that when it does for real it is second nature. So that is what she did. It is nothing to do with the colleague at all, it is just what she is told to do and in pressure situations trying to be professional she reverted to training.
Click to expand...
She is trained in the use of a taser and during the training it is explained why they must shout a warning beforehand.

We shall see if she was "just doing her job" when they IPCC are finished with it. I hope she loses it.
 
Uncle Wally One Ball said:
And yes youre right. when the police have to discharge that CS spray stuff from canisters they shout 'CS', so as to make colleagues aware, so they dont get cross contaminated by it. because then there would be problems, if everyone was suffering the effects. why do you see a problem in them shouting out what they are trained to do for a good practical reason?
Click to expand...
You've read that wrong. His problem is that she shouts it after discharging it not before as she is trained to and therefore she doesn't warn her colleague.
 
The bloke clearly has a chip on his shoulder/attitude problem.He could have prevented such an unnecessary outcome by complying with the officers request and verifying his identity - he chose to be aggressive and uncooperative which led to the Police increasing their response to his erratic behaviour.

I would imagine he now has more 'reason' to hate the Police,and i would not be surprised if this was the the very outcome he desired.

Obviousy the officer should have shouted her intention to use the Taser prior to discharge.Other than that,i see no criticism in the actions of either officer.
 
FantasyIreland said:
The bloke clearly has a chip on his shoulder/attitude problem.He could have prevented such an unnecessary outcome by complying with the officers request and verifying his identity - he chose to be aggressive and uncooperative which led to the Police increasing their response to his erratic behaviour.

I would imagine he now has more 'reason' to hate the Police,and i would not be surprised if this was the the very outcome he desired.

Obviousy the officer should have shouted her intention to use the Taser prior to discharge.Other than that,i see no criticism in the actions of either officer.
Click to expand...

I agree. He is guilty as hell.

Guilty of being a black man in front of an overhyped paramilitary goon.

Hang him. How else are these black folk going to learn they need to live in the shadows. They'll be wanting to marry our daughters next.
 
Kazzydeyna said:
I agree. He is guilty as hell.

Guilty of being a black man in front of an overhyped paramilitary goon.

Hang him. How else are these black folk going to learn they need to live in the shadows. They'll be wanting to marry our daughters next.
Click to expand...
Guilty of being an obnoxious prick,they come in all colours.
 
As someone who has been subject to section 60 which this looks like being, the police have certain duties.
To give their name and the station, the law which you have been stopped for, your rights,
what they are looking for.

You only have under law to comply, you don't have to give your name.

This video doesn't show if they did that, but they do say they think he's someone else which he denies, legally unless they have reason to believe he is a danger all their actions are unlawfull.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.