Thank god our police aren't armed

You are welcome. Even though the incidents in the video were roleplay the two individuals most certainly received an adrenaline rush while dealing with the "suspects."

You mentioned in a previous post about "hands going to pockets." IMO at that point escalating force is justified, to what extent I can't say, I wasn't there. However HANDS ARE WHAT KILL YOU. It is impossible for the officers to know what may come out of the pocket in their suspect's hand. A knife? A blackjack? Or heaven forbid a gun.
 
This thread is about whats happening in the UK, totally different situation where guns are a lot more prevalent, and certainly does not relate to two coppers coming the c*nt with an old bloke.

He was no threat to them, they could have killed a bloke that age with a f*cking taser no other reason than being on a power trip.
 
Replace the training firearm with a training taser in your mind if it helps you understand the point of the news video.

Did they know he was not a threat? No. In the video he is constantly moving and putting his hands in his pockets. That can be seen as potential danger. Am I saying the police were 100% correct? Of course not, in just a few seconds into the video I can see where they were not handling the situation properly.

All this being said, it is up to their supervisors and potentially a court to decide if their actions were proper in that situation.
 
To all,

I noticed this thread on policing, and wondered if I could for some quick anonymous help. I conducting a dissertation, at Loughborough Uni, on fans opinions on British policing methods in dealing with football hooliganism, and wondered if you had a spare 2 minutes you could fill out this quick survey. The fans opinions are often ignored so I wanted to focus my research on it.

https://lboro.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/the-policing-of-british-football-hooligans

Thanks so much in advance,
Jack
Thanks for the responses I have had so far! Really appreciated
 
This thread is about whats happening in the UK, totally different situation where guns are a lot more prevalent, and certainly does not relate to two coppers coming the c*nt with an old bloke.

He was no threat to them, they could have killed a bloke that age with a f*cking taser no other reason than being on a power trip.
They werent 'coming the cvnt with an old bloke' though.

They were attempting to clarify a 63yr old mans identity via reasonable conversation.
It was this,alleged,upstanding member of the community who decided he didnt want any of that......and instead decided to be the arsehole he obviously enjoys being and is well practiced at.

As i said earlier,he completely manufactured the incident by his hostile behaviour and actions.

Short term pain for long term gain in this tossers case.
 
They were attempting to clarify a 63yr old mans identity via reasonable conversation.

Except they have no right to his identity unless they can articulate a reasonable suspicion he has done something wrong (You look like someone is NOT grounds to escalate), he also has the right not to talk to them.
It would be very interesting to know the description of the person they claimed they were looking for, because I have a sneaky feeling it wont be a 63yr old Rasta if they can come up with one at all.

This incident started with a completely innocent man walking the street and ended with what, for a bloke of his age, could be a life threatening assault, the hostile behavior and actions were entirely from the police.
 
Except they have no right to his identity unless they can articulate a reasonable suspicion he has done something wrong (You look like someone is NOT grounds to escalate), he also has the right not to talk to them.
It would be very interesting to know the description of the person they claimed they were looking for, because I have a sneaky feeling it wont be a 63yr old Rasta if they can come up with one at all.

This incident started with a completely innocent man walking the street and ended with what, for a bloke of his age, could be a life threatening assault, the hostile behavior and actions were entirely from the police.
They have every right to stop someone if they believe he's a wrong un,and the fact he resembled a suspect wanted for arrest was plenty enough in my opinion.Any decent,reasonable,and law abiding member of society would choose to comply and clear the incident up in a matter of minutes.

But if youre an areshole,with an agenda......

I'm bowing out now,i think my point and opinion has been reiterated often enough.
 
They werent 'coming the cvnt with an old bloke' though.

They were attempting to clarify a 63yr old mans identity via reasonable conversation.
It was this,alleged,upstanding member of the community who decided he didnt want any of that......and instead decided to be the arsehole he obviously enjoys being and is well practiced at.

As i said earlier,he completely manufactured the incident by his hostile behaviour and actions.

Short term pain for long term gain in this tossers case.

His age really means little. I know a man in his late 50's that could handle any five of us no problem at all. He's an amazing fighter/martial artist. Is that the norm? No but there are people like that walking the street.

Maybe someone can clarify for me, if the police were looking for a suspect who committed a crime, and this man fit the suspect's description are they not allowed to detain him until they verify his identity?

I understand if the police think someone looks a little dodgy and they want to speak to him/her the individual in question is under no obligation speak to the police. But isn't it different if the police are dealing with a person matching a description of a criminal suspect?
 
That would come under "Reasonable articulated suspicion", but as the police have dropped the charges rather than confirm there was such a description in play you have to make your own mind up.
The misconception is that the police have any right to stop you unless you have or are about to "Breach the peace" (They get their authority from common law and it is quite clear), they can suspect whatever they like but without evidence a vague description is no grounds to arrest.
 
His age really means little. I know a man in his late 50's that could handle any five of us no problem at all. He's an amazing fighter/martial artist. Is that the norm? No but there are people like that walking the street.

Maybe someone can clarify for me, if the police were looking for a suspect who committed a crime, and this man fit the suspect's description are they not allowed to detain him until they verify his identity?

I understand if the police think someone looks a little dodgy and they want to speak to him/her the individual in question is under no obligation speak to the police. But isn't it different if the police are dealing with a person matching a description of a criminal suspect?
Yes youre right. Blueonblue is describing a stop and search encounter and he is dead right in what he says about that but those are not the circumstances in which this man was being spoken to. It was as you describe, they were looking for a suspect for a crime and in the absence of any help from him as to whether he was that suspect they have a power of arrest in order to take him in and establish if he was that person or not. if not, he would be released. His charging for an offence, it was a public order matter, is not the offence that the original suspect was wanted for, because he was not the person wanted for that matter. Nobody other than the CPS lawyer will know why that charge of some public order offence was dropped.
 

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.