Altercation at Terminal 2

[maxwellblue]

I can't say that, he seems to like repeating himself over the same point, I don't know him to call him a bellend though.

Just read his posts, that will make your mind up for you

 

[hilts]

I think that’s correct-there’s a distinct possibility his actions may be ‘judged’ to be excessive, not necessary and not proportionate.

It’s clearly an emotive issue though because there are mitigating factors as well as deciding whether he had an honest belief that his actions were reasonable. It’s a hugely complex case.

Even were he not to face criminal sanction he will likely still face misconduct proceedings and could lose his job.

That said it’s also reasonable to have no sympathy for the other parties. I hope they are swiftly brought to justice.

Like I said originally the blokes throwing punches are arseholes and should get jail time. How much? Who knows we live in a world where protesters get 5 years in this country but child rapists get out after 14 months in Holland, and get to go to the Olympics.

The copper however kicked and stamped on a grounded man's head. He wasn't even trying to get up at that point, he had literally just turned his head and looked up. From the video I saw his arms are still by his side. It's revenge for the carnage these scumbags had caused.

Why a poster then lies and says everyone is seeing it the same way on here is a blatant lie.

He should be a lawyer :-)

 

[bert38]

Going back to the judgement in Rv Palmer it adds ‘..if the attack is over and no peril remains..force may be seen as punishment’

This is fundamental here-whilst in the heat of the moment and action taken in an instant (kick) may be self defence as ‘no time to consider the niceties’ but the subsequent stamp is a second deliberate act which is unlikely to fulfill this and sits more as retribution.

The reason I say this is a hugely complex case is because it was without doubt a savage repeated attack on police, and followed (undisclosed) other assaults immediate to this-so IF it were to result in criminal trial it will be incredibly difficult to assess.

 

[Judge Roughneck]

He had a taser in his arm when he booted him. If he felt he needed to he could have used that instead, maybe he didn't because he checked and was told that he'd already been tasered.

Just because he didn't go full Falling Down doesn't mean he exercised sufficient self-control.

He had already discharged his Taser though.
What you need to understand about the X2 Taser is that it has a two shot capability. Once those two shots have been used, if you haven't achieved NMI (Neuro Muscular Incapacitation) then you may as well throw it at your assailant. The truth is, they have a surprisingly high failure rate due to any number of outcomes. The assailant in this incident had already shown an extreme intention by committing GBH on at least 2 police officers. He was not restrained, the recovery time from a Taser activation is pretty instantaneous. If he was allowed back to his feet to resume his assault he is taking on the same officers of which two were pretty much out of the fight. If he had managed to get hold of any 'conventional firearm' do you think, given his propensity for extreme violence that he would not have pulled the trigger? A risk that could not possibly be taken in my view. A kick to the head is an extreme response, but these were extreme circumstances. Anything but complete admonishment for the officer in question should result in every armed officer relinquishing their Firearms authority due to a lack of support from the force, and the government.
They are, after all, volunteers, they do not get paid extra and it would not be classed as 'going on strike'. Let's see how safe people feel using the only airport on the planet without an armed response capability.

 

[hilts]

Going back to the judgement in Rv Palmer it adds ‘..if the attack is over and no peril remains..force may be seen as punishment’

This is fundamental here-whilst in the heat of the moment and action taken in an instant (kick) may be self defence as ‘no time to consider the niceties’ but the subsequent stamp is a second deliberate act which is unlikely to fulfill this and sits more as retribution.

The reason I say this is a hugely complex case is because it was without doubt a savage repeated attack on police, and followed (undisclosed) other assaults immediate to this-so IF it were to result in criminal trial it will be incredibly difficult to assess.

Its hard to legislate for this kind of thing, when does a defence stop being so. No peril is very much open to conjecture. The only way you can completely know the peril is over is if the attacker is dead and he is on his/her own.

If this can be argued in a court of law then that gives a police officer or anyone else free rein to do some serious damage.

The way I look at it is if cctv showed me arguing in a car park with someone and he throws a punch and i throw a few back and he goes down I'm walking away and not going to court. Even if he vangs his head and dies im still not going to prison However if whilst he's down I give him a kick in the head and a stamp I'm in big trouble.

I don't think my defence of he started it would save me.

 

[MadchesterCity]

A cyst that appears within a couple of hours . I’m sure the medical experts can disprove that

Exactly that piece of shit scumbag got exactly what he deserved

 

[bert38]

Its hard to legislate for this kind of thing, when does a defence stop being so. No peril is very much open to conjecture. The only way you can completely know the peril is over is if the attacker is dead and he is on his/her own.

If this can be argued in a court of law then that gives a police officer or anyone else free rein to do some serious damage.

The way I look at it is if cctv showed me arguing in a car park with someone and he throws a punch and i throw a few back and he goes down I'm walking away and not going to court. Even if he vangs his head and dies im still not going to prison However if whilst he's down I give him a kick in the head and a stamp I'm in big trouble.

I don't think my defence of he started it would save me.

I think that’s why this is a complex matter-self defence if that’s what we are looking at is very difficult to be clear cut-all of it is mere conjecture though.

It will also have a significant impact on police use of force whichever way it ends.

 

[Coatigan]

Its hard to legislate for this kind of thing, when does a defence stop being so. No peril is very much open to conjecture. The only way you can completely know the peril is over is if the attacker is dead and he is on his/her own.

If this can be argued in a court of law then that gives a police officer or anyone else free rein to do some serious damage.

The way I look at it is if cctv showed me arguing in a car park with someone and he throws a punch and i throw a few back and he goes down I'm walking away and not going to court. Even if he vangs his head and dies im still not going to prison However if whilst he's down I give him a kick in the head and a stamp I'm in big trouble.

I don't think my defence of he started it would save me.

I'm not sure that's true. Doesn't sound like it is, and I'm pretty sure there are numerous cases of people getting done for assault and manslaughter in such circumstances.

Either way, not particularly relevant here. Other than, you are right it will hinge on whether the situation was under control and whether he was still a threat. From what I have seen, I don't think it was, and I think he was still a threat, even some time after the kick.

 

[wayne71]

They got away lightly imho, imbeciles.

 

[jimharri]

They got away lightly imho, imbeciles.

If it happened in 'murica, they'd be in wooden boxes by now.