Altercation at Terminal 2

[GH64]

From the College of Policing Website:

• Either of the following must be true:
  • two probes, two electrodes or a combination of one probe and one electrode are required to make contact with the subject’s body or clothing or
  • for the twin-cartridge devices (Taser X2 and T7) a combination of at least one top and one bottom probe from differing cartridges are required to make contact with the subject’s body or clothing

I would reckon from that that the twin cartridge tasers are still single shot both cartridges, or they don't work.

 

[Bigga]

Is that his radio mid air?

Looks like it to me.

 

[Bigga]

A failed charge in his taser? He missed his shot? I'm sure it will out in the enquiry.

That's certainly a possibility.

It would certainly be difficult to miss a shot from so close in. It's a sizable target after all.

What I will say is the two videos dovetail each other really well, actually. In the second you see the officer stand up and reach for his weapon. The first shows him pointing it as in the freeze frame.

If the argument is that there might be a gap, it will only show there was longer to think about things.

I'm arguing the process for 'decision making'. Nothing else.

 

[Bigga]

But would you accept there’s a chance he’s already used his taser earlier ( which he had on the big lads hand ) tried again which is what it looks like he’s trying to do in the first second, it doesn’t work so he kicks him instead ?

I will make the point though that you were saying last night the elder brother stepped in on instinct to help his brother
Well look at that picture, look at the brother now he’s felt the taser, he’s able to control his instincts now while his brother gets booted in the face
People are less likely to fuck about once they know there’s consequences

Let's say I take your point the taser was used before.

Why didn't the brother in black react the way his brother did getting the shock? He'd have fell to floor prone, too, as electric through the body stiffens the muscles 99% of the time.

It's only my opinion, of course, but it seems to me the brother in black sits down sharpish when the weapon is drawn on him.

 

[bluemc1]

Let's say I take your point the taser was used before.

Why didn't the brother in black react the way his brother did getting the shock? He'd have fell to floor prone, too, as electric through the body stiffens the muscles 99% of the time.

It's only my opinion, of course, but it seems to me the brother in black sits down sharpish when the weapon is drawn on him.

If you watch the video closely you see a flash between their hands and lad jolts hands back and sits back and the copper keeps pointing at him until the lad jumps him from behind

I don’t think maybe a quick electric shock on your finger tips is going to paralyse you

 

[dronefromsector7G]

What if the officer doesn’t know a first taser has been deployed as his spectacles have been knocked from him in the melee? If you look at the video he arrives on the scene wearing glasses ….theyre knocked off him when he’s being punched and I think the video shows this.

Now I can only speak from my own experience here and know I’m blind as a bat when I haven’t got my bins on…

Excellent aim with the kick and head stamp then

 

[Bigga]

What if the officer doesn’t know a first taser has been deployed as his spectacles have been knocked from him in the melee? If you look at the video he arrives on the scene wearing glasses ….theyre knocked off him when he’s being punched and I think the video shows this.

Now I can only speak from my own experience here and know I’m blind as a bat when I haven’t got my bins on…

You'd have to watch the videos in the correct order. I think the first part is on *p74 whilst the following actions posted first is on P1.

You will see the assailant tased after he grabs the officer and his on the floor getting shocked. Most officers should shout a warning of 'Taser', but we can't hear if that happens.

In the meantime the attacked officer gets up and grabs his taser gun out on the perp on the floor. From there you'd have to see the first video shown on the thread from him pointing the weapon.

You'd have to make your mind up if you see what I see or not. I feel like I've talked about this all over the thread, so nothing against your reasonable question.

*was on p72 and now gone

 

[Bigga]

If you watch the video closely you see a flash between their hands and lad jolts hands back and sits back and the copper keeps pointing at him until the lad jumps him from behind

I don’t think maybe a quick electric shock on your finger tips is going to paralyse you

I didn't know a taser gun could emit a charge without stiffening the subject it's aimed at.

That's new to me.

 

[bluemc1]

If you watch the video closely you see a flash between their hands and lad jolts hands back and sits back and the copper keeps pointing at him until the lad jumps him from behind

I didn't know a taser gun could emit a charge without stiffening the subject it's aimed at.

That's new to me.

I’ve seen tonnes of videos of people being tased and not going down

 

[fulabeer]

Some on here would want the dog prosecuted!

 

[Bigga]

I’ve seen tonnes of videos of people being tased and not going down

Indeed that can happen, so I'm happy to wait for the full investigation results.

 

[jimharri]

Some on here would want the dog prosecuted!

View attachment 126975

That's hilarious. And unfortunately true.

 

[lazerblue]

why does there have to be an inquiry, fuckers launch a brutal sustained attack on police, fuckers get arrested, end of inquiry, go straight to jail

 

[BerkshireBlue]

Pretty sure the original video shows another male in shot.

Yes, there are two more males on scene late on.

The original officer in the skirmish had not deployed the taser, it was the secondary female officer also caught by the assailant that did so.

So three in the beginning, reduced to two with the injury, one of whom deployed the weapon. The kicking officer did not deploy a shot when he had his taser aimed at the offender.

That's my argument for that choice. Not sure why others are twisting what I said out of proportion, but it is what it is for this place.

operative words there are "later on"

 

[BerkshireBlue]

Is this something made up, or do you know this for certain?

have you ever broke you nose? you can't see a thing for ages with tears streaming

 

[RadcliffeRick]

why does there have to be an inquiry, fuckers launch a brutal sustained attack on police, fuckers get arrested, end of inquiry, go straight to jail

Because there is a "community " being led by "leaders" that will demand one. The same group will be on the streets again if the police officer is not sacked. In the UK it is policing by concent meaning that the police are trusted and respected by the people being policed. These two thugs,appear to come from a community that does not respect this system. I only hope that acts like this do not usher in a paramilitary type of policing where the police no longer are part of the community rather than a force to control the people.

 

[Uncle Wally One Ball]

Some on here would want the dog prosecuted!

View attachment 126975

What a refreshing change and some light relief from it all

 

[cheekybids]

Secondary tasers are used all the time, you fool!

So you'd rather a kick to the head to bring about a better solution??

Jog on!

Just have to throw in the personal attacks, eh?

A bit pathetic, but it follows what happens with these kinds of things for having a different PoV.

You carry on. Have your silly 'win'.

I can't be arsed talking to someone who cannot see the context of anything.

You started with the personal attack calling me a fool.

I can see context. There are thousands of examples of corrupt behaviour or assaults by Cops going back since the establishment of a force, I just don’t see this as 1.

 

[i kne albert davy]

Some on here would want the dog prosecuted!

View attachment 126975

Lovely looking Dog, if things carry on like they are there will be nobody left to look after him.

 

[Bigga]

You started with the personal attack calling me a fool.

I can see context. There are thousands of examples of corrupt behaviour or assaults by Cops going back since the establishment of a force, I just don’t see this as 1.

Here's what you said to me beforehand with your ad hominem attack "...but that would require judgement & respect for the law & I reckon you lack both as well."

That's why I responded to you in kind. You played your part. I don't do insults unless in response.

And again, you skew my point for your suited agenda, which doesn't come close to touching what I said. I didn't say the cop was "corrupt". That's your language.

I said he reacted, which nobody hasn't given clear it was not a reaction. I have laid out my reasoning with clear examples.

You and others have not.