Another unfortunate incident

[chapeau]

Well we don't know if he was 'attacking' people as we only appear to have the word of the cops and we all know they don't always tell the truth when doing so will get them or their mates into trouble.

And the place for a 'nutter on the loose' is the local hospital, not the cage in the local nick, and the police have powers to bring them into casualty where they can be sorted out. If neccessary using a chemical cosh professionally administred using a syringe and hollow needle, and not with handcuffs, size twelve feet and solid batons.

Though it has to be said that some of these nutters do need half a dozen burly cops to jump on them to get them under control. However the jury who saw all the evidence seemed to think that this wasn't one of these occasions.

But hey ho, another violent death in the caring custody of the Met, and another cover up, only brought to light when a coroner and a jury of honest people get involved. Somethings never change

 

[ellal]

One cannot help but think that if plod was truly accountable when they f*ck up, then the number of f*ck ups would drop rapidly!

 

[securespark]

That's not a logical comment.

Mistakes were made in the case of baby Peter.

Since then, there have been over 100 similar cases.

 

[ellal]

That's not a logical comment.

Mistakes were made in the case of baby Peter.

Since then, there have been over 100 similar cases.

Of course it's logical as they are completely different examples...

Baby Peter was because of inaction...plod's f*ck-ups are because of over-reactions!

And when those over-reactions aren't subject to scrutiny, then they just keep on coming!

I note today is the anniversary of the Duggan killing...irrespective of what you believe about the guy, is it right that all 31 cops at the scene are allowed to refuse to even give statements?

 

[joe-90]

Why are you pandering to rat-bags? It's hardly a Tomlinson situation.

 

[sooey]

In our country, everybody is allowed to refuse to give a statement.
It's part of the right to free speech.

 

[ellal]

In our country, everybody is allowed to refuse to give a statement.
It's part of the right to free speech.

Except of course a civilian is told, "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court".....

Plod's version means, "refuse to say anything and you'll get off scot-free"...

 

[alumni]

In our country, everybody is allowed to refuse to give a statement.
It's part of the right to free speech.

Except of course a civilian is told, "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court".....

Plod's version means, "refuse to say anything and you'll get off scot-free"...

And in the incident referred to in the OP, the IPCC will also help protect the Met.

 

[cajar]

Police are already far more accountable than possibly any other public servant and are in the unique position of having to make their decisions when they or others are in serious mortal danger.

In response to what would happen if we were harsher with the cops, there would be considerably more violence for longer at each incident (from the offenders)While the cops hesitate and and second guess themselves.

 

[alumni]

Police are already far more accountable than possibly any other public servant and are in the unique position of having to make their decisions when they or others are in serious mortal danger.

In response to what would happen if we were harsher with the cops, there would be considerably more violence for longer at each incident (from the offenders)While the cops hesitate and and second guess themselves.

But in the incident in question the problems are not confined to the initial scene are they?

Custody sergeant lying on oath, others covering for him.
Then bit of a problem when the CCTV highlights the cover up.

 

[sooey]

Except of course a civilian is told, "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court".....

Which is just common sense if you think about it.
Everybody is allowed to say nothing at all in whatever circumstances you care to mention.
Obviously others will then draw their own conclusions from that refusal.

 

[sooey]

Police are already far more accountable than possibly any other public servant and are in the unique position of having to make their decisions when they or others are in serious mortal danger.

In response to what would happen if we were harsher with the cops, there would be considerably more violence for longer at each incident (from the offenders)While the cops hesitate and and second guess themselves.

But in the incident in question the problems are not confined to the initial scene are they?

Custody sergeant lying on oath, others covering for him.
Then bit of a problem when the CCTV highlights the cover up.

He was a scumbag with years of previous, so who cares?

 

[securespark]

So, let's get this straight: you want a multi-tier system of policing based on previous character?

 

[LastMagicBean]

I'd be interested to know what the alternative is to restraining and arresting f*ckwits.

Lets give 'em a cream bun and a cup of tea as a calming measure????? Sit them down and give 'em a damn good talking to??????

I'd go for the .....Kick his ass.

 

[alumni]

I'd be interested to know what the alternative is to restraining and arresting f*ckwits.

Lets give 'em a cream bun and a cup of tea as a calming measure????? Sit them down and give 'em a damn good talking to??????

I'd go for the .....Kick his ass.

It's what went on after the initial incident that is more worrying.