G20 police officer cleared of assault

Amnesia said:
wether she deserved it or not is not the point....slapping loud women in the face isn't part of his job. so he should be charged just like any other member of the public as it wasn't his job he was doing when he did that.
Click to expand...

He did get charged, thats how he ended up in court. Only people that have been charged with crimes end up in criminal court like he did.

He didnt get convicted, there is a diff.
 
So does that mean police can hit anyone who approaches them holding a mobile phone or a can of pop? "I feared for my safety" mr judge sir.
 
TBH, I think there is a secondary result of his finding of innocence....

Can you imagine a public order scenario where cops are so worried to use any force that they decide not to JUST in case they are prosecuted ??

The protestors would have a field day...
 
Amnesia said:
wether she deserved it or not is not the point....slapping loud women in the face isn't part of his job. so he should be charged just like any other member of the public as it wasn't his job he was doing when he did that.
Click to expand...
Did you miss the whole point of the thread being he was charged, got taken to court and then cleared... :rolleyes:
 
For the record, a police officer can use ANY level of force they deem necessary in a given situation. This includes deadly force.

The control factor in this is that the cop must be able to JUSTIFY the level of force used.
 
Richie said:
For the record, a police officer can use ANY REASONABLE level of force they deem necessary in a given situation. This includes deadly force.

The control factor in this is that the cop must be able to JUSTIFY the level of force used was proportionate
Click to expand...

Very important edit ;)
 
Richie said:
He did get charged, thats how he ended up in court. Only people that have been charged with crimes end up in criminal court like he did.

He didnt get convicted, there is a diff.
Click to expand...

yeah i meant convicted...kinda rushed that post a bit :p
 
KNiVES said:
He was doing his job. All the ;););) (you've put that in most of your posts so far) in the world won't change the fact a court of law has ruled in his favour.
Click to expand...

All you've said is that the woman should have stayed back and I said the opposite. He was only cleared of assault but it still doesn’t make his action justifiable.
 
He was charged - a lot of people are charged because it's "in the public interest" for the circumstances to be aired in the open, when there is a question of if a law has been broken.

The fact that he's been found not guilty means that in the eyes of the law he was innocent (probably based at least partly on the self defence grounds that apply to anyone - you're allowed to use reasonable force if you have a reasonable fear for your safety).

As for the "it was just a carton and mobile phone" argument, people can and do disguise weapons as every day objects (at the extreme end of the argument there are I believe guns disguised as mobiles, and it's pretty easy to say put something solid into a container making it into a cosh/club), he had seconds to see, identify and take action on a possible threat to his/his colleagues safety in a very hectic environment - he did so following the training he had received to protect himself using minimum force (warning, slap, then baton to relatively safe part of the body).

Personally I thought it telling the women sold her story to the papers (didn't mind the publicity when it was paying her), but then didn't want to appear in court because of publicity about her life that might have came out.

The sad thing is, that even though he's been found not guilty in the courts, he's still likely to be investigated and possibly punished by the Police services own regulatory/punishment body.
 
mmj_uk said:
Well the woman is clearly just trying to talk to him in the video, is that threatening behaviour?
Click to expand...

Ahh... A loaded question... well as I must -


Seeing as we are going wholly on the video -

To me, she comes right up to the cop close enough to be pushed away and told to back off. She then quickly returns and reaches the cop's side which results in him turning away from an angry crowd to be confronted by her still shouting and so he strikes her (with the back of a padded glove may I add).

She obviously didnt like this so she screams at him again and the crowd start advancing on the cops (raising the threat level as the impact factor of numbers comes into play) which results in the response level raising to meet it and batons are drawn by the cops.

The cop then strikes her on 2 legitimate and most advised strike areas (thigh and lower leg).



The fact that she didnt want to give any evidence beacause of her past is crap... More than likely her story would have been ripped to shreds by the defence team indicating that the full story is not captured on camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom