Have a look at this.

  • Thread starter Thread starter DM
  • Start date Start date
As for the dragging across the floor, from what ive seen thats not normal procedure as it can cause injury. Normal procedure is to use 2 or more officers to carry them, 4 if necessary (1 limb each) and then to place them gently on the floor. If the prisoner continues to resist, one applies his full bodyweight to pin the suspect to the floor while the others leave. When only 1 is left he quickly gets up and runs to the door.

I've seen this on countless TV cop shows so that appears to be proper procedure. ( and seems safer to me) than dragging her across the floor and throwing her in the cell like that.

So have the press blown it out of all proportion ? yes of course they have. The reason she didn't know what was going on was because she was drunk. She will have been told why she was being arrested but was probably too busy screaming her head off to listen. Custody sergeant has enough of her complaining in a drunken rant and looses his rag.

I'm in two minds with this, i think she was drunk, being argumentative, and after she got injured fabricated the "poor me, i would have given a breath sample if they had told me why" BS to get sympathy. She knew full well she was over the limit, and deliberately avoiding a breath test.

But equally, the copper didnt follow procedure and as a result the prisoner got hurt. Nobody deserves that, especially over something as boring as being in a car asleep when drunk. Yes its drink driving, in the eyes of the law. but does it mean she deserves a beating from the cops ? no. She's hardly a kiddie molester or similar that you would expect to receive real contempt from officers.
 
Last edited:
kgi said:
I saw it on BBC, they said she was found sleeping in her car and refused to take a breathanalyser test. If you want to philosophise about it go ahead, but to me that means she was drunk. My view is also reaffirmed by the fact that she was obviously uncooperative and had to be dragged to her cell.

His behaviour was fine, he was dealing with an uncooperative drunk person. The PC dragged the said person and threw them in a cell.



Take a deep breath will you? He threw her in the cell. Saying that he threw her face into the cell with intent on her hurting herself is silly. Do you actually think that PCs out there get a kick out of throwing senior citizens face first down a concrete floor? She was drunk and that's why she hurt herself.




I can't see the abuse. He is in authority and he is dealing with a drunk uncooperative person. He has to wrap it up quickly so that he can get back to the beat and catch criminals. I would be infuriated to see the PC actually debating getting into the cell with the said "victim" until she was sobber, knowing that I'm paying him to babysit drunkards.

In my book, if you're drunk and the police get you it's tough. You'd better cooperate or they will use reasonable force to arrest you and detain you. If you get hurt in the process accidentally (as is this case) then by all means file a complaint and a law suit and what you feel like. If it's proven that there was intent then the PC should be sacked without pay and taken to court. However, I cannot see this in the video which is nicely edited to start with the PC shouting at her to shut up. It'd be interesting to see all the previous discussion and efforts to get her to cooperate before you had to use reasonable force.
Click to expand...

See you keep missing the point, it dosent matter what bits are missing, it dosent matter what she did, shes 60 ****ing years old and a woman, in a police station for a trivial offence.

How is what happened right?
 
kgi said:
In my book, if you're drunk and the police get you it's tough. You'd better cooperate or they will use reasonable force to arrest you and detain you. If you get hurt in the process accidentally (as is this case) then by all means file a complaint and a law suit and what you feel like. If it's proven that there was intent then the PC should be sacked without pay and taken to court. However, I cannot see this in the video which is nicely edited to start with the PC shouting at her to shut up. It'd be interesting to see all the previous discussion and efforts to get her to cooperate before you had to use reasonable force.
Click to expand...

I agree with your previous sentiments, she is just hamming it up.

But dragging prisoners across the floor and throwing them around isnt reasonable force or normal procedure. They get un co-operative drunks every day of the week so have procedures for dealing with them. Draging them across the floor on your own isnt one of them.


Amnesia said:
this is the bit i don't get...why is it drink driving if you are asleep and NOT driving.
Click to expand...


she is in charge of the vehicle, legally speaking.

Its to stop people pulling over when drink driving and telling the cops "but i wasnt driving, honest guv" etc..

Equally people who when confronted sat in the car (about to drive off) cannot them claim "oh i only got in the car to get me coat, i wasnt really going to drive it" etc..

You can look at it two ways - she was asleep in the car as she had nowhere else to go and had no intention of drink driving.

or ..

she was about to drive off drunk, saw the cops approaching so claimed to be asleep and pretended she wasnt about to just drive off.

how do the cops know which is the truth ??

They dont, so the offense is being in charge of a vehicle under the influence, regardless if you are actually driving or not.
 
Last edited:
MrLOL said:
The reason she didn't know what was going on was because she was drunk.
Click to expand...
MrLOL said:
She knew full well she was over the limit, and deliberately avoiding a breath test.
Click to expand...
So she was unable to work out what was going on, but was simultaneously avoiding a breath test?

The drink drive rules also annoy me. I have slept in my car, drunk, with the keys in my pocket before. I technically broke the law, but I didn't actually do anything wrong in the slightest. For most crimes you actually need to have evidence, but more and more it's becoming the case that very flaky circumstances are all it takes. Sure, a few people may get away if you don't have draconian rules, but innocent and peaceful people will not be persecuted.
 
Last edited:
kgi said:
His behavior was fine, he was dealing with an uncooperative drunk person. The PC dragged the said person and threw them in a cell.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Oh please retract your head from your arse, his actions were not acceptable! Did you not notice the blood ******* out of her head near the end of the video? From his aggressive handling of her!
 
she claims she didnt know what was going on.

Of course she did. People who are blind and uo-operative can still refuse to take breath tests. it might be because they are smashed out of their skull, it might be because even when they are smashed, they still know you can get done for drink driving. However due to them being smashed you'll never know which. You've seen enough episodes of road wars / traffic cops to know that.
 
MrLOL said:
she claims she didnt know what was going on.

Of course she did. People who are blind and uo-operative can still refuse to take breath tests. it might be because they are smashed out of their skull, it might be because even when they are smashed, they still know you can get done for drink driving. However due to them being smashed you'll never know which. You've seen enough episodes of road wars / traffic cops to know that.
Click to expand...
I have also noticed in Road Wars they use more Police officers in controlling an assailant, due to more control and less chance of anyone getting hurt.
 
Pigeon_Killer said:
That video has been edited to make the sergeant in question look and sound as bad as possible
Click to expand...

And the officers were not under secret surveillance! All those present were aware there is CCTV recording everything that goes on. And know that they'll be answerable for anything they're seen doing, in the event of a complaint, no matter how vexatious it turns out to be.
 
^TANK^ said:
I have also noticed in Road Wars they use more Police officers in controlling an assailant, due to more control and less chance of anyone getting hurt.
Click to expand...

Tank you seem a reasonable bloke, are you telling me, that you and i couldnt pick that lady up and place her in a cell?

I dont care what shes doing, with an arm each shes going nowhere except where we put her.

How did she need dragging anywhere?

Tell me im wrong and lost the plot.
 
The SGT in question was reported by a fellow PC and is very likely facing dismissal, but don't let that stop a good police bashing. He's also looking at a ABH conviction too.
 
markweatherill said:
And the officers were not under secret surveillance! All those present were aware there is CCTV recording everything that goes on. And know that they'll be answerable for anything they're seen doing, in the event of a complaint, no matter how vexatious it turns out to be.
Click to expand...

Thats what makes it worse, that must be an everyday carry on, they just didnt care did they, those watching.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
The SGT in question was reported by a fellow PC and is very likely facing dismissal, but don't let that stop a good police bashing. He's also looking at a ABH conviction too.
Click to expand...

Do you think its wrong he should face a charge then?
 
add a poll to this ???

a simple who's side are you with on , no need to justify your answers as both sides will think they are correct .
 
Burnsy2023 said:
The SGT in question was reported by a fellow PC and is very likely facing dismissal, but don't let that stop a good police bashing. He's also looking at a ABH conviction too.
Click to expand...

yeah im glad good cops weed out the bad ones too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom