Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, ED209 said:


 

can you explain to me what protection UK law gives me if I pursue a car and it goes badly wrong?

 

(the answer is none) 

 

When has an officer ever been prosecuted in this event? For a pursuit they have good reason to be carrying out I mean.

 

As with the force argument - if you’re lawfully carrying out your job, you have nothing to worry about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BlueStar said:

 

Dunno, if it's a terrorist trying to detonate a bomb vest, probably, if it's just because you're angry because the other officer is your girlfriend and you felt humiliated in front of her, as the Crown sucesfully argued in this case, probably not.

 

Sorry but what's this in reference to exactly, Atkinson is supposed to have humiliated the copper and he lost the plot?

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, mrmojorisin75 said:

 

Sorry but what's this in reference to exactly, Atkinson is supposed to have humiliated the copper and he lost the plot?


 

Something along those lines. The supervisor who Allowed them to be crewed together needs a rocket. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mrmojorisin75 said:

 

Sorry but what's this in reference to exactly, Atkinson is supposed to have humiliated the copper and he lost the plot?

 

Doesn't even read like it was anything Atkinson did, just that he repeatedly fucked up using the taser and made himself look stupid in front of his partner, and so when he finally managed to operate it correctly he was so enraged he used it excessively and then repeatedly booted the guy in the head while he was stunned and prone on the ground.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/23/dalian-atkinson-police-officer-guilty-killing-ex-footballer/

 

Quote

After two previous Taser attempts had failed, Monk successfully discharged the device for a third time and held the trigger for 33 seconds.
The standard practice for officers is five seconds, the jury heard. 
When Mr Atkinson lay on the floor, Monk kicked him so hard it left imprints of his bootlaces on the former footballer's forehead. 


Monk attended the call with his then-girlfriend Pc Mary Ellen Bettley-Smith, 31, where Mr Atkinson was claiming to be the Messiah.  
The court, sitting in front of the Honourable Melbourne Inman QC, was told by the prosecution that Monk kicked the unarmed Mr Atkinson because he was angry at being humiliated in front of his girlfriend. 
Jurors continue to deliberate whether Bettley-Smith assaulted Mr Atkinson with her use of a baton as he lay in the road outside his father's house in Meadow Close.
The Crown said the couple, who split up in 2018, colluded to exaggerate the events in order to justify their violence.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, BlueStar said:

 

Doesn't even read like it was anything Atkinson did, just that he repeatedly fucked up using the taser and made himself look stupid in front of his partner, and so when he finally managed to operate it correctly he was so enraged he used it excessively and then repeatedly booted the guy in the head while he was stunned and prone on the ground.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/23/dalian-atkinson-police-officer-guilty-killing-ex-footballer/

 


 

i don’t think you can say he repeatedly fucked up with taser. Even the prosecution accepted that the first and second time he fired it he did nothing wrong.

 

taser is not infallible. There’s a few reasons it might not be effective.

 

 

it does look like the officer lost it though which is exactly as it seemed on day 1 of the trial. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II
1 hour ago, mrmojorisin75 said:

Did I see he was previously guilty of gross misconduct but kept on as well :anguish:

Aye, but you know, reasonable force and all that, wants fucking strung up the murderous bastard!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What was his previous gross misconduct finding for though? Was it relating to use of force or something else? It’s quite possible his gross misconduct was for something that was absolutely nothing to do with actual police work. 
 

in fact I have just read what the finding was for………. Dishonesty.  He should have been dismissed as soon as dishonesty is proved on behalf of a cop. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ed210 said:

What was his previous gross misconduct finding for though? Was it relating to use of force or something else? It’s quite possible his gross misconduct was for something that was absolutely nothing to do with actual police work. 
 

in fact I have just read what the finding was for………. Dishonesty.  He should have been dismissed as soon as dishonesty is proved on behalf of a cop. 

 

No idea how he kept his job there. But also bewildering how he was crewed with his girlfriend…

 

Complete and utter fuck up all round.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...