Interpolic Posted May 5, 2021 Share Posted May 5, 2021 3 minutes ago, Shays Given Tim Flowers said: Claiming this one Drossbot? No Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Linton Posted May 5, 2021 Share Posted May 5, 2021 1 hour ago, Interpolic said: He seemed nice. Didn't even get to ask him his opinion on the takeover Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor Zaius Posted May 5, 2021 Share Posted May 5, 2021 Had no idea we had so many coppers on here. Interesting enough debate anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted May 6, 2021 Share Posted May 6, 2021 21 hours ago, ED209 said: This bit is from the BBC, looks like the defence would probably have a reasonable argument that the cops didn’t cause Atkinson to die with their actions. “All three of the prosecution's medical experts, the court heard, agreed that while Mr Atkinson's enlarged heart meant that he could have died at any time, the prolonged period of Tasering and the kicks to his head made a "significant contribution" to his death.” I'm sure there'll be a good case made for the police who are the finest in the world no doubt, but I read that there were witnesses who claimed that the police involved in this case kicked Atkinson in the head when he was prone on the ground, and his partner also whacked him with a baton while he was on the deck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candi_Hills Posted May 6, 2021 Share Posted May 6, 2021 Did a punch of posts just get removed? I was enjoying reading those Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted May 6, 2021 Share Posted May 6, 2021 I want to believe that typo wasn't deliberate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candi_Hills Posted May 6, 2021 Share Posted May 6, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, Robster said: I want to believe that typo wasn't deliberate. It's a common quantifier. A punch of posts, a fist of comments, a headlock of messages etc. Edited May 6, 2021 by Candi_Hills Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazarus Posted May 7, 2021 Share Posted May 7, 2021 17 hours ago, Candi_Hills said: It's a common quantifier. A punch of posts, a fist of comments, a headlock of messages etc. A stamp of quotes? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted June 9, 2021 Share Posted June 9, 2021 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-57417506 A police officer accused of murdering the ex-footballer Dalian Atkinson was "not honest" in police interviews or in the account he gave in court, the prosecution has told jurors. Alexandra Healy QC said PC Benjamin Monk's apparent lack of memory was "a barricade to shelter behind". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED209 Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 (edited) To be fair the prosecution will always accuse defendants of not telling the truth, the same as the defence will always accuse witnesses of not telling the truth. Edited June 10, 2021 by ED209 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 Guilty of manslaughter. Guessing from the stuff about colluding to exaggerate the events and justify the the violence, there might also be charges coming related to that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 Turns out it’s not justifiable for a police officer to kick someone in the head then… An absolute shitshow of a situation though, which could possibly have been avoided with properly funded mental health care in this country. Another one for the Tory government to sweep under the carpet. Will be intrigued to see the verdict on the other police officer though, from what I saw/read the evidence was much less compelling. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 10 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said: Turns out it’s not justifiable for a police officer to kick someone in the head then… 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manxst Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 12 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said: Turns out it’s not justifiable for a police officer to kick someone in the head then… In THIS instance, then obviously no, it wasn’t justifiable. In another incident with different circumstances, then yes, it could well be justified, as we’ve discussed before. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 13 minutes ago, Manxst said: In THIS instance, then obviously no, it wasn’t justifiable. In another incident with different circumstances, then yes, it could well be justified, as we’ve discussed before. Which is what I maintained - it’d need to be a very unique set of circumstances that are so infrequent it’s near on impossible. Not including terrorism as that’d super-seed everything. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED209 Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 (edited) My word. Fantail Breeze talking absolute hogwash again. of course under the right circumstances it can be lawful and justified to kick someone in the head. This case however is another nail I the coffin for me. I will think seriously about carrying taser, using driving exemptions, pursuing cars etc etc etc in future. If there’s a risk of going to prison for putting myself in harms way doing my job I just won’t put myself in harms way any more. It’s simply not worth it. Edited June 23, 2021 by ED209 Added more Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 Super-seed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED209 Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 7 minutes ago, Dr.Spaceman said: Super-seed As well as having a poor grasp of written English he has no idea of the law around use of force. Whether an incident is terrorism or anything else has no bearing on use of force legislation. The law allows you to use a level of force that is reasonable in the circumstances of a situation, whatever that situation may be. It doesn’t say that you can kick a terrorist in the head but if the bloke who is trying to kill you isn’t a terrorist then you can’t Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 39 minutes ago, ED209 said: My word. Fantail Breeze talking absolute hogwash again. of course under the right circumstances it can be lawful and justified to kick someone in the head. This case however is another nail I the coffin for me. I will think seriously about carrying taser, using driving exemptions, pursuing cars etc etc etc in future. If there’s a risk of going to prison for putting myself in harms way doing my job I just won’t put myself in harms way any more. It’s simply not worth it. Which I have said in the post above. The latter part of your post is bollocks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shays Given Tim Flowers Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 Seems like a pretty sensible verdict. Jury felt that the officer acted unlawfully, but could not be sure he intended to cause a really serious injury. I suspect the officer was given more latitude than Joe Soap would have been regarding a kick in the head and intention to cause serious injury but that is speculation. Proving intent to the criminal standard is a difficult issue to Prosecute particularly so in a homicide, and particularly where there is no motive or evidence toward pre-meditation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED209 Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 24 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said: Which I have said in the post above. The latter part of your post is bollocks. What exactly is bollocks about it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 1 hour ago, ED209 said: What exactly is bollocks about it? Because you’re completely protected providing you’re using reasonable force, as we’ve been around several times. There’s a distinct difference to kicking someone in the head and pursuing cars. This officer didn’t use reasonable force and he’s correctly been prosecuted for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED209 Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 17 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said: Because you’re completely protected providing you’re using reasonable force, as we’ve been around several times. There’s a distinct difference to kicking someone in the head and pursuing cars. This officer didn’t use reasonable force and he’s correctly been prosecuted for it. 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) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED209 Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 Just now, ManDoon said: You're a copper? Fantail Breeze says I’m a fantasist so I mustn’t be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantail Breeze Posted June 23, 2021 Share Posted June 23, 2021 1 minute ago, ManDoon said: You're a copper? Me? Not any more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now