Please Help Me Find More Of These.....
Jokes2 mins ago
Now, Who's Fault Is All This?
49 Answers
https:/
1/ The young man resisting arrest?
2/ Overzealous police officers, trying to rescue a damsel in distress?
3/ An ungrateful damsel?
Or should the police officers have stood back and see how serious the argument got between a young man and his girlfriend.
1/ The young man resisting arrest?
2/ Overzealous police officers, trying to rescue a damsel in distress?
3/ An ungrateful damsel?
Or should the police officers have stood back and see how serious the argument got between a young man and his girlfriend.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
@AOG
Since when has having an argument in a public place been an arrestable offence?
Pending a video showing how the incident escalated from a casual "Excuse me, miss, but is this guy bothering you?" to a 4-officer, bundle the guy to the floor incident, I'd file this under (2), in your OP.
The article says he asked repeatedly what he was being arrested for but got no reply.
The video shows some conversation between him and the policeman who keeps pressing his head to the floor (in the video Tambo found) but the exchange is rendered inaudible because of the constant shouting by the girlfriend.
Article goes on to say he was put in a cell, in Islington but, later, released *without charge*.
Every chance his complaint will stand up.
Whatever was spat at 1:40 in Tambo's link, it moved too fast to be seen in mid flight and you cannot see where it landed on the officer. If real, I dare say there'll be a sample in an evidence bag…
Since when has having an argument in a public place been an arrestable offence?
Pending a video showing how the incident escalated from a casual "Excuse me, miss, but is this guy bothering you?" to a 4-officer, bundle the guy to the floor incident, I'd file this under (2), in your OP.
The article says he asked repeatedly what he was being arrested for but got no reply.
The video shows some conversation between him and the policeman who keeps pressing his head to the floor (in the video Tambo found) but the exchange is rendered inaudible because of the constant shouting by the girlfriend.
Article goes on to say he was put in a cell, in Islington but, later, released *without charge*.
Every chance his complaint will stand up.
Whatever was spat at 1:40 in Tambo's link, it moved too fast to be seen in mid flight and you cannot see where it landed on the officer. If real, I dare say there'll be a sample in an evidence bag…
Since when has having an argument in a public place been an arrestable offence?
______________
Section 5, Public Order Act
A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.
It's exercised widely and extensively by most Bobbies when somone is 'kicking off' and ignores requests to moderate their behaviour and/or language.
______________
Section 5, Public Order Act
A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.
It's exercised widely and extensively by most Bobbies when somone is 'kicking off' and ignores requests to moderate their behaviour and/or language.
'Every chance his complaint will stand up'. I doubt that very much.
Guardian. “The incident occurred shortly after 11.30pm when officers intervened in an argument between a man and a woman. The man then became aggressive towards the officers, at which point he was arrested.
The officers were acting lawfully in the execution of their duty when they intervened in the initial incident and then used lawful and reasonable force to arrest and detain him when he became aggressive (as seen in the video clip).
The offender accepted a formal caution thereby admitting liability so the complaint is pretty much void, although that wouldn't stop the racially biased IPCC taking it on only later to realise it was a waste of time and money.
Guardian. “The incident occurred shortly after 11.30pm when officers intervened in an argument between a man and a woman. The man then became aggressive towards the officers, at which point he was arrested.
The officers were acting lawfully in the execution of their duty when they intervened in the initial incident and then used lawful and reasonable force to arrest and detain him when he became aggressive (as seen in the video clip).
The offender accepted a formal caution thereby admitting liability so the complaint is pretty much void, although that wouldn't stop the racially biased IPCC taking it on only later to realise it was a waste of time and money.
AP - “... I believe you were acting as Judge and Jury in this instance. Incomplete evidence, as I said and you - full of presumption IMO...”
In my opinion you are mistaken and at worse a fool.
Let me take you back to what I originally posted: “... In my opinion, this chap deserved being treated in the manner he was [to which I was referring to the spitting incident and his subsequent wearing of the spit-hood – I was not referring to the reason why he was arrested in the first place since I am unaware of the circumstances] as he is clearly a thoroughly unpleasant individual [ie. he spits at police officers]. His girlfriend is, unfortunately, a stereotypical gobby piece of work [to wit, she was protesting loudly and vociferously at his arrest even though she had just witnessed him spitting at a police officer]. What a pair they are...”
Now then, AP, which part of that is me acting as though I am “judge and jury”?
In my opinion you are mistaken and at worse a fool.
Let me take you back to what I originally posted: “... In my opinion, this chap deserved being treated in the manner he was [to which I was referring to the spitting incident and his subsequent wearing of the spit-hood – I was not referring to the reason why he was arrested in the first place since I am unaware of the circumstances] as he is clearly a thoroughly unpleasant individual [ie. he spits at police officers]. His girlfriend is, unfortunately, a stereotypical gobby piece of work [to wit, she was protesting loudly and vociferously at his arrest even though she had just witnessed him spitting at a police officer]. What a pair they are...”
Now then, AP, which part of that is me acting as though I am “judge and jury”?
AP - This is why I labelled the man in question, “a thoroughly unpleasant individual”
http://
And you have the audacity to say, “... I'm glad you're not still a police officer with a "judge jury and executioner" attitude...”
You should be ashamed of yourself. But I know you won't be. People like you never are. You just sit behind the shield of protection that is provided for you by the state and you rarely, if ever, give it or those that guard you, a second thought. You walk the streets during the day and you sleep in your bed at night safe in the knowledge that people much braver than you are protecting you. Yet you are the first to criticise the police or attack anyone who supports them. You label them and their supporters with insulting epithets and go to bed again, safe in the knowledge that you live in a relatively safe country because people much more brave than you are keeping you from harm.
I've been on the front line. I've been spat at (and more). It's absolutely disgusting. That is what I was criticising; not the original reason for his arrest – quite frankly I couldn't care less why he was arrested. So as for me being “judge jury and executioner” in this matter, you could not be more wrong.
But, hey! Let's not let facts get in the way of good old insult eh?
http://
And you have the audacity to say, “... I'm glad you're not still a police officer with a "judge jury and executioner" attitude...”
You should be ashamed of yourself. But I know you won't be. People like you never are. You just sit behind the shield of protection that is provided for you by the state and you rarely, if ever, give it or those that guard you, a second thought. You walk the streets during the day and you sleep in your bed at night safe in the knowledge that people much braver than you are protecting you. Yet you are the first to criticise the police or attack anyone who supports them. You label them and their supporters with insulting epithets and go to bed again, safe in the knowledge that you live in a relatively safe country because people much more brave than you are keeping you from harm.
I've been on the front line. I've been spat at (and more). It's absolutely disgusting. That is what I was criticising; not the original reason for his arrest – quite frankly I couldn't care less why he was arrested. So as for me being “judge jury and executioner” in this matter, you could not be more wrong.
But, hey! Let's not let facts get in the way of good old insult eh?
Latest Posts
Crosswords2 mins ago
ChatterBank4 mins ago
Spectator N0 2651 By Fieldfare
Crosswords43 mins ago
