Quizzes & Puzzles15 mins ago
Guilty yes . . .
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sir.prize. 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.
-- answer removed --
Nope - my instinctive response to this sort of case is usually *not* to believe the police version - or at least to treat it with a healthy degree of scepticism. I grew up in an era when the police were (at best) 'flexible' and often worse.
But things just look 'wrong' here - would you drive off over a PC's foot when he was ticketing you? Would you not stop for 8 miles? Would you not exit the car pretty damn quickly once you had been brought to a halt?
The fact that the man was an OAP with a disabled badge is irrelevant - he behaved dangerously, suspiciously and stupidly. The police reaction was violent, yes I agree that, but how could they know what this idiot was going to do next?
But things just look 'wrong' here - would you drive off over a PC's foot when he was ticketing you? Would you not stop for 8 miles? Would you not exit the car pretty damn quickly once you had been brought to a halt?
The fact that the man was an OAP with a disabled badge is irrelevant - he behaved dangerously, suspiciously and stupidly. The police reaction was violent, yes I agree that, but how could they know what this idiot was going to do next?
-- answer removed --
If you have ever had any dealings with compensation claims (which I have in another area of public life) you'll know that legal teams will always tend to take a purely monetary view of cases. Looking not just at the actual rights and wrongs of each case, but also the potential up/down sides of contesting or settling.
It could have cost many hundreds of thousands of pounds to defend this case - with (I suspect) no real chance of retrieving much of those costs even if they won the case.
So someone took a pragmatic decision to settle out of court - with no admission of liability.
As you so rightly say, we have precious little to base our arguments on (either for or against the police) so I suggest we just accept that we have to disagree on this one.
dave
It could have cost many hundreds of thousands of pounds to defend this case - with (I suspect) no real chance of retrieving much of those costs even if they won the case.
So someone took a pragmatic decision to settle out of court - with no admission of liability.
As you so rightly say, we have precious little to base our arguments on (either for or against the police) so I suggest we just accept that we have to disagree on this one.
dave
-- answer removed --
It does look pretty OTT, but the fact that the driver locked his door woiuld be sufficient grounds for the police to break in to prevent him driving away again - public safey being the reasoning behind this kind of activity.
It might have been better if the officer on the bonet had walked to one side, and the officer on the driver's side had tapped on the window a couple of times demanding that the door be opened, given that they knew the driver was an older person.
It might have been better if the officer on the bonet had walked to one side, and the officer on the driver's side had tapped on the window a couple of times demanding that the door be opened, given that they knew the driver was an older person.
