Police brutality at the G20 protest

[Roman Rapper]

As you can see, he first slaps her across the face for having the audacity to try to speak to him, and then when she doesn't run away he smacks her as hard as he can with a steel-tipped baton, knocking her to the floor.

I myself was at the protest and, just as I told you all last week, what happened to Mr Tomlison was not an isolated event. The police were totally out of control and violently attacked dozens and dozens people.

The officer who murdered Mr Tomlison has now been suspended (on full pay!) I wonder if this violent thug will get a slap on the wrist as well.

[IrishHitman]

While this behaviour is totally out of line, perhaps you shouldn't have associated with people went smashing up company buildings then?

[Roman Rapper]

While this behaviour is totally out of line, perhaps you shouldn't have associated with people went smashing up company buildings then?

Rubbish. I live in a free country and will go anywhere I want, just as my forefathers did. It is my right to do that without having to put up with being attacked by the police.
I also should not have to put up with the police trapping us in and not letting anyone leave for almost 10 hours, which is what the police did to us. It is illegal for them to do that, and if more of us don't start protesting aginst that itself, then soon even more of our rights are going to be taken away.

And all this talk of it being a "riot" is rubbish as well. The only people who were rioting were the police, not us protesters. We were peacefull, and were met with violence.

[IrishHitman]

Rubbish. I live in a free country and will go anywhere I want, just as my forefathers did. It is my right to do that without having to put up with being attacked by the police.
I also should not have to put up with the police trapping us in and not letting anyone leave for almost 10 hours, which is what the police did to us. It is illegal for them to do that, and if more of us don't start protesting aginst that itself, then soon even more of our rights are going to be taken away.

And all this talk of it being a "riot" is rubbish as well. The only people who were rioting were the police, not us protesters. We were peacefull, and were met with violence.

There was footage of protesters putting out windows....

[Roman Rapper]

There was footage of protesters putting out windows....

One broken window does not a riot make.

[IrishHitman]

One broken window does not a riot make.

Didn't notice the use of the plural of window, did you?

Try an entire floor's windows.

[NONOPUST]

While what the cop did was "violent", us people watching that video have no idea what took place right before it. When people get into a mob like that it can be scary, and they must be kept in check. I'm not saying what the cop did was right, but people need to think before what they do. I mean cmon, after he slaps her she goes right back up to him, and people are screaming. I would have pegged her legs too.

[Atlassmurf]

Why is it wrong to slap a woman?

[Каие]

Rubbish. I live in a free country and will go anywhere I want, just as my forefathers did. It is my right to do that without having to put up with being attacked by the police.

Yeah but it's not the right of anyone to smash up shops and windows.

And all this talk of it being a "riot" is rubbish as well. The only people who were rioting were the police, not us protesters. We were peacefull, and were met with violence.

We have photo and video evidence to the contrary. I don't dispute the vast majority of protectors were peaceful, just that there was BS going on, we all saw it. Not that I agree with the police reaction, cowboys who get caught in the moment.

[Arkhan]

Rubbish. I live in a free country and will go anywhere I want, just as my forefathers did. It is my right to do that without having to put up with being attacked by the police.
I also should not have to put up with the police trapping us in and not letting anyone leave for almost 10 hours, which is what the police did to us. It is illegal for them to do that, and if more of us don't start protesting aginst that itself, then soon even more of our rights are going to be taken away.

And all this talk of it being a "riot" is rubbish as well. The only people who were rioting were the police, not us protesters. We were peacefull, and were met with violence.

I know I am coming into the conversation a little late but if you guys were so darn peaceful how did all those buildings get damaged? Did the cops dress up as looters and start smashing stuff??

Now then, those questions aside, there is no doubt that some of the police got out of hand... but they almost always do in situations like this. Alsi from what I saw there was certainly on reason for that woman to get beat down like she did.

However that does nothing to change the fact that most police do an outstanding job under very trying, often life threating conditions.

[Roman Rapper]

I know I am coming into the conversation a little late but if you guys were so darn peaceful how did all those buildings get damaged? Did the cops dress up as looters and start smashing stuff??
.

ONE single panel of glass on the side of a RBS building was smashed. That's it. Nothing else was damaged.

On the streets surrounding the Bank of England there are hundreds and hundreds of glass doors and windows on ground level. It would have been easy for us protesters to smash a few of them just for the hell of it, but none of them were smashed, with the exception of that one isolated incident at the RBS building earlier on in the day.

And in any case, that SINGLE panel of glass that was smashed was outside of the police cordon that was surrounding and detaining us protesters for almost 10 hours, so the people who did that damage could not possibly have been one of us protesters anyway.

[The Alcotroll]

ONE single panel of glass on the side of a RBS building was smashed. That's it. Nothing else was damaged.

Ha ha ha ha ha!

Times Online:

As officers on the steps of the Bank held firm, several hundred demonstrators broke away to move towards the RBS building on the corner of Bartholomew Lane.
Officers attempted to control them but a hardcore group of 20 still got into the building, which had been closed for the day.

The rioters then went on the rampage within the bank, which was at the centre of a row over the £700,000-per-year pension of Sir Fred Goodwin, its former chief executive.

Telephone lines were ripped out, office furniture wrecked, windows smashed and graffiti daubed on both the inside and outside. A blue office chair was used to smash up one of the blacked-out branch windows, while another chair was thrown out of the window.

Police officers eventually managed to drag the protesters out after 15 minutes and drive the crowd away from the building shortly afterwards. All of those involved in the incident were believed to have been arrested.

Lies! All lies!

I'll get my tinfoil hat...

[mongrel]

I know I am coming into the conversation a little late but if you guys were so darn peaceful how did all those buildings get damaged? Did the cops dress up as looters and start smashing stuff??

Now then, those questions aside, there is no doubt that some of the police got out of hand... but they almost always do in situations like this. Alsi from what I saw there was certainly on reason for that woman to get beat down like she did.

However that does nothing to change the fact that most police do an outstanding job under very trying, often life threating conditions.

Erm........The video refers to the protest the following day, in memory of the bloke who died the previous day.

Call me old fashioned, but there is really no reason to beat up a woman, really there isn't.

What happened to Mr Tomlinson was tragic and unnecessarily brutal.
But it was the actions of one angry individual, not a cover up.

Clearly upon hearing accusations of this event, the blokes in charge of the met thought it was made up to make them look bad seeing as they hadn't received any reports of the events from any officers.
They released a statement saying what they knew at the time, only later did this video evidence come to light and inform the people in charge of the met of the situation.

The Metropolitan Police made a cock-up; it happens in any governmental body, but a mistake does not equate a coverup

I think events suggest otherwise.


I am pasting a post I made elsewhere. The IPCC said there was no CCTV cameras in the vicinity when someone would have known that there damned well was. Lets hope that the footage doesn't go the same way as some of the Stockwell stuff.

I quote Nick Hardwick, chairman of the IPCC, who said it took so long to start an investigation because there was no CCTV footage available. He said: "We do not have CCTV footage of the incident. There were no cameras where he was assaulted."

Go look for yourself if you live in London, there are loads in that specific area.

When the Evening Standard put it to the IPCC that there were at least six CCTV cameras trained on the corner of Threadneedle Street and Royal Exchange Passagethe IPCC released a statement correcting Mr Hardwick's initial comments. Quote: "At this point Mr Hardwick believed that he was correct - we now know this may not be accurate. There are cameras in the surrounding area."

Why did they get this so wrong. Did they not check? After all there is not a square yard not covered by CCTV in Central London, did they try to mislead us, if so they must think we are idiots. Did the Police misinform them or was it the start of a cover up? You decide. After all legend has it that British CCTV can capture any crime except those committed by rogue or bent coppers. My personal view is that the matter should be put to judicial review, no reasonable person can say that the IPCC is competent to investigate this case under all the circumstances. Curious to know if the video recordings meet the same fate as some of the vital Menezes footage.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...dog/article.do

[Denny Crane!]

First -- the incidents are being investigated. There is no reason to suspect that the truth is being covered up. Out of curiosity though -- when violence is expected at a planned demonstration -- are you showing good personal judgment in attending and then complaining that things got out of hand? Also, perhaps maybe a bit of hypocrisy is showing as well?

Most protests can turn violent, therefore your arguement would rule out my protesting anything ever...

That is a sad incident, that could only happen in a country run by new labour.


Clear, focused, crime-fighting responsibility has got lost in a Labour sea of red tape, and targets, and management consultants, and reorganisations. So instead of responding to the demands of working people for tough, beat-based community policing, today's police officers respond to ministers in Whitehal.



Vote Conservative.


Yours Sincerely....


D.Cameron

[/quote]

Fairly certain David Cameron wouldn't use bad grammar and spelling mistakes

Yeah but it's not the right of anyone to smash up shops and windows.



We have photo and video evidence to the contrary. I don't dispute the vast majority of protectors were peaceful, just that there was BS going on, we all saw it. Not that I agree with the police reaction, cowboys who get caught in the moment.

Exactly and just about every police officer I've ever met wouldn't be to pleased to be associated with this kind of behaviour, while they might relish the idea of giving the public a slap (as would I having worked with them) most of them aren't idiots and understand the difference between their job and their personal wishes.

Wasnt the guy that got killed just walking back from work? So he wasnt "associating" with the wrong people anyway?

MhhHmmm!

An easy to forget fact when examining these kinds of actions. That police officer should face a manslaughter charge.

Hardly un provoked, at least 7 people shouting "pig" etc at you during the middle of a riot surrounded by people, then some women gets in your face.

Pimpslap is the only way to go from there.

Really? Then why are politicians up in arms as well as just about every member of the public, regulatory body and other police who aren't cowboys enraged by this.

Perhaps because your kind of attitude leads to an innocent person dying as happened.

This video is clearly not the same as the other. There is clearly a disturbance occuring in this one, and this police officer backs off after the first blow, the woman comes back. To an extend we have to recognise that riot control is nasty, and I think this video is defendable.

The fact that it is a man from the same unit as the officer who attacked tomlinson and they both had their identification covered suggests that brutality is certainly a problem within this unit and there is a problem needing to be addressed.

Also in no riot training will you be told that it is acceptable to backhand a member of the public in the face just for not going away when told. There are ways and means for controlling crowds and that wasn't it.

If you have access to sources of information that I don't then please show them to me. I'd be shocked if that is considered acceptable by UK authorities.

Well, maybe not even that. After all, she's not doing the filming. The policeman makes a blow that is not dangerous, twice, and he is almost certainly following orders to clear or control an area. To compare this to the video with Ian Tomlison where there is an unprovoked and followed-up attack, combined with police lies, ultimately undermines Medi Rapper's argument.

Which is not acceptable. That level of violence when not under attack is unacceptable by any guidebook.

David Howarth, the Liberal Democrat justice spokesman, said: "How did the police end up in a situation where they used the same degree of force on the most peaceful demonstration as they did for a violent protest at the Bank of England? They seem to only have one trick."

My arse he should. His job was to protect a place and control a crowd. He gave a verbal warning, which was ignored. He made an initial measured physical attack, which was ignored. He made another physical attack. That is his job, it appears he did it appropriately.

Once again I'd like to see some police guidelines here where it states that this officer was right and we'll wait and see if he gets disciplined to boot.

I note that his epaulets are deliberately covered in order to hide his rank and serial number. That being the case, he reported for duty on the premise that it would be that much harder to hold him into account for any actions he would subsequently make. Because of this, I can't say I would give him the benefit of the doubt.

Pah, nonsense.

The Police are paid to protect us the citizens. It includes protesters, who by being blessed by living in England rather than Zimbabwe, should be able to partake in lawful protest without fear of summary beatings. If New Labour wanted us to appreciate the hype of Gordon's diplomatic prowess, they should do so through argument, not by kettling and brute force.

Good post.

Which most analysts would agree kettling and force actually incites violence not controls it. They are supposed to filter the crowds and disperse them passively not attack them. In doing so if anyone needs picking up and removing it is easily done without violence.


Riot Control Tactics
The tactics used to control riots in the past were simple -- they were based on the fact that the police were almost always better-armed than the rioters. The tactics they used basically consisted of forming a line and charging into the crowd. Today, the police are still well-armed, but tactics have advanced significantly in hopes of preventing injuries.

When a riot is in full swing, police will deploy in a square formation with a command team at the center. The command team is protected on all four sides by echelons of troops deployed in groups of 10 or 12 officers. There is also an arrest team at the center of the square.



his tactical unit is very mobile and able to adapt on the fly to changes in the situation. If a threat suddenly appears behind or to one side of the unit, then the echelon facing that direction is designated the front of the unit. The entire team can then change the direction it's facing without a lot of maneuvering. Also, the echelons can cover each other when the team moves to take advanced positions. If the unit is under attack, the whole team does not move together: One echelon moves while the others provide covering fire or an actual physical screen (with riot shields). Then another echelon moves up into position.
The echelon is not meant to be an impenetrable wall of cop. In fact, the riot squad often leaves an escape route to let rioters run past the squad. The officers can adopt a passive position, in which they spread out and leave several yards between each officer. The crowd can then easily filter through them. If a particularly violent group moves toward the officers or they spot specific suspects they want to arrest, they can quickly close the gaps and form a tight line.

As the unit moves forward into a crowd, it will prod and push at anyone who doesn't respond to requests to move away by the time the front echelon reaches them. If they still refuse to move, the unit continues moving forward, but the front echelon opens up and passes around the protestors. Once the protestors are inside the square, the unit stops, the front echelon reforms and the arrest team processes the rioters. When they're done, the unit can continue moving.

http://people.howstuffworks.com/riot-control1.htm

I'd love to know how hemming innocent protestors in for 8 hours helped the situation. One liberal Democrat and MP as well as a few Guardian reporters were observing one group and stated they were not violent or aggressive and contained no trouble makers.

The blows in this video are hardly cuddles now, but they could be a hell of alot worse.

We're not quite in Tianemmen square yet, yet.

Why did they get this so wrong. Did they not check? After all there is not a square yard not covered by CCTV in Central London, did they try to mislead us, if so they must think we are idiots. Did the Police misinform them or was it the start of a cover up? You decide. After all legend has it that British CCTV can capture any crime except those committed by rogue or bent coppers. My personal view is that the matter should be put to judicial review, no reasonable person can say that the IPCC is competent to investigate this case under all the circumstances. Curious to know if the video recordings meet the same fate as some of the vital Menezes footage.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...dog/article.do

Well the seemingly deliberate incompetency of the IPCC has worked for them before, why not now? They may well think we are idiots and they may well be right since they can get away with it.

[bomberboy]

And all this talk of it being a "riot" is rubbish as well. The only people who were rioting were the police, not us protesters. We were peacefull, and were met with violence.

Liar, we all saw what happened on the news, (I watched the BBC), so called anarchists detroying public buildings and attacking police officers. Yes he acted too harshly on her but what would you feel like if you were him eh?

[Roman Rapper]

Liar, we all saw what happened on the news, (I watched the BBC), so called anarchists detroying public buildings and attacking police officers. Yes he acted too harshly on her but what would you feel like if you were him eh?

No buildings were destroyed, one buiding was slighty damaged.

He didn't attack her because he was scared for his own safety; the police had the protesters surrounded and there was no danger to him at all. No, he attacked her simply because he is a violent thug.

[bomberboy]

No buildings were destroyed, one buiding was slighty damaged.

He didn't attack her because he was scared for his own safety; the police had the protesters surrounded and there was no danger to him at all. No, he attacked her simply because he is a violent thug.

I was playing devils advocate about the police officer also about the destroying bit I was describing. And yes the police can be brutal very brutal, infact it was on the news a few mimutes ago.

[Yorkshireman]

The only people who were rioting were the police, not us protesters. We were peacefull, and were met with violence.

All peaceful protesters? I like that non-violent man hitting the police with the pole on 0.33 secs.



Anyone who thinks getting a slap or hit on the legs with a stick is brutality must have led a very sheltered life.

[Scar Face]

You a fan of really long titles?

[Adrian]

Those cops are under immense pressure being in the middle of a mob that at any moment may start rioting or hitting you.

What do you expect yes the cop acted rashly but the pressure they are under can make anyone crack.