woolybanana Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Surely the police in this video are way over the top. Notice the speed of the Range Rover and that it stops as soon as there is an appropriate place to stop, or seems to. They should have been sanctioned at least, if not something more serious.Imagine what would have happened if they had been armed!http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2011/06/10/actions-of-police-who-broke-pensioner-s-car-window-justified-91466-28854676/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idun Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 It is never justified. AND you are right, it is a good job that they are not armed. We know what happens when they are.[:@] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted June 11, 2011 Author Share Posted June 11, 2011 But yet they were cleared of all wrong doing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnOther Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 We don't see the whole incident though do we but apparently it went on for whole 17 minutes and in the end he only stopped because of a stinger so I reserve judgement.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-10879719EDIT: Not to give a dog a bad name but the gentleman in question would seem to have priorshttp://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/archive/2004/07/30/Gwent+Archive/4602722.Driver_in_assault_protest_is_guilty/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Val_2 Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Surely if he decides not wear a seatbelt, then it's his decision to go through the windscreen and kill himself, he knows the risks of that. I too reckon there is more to this than is made public and it could have been some very serious previous stuff too that made the police do what they did in case the public have suffered previously and they did not want a repeat. If not and he was perfectly innocent, then it is a frightening scenario that could spread and having family who are police officers I honestly could not see them doing that sort of thing without just cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbie Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Maybe he does have the right to go through the windscreen and kill himself but does he have the right to go through the windscreen, be seriously injured and have the Health Service treat him at public expense? I think that we have a right to expect people to take reasonable precautions to avoid serious injury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fisherman Posted June 11, 2011 Share Posted June 11, 2011 Paraphrasing the police evidence in the inquest, Ian Tomlinson got a whack for walking insolently so I guess this guy got off quite lightly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnOther Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 It's stretching credibility to believe that he could really have driven for 17 minutes without knowing the police were behind him with 'twos & blues' on so he should have stopped or at least pulled over to let them by. If he really didn't see or hear them then he should have been facing a charge of driving without due care and attention but in any case claiming that he thought they were giving him an escort home is risible and demonstrates that he knew full well that they were behind him.I believe the 'shock and awe' response is fairly standard procedure for fail to stops these days and is designed to disorient an offender and gain control of the situation as quickly as possible.As I said earlier, just stop, end of problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted June 13, 2011 Author Share Posted June 13, 2011 Gratuitous violence and unnecessary, especially if a stinger had been used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boiling a frog Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 I bet if the driver had been drunk and/ or run over a child killing it you would have been questioning why he was not stopped sooner.Pray tell us all how the police have been endued with second sight that they are able to know, just by being in the vicinity of a motorist his condition(mental or otherwise) and what he is going to do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunday Driver Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 According to one of the links posted earlier:"Robert Whatley drove off, allegedly knocking one officer, when they tried to give him a penalty notice, Caerphilly Magistrates Court heard." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sid Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Could you imagine trying to drive off here in France? You'd probably get shot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 "Robert Whatley drove off, allegedly knocking one officer, when they tried to give him a penalty notice, Caerphilly Magistrates Court heard."Us the dumb public are restrained from viewing the proceedings BUT we are privileged to learn little snippets, of course uncorroborated, seeking to put the fuzz in favourable strong third degree backlighting.Still there is a clear object lesson: avoid a bench with unqualified quacks knowing less about the law than a barrack room lawyer.Go for a Crown Court Hearing; you might get a bigger sentence if you are really unlucky and the evidence backs up against you; but at least you will have the chance of a reasonably fair trial.P.S. Reminds me of the stamwarts at the Ludlow Magistrates Court congratulating the "offizer" on his correct behaviour by speeding to hone his driving skills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunday Driver Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 [quote user="sid"]Could you imagine trying to drive off here in France? You'd probably get shot![/quote]Last year, there was an incident in Coulanges sur L'Autize just outside Niort. The gendarmes had a tip-off that there was going to be a break-in at the local pharmacie so they staged an ambush to catch the gang. When challenged, one of the gang jumped in their car and drove straight at one of the gendarmes, who instantly drew his gun and shot him.Put down to self defence, apparently..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickP Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 [quote user="pachapapa"]"Robert Whatley drove off, allegedly knocking one officer, when they tried to give him a penalty notice, Caerphilly Magistrates Court heard."Us the dumb public are restrained from viewing the proceedings BUT we are privileged to learn little snippets, of course uncorroborated, seeking to put the fuzz in favourable strong third degree backlighting.Still there is a clear object lesson: avoid a bench with unqualified quacks knowing less about the law than a barrack room lawyer.Go for a Crown Court Hearing; you might get a bigger sentence if you are really unlucky and the evidence backs up against you; but at least you will have the chance of a reasonably fair trial.P.S. Reminds me of the stamwarts at the Ludlow Magistrates Court congratulating the "offizer" on his correct behaviour by speeding to hone his driving skills.[/quote] No just obey the law and you don't have to go to court. [:D] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted June 13, 2011 Author Share Posted June 13, 2011 Just look again at the violence employed by the young (?) copper on the windscreen or sidescreen of the Range Rover. That is manic and out of control. I doubt he should be employed in such a position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 [quote user="Sunday Driver"] [quote user="sid"]Could you imagine trying to drive off here in France? You'd probably get shot![/quote]Last year, there was an incident in Coulanges sur L'Autize just outside Niort. The gendarmes had a tip-off that there was going to be a break-in at the local pharmacie so they staged an ambush to catch the gang. When challenged, one of the gang jumped in their car and drove straight at one of the gendarmes, who instantly drew his gun and shot him.Put down to self defence, apparently..... [/quote]Is that the same coule d'Anges that is south of Secondigny on the way to that town in La Vendée that has converted the railway station into an auditorium?http://www.ville-coulonges-sur-lautize.fr/sommaire/sommaire.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boiling a frog Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Just look again at the violence employed by the young (?) copper on the windscreen or sidescreen of the Range Rover. That is manic and out of control. I doubt he should be employed in such a position. Rubbish, do you suggest a pretty please a feather duster, a jolly good telling off. This man refused to stop for 17 miles and then when he did locked the doors and would not leave the vehicle .Alternative please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted June 13, 2011 Author Share Posted June 13, 2011 Immobilize the vehicle and force door Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 [quote user="NickP"][quote user="pachapapa"] "Robert Whatley drove off, allegedly knocking one officer, when they tried to give him a penalty notice, Caerphilly Magistrates Court heard."Us the dumb public are restrained from viewing the proceedings BUT we are privileged to learn little snippets, of course uncorroborated, seeking to put the fuzz in favourable strong third degree backlighting.Still there is a clear object lesson: avoid a bench with unqualified quacks knowing less about the law than a barrack room lawyer.Go for a Crown Court Hearing; you might get a bigger sentence if you are really unlucky and the evidence backs up against you; but at least you will have the chance of a reasonably fair trial.P.S. Reminds me of the stamwarts at the Ludlow Magistrates Court congratulating the "offizer" on his correct behaviour by speeding to hone his driving skills.[/quote] No just obey the law and you don't have to go to court. [:D][/quote]Laughing at your own jokes now.[:(]But congratulations on your supreme deth of legal knowledge keeping you beyond reproach.Definitely mega-better than a poor barrack room lawyer.[:D] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boiling a frog Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Immobilize the vehicle and force door Precisely how do you immobilise the vehicle and force the door if the person inside has locked the doors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 [quote user="Boiling a frog"]Immobilize the vehicle and force door Precisely how do you immobilise the vehicle and force the door if the person inside has locked the doors.[/quote]Quite right! Totally impractical§RPGs built into the front bumper is the solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted June 13, 2011 Author Share Posted June 13, 2011 The level of violence by both policemen shows the gap that has grown beyond the police and the public. They reacted as if they were on a drugs bust where violence had been used. This was a moving traffic offence committed by an elderly man whoh was not wearing a seat belt.In other words they only seem to have one level of reaction which is total violence. Had the driver been a pregnant woman, would they have reacted in the same way? No, they have been watching too many macho videos and are a danger to the public. They should be taken off active duty immediately as they are mentally unfit for the job.That the hearing was in secret is indicative of an urge to cover up the event by the police service.Once the vehicle had been stopped they could have talked the guy out easily enough.I am surprised that anyone could justify their behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boiling a frog Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 How do you know that, you were not there.You have made a ludicrous suggestion as to how they should have got the person out ie immobilise the vehicle and then force the door , but when it is pointed out that said person refused to open doors and locked himself in you come up with talk him out. Why should a discipline hearing be in public, there are no discipline hearing held in public for anyone in the UK The OAP was present at the hearing which lasted 3 days and he gave evidence so hardly a cover up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chancer Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 [quote user="Boiling a frog"] Rubbish, do you suggest a pretty please a feather duster, a jolly good telling off. This man refused to stop for 17 miles and then when he did locked the doors and would not leave the vehicle . Alternative please.[/quote]Break the side window and use the force necessary to restrain him if he resisted arrest, isnt that what they claim to have done?Break the side window and taser him [6]Break the side window and pepper spray him [6]Shoot him through the side window. [6]Shoot the guy operating the video camera. [6] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.