Policeman guilty of assault

TGR":19sk86e2 said:
Another 2p's worth

I do see a difference in "going into a cell and giving a kicking to" anyone and the reaction to someone spitting into you mouth, irrespective of whether the officer had to open a door to get to the spitter or not.

Consider a normal person's reaction to the spit - Police officers may receive training in relation to use of force etc. but at the end of the day, they are people and sometimes will react to provocation. Reacting may, in some circumstances, be wrong and it appears in this case, the Court has found the officer to be in the wrong.

I do understand that within the confines of the law, the officer is in the wrong - spitting in someone's mouth will not cause them any immediate harm and there is not a need to protect yourself from impending injury etc BUT what I have been trying to explain is that, in my opinion, the officer reacted in a normal human way.

Richard

I don't buy that. If he'd have struck the spitter, and said he did it to attempt to ensure he didn't spit again - that would be one thing. But when the hazard is in the back of a van, and behind a closed van door - it's rather hard to see the clear and present danger - then opening the van door again, and hitting him more than once - then the copper wasn't doing it because he was in danger, it rather sounds like he was doing it for revenge.

In those circumstances, it's no bloody wonder he was found guilty, he was also guilty of being bloody stupid. Ask yourself this - what would you imagine the police would do, if those circumstances were part of a proper police complaint, only the person opening the van door again, and walloping the guy in the van a few times for good measure, wasn't a copper?
 
I take your point TGR, it is understandable that due to the stress of the situation, one might lash out even after one would expect he had time to think.

The only thing is, the assailant was in custody, and the officer had a duty of care he neglected.

I have been assaulted several times by police officers over my lifetime, three particular times completely without cause.

They are just human beings, but in the same way I have been trained to contain situations they are trained to do so, and keep a cool head. Suggesting society is going to hell in a handcart merely because an officer has been found guilty of a crime it seems clear he committed is ridiculous.

The premeditation is the real key to it. Really ought to have exercised self control, and it really has to be asked what he may do behind closed doors.

Perhaps he is not a bad fella, but he is not up to snuff as an officer of the law.
 
Neil,

You typed 'i don't buy that' but as far as i can see you actually agree with me to some extent.

Highlandlandsflyer,

I am not being argumentative, just stating a point that the 'red mist' may have been down when the incident happened. Training will help prevent the 'red mist' but will never totally prevent it. I am not trying to justify what the officer did, i am trying to explain what 'might' have happened and the report gives no indication as to the time frame involved between the spit and the assault.

You have made the point that Police officers are human beings which is the point I have been trying to make.

I still hold the view that if someone did this to you, would you hold the moral high ground and turn the other cheek?

Was John Prescott right or wrong?

Richard
 
OK, I will bite.

I have not only been spat on, I have had objects thrown at me and been punched, kicked, bitten and all sorts of other 'assaults'. This was by psychiatric patients or adults with extreme challenging behaviour.

I went into the work with my eyes open, and had the required training. My response was always professional regardless of my emotional state. Thanks to discipline, and realising I was not under serious threat as I had the ability to control the situation as part of a trained team.

One time I went to collect one of my employers from a day centre and he ran out and blind sided me with an impressive right hook. I was concussed by smacking my head on the kerb and as I regained my awareness he was being pinned down by the day centre staff.

If I were alone and saw him coming at me, as happened on many other occasions, I would have handled it.

As a police officer you are trained to deal with violence, there is never an excuse to go beyond an instinctive response. It may indeed be human to feel like doing it, but it is illegal to go ahead and take one's anger out on someone under one's care.
 
TGR":2ydrqv6g said:
Neil,

You typed 'i don't buy that' but as far as i can see you actually agree with me to some extent.

I replied with "I don't buy that" to the bit I emboldened - ie it was a normal human reaction. If he'd have done it immediately, I'd buy it. But to shut the guy in the van, wipe off the spit, then open the van and launch himself at the guy and hit him more than once?

That's not just defence, that's not just instinct, that's retribution. And IMO, that's why he was found guilty. Because there was a pregnant pause in proceedings, and because he hit the guy more than once.

TGR":2ydrqv6g said:
Highlandlandsflyer,

I am not being argumentative, just stating a point that the 'red mist' may have been down when the incident happened. Training will help prevent the 'red mist' but will never totally prevent it. I am not trying to justify what the officer did, i am trying to explain what 'might' have happened and the report gives no indication as to the time frame involved between the spit and the assault.

You have made the point that Police officers are human beings which is the point I have been trying to make.

I still hold the view that if someone did this to you, would you hold the moral high ground and turn the other cheek?

Was John Prescott right or wrong?

Richard

The two-jags thing was different - he reacted instantaneously. If that had happened the egg-thrower cuffed and walked, then two-jags turned around, got free of his handlers (yes, just like in the movies...) and had a pop at the egg-thrower? Quite a different situation.
 
Neil":3tdionwf said:
We_are_Stevo":3tdionwf said:
It would be interesting to have a time machine and be able to see accurately how long we have before society breaks down completely :|

I'm completely not getting this - are you saying finding a copper guilty for opening up a van door again, and walloping some ne'er-do-well a couple of times is suggestive that society is heading for meltdown?

What's the difference between that, and going into a cell and giving a kicking to some mouthy scrote?

I'm just waiting for the obligatory "when did you stop beating your wife?"

You have only to open your eyes to see society is heading for meltdown; not in my time admittedly but inevitably?

Definitely... :|

The Middle East had the most advanced civilisation in the world at a time when our ancestors were grubbing around in mud huts, dressing in animal skins and mislaying divers personal belongings and misgotten gains for future metal detector fans; look at the state they're in today!
 
I don't see anything to rival the library of Ephesus in this country...

...the Romans had central heating; we had wattle and daub!
 
Back
Top