Maybe NWA had a point
Posted on Dec 06 2007 | Tagged as: Uncategorized
Joy. Now not only can the police arrest you for pretty much anything they like (and often call it “terrorism”), they can now beat the crap out of you while doing so:
POLICE officers who seriously injured an innocent man when they forced their way into his home to arrest him have been cleared of using excessive force.
Stephen Whenary needed 13 weeks off work to recover from the beating he received when officers from Cleveland Police used batons and CS gas on him while he was cowering in his bathroom.
Following an 18-month investigation, carried out by the same force, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has ruled the officers have no case to answer and will not face criminal or misconduct charges.
(My emphasis.)
Behaviour like that is only going to turn law-abiding people against the police force — as does their general contemptuous attitude to the public.
Not that long ago a copper in Cardiff stopped me from walking into the back of the students’ union. When I asked why, I got shouted at: “Because I said so.” Not really the explanation I was after. Is it really that much harder to say something along the lines of, “It’s a crime scene and we’re sealng it off”?
When my cousin visited a few weeks ago I hardly spoke to her, mostly because she’s a PCSO. And this is from someone used to tape The Bill and watch a term’s worth in two days.
on 06 Dec 2007 at 12:13 pm 1 DanW said …
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7130028.stm
Makes you wonder just how “blind” justice is to those who should be brought before her eh? The current levels of contempt for the government and the police, and justifiably the army’s ‘top’ brass and less justifiably the army’s personal (troops etc.) is hardly going to incite a rebellion but there does seem to be growing anger at a) there complete ineptitude and b) there utter inability to accept liability and then have the decency to resign.
Did you see on the news the police officer caught speeding as linked in the above story, issued a statement through his lawyer saying he was pleased to have pleaded guilty and not used excuses or tried to blame technology to escape a guilty verdict as people often do, and he has criticised this, so was pleased to have followed his own example?
…
Do these people have no shame? Who cares if you pleaded guilty. You were guilty. He should resign, or be sacked, but somehow I doubt he will.
Apologies for high-jacking your thread..
“hijacking?”
“he’s a terrorist!”
on 06 Dec 2007 at 12:21 pm 2 Christopher White said …
Yeah, I saw that on the telly news last night. What a tit. I mean, I’ve been busted for speeding but I’ve also not been preaching about how out of order it is for years.
I noticed, as well, that when they showed the photos of other officers from the same force caught in the act of speeding (ie the shots taken from the gatsos), they said that the Information Commisioner had ordered the release of the pics — so the force had tried to weasel its way out of it and initially refused to release them.
on 06 Dec 2007 at 12:44 pm 3 DanW said …
The reasons given were along the lines that it could lead to harassment of the drivers by members of the public, which contradicted their own original reasons for non-prosecution which was that there was no way of identifying the drivers.
Despite this it’s now “too old” to prosecute. Suggesting htat crimes are only worth following up if they happened recently. I think the canoeist should go free on these grounds, if he is guilty of anything that is.
on 07 Dec 2007 at 9:51 pm 4 Szwagier said …
Do you think policepeople (officers my arse) are born thick and aggressive, or do they have to go to school for it?