|
|
Post by callas12 on Jul 28, 2024 11:01:35 GMT
I've just sat and caught up with the last few pages of updates and posts some people have made on the Mancheter Airport thread over the last few days.
I totally get it's a devisive & delicate subject & interestingly the vast majority (usual pro and anti police sides) do all kind of agree with the core values of what the majority are trying to say.
It's just easy to get sidelined, distracted and even carried away with throw away comments made by people that unfortunately skewers the main issues at play.
I get whilst Paul Spencer is preferring to focus on the officers kick and stamp incident (which has been the main focal point for days now), Cobs is attempting to come in from the angle of if the assault and resisting arrest hadn't occured in the build up then the kick/stamp matter wouldn't have likely occurred which I totally agree with.
Life is all about sliding doors moments and no one incident would ever occur without any build up inter-play so to speak, call it an assist.
To keep it simple in football terms, Crouchies wonder strike against Man City wouldn't have happened without a little knock down from Pennant. Such a minor thing most people dont even recall happening on that great occasion that we've all watched numerous times over, but it was a vital element that helped result in the fine finish from Crouch. Without the knock down, or even go back before that bit to Begovics accurate kick out, they'd be no Crouch worldie goal we all talk and reminisce about today.
Yes whilst a goal at Stoke and the incident at Manchester Airport are world's apart, in lies the same meaning.
Without the resisting of the initial arrest happening, but also the absolute level of ferocious violence the attending officers were then subjected to, which undoubtedly & subsequently led to the chain of events that followed resulting in the aggressor being kicked in the head.
So whilst it might be easy to disregard the build up to it and purely focus on the kick event itself, chronologically it's all part of the build up and must all be viewed in context which is what I've no doubts a court & jury will eventually do.
& the reason I mention this is for the following reasons :
The officer involved in the kick and stamp was involved in the initial attempt at arresting the suspect for the earlier matter being investigated. As he appears to go hands on first and take ownership of this tasking he is met with the most initial resistance & aggression. He gets involved shorty afterwards with a second party who it looks like manages to inflict numerous punches to the officers face at the side of wall mounted machine.
This officer is most likely suffering pain, disorientation & is fearful for his own safety at this point from a very early stage.
He'll be subconsciously aware at this point that his colleagues are also heavily involved in dealing with the growing discontent in this area of the building & help may not be as forthcoming or effective as he would be hoping it would. He may most likely also see that his colleagues, a couple who are female are coming under a barrage of attack from someone clear in their desire to not be detained at any cost and is willing to fight their way out to make sure they preserve their freedom. This in itself will be making him think, why is he taking such extreme measures to avoid capture?! He'll most likely be aware that these officers are also bleeding from injuries and have also been floored by the aggressors. A quickly evolving frightening scenario for anyone at this stage.
As has been mentioned by other posters on this thread, name me another country in the world where if you offered such a level of violence to police or security staff inside an airport building you would get away with not being shot on the spot?! It wouldn't happen. So fair play to the police officers for not stepping back and drawing their actual firearms straight away in an attempt to deal with the quickly escalating level of violence. Imagine what news and controversy that would have actually caused?! Doesn't bare thinking about.
Remember any other country it would have happened that way guaranteed! So the way this matter is being dealt with is way more leaniant than it could have been from the outset.
At this stage, whatever training you've received whilst being important, is not the key factor in your thinking necessarily. The officer will have gone through the naturally inbuilt fight or flight thought process and the latter clearly isn't an option for him.
The officer subject to most of the debate on this thread (the kicking officer for point of clarity) has not been punched in the face on numerous times by one subject, he has then been attacked by the main subject (the kicked in the head person for clarity), who has clearly had no qualms in fighting other police officers including the two women.
The subject officer has then become involved in a grapple scenario type situation with the main subject who has now reapproached him during which it's essentially very close quarter fighting. Not only is the officers thought process on survival and restraining the attacker, he'll also have somewhere in his very active thought process that he has a live firearm attached to him that could at any point be taken from him or even come loose whilst he's tussling. His training will at this point mean you are legally entitled to use whatever force is necessary to make sure you do not become disconnected from your firearms in any way shape or form.
Now the footage we view clearly shows the subject get tasered, it's unlear whether the grappling officer fires his taser or I think most likely it's the female officer who had already been floored by the attacker stood to the right on the footage.
Either way both the subject & the officer fall to the ground. The officers fear of being exposed to losing or having his firearm taken from him will have increased massively with this fall. This looks to be the point at which he stands up and instinctively kicks and stamps on the grounded subjects head only a matter of seconds later.
Now in isolation the kick and stamp look really bad and despite having seen the extra footage now as well, I am still of the opinion the officer has rightly or wrongly overacted & shouldn't have kicked the head area as he clearly does at that stage.
But I am aware that the high stress levels this officer went through in those matter of seconds, yes we're not talking about minutes here but seconds in a very fast evolving situation, mean that even if he's acted violently excessive, their were perhaps mitigating factors that may have led to him thinking this was the course of action he had to take at that moment in time. If he had a genuine belief and fear that in the fall and melee he may have either lost or had his firearm taken from him then I totally get why he has done what he has done in a last resort attempt to stop the perpetrator gaining access to his firearm!
Who are we to judge him on that, if that's genuinely what he was fearing was happening. In that moment the officer hasn't had the benefit of hindsight and numerous replays from different angles, it was the unknown in a quickly escalating act of violence towards numerous police officers.
Despite thinking and hoping from the limited access we've been shown, that the officers actions were meant in good faith, I do still think his actions will be brought to question which is only right and proper.
It'll then be for the members of the jury to decide if the level of force the officer used was proportionate in the circumstances. Only they will be privy to all the facts of which they can base their decision making on.
I appreciate this post is quite lengthy but just wanted to get across that sometimes the whole context needs to be considered of what happened. This extends beyond what we can visibly see & actually putting yourself in some one else's position to try and understand perhaps why they've done what they have.
Interestingly if I was to ask the officer right now would he do the same again if he found himself in the same circumstances, I almost guarantee his answer will be 'yes'.. That is quite telling. He acted if answered yes because it means he'd have acted on instinct & not with the benefit of hindsight!
Forget Hindsight, forget Training Protocol, forget Laws, Policies and Procedures, that's all fictional and reflective in an ideal world, presented with a real life scenario of life and death, you do what you do and deal with the consequences afterwards. Time isn't your friend in these scenarios, being positive and decisive is, we all know and have been involved im sure with could'a, would'a, should'a scenarios. But how many have been under such frantic and scary scenarios as this I wonder 🤔 ?!
|
|
|
|
Post by chamberlain on Jul 28, 2024 11:31:42 GMT
Paul I was having a rational general conversation about moral in the police with Chamberlin, our conversations don’t all have to be about this case you know. I will however give you a scenario from the case In Manchester to explain my point. There’s a female officer a couple of days ago who’s probably gone home to her family after being in A and E for hours having been badly assaulted by some scumbag who’s punched her in the face. No doubt she’s arrived at home, upset and in considerable pain having finished late having had to write a statement about the days events. Her anxiety raised further by seeing her family and loved ones upset due to seeing her face battered and bruised. She’s then probably sat down and switched on the news / social media etc only to read about her colleagues actions with not a report or care for her welfare from those reporting. She’s then read about the individual that assaulted her being lauded as some sort of martyr / victim by his crooked lawyer when he was the one who battered her and her colleagues and put her in hospital. If that was you or a loved one how would your feelings be ? I’m pretty sure that there’s officers all over the country that work there guts out every shift doing some great work and no doubt save lives and arrest the bad guys whilst being assaulted on numerous occasions to keep people like you and I safe. For what? To be told on social media or mainstream media that they’re scum, all the same, racists with never a positive word for all the great stuff they do. That’s what I meant when I said they need to feel loved and appreciated. Of course there are bad cops and some that make mistakes when there feelings get the better of them but there needs to be focus on the good ones one too (which rarely happens). I’m sure there’s plenty out there that won’t condone the brothers because it’s easier to make it all about the officer. Do you mean, won't condemn the brothers rather than condone? It's nothing about it being 'easier', it is all about the officer. If he hadn't done what he did, we wouldn't even know about an incident at Manchester airport between the police and a couple of scrotes during the week. I'm sure villains resist arrest all the time but we don't ever get to hear about it because the police involved don't massively overstep their powers. All about the officer , that's the sad state of the country. |
|
|
|
Post by chuffedstokie on Jul 28, 2024 11:49:56 GMT
I was in the job, wouldn't want a firearm thanks, just made do with the truncheon. Didn't stop me getting stabbed though. Some civilians ought to try police work then come back and discuss their experiences. My sister and brother in law are both in the force now. I’d prefer them, especially my sister to be armed for her own safety. If I'd been armed when the guy attacked me and I chose to use a gun yes I'd probably stopped him but he'd highly likely be dead, not sure I'd want to carry that around with me for the rest of my life if I'm honest. Then again what the hell was he doing at 2am with a dirty great big bowie knife. You haven't a clue how things escalate from asking a question to all out violence. |
|
|
|
Post by DansViews on Jul 28, 2024 12:38:35 GMT
My sister and brother in law are both in the force now. I’d prefer them, especially my sister to be armed for her own safety. If I'd been armed when the guy attacked me and I chose to use a gun yes I'd probably stopped him but he'd highly likely be dead, not sure I'd want to carry that around with me for the rest of my life if I'm honest. Then again what the hell was he doing at 2am with a dirty great big bowie knife. You haven't a clue how things escalate from asking a question to all out violence. Obviously never been in that situation myself, but I would sleep better if he’d attacked my sister whilst she was on patrol, and she put a bullet square between his eyes ! |
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jul 28, 2024 12:45:47 GMT
I've just sat and caught up with the last few pages of updates and posts some people have made on the Mancheter Airport thread over the last few days. I totally get it's a devisive & delicate subject & interestingly the vast majority (usual pro and anti police sides) do all kind of agree with the core values of what the majority are trying to say. It's just easy to get sidelined, distracted and even carried away with throw away comments made by people that unfortunately skewers the main issues at play. I get whilst Paul Spencer is preferring to focus on the officers kick and stamp incident (which has been the main focal point for days now), Cobs is attempting to come in from the angle of if the assault and resisting arrest hadn't occured in the build up then the kick/stamp matter wouldn't have likely occurred which I totally agree with. Life is all about sliding doors moments and no one incident would ever occur without any build up inter-play so to speak, call it an assist. To keep it simple in football terms, Crouchies wonder strike against Man City wouldn't have happened without a little knock down from Pennant. Such a minor thing most people dont even recall happening on that great occasion that we've all watched numerous times over, but it was a vital element that helped result in the fine finish from Crouch. Without the knock down, or even go back before that bit to Begovics accurate kick out, they'd be no Crouch worldie goal we all talk and reminisce about today. Yes whilst a goal at Stoke and the incident at Manchester Airport are world's apart, in lies the same meaning. Without the resisting of the initial arrest happening, but also the absolute level of ferocious violence the attending officers were then subjected to, which undoubtedly & subsequently led to the chain of events that followed resulting in the aggressor being kicked in the head. So whilst it might be easy to disregard the build up to it and purely focus on the kick event itself, chronologically it's all part of the build up and must all be viewed in context which is what I've no doubts a court & jury will eventually do. & the reason I mention this is for the following reasons : The officer involved in the kick and stamp was involved in the initial attempt at arresting the suspect for the earlier matter being investigated. As he appears to go hands on first and take ownership of this tasking he is met with the most initial resistance & aggression. He gets involved shorty afterwards with a second party who it looks like manages to inflict numerous punches to the officers face at the side of wall mounted machine. This officer is most likely suffering pain, disorientation & is fearful for his own safety at this point from a very early stage. He'll be subconsciously aware at this point that his colleagues are also heavily involved in dealing with the growing discontent in this area of the building & help may not be as forthcoming or effective as he would be hoping it would. He may most likely also see that his colleagues, a couple who are female are coming under a barrage of attack from someone clear in their desire to not be detained at any cost and is willing to fight their way out to make sure they preserve their freedom. This in itself will be making him think, why is he taking such extreme measures to avoid capture?! He'll most likely be aware that these officers are also bleeding from injuries and have also been floored by the aggressors. A quickly evolving frightening scenario for anyone at this stage. As has been mentioned by other posters on this thread, name me another country in the world where if you offered such a level of violence to police or security staff inside an airport building you would get away with not being shot on the spot?! It wouldn't happen. So fair play to the police officers for not stepping back and drawing their actual firearms straight away in an attempt to deal with the quickly escalating level of violence. Imagine what news and controversy that would have actually caused?! Doesn't bare thinking about. Remember any other country it would have happened that way guaranteed! So the way this matter is being dealt with is way more leaniant than it could have been from the outset. At this stage, whatever training you've received whilst being important, is not the key factor in your thinking necessarily. The officer will have gone through the naturally inbuilt fight or flight thought process and the latter clearly isn't an option for him. The officer subject to most of the debate on this thread (the kicking officer for point of clarity) has not been punched in the face on numerous times by one subject, he has then been attacked by the main subject (the kicked in the head person for clarity), who has clearly had no qualms in fighting other police officers including the two women. The subject officer has then become involved in a grapple scenario type situation with the main subject who has now reapproached him during which it's essentially very close quarter fighting. Not only is the officers thought process on survival and restraining the attacker, he'll also have somewhere in his very active thought process that he has a live firearm attached to him that could at any point be taken from him or even come loose whilst he's tussling. His training will at this point mean you are legally entitled to use whatever force is necessary to make sure you do not become disconnected from your firearms in any way shape or form. Now the footage we view clearly shows the subject get tasered, it's unlear whether the grappling officer fires his taser or I think most likely it's the female officer who had already been floored by the attacker stood to the right on the footage. Either way both the subject & the officer fall to the ground. The officers fear of being exposed to losing or having his firearm taken from him will have increased massively with this fall. This looks to be the point at which he stands up and instinctively kicks and stamps on the grounded subjects head only a matter of seconds later.Now in isolation the kick and stamp look really bad and despite having seen the extra footage now as well, I am still of the opinion the officer has rightly or wrongly overacted & shouldn't have kicked the head area as he clearly does at that stage. But I am aware that the high stress levels this officer went through in those matter of seconds, yes we're not talking about minutes here but seconds in a very fast evolving situation, mean that even if he's acted violently excessive, their were perhaps mitigating factors that may have led to him thinking this was the course of action he had to take at that moment in time. If he had a genuine belief and fear that in the fall and melee he may have either lost or had his firearm taken from him then I totally get why he has done what he has done in a last resort attempt to stop the perpetrator gaining access to his firearm! Who are we to judge him on that, if that's genuinely what he was fearing was happening. In that moment the officer hasn't had the benefit of hindsight and numerous replays from different angles, it was the unknown in a quickly escalating act of violence towards numerous police officers. Despite thinking and hoping from the limited access we've been shown, that the officers actions were meant in good faith, I do still think his actions will be brought to question which is only right and proper. It'll then be for the members of the jury to decide if the level of force the officer used was proportionate in the circumstances. Only they will be privy to all the facts of which they can base their decision making on. I appreciate this post is quite lengthy but just wanted to get across that sometimes the whole context needs to be considered of what happened. This extends beyond what we can visibly see & actually putting yourself in some one else's position to try and understand perhaps why they've done what they have. Interestingly if I was to ask the officer right now would he do the same again if he found himself in the same circumstances, I almost guarantee his answer will be 'yes'.. That is quite telling. He acted if answered yes because it means he'd have acted on instinct & not with the benefit of hindsight! Forget Hindsight, forget Training Protocol, forget Laws, Policies and Procedures, that's all fictional and reflective in an ideal world, presented with a real life scenario of life and death, you do what you do and deal with the consequences afterwards. Time isn't your friend in these scenarios, being positive and decisive is, we all know and have been involved im sure with could'a, would'a, should'a scenarios. But how many have been under such frantic and scary scenarios as this I wonder 🤔 ?! I agree with most of that and I possibly would have agreed with all of that if I had only seen what I'm calling Act 2 in an early Twitter Post and not seen a more extended version as posted by Mr Fog www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/new-manchester-airport-video-shows-29In my viewing "the kicking officer" after grappling with "the kicked in the head person" gets up from the floor, gathers himself and proceeds to kick the suspect in the head. In my opinion it was gratuitous and unnecessary. We also know from the first released video that he then proceeds to stamp on the head of "the kicked in the head person" before moving over to the other Brother who is now prostrate on the ground having been tazered and whom "the kicking officer" had grappled with previously and proceeds to beat him with some sort of implement on the back and on the back of the head. In any case irrespective of how you and i may view the same or several videos differently as you say it's most likely that a Judge and Jury will be the final arbiters |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2024 12:46:51 GMT
If I'd been armed when the guy attacked me and I chose to use a gun yes I'd probably stopped him but he'd highly likely be dead, not sure I'd want to carry that around with me for the rest of my life if I'm honest. Then again what the hell was he doing at 2am with a dirty great big bowie knife. You haven't a clue how things escalate from asking a question to all out violence. Obviously never been in that situation myself, but I would sleep better if he’d attacked my sister whilst she was on patrol, and she put a bullet square between his eyes ! The issue with cops carrying guns isn’t when they use them on people carrying a knife, it’s when they use them to shoot a child in a park whose playing with a toy: www.splcenter.org/news/2020/11/20/remembering-tamir-rice-police-shooting-12-year-old-playing-toy-gun-energized-criminalCops having guns makes them more likely to kill everyday people. |
|
|
|
Post by knype on Jul 28, 2024 12:52:45 GMT
But it's also a massive deterrent. Of course there is the increased chance that someone would get killed accidentally but counter that with how many people would think twice about doing things because of the chance of being shot. And if people then still piss about, that's their stupid choice |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2024 13:08:25 GMT
But it's also a massive deterrent. Of course there is the increased chance that someone would get killed accidentally but counter that with how many people would think twice about doing things because of the chance of being shot. And if people then still piss about, that's their stupid choice A 12 year old child was playing with a toy in a park. Now, he’s dead. What a stupid choice the child made by playing in a park. It wouldn’t be a deterrent to hardened criminals, they would just buy more guns and knives like they do in the US. All guns have done here is made cops more nervous, more likely to reach for a gun and more likely to escalate a situation. If cops are too scared to go to a situation, they shouldn’t be cops. |
|
|
|
Post by knype on Jul 28, 2024 13:10:52 GMT
But it's also a massive deterrent. Of course there is the increased chance that someone would get killed accidentally but counter that with how many people would think twice about doing things because of the chance of being shot. And if people then still piss about, that's their stupid choice A 12 year old child was playing with a toy in a park. Now, he’s dead. What a stupid choice the child made by playing in a park. It wouldn’t be a deterrent to hardened criminals, they would just buy more guns and knives like they do in the US. All guns have done here is made cops more nervous, more likely to reach for a gun and more likely to escalate a situation. If cops are too scared to go to a situation, they shouldn’t be cops. I wasn't commenting on that individual case as you well know. That's obviously a tragic accident of massive proportion. If criminals are armed, cops should be. |
|
|
|
Post by callas12 on Jul 28, 2024 13:14:45 GMT
I've just sat and caught up with the last few pages of updates and posts some people have made on the Mancheter Airport thread over the last few days. I totally get it's a devisive & delicate subject & interestingly the vast majority (usual pro and anti police sides) do all kind of agree with the core values of what the majority are trying to say. It's just easy to get sidelined, distracted and even carried away with throw away comments made by people that unfortunately skewers the main issues at play. I get whilst Paul Spencer is preferring to focus on the officers kick and stamp incident (which has been the main focal point for days now), Cobs is attempting to come in from the angle of if the assault and resisting arrest hadn't occured in the build up then the kick/stamp matter wouldn't have likely occurred which I totally agree with. Life is all about sliding doors moments and no one incident would ever occur without any build up inter-play so to speak, call it an assist. To keep it simple in football terms, Crouchies wonder strike against Man City wouldn't have happened without a little knock down from Pennant. Such a minor thing most people dont even recall happening on that great occasion that we've all watched numerous times over, but it was a vital element that helped result in the fine finish from Crouch. Without the knock down, or even go back before that bit to Begovics accurate kick out, they'd be no Crouch worldie goal we all talk and reminisce about today. Yes whilst a goal at Stoke and the incident at Manchester Airport are world's apart, in lies the same meaning. Without the resisting of the initial arrest happening, but also the absolute level of ferocious violence the attending officers were then subjected to, which undoubtedly & subsequently led to the chain of events that followed resulting in the aggressor being kicked in the head. So whilst it might be easy to disregard the build up to it and purely focus on the kick event itself, chronologically it's all part of the build up and must all be viewed in context which is what I've no doubts a court & jury will eventually do. & the reason I mention this is for the following reasons : The officer involved in the kick and stamp was involved in the initial attempt at arresting the suspect for the earlier matter being investigated. As he appears to go hands on first and take ownership of this tasking he is met with the most initial resistance & aggression. He gets involved shorty afterwards with a second party who it looks like manages to inflict numerous punches to the officers face at the side of wall mounted machine. This officer is most likely suffering pain, disorientation & is fearful for his own safety at this point from a very early stage. He'll be subconsciously aware at this point that his colleagues are also heavily involved in dealing with the growing discontent in this area of the building & help may not be as forthcoming or effective as he would be hoping it would. He may most likely also see that his colleagues, a couple who are female are coming under a barrage of attack from someone clear in their desire to not be detained at any cost and is willing to fight their way out to make sure they preserve their freedom. This in itself will be making him think, why is he taking such extreme measures to avoid capture?! He'll most likely be aware that these officers are also bleeding from injuries and have also been floored by the aggressors. A quickly evolving frightening scenario for anyone at this stage. As has been mentioned by other posters on this thread, name me another country in the world where if you offered such a level of violence to police or security staff inside an airport building you would get away with not being shot on the spot?! It wouldn't happen. So fair play to the police officers for not stepping back and drawing their actual firearms straight away in an attempt to deal with the quickly escalating level of violence. Imagine what news and controversy that would have actually caused?! Doesn't bare thinking about. Remember any other country it would have happened that way guaranteed! So the way this matter is being dealt with is way more leaniant than it could have been from the outset. At this stage, whatever training you've received whilst being important, is not the key factor in your thinking necessarily. The officer will have gone through the naturally inbuilt fight or flight thought process and the latter clearly isn't an option for him. The officer subject to most of the debate on this thread (the kicking officer for point of clarity) has not been punched in the face on numerous times by one subject, he has then been attacked by the main subject (the kicked in the head person for clarity), who has clearly had no qualms in fighting other police officers including the two women. The subject officer has then become involved in a grapple scenario type situation with the main subject who has now reapproached him during which it's essentially very close quarter fighting. Not only is the officers thought process on survival and restraining the attacker, he'll also have somewhere in his very active thought process that he has a live firearm attached to him that could at any point be taken from him or even come loose whilst he's tussling. His training will at this point mean you are legally entitled to use whatever force is necessary to make sure you do not become disconnected from your firearms in any way shape or form. Now the footage we view clearly shows the subject get tasered, it's unlear whether the grappling officer fires his taser or I think most likely it's the female officer who had already been floored by the attacker stood to the right on the footage. Either way both the subject & the officer fall to the ground. The officers fear of being exposed to losing or having his firearm taken from him will have increased massively with this fall. This looks to be the point at which he stands up and instinctively kicks and stamps on the grounded subjects head only a matter of seconds later.Now in isolation the kick and stamp look really bad and despite having seen the extra footage now as well, I am still of the opinion the officer has rightly or wrongly overacted & shouldn't have kicked the head area as he clearly does at that stage. But I am aware that the high stress levels this officer went through in those matter of seconds, yes we're not talking about minutes here but seconds in a very fast evolving situation, mean that even if he's acted violently excessive, their were perhaps mitigating factors that may have led to him thinking this was the course of action he had to take at that moment in time. If he had a genuine belief and fear that in the fall and melee he may have either lost or had his firearm taken from him then I totally get why he has done what he has done in a last resort attempt to stop the perpetrator gaining access to his firearm! Who are we to judge him on that, if that's genuinely what he was fearing was happening. In that moment the officer hasn't had the benefit of hindsight and numerous replays from different angles, it was the unknown in a quickly escalating act of violence towards numerous police officers. Despite thinking and hoping from the limited access we've been shown, that the officers actions were meant in good faith, I do still think his actions will be brought to question which is only right and proper. It'll then be for the members of the jury to decide if the level of force the officer used was proportionate in the circumstances. Only they will be privy to all the facts of which they can base their decision making on. I appreciate this post is quite lengthy but just wanted to get across that sometimes the whole context needs to be considered of what happened. This extends beyond what we can visibly see & actually putting yourself in some one else's position to try and understand perhaps why they've done what they have. Interestingly if I was to ask the officer right now would he do the same again if he found himself in the same circumstances, I almost guarantee his answer will be 'yes'.. That is quite telling. He acted if answered yes because it means he'd have acted on instinct & not with the benefit of hindsight! Forget Hindsight, forget Training Protocol, forget Laws, Policies and Procedures, that's all fictional and reflective in an ideal world, presented with a real life scenario of life and death, you do what you do and deal with the consequences afterwards. Time isn't your friend in these scenarios, being positive and decisive is, we all know and have been involved im sure with could'a, would'a, should'a scenarios. But how many have been under such frantic and scary scenarios as this I wonder 🤔 ?! I agree with most of that and I possibly would have agreed with all of that if I had only seen what I'm calling Act 2 in an early Twitter Post and not seen a more extended version as posted by Mr Fog www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/new-manchester-airport-video-shows-29In my viewing "the kicking officer" after grappling with "the kicked in the head person" gets up from the floor, gathers himself and proceeds to kick the suspect in the head. In my opinion it was gratuitous and unnecessary. We also know from the first released video that he then proceeds to stamp on the head of "the kicked in the head person" before moving over to the other Brother who is now prostrate on the ground having been tazered and whom "the kicking officer" had grappled with previously and proceeds to beat him with some sort of implement on the back and on the back of the head. In any case irrespective of how you and i may view the same or several videos differently as you say it's most likely that a Judge and Jury will be the final arbiters Yep you raise a good point and do see the angle you're looking at that from. That'll definitely be the pinch point of which a court will have to determine intent or that of any mitigating circumstances. If it is deemed that officer was sufficiently coherent at that point, & carried out an act of dishing out own punishment, thats a definite no no & clearly assault.. |
|
|
|
Post by chuffedstokie on Jul 28, 2024 13:24:45 GMT
But it's also a massive deterrent. Of course there is the increased chance that someone would get killed accidentally but counter that with how many people would think twice about doing things because of the chance of being shot. And if people then still piss about, that's their stupid choice A 12 year old child was playing with a toy in a park. Now, he’s dead. What a stupid choice the child made by playing in a park. It wouldn’t be a deterrent to hardened criminals, they would just buy more guns and knives like they do in the US. All guns have done here is made cops more nervous, more likely to reach for a gun and more likely to escalate a situation. If cops are too scared to go to a situation, they shouldn’t be cops. That last sentence. Cops are members of the public wearing the uniform and carrying the warrant, that fact appears to get dismissed all too often. Trained tactical firearms officers are separate and thankfully so. |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on Jul 28, 2024 13:38:15 GMT
I've just sat and caught up with the last few pages of updates and posts some people have made on the Mancheter Airport thread over the last few days. I totally get it's a devisive & delicate subject & interestingly the vast majority (usual pro and anti police sides) do all kind of agree with the core values of what the majority are trying to say. It's just easy to get sidelined, distracted and even carried away with throw away comments made by people that unfortunately skewers the main issues at play. I get whilst Paul Spencer is preferring to focus on the officers kick and stamp incident (which has been the main focal point for days now), Cobs is attempting to come in from the angle of if the assault and resisting arrest hadn't occured in the build up then the kick/stamp matter wouldn't have likely occurred which I totally agree with. Life is all about sliding doors moments and no one incident would ever occur without any build up inter-play so to speak, call it an assist. To keep it simple in football terms, Crouchies wonder strike against Man City wouldn't have happened without a little knock down from Pennant. Such a minor thing most people dont even recall happening on that great occasion that we've all watched numerous times over, but it was a vital element that helped result in the fine finish from Crouch. Without the knock down, or even go back before that bit to Begovics accurate kick out, they'd be no Crouch worldie goal we all talk and reminisce about today. Yes whilst a goal at Stoke and the incident at Manchester Airport are world's apart, in lies the same meaning. Without the resisting of the initial arrest happening, but also the absolute level of ferocious violence the attending officers were then subjected to, which undoubtedly & subsequently led to the chain of events that followed resulting in the aggressor being kicked in the head. So whilst it might be easy to disregard the build up to it and purely focus on the kick event itself, chronologically it's all part of the build up and must all be viewed in context which is what I've no doubts a court & jury will eventually do. & the reason I mention this is for the following reasons : The officer involved in the kick and stamp was involved in the initial attempt at arresting the suspect for the earlier matter being investigated. As he appears to go hands on first and take ownership of this tasking he is met with the most initial resistance & aggression. He gets involved shorty afterwards with a second party who it looks like manages to inflict numerous punches to the officers face at the side of wall mounted machine. This officer is most likely suffering pain, disorientation & is fearful for his own safety at this point from a very early stage. He'll be subconsciously aware at this point that his colleagues are also heavily involved in dealing with the growing discontent in this area of the building & help may not be as forthcoming or effective as he would be hoping it would. He may most likely also see that his colleagues, a couple who are female are coming under a barrage of attack from someone clear in their desire to not be detained at any cost and is willing to fight their way out to make sure they preserve their freedom. This in itself will be making him think, why is he taking such extreme measures to avoid capture?! He'll most likely be aware that these officers are also bleeding from injuries and have also been floored by the aggressors. A quickly evolving frightening scenario for anyone at this stage. As has been mentioned by other posters on this thread, name me another country in the world where if you offered such a level of violence to police or security staff inside an airport building you would get away with not being shot on the spot?! It wouldn't happen. So fair play to the police officers for not stepping back and drawing their actual firearms straight away in an attempt to deal with the quickly escalating level of violence. Imagine what news and controversy that would have actually caused?! Doesn't bare thinking about. Remember any other country it would have happened that way guaranteed! So the way this matter is being dealt with is way more leaniant than it could have been from the outset. At this stage, whatever training you've received whilst being important, is not the key factor in your thinking necessarily. The officer will have gone through the naturally inbuilt fight or flight thought process and the latter clearly isn't an option for him. The officer subject to most of the debate on this thread (the kicking officer for point of clarity) has not been punched in the face on numerous times by one subject, he has then been attacked by the main subject (the kicked in the head person for clarity), who has clearly had no qualms in fighting other police officers including the two women. The subject officer has then become involved in a grapple scenario type situation with the main subject who has now reapproached him during which it's essentially very close quarter fighting. Not only is the officers thought process on survival and restraining the attacker, he'll also have somewhere in his very active thought process that he has a live firearm attached to him that could at any point be taken from him or even come loose whilst he's tussling. His training will at this point mean you are legally entitled to use whatever force is necessary to make sure you do not become disconnected from your firearms in any way shape or form. Now the footage we view clearly shows the subject get tasered, it's unlear whether the grappling officer fires his taser or I think most likely it's the female officer who had already been floored by the attacker stood to the right on the footage. Either way both the subject & the officer fall to the ground. The officers fear of being exposed to losing or having his firearm taken from him will have increased massively with this fall. This looks to be the point at which he stands up and instinctively kicks and stamps on the grounded subjects head only a matter of seconds later. Now in isolation the kick and stamp look really bad and despite having seen the extra footage now as well, I am still of the opinion the officer has rightly or wrongly overacted & shouldn't have kicked the head area as he clearly does at that stage. But I am aware that the high stress levels this officer went through in those matter of seconds, yes we're not talking about minutes here but seconds in a very fast evolving situation, mean that even if he's acted violently excessive, their were perhaps mitigating factors that may have led to him thinking this was the course of action he had to take at that moment in time. If he had a genuine belief and fear that in the fall and melee he may have either lost or had his firearm taken from him then I totally get why he has done what he has done in a last resort attempt to stop the perpetrator gaining access to his firearm! Who are we to judge him on that, if that's genuinely what he was fearing was happening. In that moment the officer hasn't had the benefit of hindsight and numerous replays from different angles, it was the unknown in a quickly escalating act of violence towards numerous police officers. Despite thinking and hoping from the limited access we've been shown, that the officers actions were meant in good faith, I do still think his actions will be brought to question which is only right and proper. It'll then be for the members of the jury to decide if the level of force the officer used was proportionate in the circumstances. Only they will be privy to all the facts of which they can base their decision making on. I appreciate this post is quite lengthy but just wanted to get across that sometimes the whole context needs to be considered of what happened. This extends beyond what we can visibly see & actually putting yourself in some one else's position to try and understand perhaps why they've done what they have. Interestingly if I was to ask the officer right now would he do the same again if he found himself in the same circumstances, I almost guarantee his answer will be 'yes'.. That is quite telling. He acted if answered yes because it means he'd have acted on instinct & not with the benefit of hindsight! Forget Hindsight, forget Training Protocol, forget Laws, Policies and Procedures, that's all fictional and reflective in an ideal world, presented with a real life scenario of life and death, you do what you do and deal with the consequences afterwards. Time isn't your friend in these scenarios, being positive and decisive is, we all know and have been involved im sure with could'a, would'a, should'a scenarios. But how many have been under such frantic and scary scenarios as this I wonder 🤔 ?! Excellent well thought out post |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2024 13:50:19 GMT
A 12 year old child was playing with a toy in a park. Now, he’s dead. What a stupid choice the child made by playing in a park. It wouldn’t be a deterrent to hardened criminals, they would just buy more guns and knives like they do in the US. All guns have done here is made cops more nervous, more likely to reach for a gun and more likely to escalate a situation. If cops are too scared to go to a situation, they shouldn’t be cops. That last sentence. Cops are members of the public wearing the uniform and carrying the warrant, that fact appears to get dismissed all too often. Trained tactical firearms officers are separate and thankfully so. The last sentence was deliberately provocative 😂.🎣 |
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jul 28, 2024 13:52:24 GMT
A 12 year old child was playing with a toy in a park. Now, he’s dead. What a stupid choice the child made by playing in a park. It wouldn’t be a deterrent to hardened criminals, they would just buy more guns and knives like they do in the US. All guns have done here is made cops more nervous, more likely to reach for a gun and more likely to escalate a situation. If cops are too scared to go to a situation, they shouldn’t be cops. I wasn't commenting on that individual case as you well know. That's obviously a tragic accident of massive proportion. If criminals are armed, cops should be. We already have armed officers. |
|
|
|
Post by knype on Jul 28, 2024 13:53:43 GMT
I wasn't commenting on that individual case as you well know. That's obviously a tragic accident of massive proportion. If criminals are armed, cops should be. We already have armed officers. All cops should be. I know that we already have armed cops as I have 2 mates that are armed response |
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jul 28, 2024 14:02:42 GMT
We already have armed officers. All cops should be. I know that we already have armed cops as I have 2 mates that are armed response Really? Hope they don't think like you. |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on Jul 28, 2024 14:10:41 GMT
We already have armed officers. All cops should be. I know that we already have armed cops as I have 2 mates that are armed response I’m not so sure about everywhere mate. I think it’s about right as it is. Perhaps arm those in the bigger cities where the crimes higher and generally more serious. In other forces keep it as it is have specialist units and allow response to carry tasers which are non lethal and the training required less. I believe the training for firearms is 16 weeks as it should be Im not there is the resources to train everyone and to be fair not everyone wants to carry a gun. I also think if police up the ante the criminals will so there’ll be more gun crime on both sides. |
|
|
|
Post by mrnovember on Jul 28, 2024 14:12:10 GMT
All cops should be. I know that we already have armed cops as I have 2 mates that are armed response I’m not so sure about everywhere mate. I think it’s about right as it is. Perhaps arm those in the bigger cities where the crimes higher and generally more serious. In other forces keep it as it is have specialist units and allow response to carry tasers which are non lethal and the training required less. I believe the training for firearms is 16 weeks as it should be Im not there is the resources to train everyone and to be fair not everyone wants to carry a gun. I also think if police up the ante the criminals will so there’ll be more gun crime on both sides. |
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Jul 28, 2024 15:12:16 GMT
👏👏
|
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Jul 28, 2024 15:14:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by knype on Jul 28, 2024 15:24:44 GMT
All cops should be. I know that we already have armed cops as I have 2 mates that are armed response Really? Hope they don't think like you. Just like me thankfully and not like you |
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jul 28, 2024 16:31:44 GMT
I presume we all condemn the assault on the 4 Police Officers by people taking part in the Tommy Robinson Protest yesterday. This was in addition to two others who had been arrested earlier for GBH The force (Met) later added: “A further four people have been arrested outside a pub in Whitehall on suspicion of assault on emergency workers. Four officers were assaulted. Fortunately none sustained serious injuries.”
It also said a number of videos depicting racist and anti-Muslim chants were being investigated.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tommy-robinson-met-police-racism-protest-london-b2586984.html |
|
|
|
Post by knype on Jul 28, 2024 16:40:09 GMT
I presume we all condemn the assault on the 4 Police Officers by people taking part in the Tommy Robinson Protest yesterday. This was in addition to two others who had been arrested earlier for GBH The force (Met) later added: “A further four people have been arrested outside a pub in Whitehall on suspicion of assault on emergency workers. Four officers were assaulted. Fortunately none sustained serious injuries.”
It also said a number of videos depicting racist and anti-Muslim chants were being investigated.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tommy-robinson-met-police-racism-protest-london-b2586984.htmlOf course we all do. Scrotes for attacking the police. Let's see what footage comes out of how they were treated and how they behaved 1st though? |
|
|
|
Post by numpty40 on Jul 28, 2024 16:43:32 GMT
I presume we all condemn the assault on the 4 Police Officers by people taking part in the Tommy Robinson Protest yesterday. This was in addition to two others who had been arrested earlier for GBH The force (Met) later added: “A further four people have been arrested outside a pub in Whitehall on suspicion of assault on emergency workers. Four officers were assaulted. Fortunately none sustained serious injuries.”
It also said a number of videos depicting racist and anti-Muslim chants were being investigated.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tommy-robinson-met-police-racism-protest-london-b2586984.htmlAbsolutely condemn them, who wouldn't? One or two on here though seem unable to condemn the manchester airport thugs who assaulted 4 police officers. |
|
|
|
Post by Clem Fandango on Jul 28, 2024 16:48:40 GMT
Not grasping at straws at all. If you watch the footage closely something definitely falls to the ground from the police officers body and ends up as I’ve pointed out. I’m just speculating like everyone else is and sorry it doesn’t fit your agenda if it is as I have speculated. I think it's the radio as it seems to be on a wire (looking at the video). The two wankers need to be jailed, any of those punches could have been life threatening if it connected in just the wrong way and unfortunately, the copper who clearly got the red mist needs to be dealt with too. He could have killed the wanker. It's a shame he didn't get a chance to do what he did during the fight though. At least if it is the worst case scenario for him and he was to be jailed, it will be much, much less than the 9 months that scum who attacked the traffic warden got. I think it’s his sidearm arm mate. They tender to be tethered to the holster like the military do (bit like a curly cord you used to find on telephones). The radios don’t tend to be tethered but clipped to a part of the stab vest or belt. The only wires from radios are the ear piece. |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on Jul 28, 2024 17:04:53 GMT
I presume we all condemn the assault on the 4 Police Officers by people taking part in the Tommy Robinson Protest yesterday. This was in addition to two others who had been arrested earlier for GBH The force (Met) later added: “A further four people have been arrested outside a pub in Whitehall on suspicion of assault on emergency workers. Four officers were assaulted. Fortunately none sustained serious injuries.”
It also said a number of videos depicting racist and anti-Muslim chants were being investigated.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tommy-robinson-met-police-racism-protest-london-b2586984.htmlDamn right. Criminals should never be politicised they’re all bad news. The laws there for a reason so that all law abiding people regardless of colour, background, religion, gender or age should feel safe. |
|
|
|
Post by mrnovember on Jul 28, 2024 17:06:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on Jul 28, 2024 17:16:51 GMT
Excellent and fair explanation |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2024 17:44:51 GMT
I think it's the radio as it seems to be on a wire (looking at the video). The two wankers need to be jailed, any of those punches could have been life threatening if it connected in just the wrong way and unfortunately, the copper who clearly got the red mist needs to be dealt with too. He could have killed the wanker. It's a shame he didn't get a chance to do what he did during the fight though. At least if it is the worst case scenario for him and he was to be jailed, it will be much, much less than the 9 months that scum who attacked the traffic warden got. I think it’s his sidearm arm mate. They tender to be tethered to the holster like the military do (bit like a curly cord you used to find on telephones). The radios don’t tend to be tethered but clipped to a part of the stab vest or belt. The only wires from radios are the ear piece. More reason for them to not all have guns if those trained in their use can’t keep hold of them in a scuffle. |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on Jul 28, 2024 18:18:32 GMT
|
|
