Should we condemn this policeman

many many years ago I worked in the original Covent Garden market in London , one particular warehouse had a very large basement area ,where you could go in and either buy or order any items of your desires that had been stolen or shoplifted in London from designer shirts up to t.v's ,cameras etc if you had the means to pay you could have it ..

now this particular warehouse was virtually opposite bow street magistrates court and police station and the majority the buyers consisted of solicitors ,judges, policemen at all levels as well as us workers in the market . it was quiet a open secret I believe that even a few members of h.m government were also clients .

and if you think back long enough you will remember that a certain gang of train robbers had a florist among its members ever wonder where he met that bent brief ??? what I'm trying to point out is that the police, truth,honesty etc have always been a mixed bag of metaphors ...

yes there are 100% honest coppers but as in all aspects of society there will always be those that bend the rules or as is possible in this case phrase things wrongly . . 20 years ago it would have been a case of I never said that .. let it go .. s*** 'appens
 
gerry s said:
Whatever it was it didn’t need that response... they just behaved like thugs and really bugger it up for good coppers.
Click to expand...
If a thug had dealt with him, he wouldn't have got up off the floor. I think sound may have provided another perspective on the story.
 
nilagin said:
You made the comment about assumptions made from watching a short video, yet you have also made your own assumptions from watching the exact same short video.
Click to expand...

No I haven't. You've simply assumed I have.
 
AZ6 said:
No I haven't. You've simply assumed I have.
Click to expand...
AZ6 said:
Copper should be sacked. Openly stating he is going to 'make something up'? It's good he's been caught on camera. I doubt much will happen beyond a reprimand though.



You'll 'guarantee'? How, without the 'full story'? All that is, is your prejudice showing. Fortunately, our legal system works on the basis of 'innocent until proven guilty'.



Again; you have no information other than that video. The only 'facts' we have are that the copper openly stated he was willing to fabricate a reason to arrest somebody. That is utterly, utterly unacceptable. Under no circumstances whatsoever, should the copper lose his temper. This individual clearly isn't fit to serve society. Sack him.
Click to expand...
I must have assumed you had written all the above then
How odd.
 
Last edited:
AZ6 said:
I don't think you've understood it properly.
Click to expand...
I understood perfectly. You have accused people of coming up with a wrong opinion based on a short video which may not portray the full facts, but you have managed to come up with your own opinion which you think is correct based on the same video which you state yourself may not give the full facts.
 
nilagin said:
I understood perfectly. You have accused people of coming up with a wrong opinion based on a short video which may not portray the full facts, but you have managed to come up with your own opinion which you think is correct based on the same video which you state yourself may not give the full facts.
Click to expand...

No. I merely stated the facts of what actually happened in the video, I didn't assume anything else had happened. As a court of law would see it; you can only make a judgment based on the facts, nothing else. Stuff like 'the scrote deserved it' etc, aren't facts, just opinions based on no other information.

Sorry, but I think you really have misunderstood this.

All a non story really.
Click to expand...

I, and it seems several others, think differently. I think this is definitely a worthy story, and it's important that the facts be reported. I believe that the law should be applied equally and without prejudice, to all. In acting in this manner, this individual has undermined that institution, and I believe he should be dealt with appropriately, and in my opinion, that means dismissal from the police force.
 
Last edited:
AZ6 said:
No. I merely stated the facts of what actually happened in the video, I didn't assume anything else had happened. As a court of law would see it; you can only make a judgment based on the facts, nothing else. Stuff like 'the scrote deserved it' etc, aren't facts, just opinions based on no other information.
Click to expand...
The police are unlikely to have stopped the car, just so they could fabricate a reason for arrest. So it is safe to assume that something else has happened prior to the copper making the comment.
Also why was someone filming the interaction in the first place. In my experience things like this because people find it funny to act the cock and wind up the police, mouthing off rather than just acting calmly, answering their questions and allow them to do what ever they need to do. A court won't base their findings based just on the evidence of the phone footage, they will require more evidence.
A lot of police officers and their cars also carry cameras, so just as likely will have footage leading up to the comment.
The copper saying he would find a reason was just poor choice of words. He actually mentions a plausible reason for charging the bloke. By saying he could think up more could just mean at that time he just wants to go about his duty, and move on rather than waste his time and have someone being awkward, just because they didn't like being stopped.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
Without knowing the whole context all we know is that a policeman confronting someone lost his temper. Would that be a good reason to misuse his authority? I certainly can't comment on this particular case.

I have run into people who in my opinion deserve be charged with "breathing in a public place". In the interest of full disclosure: three of them were policemen.
Click to expand...

True, but the office should be capable of dealing with that no matter the reasons.

People who make offensive social media posts in the heat of the moment through stress (as an example) have had action take against them/fired from jobs etc... so this should apply here too.
 
cambsno said:
True, but the office should be capable of dealing with that no matter the reasons.
Click to expand...
My opinion is that, with some people, politeness and restraint is seen as weakness and only encourages agression. I suspect this was such a person. I also suspect that if we saw a record of the whole event many of us would applaud the constable's actions.
 
AZ6 said:
No. I merely stated the facts of what actually happened in the video, I didn't assume anything else had happened. As a court of law would see it; you can only make a judgment based on the facts, nothing else. Stuff like 'the scrote deserved it' etc, aren't facts, just opinions based on no other information.

Sorry, but I think you really have misunderstood this.



I, and it seems several others, think differently. I think this is definitely a worthy story, and it's important that the facts be reported. I believe that the law should be applied equally and without prejudice, to all. In acting in this manner, this individual has undermined that institution, and I believe he should be dealt with appropriately, and in my opinion, that means dismissal from the police force.
Click to expand...

Once you get down from your high horse and actually back onto the real planet maybe you will see this for what it is, a little chav prick and his friends out breaking the law, and police officer at the end of his tether getting his words wrong. but you stick with the lets destroy the guys life because he "said" something.
 
nilagin said:
So it is safe to assume
Click to expand...

It is never safe to assume anything. Because whilst your assumption may be based on actual experience, every single situation is unique and should be treated as such.

The law can only work with FACTS, or as close to fact as a jury or judge may decide. 'Beyond reasonable doubt'. Ever heard that expression? Many, many court cases collapse each year, because of assumptions. Many claims of wrongful arrest are won because of assumptions. Many miscarriages of justice have happened, because of assumptions. Whilst you may well think you 'know' something, it is often foolish to proceed on such an assumption, as you don't in fact, know anything about that particular situation beyond facts apparent before you.



Studio488commercial said:
Once you get down from your high horse and actually back onto the real planet maybe you will see this for what it is, a little chav prick and his friends out breaking the law, and police officer at the end of his tether getting his words wrong. but you stick with the lets destroy the guys life because he "said" something.
Click to expand...

You don't know any of this. You've just made something up to suit your own particular, prejudiced narrative. Whatever you imagine might have happened, is irrelevant. The FACTS of the matter are, this individual serving police officer openly stated that he would 'make something up' regarding having a reason to arrest whoever. Which, I'm sure you'll agree, if you do in fact respect our legal system, is totally unacceptable.

"Once you get down from your high horse and actually back onto the real planet "

Please. Spare me the righteous indignation. It's unbecoming of you.
 
AZ6 said:
It is never safe to assume anything. Because whilst your assumption may be based on actual experience, every single situation is unique and should be treated as such.

The law can only work with FACTS, or as close to fact as a jury or judge may decide. 'Beyond reasonable doubt'. Ever heard that expression? Many, many court cases collapse each year, because of assumptions. Many claims of wrongful arrest are won because of assumptions. Many miscarriages of justice have happened, because of assumptions. Whilst you may well think you 'know' something, it is often foolish to proceed on such an assumption, as you don't in fact, know anything about that particular situation beyond facts apparent before you.





You don't know any of this. You've just made something up to suit your own particular, prejudiced narrative. Whatever you imagine might have happened, is irrelevant. The FACTS of the matter are, this individual serving police officer openly stated that he would 'make something up' regarding having a reason to arrest whoever. Which, I'm sure you'll agree, if you do in fact respect our legal system, is totally unacceptable.

"Once you get down from your high horse and actually back onto the real planet "

Please. Spare me the righteous indignation. It's unbecoming of you.
Click to expand...
And all your ranting of "He should be sacked" isn't all based on that video, you have also made assumptions.

Explain why it is ok to have an opinion based on assumptions and the video, but we aren't allowed to have an alternative opinion based on our own assumptions and the same video.
 
Last edited:
nilagin said:
And all your ranting of "He should be sacked" isn't all based on that video, you have also made assumptions.

Explain why it is ok to have an opinion based on assumptions and the video, but we aren't allowed to have an alternative opinion based on our own assumptions and the same video.
Click to expand...

I dont think that a policeman saying what he said to a member to the oublic is us making assumptions - he said it end of. It does not matter what context it was in,
 
AZ6 said:
It is never safe to assume anything. Because whilst your assumption may be based on actual experience, every single situation is unique and should be treated as such.

The law can only work with FACTS, or as close to fact as a jury or judge may decide. 'Beyond reasonable doubt'. Ever heard that expression? Many, many court cases collapse each year, because of assumptions. Many claims of wrongful arrest are won because of assumptions. Many miscarriages of justice have happened, because of assumptions. Whilst you may well think you 'know' something, it is often foolish to proceed on such an assumption, as you don't in fact, know anything about that particular situation beyond facts apparent before you.





You don't know any of this. You've just made something up to suit your own particular, prejudiced narrative. Whatever you imagine might have happened, is irrelevant. The FACTS of the matter are, this individual serving police officer openly stated that he would 'make something up' regarding having a reason to arrest whoever. Which, I'm sure you'll agree, if you do in fact respect our legal system, is totally unacceptable.

"Once you get down from your high horse and actually back onto the real planet "

Please. Spare me the righteous indignation. It's unbecoming of you.
Click to expand...

Its very becoming of me, I just gets on my tits listening to people like you insisting on people who made a mistake are sacked, its this attitude and the fear of doing wrong that stops people doing things, my brother, step bother both retired from serving Specials, my father a 20+ years special inspector, retired, all couldn't be bothered with the political correct claptrap where the criminals have more rights than those trying to keep the rest of us safe. Maybe its because I have seen and witnessed the chav scum that would make the pope smack them in the face, listened to the injustice the police have to deal with daily as criminals walk out of court because a judge decided they needed a break.
AZ6 said:
Copper should be sacked. Openly stating he is going to 'make something up'? It's good he's been caught on camera. I doubt much will happen beyond a reprimand though.



You'll 'guarantee'? How, without the 'full story'? All that is, is your prejudice showing. Fortunately, our legal system works on the basis of 'innocent until proven guilty'.



Again; you have no information other than that video. The only 'facts' we have are that the copper openly stated he was willing to fabricate a reason to arrest somebody. That is utterly, utterly unacceptable. Under no circumstances whatsoever, should the copper lose his temper. This individual clearly isn't fit to serve society. Sack him.
Click to expand...

Well hes been suspended and if more people like you beat their chests you all may get your way and get him sacked, you want to try and go out and see these scum bag criminals in action, see the effect and damage they do, maybe then instead of sacking the police you would give them all tasers and a £50 bonus for every piece of s*** they use them on.

So in years to come, lets see how it pans out because we are already on the slippy slope where the police are scared to death of the saying or doing something wrong to the criminals, and the criminals know it, you will get a police force full of people so concentrated on keeping their jobs that they will be unable to function as intended.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps you should ask your brother, your brother in law and your father how many times each of the threatened to make up a charge.
There is no comparison between this and the police being scared to death of saying or doing something wrong.
it’s also a little disconcerting having somebody say give them all tasers and a fifty quid bonus every time they use it. Your not a special by any chance are you?
 
gerry s said:
Perhaps you should ask your brother, your brother in law and your father how many times each of the threatened to make up a charge.
There is no comparison between this and the police being scared to death of saying or doing something wrong.
it’s also a little disconcerting having somebody say give them all tasers and a fifty quid bonus every time they use it. Your not a special by any chance are you?
Click to expand...

Theres no way in hell I would be a special or a police officer, It would be a week before some scum bag lost their teeth, The police “come up” with things all the time, it’s part of the process.

People want to get out a bit more, see what these officers, paramedics, fire crews have to deal with.

And you think the taser idea is a genuine suggestion ? seriously,!

I would love to come to work with you guys for a week, on the understanding that the moment you say or do something wrong, you will be all over YouTube and the media and will lose you job.
 
Last edited:
AZ6 said:
My experience is that far too many shouldn't be in uniform. Too many insecure, inadequate people in police uniforms. Given a bit of 'power', many tend to abuse it. One major issue is that the entry standards are so low; you don't even need GCSEs to sign up, just a basic competence in maths and English. That's insufficient, given that the job requires a certain level of intelligence. Not to say qualifications are everything, but they do at least indicate a person has sufficient intelligence to think about stuff a bit more than the average copper appears to. If entry standards were raised to at least A-level equivalence, then we'd see a much better, efficient and more effective police force. Plus, better educated people tend to be more secure within themselves, and less inadequate/insecure. Plus, training should be extended to include at least 6 months of law studies. As a bare minimum. Of course, this would lead to a situation where coppers would demand higher wages, and would cost more; yeah, like that is ever gonna happen with this government... A less educated, less 'intelligent' police force is easier to control and command, by those who sit in positions of power. And so it has ever been...
Click to expand...
I wonder what low pay, reduced benefits, cut services, roll back the state construct led to that grim scenario?
 
nilagin said:
And all your ranting of "He should be sacked" isn't all based on that video, you have also made assumptions.

Explain why it is ok to have an opinion based on assumptions and the video, but we aren't allowed to have an alternative opinion based on our own assumptions and the same video.
Click to expand...

I haven't made assumptions. I based my view (that he should be sacked) on the FACTS shown in the video. That we can all see. Of which there can be no doubt or dispute, because they are FACTS. I don't care what ever else happened; that copper openly stated he would 'make something up'. There is no denying that. And if he is willing to do such a thing, he should be sacked. I don't give a flying hoot if he was under stress, or tired, or whatever. His job is to UPHOLD THE LAW. End of. That is what his job is all about, literally. If he chooses to break the law, then he is not fit for duty serving the public. End of. I really don't know why anyone would have a problem with this.


Studio488commercial said:
I just gets on my tits listening to people like you...
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I got to that bit and just zoned out. Blah blah blah blah. It's like playing Daily Mail Reader Bingo. Have we got a full house yet? Has anyone mentioned immigrunts? Funny shaped bananas? How you can't call a spade a spade any more?

Studio488commercial said:
Theres no way in hell I would be a special or a police officer, It would be a week before some scum bag lost their teeth,
Click to expand...

Nice.


Studio488commercial said:
The police “come up” with things all the time, it’s part of the process.
Click to expand...

What, like shooting dead unarmed Brazillian electricians in Tube stations?
 
AZ6 said:
I haven't made assumptions. I based my view (that he should be sacked) on the FACTS shown in the video. That we can all see. Of which there can be no doubt or dispute, because they are FACTS. I don't care what ever else happened; that copper openly stated he would 'make something up'. There is no denying that. And if he is willing to do such a thing, he should be sacked. I don't give a flying hoot if he was under stress, or tired, or whatever. His job is to UPHOLD THE LAW. End of. That is what his job is all about, literally. If he chooses to break the law, then he is not fit for duty serving the public. End of. I really don't know why anyone would have a problem with this.
Click to expand...

FACT from the video, the copper is trying to deal with the situation at the roadside. But the person he has stopped doesn't want to play ball, so the copper says, ok we'll deal with it at the police station, the person has been given the opportunity to have it all dealt with at the roadside, but is still gobbling off. So the copper says he will arrest him for public order or make something up. Public order seems plausible for the way the person was acting in the video.
All the copper did in the video was threaten to make up a charge. From the facts in the video, did he arrest the person on a false charge? FACT there is no evidence an arrest is made. All it was is a threat of arrest to allow a copper to deal with what ever reason the person was stopped for, because the person wasn't allowing the copper to deal with the situation.
 
Studio488commercial said:
Theres no way in hell I would be a special or a police officer, It would be a week before some scum bag lost their teeth, The police “come up” with things all the time, it’s part of the process.

People want to get out a bit more, see what these officers, paramedics, fire crews have to deal with.

And you think the taser idea is a genuine suggestion ? seriously,!

I would love to come to work with you guys for a week, on the understanding that the moment you say or do something wrong, you will be all over YouTube and the media and will lose you job.
Click to expand...

I I appreciate there are a number of people who do deserve to be thrown down a few stairs, but you cannot have the police threatening stuff or saying things they shouldnt..

And yes, if I went on social media and said some things I would be fired - many people have been in the past.
 
nilagin said:
FACT from the video, the copper is trying to deal with the situation at the roadside. But the person he has stopped doesn't want to play ball, so the copper says, ok we'll deal with it at the police station, the person has been given the opportunity to have it all dealt with at the roadside, but is still gobbling off. So the copper says he will arrest him for public order or make something up. Public order seems plausible for the way the person was acting in the video.
All the copper did in the video was threaten to make up a charge. From the facts in the video, did he arrest the person on a false charge? FACT there is no evidence an arrest is made. All it was is a threat of arrest to allow a copper to deal with what ever reason the person was stopped for, because the person wasn't allowing the copper to deal with the situation.
Click to expand...

Nope. That's your interpretation of events. You know nothing more about the situation, than that few seconds clip. How do you know the car has even been stopped in accordance with the law? You don't. You're just making something up. FACT is that the copper was clearly irate, showed aggression towards the person he was arguing with, and said that he would 'make something up'. How you can make any other judgment about the situation, from the actual FACTS presented, I have no idea.
 
Last edited:
I'm not a great fan of the police, in particular I'm very unhappy with the blatant lies and cover ups that often follow police misconduct.
But having watched that video clip, my thoughts are that the officer was throwing his weight around a bit, telling someone who appears to be less than squeaky clean that he can, if he wishes, make life difficult for him. He shouldn't have done that because, as a police officer, he should set an example of good behaviour rather than descend to the level of the people that they have to deal with, and it was also a pretty stupid thing to do given that - as this event proves - there's a possibility of his words and actions being recorded.

But sack or even suspend him? No.
 
AZ6 said:
Nope. That's your interpretation of events. You know nothing more about the situation, than that few seconds clip. How do you know the car has even been stopped in accordance with the law? You don't. You're just making something up. FACT is that the copper was clearly irate, showed aggression towards the person he was arguing with, and said that he would 'make something up'. How you can make any other judgment about the situation, from the actual FACTS presented, I have no idea.
Click to expand...
Because the full facts can not be known from just that video footage, so I am willing to give the benefit of doubt.
When I was in my late teens and early twenties, I was stopped several times by the police, some of them I had done something wrong, some they must have had their suspicions for whatever reason, but I was civil and allowed them to do whatever, whether it was simply answer questions or allow them to search the car. Out of those numerous situations, only one resulted in a prosecution and that was because I had not been paying attention properly, and driven through a red traffic light, causing an accident. But I was civil with the copper and he was civil with me.
It's a two way street, if you want to act the prick, expect to be treated like a prick.
 
nilagin said:
Because the full facts can not be known from just that video footage, so I am willing to give the benefit of doubt....if you want to act the prick, expect to be treated like a prick.
Click to expand...

But you don't know anything about how the other people in the video did react, or behave; you're just making assumptions. Which are utterly irrelevant here, because this is only about the copper's behaviour. Nothing else. He is expected to serve the public, and to uphold law and order, within a set of legal regulations and a quite clearly defined set of standards and codes of conduct. He has clearly gone beyond all of that. There is no point assuming that the people who've been pulled over have done anything illegal at all, nor is there any point in making assumptions about their behaviour/character/class or anything else. All that is totally and utterly irrelevant. I really don't know why you keep banging that same drum.
 
AZ6 said:
But you don't know anything about how the other people in the video did react, or behave; you're just making assumptions. Which are utterly irrelevant here, because this is only about the copper's behaviour. Nothing else. He is expected to serve the public, and to uphold law and order, within a set of legal regulations and a quite clearly defined set of standards and codes of conduct. He has clearly gone beyond all of that. There is no point assuming that the people who've been pulled over have done anything illegal at all, nor is there any point in making assumptions about their behaviour/character/class or anything else. All that is totally and utterly irrelevant. I really don't know why you keep banging that same drum.
Click to expand...
I haven't made any assumptions though. Just like reality TV, they record and show the right bits to get the reaction they want and you have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.
 
nilagin said:
I haven't made any assumptions though. Just like reality TV, they record and show the right bits to get the reaction they want and you have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.
Click to expand...

Have I? I’m not the one making assumptions though. What have I fallen for?
 
Last edited:
gerry s said:
He has seen all that was shown... anything else is pure speculation.
Surely you must understand that
Click to expand...
I do understand it, but I also understand that the situation can't be based on that alone, there is a before and an after, none of which any of us are party too, so it is wrong to pass judgement.
 
nilagin said:
Finally you admit it, I hadn't been making any assumptions, but you had.
Click to expand...

Lol!


nilagin said:
there is a before and an after, none of which any of us are party too, so it is wrong to pass judgement.
Click to expand...

Yet:

nilagin said:
FACT from the video, the copper is trying to deal with the situation at the roadside. But the person he has stopped doesn't want to play ball, so the copper says, ok we'll deal with it at the police station, the person has been given the opportunity to have it all dealt with at the roadside, but is still gobbling off.
Click to expand...



You're funny.
 
Last edited:
nilagin said:
All the copper did in the video was threaten to make up a charge.
Click to expand...
All the copper did was cause every solicitor representing every person that has been convicted in a trial where evidence from this person was used to go back and look very carefully at the case again, because it has thrown every single one of those convictions in to doubt. That's all he did. Amazed people haven't realised that yet and are still talking like it was a heat of the moment thing with no consequences. It has huge consequences for his force and his colleagues.

The police force that employs him knows exactly how serious this is, which is why the chief constable has issued an apology that makes no attempt to diminish the seriousness of what is shown in the video,

The officer should be reported for a professional standards investigation, because like someone accused of a crime, they also deserve full due process (and I'm pretty sure sworn officers are legally guaranteed it by PACE or later legislation).
 
onomatopoeia said:
All the copper did was cause every solicitor representing every person that has been convicted in a trial where evidence from this person was used to go back and look very carefully at the case again, because it has thrown every single one of those convictions in to doubt. That's all he did. Amazed people haven't realised that yet and are still talking like it was a heat of the moment thing with no consequences. It has huge consequences for his force and his colleagues.
Click to expand...
That is if any arrest results in a prosecution. If it does, there would have been claims of fabrication during the police interview and or solicitor interview. It wasn't the coppers intention to make an arrest in this case however, he just wanted to deal with whatever the situation was at the side of the road.
 
Let’s get this into perspective this is just It is just about the hatred of the police be a select few that causes the problem, if this had been a nurse in A&E threatening not to treat someone in the same way, it would have been related to stress, long hours, the story would have been let’s pay him more, and so on.

if the video turned out to show the guys had just abducted a child who was found in the back of the van, would it be a sack him situation?
 
Studio488commercial said:
Let’s get this into perspective this is just It is just about the hatred of the police be a select few that causes the problem, if this had been a nurse in A&E threatening not to treat someone in the same way, it would have been related to stress, long hours, the story would have been let’s pay him more, and so on.

if the video turned out to show the guys had just abducted a child who was found in the back of the van, would it be a sack him situation?
Click to expand...

Yes, because if I posted some hatred or something very wrong on social media and my employer saw it I could well be sacked.
 
j crossley said:
Detective Superintendent Steve Fulcher was disciplined for breaching PACE guidelines when he arrested Christopher Halliwell.
Click to expand...
A big difference between doing something and threatening to do something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top