Police Officer Smashes Windscreen

[Alpinestars]

vonhosen said:

It's not all you've heard, you've heard wait for the full investigation & it's conclusion.

I've seen some closing of ranks, arrogance and an inability to debate the potential wrongs of something so public, and which rightly or wrongly has elicited a strong negative response from the public, who they are supposed to me serving.

[Greendubber]

Alpinestars said:

vonhosen said:

It's not all you've heard, you've heard wait for the full investigation & it's conclusion.

I've seen some closing of ranks, arrogance and an inability to debate the potential wrongs of something so public, and which rightly or wrongly has elicited a strong negative response from the public, who they are supposed to me serving.

Hardly, you've seen no closing of ranks at all.

Inability to debate? People have explained their view point numerous times and you've constantly repeated yourself as you simply cannot accept them.

[Alpinestars]

Greendubber said:

Hardly, you've seen no closing of ranks at all.

Inability to debate? People have explained their view point numerous times and you've constantly repeated yourself as you simply cannot accept them.

And you are one of those that my comments are aimed at. I'm genuinely surprised at yours and one or two others' reaction and comments.

Never been in trouble with the police, middle class, not a DJ, rapper, came into this with a genuine curiosity as to legalities, no axe to grind etc etc.

[XCP]

I think most sensible people will wait until all the evidence has been investigated properly before making any judgement. There is a lot of prejudice ( in it's most literal sense) being displayed on this thread. That often seems to be the way in PH.

Most of the comments from those I know to be police, have been of the 'wait and see' variety. I can't recall much arrogance to be fair.

[Greendubber]

Alpinestars said:

Greendubber said:

Hardly, you've seen no closing of ranks at all.

Inability to debate? People have explained their view point numerous times and you've constantly repeated yourself as you simply cannot accept them.

And you are one of those that my comments are aimed at. I'm genuinely surprised at yours and one or two others' reaction and comments.

Never been in trouble with the police, middle class, not a DJ, rapper, came into this with a genuine curiosity as to legalities, no axe to grind etc etc.

I'm sure you would rather police officers await all information and evidence when looking at an incident and not take everything at face value though. Thats what I'd do if I was investigating an allegation made towards you and I'm sure thats what you would expect me to do, why is it wrong to do so here?

[Alpinestars]

XCP said:

I think most sensible people will wait until all the evidence has been investigated properly before making any judgement. There is a lot of prejudice ( in it's most literal sense) being displayed on this thread. That often seems to be the way in PH.

Most of the comments from those I know to be police, have been of the 'wait and see' variety. I can't recall much arrogance to be fair.

Maybe have a read back. Playing the man etc was used, I've made genuine attempts to debate and the response from some has been "it's been explained to you". As a bystander, it doesn't reflect well. That's not aimed at you.

[Alpinestars]

Greendubber said:

I'm sure you would rather police officers await all information and evidence when looking at an incident and not take everything at face value though. Thats what I'd do if I was investigating an allegation made towards you and I'm sure thats what you would expect me to do, why is it wrong to do so here?

Nothing wrong with a proper investigation. And it's absolutely the right course of action.

But your views have been somewhat partisan. You've outright refused to explain points because you either can't (that's being kind to you or maybe me) or you don't want to because you don't understand them yourself. I've asked you politely, but you and ANO have "played the man". I can't be arsed responding in kind because it just reflects badly. Especially on someone who needs the public to be onside.

[Greendubber]

Alpinestars said:

Greendubber said:

I'm sure you would rather police officers await all information and evidence when looking at an incident and not take everything at face value though. Thats what I'd do if I was investigating an allegation made towards you and I'm sure thats what you would expect me to do, why is it wrong to do so here?

Nothing wrong with a proper investigation. And it's absolutely the right course of action.

But your views have been somewhat partisan. You've outright refused to explain points because you either can't (that's being kind to you or maybe me) or you don't want to because you don't understand them yourself. I've asked you politely, but you and ANO have "played the man". I can't be arsed responding in kind because it just reflects badly. Especially on someone who needs the public to be onside.

You asked which powers could be used and someone told you. You dont agree with it, thats fair enough but there is no need to keep going around the houses is there?

[Alpinestars]

Greendubber said:

You asked which powers could be used and someone told you. You dont agree with it, thats fair enough but there is no need to keep going around the houses is there?

No, it's not that I don't agree. You're happy wasting ink debating now. But you weren't willing to debate a point where I'm pretty sure you're wrong (in a diplomatic way). But I've equally said that if I am wrong, I'll eat shed loads of humble pie. The worst answers are those that say "just", "that's how it is, lump it or like it", "it's been explained so go away". Maybe I'm just a bit slow .

It's easy to be dismissive and flippant on t'internet, but I really do hope you're better at dealing with people whilst carrying our your duties.

[Greendubber]

Alpinestars said:

Greendubber said:

You asked which powers could be used and someone told you. You dont agree with it, thats fair enough but there is no need to keep going around the houses is there?

No, it's not that I don't agree. You're happy wasting ink debating now. But you weren't willing to debate a point where I'm pretty sure you're wrong (in a diplomatic way). But I've equally said that if I am wrong, I'll eat shed loads of humble pie. The worst answers are those that say "just", "that's how it is, lump it or like it", "it's been explained so go away". Maybe I'm just a bit slow .

It's easy to be dismissive and flippant on t'internet, but I really do hope you're better at dealing with people whilst carrying our your duties.

You thought the police officers were wrong that had explained the use of force to you, there is no point in me or them repeating themselves is there, its utterly pointless to keep on saying each other is wrong.

All I know is that I have been subject to questioning in mags & crown court and under complaint situations regarding the use of force and I have never had any cause for concern regarding my knowledge over the last 10 years or any complaints upheld against me. I'm quite confident I know what I am talking about, if you want to disagree with me then fill your boots.

[Alpinestars]

Greendubber said:

You thought the police officers were wrong that had explained the use of force to you, there is no point in me or them repeating themselves is there, its utterly pointless to keep on saying each other is wrong.

All I know is that I have been subject to questioning in mags & crown court and under complaint situations regarding the use of force and I have never had any cause for concern regarding my knowledge over the last 10 years or any complaints upheld against me. I'm quite confident I know what I am talking about, if you want to disagree with me then fill your boots.

There you go again. No point wasting time debating but you can spend time typing all that.

Saying you're right doesn't make you right.

[Greendubber]

Alpinestars said:

Greendubber said:

You thought the police officers were wrong that had explained the use of force to you, there is no point in me or them repeating themselves is there, its utterly pointless to keep on saying each other is wrong.

All I know is that I have been subject to questioning in mags & crown court and under complaint situations regarding the use of force and I have never had any cause for concern regarding my knowledge over the last 10 years or any complaints upheld against me. I'm quite confident I know what I am talking about, if you want to disagree with me then fill your boots.

There you go again. No point wasting time debating but you can spend time typing all that.

Saying you're right doesn't make you right.

It took all of 40 seconds?

And see my last sentence.

[XCP]

Alpinestars said:

Maybe have a read back. Playing the man etc was used, I've made genuine attempts to debate and the response from some has been "it's been explained to you". As a bystander, it doesn't reflect well. That's not aimed at you.

I think people get tired of repeating themselves. The law governing the use of force has been linked to and explained many many times. At the end of the day the PC has to be able to justify his use of force. If he can, fine. If he can't, he is for the high jump.
And the only way that will be resolved is by investigating ALL the circumstances surrounding the incident in a level headed and dispassionate manner.

None of us are in a position to do that, so we will all have to wait and see. Anything else is just so much froth.

[Greendubber]

XCP said:

Alpinestars said:

Maybe have a read back. Playing the man etc was used, I've made genuine attempts to debate and the response from some has been "it's been explained to you". As a bystander, it doesn't reflect well. That's not aimed at you.

I think people get tired of repeating themselves. The law governing the use of force has been linked to and explained many many times. At the end of the day the PC has to be able to justify his use of force. If he can, fine. If he can't, he is for the high jump.
And the only way that will be resolved is by investigating ALL the circumstances surrounding the incident in a level headed and dispassionate manner.

None of us are in a position to do that, so we will all have to wait and see. Anything else is just so much froth.

It really is this.

[Alpinestars]

Greendubber said:

It took all of 40 seconds?

You type quickly.

Try showing just a touch of humility. Go on. It won't hurt and you might learn something, and if not, you'll be more endearing to the public you serve. Enjoy your evening officer.

[vonhosen]

Alpinestars said:

vonhosen said:

It's not all you've heard, you've heard wait for the full investigation & it's conclusion.

I've seen some closing of ranks, arrogance and an inability to debate the potential wrongs of something so public, and which rightly or wrongly has elicited a strong negative response from the public, who they are supposed to me serving.

But there's not much to debate, until we know what the officer is saying as to the justification for the use of force. It's for him to justify & he stands or falls on that, not on what we are limited to seeing in the video.

Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 28th September 22:53

[Greendubber]

Alpinestars said:

Greendubber said:

It took all of 40 seconds?

You type quickly.

Try showing just a touch of humility. Go on. It won't hurt and you might learn something, and if not, you'll be more endearing to the public you serve. Enjoy your evening officer.

Go on, try and be a bit more patronising and maybe look at that chip you seem to have on your shoulder.

[Alpinestars]

XCP said:

I think people get tired of repeating themselves. The law governing the use of force has been linked to and explained many many times. At the end of the day the PC has to be able to justify his use of force. If he can, fine. If he can't, he is for the high jump.
And the only way that will be resolved is by investigating ALL the circumstances surrounding the incident in a level headed and dispassionate manner.

None of us are in a position to do that, so we will all have to wait and see. Anything else is just so much froth.

This is closer to my understanding. Not sure some of your other colleagues have put it in that same way - this is a bit more circumspect. He could only rely on using force as a result of preventing a crime. Case law only really supports that where there is imminent danger (perceived or real). A high bar from what the video shows, but you're right, maybe there's something so compelling that happened before the recording that justifies the "I was preventing a crime".

In your view, why has this gone to an investigation and the PC put on restricted duties? Does that happen anytime a member of public makes a complaint?

[Alpinestars]

Greendubber said:

Go on, try and be a bit more patronising and maybe look at that chip you seem to have on your shoulder.

Brilliant.

[Greendubber]

Alpinestars said:

Greendubber said:

Go on, try and be a bit more patronising and maybe look at that chip you seem to have on your shoulder.

Brilliant.

Thanks