Bianca Williams stop accusing race motivated.

[eldar]

biggbn said:

Mmm? Another new spin on things. I am glad they have done so as the (admittedly one sided) footage, accepted practice or not, looked dreadful. I wonder what their reasons are?

Very good question. One could assume the body worn camera footage was ‘interesting’.

[DeWar]

Zoon said:

Slippery slope, soon the Police will be unable to stop a black driver for fear of repercussions.

67% of stop and searches are carried out on white people. But I don't see any outrage about that.

Why would there be outrage about people who constitute 90% of the population getting stopped 67% of the time?

[biggbn]

eldar said:

biggbn said:

Mmm? Another new spin on things. I am glad they have done so as the (admittedly one sided) footage, accepted practice or not, looked dreadful. I wonder what their reasons are?

Very good question. One could assume the body worn camera footage was ‘interesting’.

I wondered about this during yesterday's posting. It must surely provide little if any saving grace if this volte face is anything to go by. It would, nonetheless, be interesting to find out how many of the initial accusations were true? I'm rather torn by this, if this is a political decision it somewhat emasculates the police going forward and serves nobody, ultimately, much good. If it is because of malpractice it shows that some/all of the police involved were willing to fabricate a story to cover up a badly handled situation. Neither of those reasons give me much solace

[biggbn]

it gets stranger. Dame Cressida has said that bodycam and van footage has been examined and no misconduct was found. So why apologise? Also, Dick has suggested handcuffing procedures need reviewing and Starmer, again, hardly impartial, but a QC has stated the standards needed to cuff the couple were not met, no pun intended. I predict a veritable $hitstorm!!

[98elise]

Bigends said:

Zoon said:

eldar said:

Police apologise.

Bianca Williams: Met apologises to sprinter over stop-and-search https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53307...

Seems the police accept they were wrong.

Slippery slope, soon the Police will be unable to stop a black driver for fear of repercussions.

67% of stop and searches are carried out on white people. But I don't see any outrage about that.

No...just treat them reasonably during the stop

After failing to stop?

How about the public being reasonable and stopping when required by the police? How about not accusing the police of racism after failing to stop? How about not trying to extract money from the police force after failing to stop?

Act like a reasonable person and perhaps the police will teat you reasonably.

[Bigends]

biggbn said:

it gets stranger. Dame Cressida has said that bodycam and van footage has been examined and no misconduct was found. So why apologise? Also, Dick has suggested handcuffing procedures need reviewing and Starmer, again, hardly impartial, but a QC has stated the standards needed to cuff the couple were not met, no pun intended. I predict a veritable $hitstorm!!

Looks like the apology mailnly refers to the upset caused to Bianca Williams rather than the stop as a whole. At the time of the stop, the issue was with the manner of driving - not the back seat passenger. Its not as if shed been seen waving a knife or machete out of the window. As soon as the back door was opened and they saw a young woman and baby in the back, perhaps things could have been explained to her more calmly, allow her to get the baby and move her off to one side whilst the driver - the cause of the issue - was dealt with. Instead of diving straight in with cuffs and restraint. Cuffs should be used if there is fear of flight or violence likely to be offered and not as a matter of routine as now often seems to be the case.

[Bigends]

98elise said:

Bigends said:

Zoon said:

eldar said:

Police apologise.

Bianca Williams: Met apologises to sprinter over stop-and-search https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53307...

Seems the police accept they were wrong.

Slippery slope, soon the Police will be unable to stop a black driver for fear of repercussions.

67% of stop and searches are carried out on white people. But I don't see any outrage about that.

No...just treat them reasonably during the stop

After failing to stop?

How about the public being reasonable and stopping when required by the police? How about not accusing the police of racism after failing to stop? How about not trying to extract money from the police force after failing to stop?

Act like a reasonable person and perhaps the police will teat you reasonably.

The driver failed to stop - NOT the passenger

[Vanden Saab]

biggbn said:

eldar said:

biggbn said:

Mmm? Another new spin on things. I am glad they have done so as the (admittedly one sided) footage, accepted practice or not, looked dreadful. I wonder what their reasons are?

Very good question. One could assume the body worn camera footage was ‘interesting’.

I wondered about this during yesterday's posting. It must surely provide little if any saving grace if this volte face is anything to go by. It would, nonetheless, be interesting to find out how many of the initial accusations were true? I'm rather torn by this, if this is a political decision it somewhat emasculates the police going forward and serves nobody, ultimately, much good. If it is because of malpractice it shows that some/all of the police involved were willing to fabricate a story to cover up a badly handled situation. Neither of those reasons give me much solace

It may be that the evidence that the police followed all procedures is so overwhelming that referring the matter to the IOPC will show the true story. If that is the case we should welcome it.

[biggbn]

Bigends said:

biggbn said:

it gets stranger. Dame Cressida has said that bodycam and van footage has been examined and no misconduct was found. So why apologise? Also, Dick has suggested handcuffing procedures need reviewing and Starmer, again, hardly impartial, but a QC has stated the standards needed to cuff the couple were not met, no pun intended. I predict a veritable $hitstorm!!

Looks like the apology mailnly refers to the upset caused to Bianca Williams rather than the stop as a whole. At the time of the stop, the issue was with the manner of driving - not the back seat passenger. Its not as if shed been seen waving a knife or machete out of the window. As soon as the back door was opened and they saw a young woman and baby in the back, perhaps things could have been explained to her more calmly, allow her to get the baby and move her off to one side whilst the driver - the cause of the issue - was dealt with. Instead of diving straight in with cuffs and restraint. Cuffs should be used if there is fear of flight or violence likely to be offered and not as a matter of routine as now often seems to be the case.

Thank you. Very helpful. Many have suggested her behaviour, refusing to leave the car, screaming warranted cuffing, is this, then, not the case? Does the public apology leave the door open for a compensation claim?

[biggbn]

Vanden Saab said:

biggbn said:

eldar said:

biggbn said:

Mmm? Another new spin on things. I am glad they have done so as the (admittedly one sided) footage, accepted practice or not, looked dreadful. I wonder what their reasons are?

Very good question. One could assume the body worn camera footage was ‘interesting’.

I wondered about this during yesterday's posting. It must surely provide little if any saving grace if this volte face is anything to go by. It would, nonetheless, be interesting to find out how many of the initial accusations were true? I'm rather torn by this, if this is a political decision it somewhat emasculates the police going forward and serves nobody, ultimately, much good. If it is because of malpractice it shows that some/all of the police involved were willing to fabricate a story to cover up a badly handled situation. Neither of those reasons give me much solace

It may be that the evidence that the police followed all procedures is so overwhelming that referring the matter to the IOPC will show the true story. If that is the case we should welcome it.

So why apologise? I'm not au fait with how all this works, sorry. Surely if the evidence is overwhelmingly pro police side, no apology is required, and any apology emasculates the police moving forward, Rod with which to beat them with etc.. And why has Dick suggested cuffing protocol needs reviewed?

Edit. We are/i am speculating again, im sure further info will be dropped out over next few hours or days. All seems rather fascinating in a bizarre way!

[Graveworm]

biggbn said:

it gets stranger. Dame Cressida has said that bodycam and van footage has been examined and no misconduct was found. So why apologise? Also, Dick has suggested handcuffing procedures need reviewing and Starmer, again, hardly impartial, but a QC has stated the standards needed to cuff the couple were not met, no pun intended. I predict a veritable $hitstorm!!

If someone was completely lawfully and properly dragged, out of a car to search for weapons and none were found, they should get an apology. Not for the police doing there job but for the impact and upset that was caused.

[Bigends]

biggbn said:

Vanden Saab said:

biggbn said:

eldar said:

biggbn said:

Mmm? Another new spin on things. I am glad they have done so as the (admittedly one sided) footage, accepted practice or not, looked dreadful. I wonder what their reasons are?

Very good question. One could assume the body worn camera footage was ‘interesting’.

I wondered about this during yesterday's posting. It must surely provide little if any saving grace if this volte face is anything to go by. It would, nonetheless, be interesting to find out how many of the initial accusations were true? I'm rather torn by this, if this is a political decision it somewhat emasculates the police going forward and serves nobody, ultimately, much good. If it is because of malpractice it shows that some/all of the police involved were willing to fabricate a story to cover up a badly handled situation. Neither of those reasons give me much solace

It may be that the evidence that the police followed all procedures is so overwhelming that referring the matter to the IOPC will show the true story. If that is the case we should welcome it.

So why apologise? I'm not au fait with how all this works, sorry. Surely if the evidence is overwhelmingly pro police side, no apology is required, and any apology emasculates the police moving forward, Rod with which to beat them with etc.. And why has Dick suggested cuffing protocol needs reviewed?

Because cuffs are being used unnecessarily. They are a use of force and have to be justified. Get the rules changed so that every detained person gets cuffed or stick to the current rules

[biggbn]

Bigends said:

biggbn said:

Vanden Saab said:

biggbn said:

eldar said:

biggbn said:

Mmm? Another new spin on things. I am glad they have done so as the (admittedly one sided) footage, accepted practice or not, looked dreadful. I wonder what their reasons are?

Very good question. One could assume the body worn camera footage was ‘interesting’.

I wondered about this during yesterday's posting. It must surely provide little if any saving grace if this volte face is anything to go by. It would, nonetheless, be interesting to find out how many of the initial accusations were true? I'm rather torn by this, if this is a political decision it somewhat emasculates the police going forward and serves nobody, ultimately, much good. If it is because of malpractice it shows that some/all of the police involved were willing to fabricate a story to cover up a badly handled situation. Neither of those reasons give me much solace

It may be that the evidence that the police followed all procedures is so overwhelming that referring the matter to the IOPC will show the true story. If that is the case we should welcome it.

So why apologise? I'm not au fait with how all this works, sorry. Surely if the evidence is overwhelmingly pro police side, no apology is required, and any apology emasculates the police moving forward, Rod with which to beat them with etc.. And why has Dick suggested cuffing protocol needs reviewed?

Because cuffs are being used unnecessarily. They are a use of force and have to be justified. Get the rules changed so that every detained person gets cuffed or stick to the current rules

Thanks, that is a different stance than some who have quoted PACE and shown the cuffing was necessary and justified? I guess it will always come down to an individuals interpretation of both the guidelines and the situation.

[biggbn]

Graveworm said:

biggbn said:

it gets stranger. Dame Cressida has said that bodycam and van footage has been examined and no misconduct was found. So why apologise? Also, Dick has suggested handcuffing procedures need reviewing and Starmer, again, hardly impartial, but a QC has stated the standards needed to cuff the couple were not met, no pun intended. I predict a veritable $hitstorm!!

If someone was completely lawfully and properly dragged, out of a car to search for weapons and none were found, they should get an apology. Not for the police doing there job but for the impact and upset that was caused.

I agree, it is just such a turnaround since yesterday. Equally worrying and embarrassing.

[over_the_hill]

DeWar said:

Zoon said:

Slippery slope, soon the Police will be unable to stop a black driver for fear of repercussions.

67% of stop and searches are carried out on white people. But I don't see any outrage about that.

Why would there be outrage about people who constitute 90% of the population getting stopped 67% of the time?

I suspect that it isn't quite that simple. The majority of stop and searches likely happen in large cities where ethnic and minority groups are not quite so minority. How many stop and searches get carried out in areas like Norfolk or Lanarkshire.
As ever statistics can be misleading.

[Greendubber]

Bigends said:

biggbn said:

it gets stranger. Dame Cressida has said that bodycam and van footage has been examined and no misconduct was found. So why apologise? Also, Dick has suggested handcuffing procedures need reviewing and Starmer, again, hardly impartial, but a QC has stated the standards needed to cuff the couple were not met, no pun intended. I predict a veritable $hitstorm!!

Looks like the apology mailnly refers to the upset caused to Bianca Williams rather than the stop as a whole. At the time of the stop, the issue was with the manner of driving - not the back seat passenger. Its not as if shed been seen waving a knife or machete out of the window. As soon as the back door was opened and they saw a young woman and baby in the back, perhaps things could have been explained to her more calmly, allow her to get the baby and move her off to one side whilst the driver - the cause of the issue - was dealt with. Instead of diving straight in with cuffs and restraint. Cuffs should be used if there is fear of flight or violence likely to be offered and not as a matter of routine as now often seems to be the case.

The female officer speaking to the rear seat occupant was calm, the ante was raised by her not the police.

Fear of flight for handcufding is made out as the vehicle had just made off! So despite it being looked at twice, no misconduct found and because of a media frenzy spineless Dick is pandering to them and apologising. Well done Commissioner you've just made your officers job then times harder.

I suppose shes apologising for the distress and
not the stop though which is important to remember.

Edited by Greendubber on Wednesday 8th July 12:00

[Bigends]

over_the_hill said:

DeWar said:

Zoon said:

Slippery slope, soon the Police will be unable to stop a black driver for fear of repercussions.

67% of stop and searches are carried out on white people. But I don't see any outrage about that.

Why would there be outrage about people who constitute 90% of the population getting stopped 67% of the time?

I suspect that it isn't quite that simple. The majority of stop and searches likely happen in large cities where ethnic and minority groups are not quite so minority. How many stop and searches get carried out in areas like Norfolk or Lanarkshire.
As ever statistics can be misleading.

A rural force like Norfolk carried out 3000 stop / searches in 2018/19. Disproportionality is high in Norfolk for black and mixed race people. In 2018/19, black people were stopped and searched at 10.4 times the rate of white people, and those from mixed backgrounds were searched at seven and a half times the rate of whites. Cambs stopped / searched black persons at a rate seven times higher than whites. In rural Dorsetshire the rate is even higher at 24:1 so the same stats are countrwide regardless of the makeup of the area

[biggbn]

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

biggbn said:

it gets stranger. Dame Cressida has said that bodycam and van footage has been examined and no misconduct was found. So why apologise? Also, Dick has suggested handcuffing procedures need reviewing and Starmer, again, hardly impartial, but a QC has stated the standards needed to cuff the couple were not met, no pun intended. I predict a veritable $hitstorm!!

Looks like the apology mailnly refers to the upset caused to Bianca Williams rather than the stop as a whole. At the time of the stop, the issue was with the manner of driving - not the back seat passenger. Its not as if shed been seen waving a knife or machete out of the window. As soon as the back door was opened and they saw a young woman and baby in the back, perhaps things could have been explained to her more calmly, allow her to get the baby and move her off to one side whilst the driver - the cause of the issue - was dealt with. Instead of diving straight in with cuffs and restraint. Cuffs should be used if there is fear of flight or violence likely to be offered and not as a matter of routine as now often seems to be the case.

The female officer speaking to the rear seat occupant was calm, the ante was raised by her not the police.

Fear of flight for handcufding is made out as the vehicle had just made off! So despite it being looked at twice, no misconduct found and because of a media frenzy spineless Dick is pandering to them and apologising. Well done Commissioner you've just made your officers job then times harder.

That is one of the scenarios I outlined earlier. I am interested in seeing/hearing further evidence. A political apology is worse than no apology and serves little purpose to either party with the added side effect we have both highlighted.

[Greendubber]

biggbn said:

Bigends said:

biggbn said:

Vanden Saab said:

biggbn said:

eldar said:

biggbn said:

Mmm? Another new spin on things. I am glad they have done so as the (admittedly one sided) footage, accepted practice or not, looked dreadful. I wonder what their reasons are?

Very good question. One could assume the body worn camera footage was ‘interesting’.

I wondered about this during yesterday's posting. It must surely provide little if any saving grace if this volte face is anything to go by. It would, nonetheless, be interesting to find out how many of the initial accusations were true? I'm rather torn by this, if this is a political decision it somewhat emasculates the police going forward and serves nobody, ultimately, much good. If it is because of malpractice it shows that some/all of the police involved were willing to fabricate a story to cover up a badly handled situation. Neither of those reasons give me much solace

It may be that the evidence that the police followed all procedures is so overwhelming that referring the matter to the IOPC will show the true story. If that is the case we should welcome it.

So why apologise? I'm not au fait with how all this works, sorry. Surely if the evidence is overwhelmingly pro police side, no apology is required, and any apology emasculates the police moving forward, Rod with which to beat them with etc.. And why has Dick suggested cuffing protocol needs reviewed?

Because cuffs are being used unnecessarily. They are a use of force and have to be justified. Get the rules changed so that every detained person gets cuffed or stick to the current rules

Thanks, that is a different stance than some who have quoted PACE and shown the cuffing was necessary and justified? I guess it will always come down to an individuals interpretation of both the guidelines and the situation.

Those officers can justify handcuffs all day long in those circumstances. Im amazed Bigends was once a police officer.

[Bigends]

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

biggbn said:

it gets stranger. Dame Cressida has said that bodycam and van footage has been examined and no misconduct was found. So why apologise? Also, Dick has suggested handcuffing procedures need reviewing and Starmer, again, hardly impartial, but a QC has stated the standards needed to cuff the couple were not met, no pun intended. I predict a veritable $hitstorm!!

Looks like the apology mailnly refers to the upset caused to Bianca Williams rather than the stop as a whole. At the time of the stop, the issue was with the manner of driving - not the back seat passenger. Its not as if shed been seen waving a knife or machete out of the window. As soon as the back door was opened and they saw a young woman and baby in the back, perhaps things could have been explained to her more calmly, allow her to get the baby and move her off to one side whilst the driver - the cause of the issue - was dealt with. Instead of diving straight in with cuffs and restraint. Cuffs should be used if there is fear of flight or violence likely to be offered and not as a matter of routine as now often seems to be the case.

The female officer speaking to the rear seat occupant was calm, the ante was raised by her not the police.

Fear of flight for handcufding is made out as the vehicle had just made off! So despite it being looked at twice, no misconduct found and because of a media frenzy spineless Dick is pandering to them and apologising. Well done Commissioner you've just made your officers job then times harder.

There was little or no fear of flight by the passenger no matter how you twist the circumstances. She had to be pulled out of the car so was unlikely to do a runner. Get the rules changed so everybody gets cuffed or stick to the current rules