Bianca Williams stop accusing race motivated.

[anonymous-user]

carinaman said:

A police officer that's arrived to the scene of a suspected theft in the countryside of Royal Berkshire in the middle of the night is comparable to a van load of police officers stopping a car in Maida Vale in broad daylight?

There are thousands of traffic stops that bear no comparison to either of those two situations.

You of all posters claiming a comparison is irrelevant

I wasn’t aware a car can’t be dangerous because it’s daylight and there are more officers. Physics must be different in those two scenarios.

[andymadmak]

carinaman said:

andymadmak said:

In the week when we are hearing about what happened to PC Harper when he approached a car?

A police officer that's arrived to the scene of a suspected theft in the countryside of Royal Berkshire in the middle of the night is comparable to a van load of police officers stopping a car in Maida Vale in broad daylight?

No. I am pointing out that those suggesting the Police should have been less 'prepared' are being a little naive. Remember this car drove off..... so the officers following it can be excused for assuming that they may have to prepare for something a bit worse than normal.

carinaman said:

There are thousands of traffic stops that bear no comparison to either of those two situations.

Yes, there are. And in those cases the driver usually doesn't get cuffed, because the driver doesn't usually driver away at speed from the initial stop, only to stop later.

carinaman said:

Was the use of hand cuffs proportionate?

Possibly yes. Because the driver drove away from a stop, quickly, and then stopped again later, and then initially refused to get out of his vehicle and then was aggressive when he did. Had he stopped when he was told, not driven away, got out when asked, remained calm, do you honestly think he would have been cuffed? The driver changed the dynamic of the encounter by being a dick.

carinaman said:

Were the use of hand cuffs a punishment? Is it the job of the police to issue punishments or is that the job of the courts?

Now you're being silly. The driver got cuffed because he drove badly and then drove away from the first stop and then refused to comply with instructions and became aggressive. Which part of this sequence is hard to understand?

carinaman said:

If the use of hand cuffs wasn't proportionate and their use was to humiliate and/or punish Bianca Williams and Ricardo dos Santos where would that sit with the fundamental Human Rights mentioned on the Constable's Oath?

Getting even sillier now. All the driver had to do was act normally. Human rights my left bum cheek.

[carinaman]

V8RX7 said:

carinaman said:

Was the use of hand cuffs proportionate?

Were the use of hand cuffs a punishment? Is it the job of the police to issue punishments or is that the job of the courts?

If the use of hand cuffs wasn't proportionate and their use was to humiliate and/or punish Bianca Williams and Ricardo dos Santos where would that sit with the fundamental Human Rights mentioned on the Constable's Oath?

Lets look at it another way - you are a cop, you've stopped two young fit looking people, they made off once in the car, you stop them a second time, you don't cuff them and they run off.

I'm your senior officer and I ask you - why they hell didn't you cuff them after they'd already made off once ?

What's your reply ?

My reply is 'What does the force policy on restraint use say?'

[biggbn]

Red 4 said:

biggbn said:

I do believe the video made (a policeman) look aggresive and intimidating and I am both surprised and disappointed that this has been described as standard practice in the Met, although, I say again, i have no problem with robust policing when required. I dont think its required for general arseyness and gobbiness

You're missing the point again. The officer intended to look "aggressive and intimidating" because the vehicle failed to stop (well, actually it did stop but then made off because they wanted to bait the police).

This may surprise you but sometimes people behave like complete arses because they think it's hilarious to have a laugh at the police's expense.
Williams' little tale is a prime example of that. Unfortunately (for her) it backfired on her.

Regarding the "general arseyness and gobbiness" I agree - to a point.
However, the behaviour of this pair went beyond that.

I have said before, I am well aware of police procedure having worked alongside them for over thirty years and I am generally sympathetic to the police. I am not missing the point. I disagree with the point, there is a difference. One cop standing by the car door, looking aggressive with a raised baton? Why does that envourahe anyone to get out of a car? No way on gods earth am I getting out of my car to face that. I appreciate you disagree, and that, brother, is cool. No problem. I'm not sayimg im right, you have given many decent reasons why this is a tactic. Its just not one I can endorse. Lastly, there is little left that could surprise me about the behavior of the general public!!

[catso]

mcdjl said:

they have learnt the lesson to stop for the police and not drive like idiots?

Hopefully?

I don't know (or care) why they were initially 'of interest' but not stopping when instructed to do so is going to get you in trouble. In many countries it could get you shot, regardless of ethnicity...

[carinaman]

andymadmak said:

Getting even sillier now. All the driver had to do was act normally. Human rights my left bum cheek.

The Constable's Oath is what officers pledge when they take Public Office of Constable. It mentions fundamental Human Rights.

So you're suggesting the Constable's Oath should be scrapped or edited?

You're suggesting officers should just ignore the Constable's Oath?

[andymadmak]

carinaman said:

andymadmak said:

Getting even sillier now. All the driver had to do was act normally. Human rights my left bum cheek.

The Constable's Oath is what officer's pledge when they take Public Office of Constable. It mentions fundamental Human Rights.

So you're suggesting the Constable's Oath should be scrapped or edited?

I'm sorry, but I'm just not going to engage with this level of debate. You have a view, and that's your right to hold it. I personally think you're being rather silly in ignoring salient facts in relation to this incident and also ignoring the current climate for policing, but as I say, that's your right to do so.

But I do believe that any sensible person is going to look at the evidence (even the limited evidence presented by Ms Williams herself) and conclude that the couple contributed significantly to events.
As soon as they drove away from the first stop they fundamentally changed the nature of the engagement imho.

[J4CKO]

It didn't look that horrendous to be honest, I have been cuffed and survived, I have been frisked with my hands on top of my car with no ill effects, first one was as an old lady confused me with one of the lads in a stolen car and the second was I made a half arsed attempt to evade the plod I drove past at speed, they were pretty aggressive until they found out it was my car, was insured, taxed and MOT'd. I just got out when told and put my hands on the roof, no resistance as I knew that would end up hurting and I did go flying past a cop car, heading into Wythenshawe just before midnight and didnt stop straight away.

They had used up the first couple of levels of potential ways of dealing with it by not stopping exactly where and when they were told, if a copper has to come after you, you can bet on one level they are thinking it probably needs a more forceful approach, and secondly they are pissed off.

If they were taking the piss and using the current climate to have a laugh, then they need to have a serious think as having seen actual examples of Police Brutality and overt racism, particularly in videos from the US then that would stink and it doesn't exactly help the cause does it ?

[anonymous-user]

carinaman said:

andymadmak said:

Getting even sillier now. All the driver had to do was act normally. Human rights my left bum cheek.

The Constable's Oath is what officers pledge when they take Public Office of Constable. It mentions fundamental Human Rights.

So you're suggesting the Constable's Oath should be scrapped or edited?

You're suggesting officers should just ignore the Constable's Oath?

Perhaps instead of wibbling on about that, you should look up the “strawman fallacy”, as you’ve provided some fantastic examples.

[Leon R]

biggbn said:

Why does that envourahe anyone to get out of a car? No way on gods earth am I getting out of my car to face that.

At what point do you think it is acceptable for the police to stop encouraging people to do what they want them to do and actually take action.

You have mentioned that you wouldn't want to get out of the car to face the officer but surely the time to have a polite conversation was when they initially asked you to stop.

[V8RX7]

carinaman said:

V8RX7 said:

carinaman said:

Was the use of hand cuffs proportionate?

Were the use of hand cuffs a punishment? Is it the job of the police to issue punishments or is that the job of the courts?

If the use of hand cuffs wasn't proportionate and their use was to humiliate and/or punish Bianca Williams and Ricardo dos Santos where would that sit with the fundamental Human Rights mentioned on the Constable's Oath?

Lets look at it another way - you are a cop, you've stopped two young fit looking people, they made off once in the car, you stop them a second time, you don't cuff them and they run off.

I'm your senior officer and I ask you - why they hell didn't you cuff them after they'd already made off once ?

What's your reply ?

My reply is 'What does the force policy on restraint use say?'

I'm guessing it boils down to: "use restraints where necessary to stop suspects escaping"

Now why didn't you use them ?

[Red 4]

biggbn said:

Red 4 said:

biggbn said:

I do believe the video made (a policeman) look aggresive and intimidating and I am both surprised and disappointed that this has been described as standard practice in the Met, although, I say again, i have no problem with robust policing when required. I dont think its required for general arseyness and gobbiness

You're missing the point again. The officer intended to look "aggressive and intimidating" because the vehicle failed to stop (well, actually it did stop but then made off because they wanted to bait the police).

This may surprise you but sometimes people behave like complete arses because they think it's hilarious to have a laugh at the police's expense.
Williams' little tale is a prime example of that. Unfortunately (for her) it backfired on her.

Regarding the "general arseyness and gobbiness" I agree - to a point.
However, the behaviour of this pair went beyond that.

I have said before, I am well aware of police procedure having worked alongside them for over thirty years and I am generally sympathetic to the police. I am not missing the point. I disagree with the point, there is a difference. One cop standing by the car door, looking aggressive with a raised baton? Why does that envourahe anyone to get out of a car? No way on gods earth am I getting out of my car to face that. I appreciate you disagree, and that, brother, is cool. No problem. I'm not sayimg im right, you have given many decent reasons why this is a tactic. Its just not one I can endorse. Lastly, there is little left that could surprise me about the behavior of the general public!!

Well, lots of people don't play nice. Quite often those same people try to evade police and don't want to do as they are (lawfully) told.

I have zero problem with the baton in these circumstances. The circumstances, up to this point, pointed to the occupants of the car not wanting to play nice. We will have to agree to disagree.

Regarding the behaviour of people (or more specifically people that the police often come into contact with) they often do not behave normally or rationally. There are many, varied reasons for that but officer safety is always a concern/ a factor when dealing with anyone.
I've seen stuff go very, very badly wrong (PC Andrew Harper is not the only officer to be killed by a vehicle) and if the circumstances warrant it - better safe than sorry.

[Bigends]

carinaman said:

V8RX7 said:

carinaman said:

Was the use of hand cuffs proportionate?

Were the use of hand cuffs a punishment? Is it the job of the police to issue punishments or is that the job of the courts?

If the use of hand cuffs wasn't proportionate and their use was to humiliate and/or punish Bianca Williams and Ricardo dos Santos where would that sit with the fundamental Human Rights mentioned on the Constable's Oath?

Lets look at it another way - you are a cop, you've stopped two young fit looking people, they made off once in the car, you stop them a second time, you don't cuff them and they run off.

I'm your senior officer and I ask you - why they hell didn't you cuff them after they'd already made off once ?

What's your reply ?

My reply is 'What does the force policy on restraint use say?'

Its down to the two officers who detained and cuffed the driver and passenger to individually justify - a. The use of cuffs and b. The grounds for the weapons search. There are rules and guidelines covering both

[Greendubber]

carinaman said:

V8RX7 said:

carinaman said:

Was the use of hand cuffs proportionate?

Were the use of hand cuffs a punishment? Is it the job of the police to issue punishments or is that the job of the courts?

If the use of hand cuffs wasn't proportionate and their use was to humiliate and/or punish Bianca Williams and Ricardo dos Santos where would that sit with the fundamental Human Rights mentioned on the Constable's Oath?

Lets look at it another way - you are a cop, you've stopped two young fit looking people, they made off once in the car, you stop them a second time, you don't cuff them and they run off.

I'm your senior officer and I ask you - why they hell didn't you cuff them after they'd already made off once ?

What's your reply ?

My reply is 'What does the force policy on restraint use say?'

And they'd tell you to remember your fking training, in particular Sec 117 of PACE.

[Red 4]

Bigends said:

carinaman said:

V8RX7 said:

carinaman said:

Was the use of hand cuffs proportionate?

Were the use of hand cuffs a punishment? Is it the job of the police to issue punishments or is that the job of the courts?

If the use of hand cuffs wasn't proportionate and their use was to humiliate and/or punish Bianca Williams and Ricardo dos Santos where would that sit with the fundamental Human Rights mentioned on the Constable's Oath?

Lets look at it another way - you are a cop, you've stopped two young fit looking people, they made off once in the car, you stop them a second time, you don't cuff them and they run off.

I'm your senior officer and I ask you - why they hell didn't you cuff them after they'd already made off once ?

What's your reply ?

My reply is 'What does the force policy on restraint use say?'

Its down to the two officers who detained and cuffed the driver and passenger to individually justify - a. The use of cuffs and b. The grounds for the weapons search. There are rules and guidelines covering both

Given some of your replies on this thread bigends, I'm just wondering how many prisoners/ suspects you lost over your 30 year career due to being a bit shy with the 'cuffs ...

[biggbn]

Leon R said:

biggbn said:

Why does that envourahe anyone to get out of a car? No way on gods earth am I getting out of my car to face that.

At what point do you think it is acceptable for the police to stop encouraging people to do what they want them to do and actually take action.

You have mentioned that you wouldn't want to get out of the car to face the officer but surely the time to have a polite conversation was when they initially asked you to stop.

I agree, and have consistently said that the couple have not covered themselves in glory here. I have also posted what my reaction to the officer with the aggressive stance would be. I am trying to look at this from all angles and perspective with the caveat that we are discussing it through seeing one, heavily edited and rather bias film. I cannot square the circle of this situation and am interested to see what else comes out. I have over thirty years working with aggressive, drunk, drugged up patrons and have been involved in rather a lot of violence, sustaining various injuries in the process from bottles, bricks and more serious weapons (its good up here!) I have worked extensively with the police and am a conflict management and physical intervention instructor with a judo dan grade and general martial arts background. None of that makes me an expert or makes my opinion more weighty, but hopefully you can see I'm not some moaning minnie Internet warrior just making a noise. I have a genuine interest in good policing and huge sympathy for them. But. I dont think on the evidence thus presented, the aggressive stance, baton and subsequent cuffing were necessary...only an opinion...and if they were policy, I dont think it was helpful in this case.

Thanks everyone for all your posts on this subject, very thought provoking and helpful, gbn

Edited by biggbn on Thursday 9th July 14:33

[carinaman]

Bigends said:

carinaman said:

V8RX7 said:

carinaman said:

Was the use of hand cuffs proportionate?

Were the use of hand cuffs a punishment? Is it the job of the police to issue punishments or is that the job of the courts?

If the use of hand cuffs wasn't proportionate and their use was to humiliate and/or punish Bianca Williams and Ricardo dos Santos where would that sit with the fundamental Human Rights mentioned on the Constable's Oath?

Lets look at it another way - you are a cop, you've stopped two young fit looking people, they made off once in the car, you stop them a second time, you don't cuff them and they run off.

I'm your senior officer and I ask you - why they hell didn't you cuff them after they'd already made off once ?

What's your reply ?

My reply is 'What does the force policy on restraint use say?'

Its down to the two officers who detained and cuffed the driver and passenger to individually justify - a. The use of cuffs and b. The grounds for the weapons search. There are rules and guidelines covering both

Hence my answer.

A restraint policy I've seen makes much of risks of violence or escape with regard to restraint use.

There's a risk of violence?

There's a risk of escape?


If there appears little risk of violence or escape that would strengthen the case that the use of cuffs was disproportionate and used as a punishment?

[Bigends]

Red 4 said:

Bigends said:

carinaman said:

V8RX7 said:

carinaman said:

Was the use of hand cuffs proportionate?

Were the use of hand cuffs a punishment? Is it the job of the police to issue punishments or is that the job of the courts?

If the use of hand cuffs wasn't proportionate and their use was to humiliate and/or punish Bianca Williams and Ricardo dos Santos where would that sit with the fundamental Human Rights mentioned on the Constable's Oath?

Lets look at it another way - you are a cop, you've stopped two young fit looking people, they made off once in the car, you stop them a second time, you don't cuff them and they run off.

I'm your senior officer and I ask you - why they hell didn't you cuff them after they'd already made off once ?

What's your reply ?

My reply is 'What does the force policy on restraint use say?'

Its down to the two officers who detained and cuffed the driver and passenger to individually justify - a. The use of cuffs and b. The grounds for the weapons search. There are rules and guidelines covering both

Given some of your replies on this thread bigends, I'm just wondering how many prisoners/ suspects you lost over your 30 year career due to being a bit shy with the 'cuffs ...

Just quoting policy which you'll already be aware of. I was responding to the query posted above in relation to force policy on restraint. I Never lost a single prisoner in my whole 30yrs as it happens and happily used them when necessary and could happily justify the use in writing on every occasion.

[V8RX7]

carinaman said:

Hence my answer.

A restraint policy I've seen makes much of risks of violence or escape with regard to restraint use.

There's a risk of violence?

There's a risk of escape?


If there appears little risk of violence or escape that would strengthen the case that the use of cuffs was disproportionate and used as a punishment?

Of course there's a risk of escape - they've done it once already !

If you knew who she was, you'd also know you're not catching her if she runs !

[Graveworm]

carinaman said:

Bigends said:

carinaman said:

V8RX7 said:

carinaman said:

Was the use of hand cuffs proportionate?

Were the use of hand cuffs a punishment? Is it the job of the police to issue punishments or is that the job of the courts?

If the use of hand cuffs wasn't proportionate and their use was to humiliate and/or punish Bianca Williams and Ricardo dos Santos where would that sit with the fundamental Human Rights mentioned on the Constable's Oath?

Lets look at it another way - you are a cop, you've stopped two young fit looking people, they made off once in the car, you stop them a second time, you don't cuff them and they run off.

I'm your senior officer and I ask you - why they hell didn't you cuff them after they'd already made off once ?

What's your reply ?

My reply is 'What does the force policy on restraint use say?'

Its down to the two officers who detained and cuffed the driver and passenger to individually justify - a. The use of cuffs and b. The grounds for the weapons search. There are rules and guidelines covering both

Hence my answer.

A restraint policy I've seen makes much of risks of violence or escape with regard to restraint use.

There's a risk of violence?

There's a risk of escape?


If there appears little risk of violence or escape that would strengthen the case that the use of cuffs was disproportionate and used as a punishment?

Something like -
They and the car they were in were being searched for weapons, they had already made off once, were excitable and uncooperative. I handcuffed them to reduce the chance of them escaping or accessing a weapon, thus minimising the possibility of harm to themselves, me or other officers.
The grounds for detaining for the purpose of a search falls to the officer taking the decision to exercise the power not the officers carrying it out.

Edited by Graveworm on Thursday 9th July 12:57