UK : Fascist Bully Boys tasered 63 year old Man in the face for Not Giving His Name

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Cobaltic1978

So let's say this was the guy they were looking for.

Police "Can we have your name please"

Mr criminal "no"

Police " bye then"

Mr criminal "that was easy"

No, that's not what I am suggesting, stop putting words in my mouth.

They should have arrested him on suspicion of committing the crime in question, without the need to pull out the taser. As I said earlier, there are too many nervous nellies being allowed to carry these things legally.

Also, if this had not been filmed on a neighbour's phone, I am sure this would not have made the headlines. It would have been covered up, that I am sure of.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Would you suggest this was such a case ? , or did the police , who are supposed to be public servants , overstep the mark.

I'm sure with a bit of civility Mr Adunbi would have given his name but it's all down to the way the question is asked.
My past experience is civility is not a thing taught to British police , seems little has changed except now they have more than a stick to play with.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Cobaltic1978

So let's say this was the guy they were looking for.

Police "Can we have your name please"

Mr criminal "no"

Police " bye then"

Mr criminal "that was easy"

No, that's not what I am suggesting, stop putting words in my mouth.

They should have arrested him on suspicion of committing the crime in question, without the need to pull out the taser. As I said earlier, there are too many nervous nellies being allowed to carry these things legally.

Also, if this had not been filmed on a neighbour's phone, I am sure this would not have made the headlines. It would have been covered up, that I am sure of.

Ah right so they try to arrest him and he starts fighting with them, we know he has keys in his hands (potential weapon). The taser has already been deployed. How else could they have acted?

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

"Should have arrested him on suspicion.....without the need to pull out the Taser." So....you think if they woulda said "alright well you're under arrest because we think you're the guy we're looking for and since you won't tell us who you are there's not really any other way to figure it out without arresting you" then he woulda just been all "hey cool sounds good mate" and it wouldn't have gotten physical, thus necessitating the Taser?

a reply to: gortex

Nothing to see here people, just the U.K finest bacon flavored bastards doing what they do best.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

How else could they have acted?

They could not have inflamed the situation , they know where he lives because he told them and they saw him enter the property.
They over reacted to a situation of their own making , that's bad policing , it deserves to be exposed and criticised.

a reply to: gortex

Well God knows no criminal has ever said "yep I live here" in a place they didn't live before. You're right, once he said he lived there that should've been the end of it.

As an aside - were you going to explain how she broke the law by not giving a warning?

a reply to: Shamrock6

She didn't break the law I was wrong , anger does that , she broke protocol.

They saw him enter his property , they were told by the bystander he lived there.
He isn't a criminal he's a member of the public , he like the rest of us deserve to be treated with respect.

a reply to: gortex

Seeing a person enter a residence doesn't mean the person lives there. A third-party saying the person lives there doesn't mean the person lives there. Criminals are also members of the public, until such time as they're incarcerated. You're absolutely right, he does deserve to be treated with respect.

The officers didn't handle it very well, I won't dispute that at all. But harping on the fact that they didn't just accept what some random person on the street told them as being factual is utterly moot.

a reply to: gortex

TextThey saw him enter his property , they were told by the bystander he lived there.

How did they not know that he was the criminal trying to escape?

I doubt very much that the gated area is classed as the guys property. Behind his front door is a different matter. The guy appeared to be resisting arrest/apprehention although the only time i heard the police say they were arresting him was after they tazed him.

If you have nothing to hide just give the police your name...If you have a warrant out for you....run like #.

To the Americans in the thread, this just simply isn't how it works in the UK. Many will withhold personal information from the police for know other reason than because they can. We have the right to not assist our PC's in harrassing us.

Should we pay their salaries AND do their jobs for them???

originally posted by: FauxMulder
a reply to: gortex

Is it known why they were talking to him in the first place? The video starts after they are already arguing. They just randomly started talking to him and asking for his ID?

The confused him with a wnated suspect.

Quiet frankly the grumpy old git should of been helpful and gave his name as the police where just doing there job in tracking a suspect down.

Lucky for the victim the cops lied on video attempting to frame him for somethong he didnt do. Assault. No jury would rule that as an assault.

I hope he sues thr police and in the 998 letter demand both cops are fired with out pensions. Then i hope he goes after those two in court and sues them both personally as civilians.

They coulda said he was refusng arrest or something but no they coped out and did the chicken shyte thing and assaulted a old man and then lied in an attempt to cover it up.

originally posted by: Dem0nc1eaner
To the Americans in the thread, this just simply isn't how it works in the UK. Many will withhold personal information from the police for know other reason than because they can. We have the right to not assist our PC's in harrassing us.

Should we pay their salaries AND do their jobs for them???

Pro-tip: in many states, you don't have to identify yourself here in the US either, except in certain circumstances. Much like it is in the UK.

The irony of all this is that some of you seem to be advancing the notion that if the cops wanted to ID this fella they shoulda just arrested him instead of asking him. That's both preposterous and hysterical.

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: Dem0nc1eaner
To the Americans in the thread, this just simply isn't how it works in the UK. Many will withhold personal information from the police for know other reason than because they can. We have the right to not assist our PC's in harrassing us.

Should we pay their salaries AND do their jobs for them???

Pro-tip: in many states, you don't have to identify yourself here in the US either, except in certain circumstances. Much like it is in the UK.

The irony of all this is that some of you seem to be advancing the notion that if the cops wanted to ID this fella they shoulda just arrested him instead of asking him. That's both preposterous and hysterical.

Differences are....

A) If you get a bad cop in the UK, the chances are you won't get shot for sticking up for your rights.

B) They cannot arrest you just to get your ID. They have to have suspiscion of illegal activity and "illegal activites" cannot and do not include anything that is not illegal. For instance, running from the cops is not suspicious activity on it's own, as long as you are running in an area where it is legal for you to be. Now, if you were running from the cops and looked like you were concealing a weapon, different story... maybe not the best example but hopefully it made sense.

How else could they have acted?

Well, not tasering the poor guy in the face would have been a good start.

They are specifically trained to aim at central mass when the shot is clear. This officer clearly panicked, full of adrenaline, and fired willy nilly, hoping for the best.

Whether the old fella deserved to be arrested or not, this officer could have blinded him or worse with her mistake.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
I doubt very much that the gated area is classed as the guys property. Behind his front door is a different matter. The guy appeared to be resisting arrest/apprehention although the only time i heard the police say they were arresting him was after they tazed him.

If you have nothing to hide just give the police your name...If you have a warrant out for you....run like #.

God I might actually agree with you

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: CulturalResilience
A strict policy of recruiting from low end of the evolutionary scale goes along way to explaining it. reply to: Slickinfinity

The best part about comments like this is that law enforcement agencies tend to reflect, as far as average IQ levels, the general population they draw their officers from. For some reason this notion became a meme after the whole "don't have to hire somebody that's too smart" lawsuit. Yet people conveniently dismiss that average intelligence is average intelligence. Cops may be stupid I guess, but look what they have to hire from

On the other hand it could be that any smart person would not put that uniform on.

a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

A) chances are overwhelmingly against getting shot by a cop in the US for any reason, including "sticking up for your rights"

B) All of which is irrelevant to the fact that some folks in this thread seem to be pushing the idea that they should have just arrested him instead of asking him to identify himself but cool I guess? I'm not debating the parameters under which a cop in the UK can arrest somebody. I'm pointing out that more than one person in this thread has implied or outright said the cops should've just arrested him instead of trying to have a conversation.