CS Gas at Peaceful Protest

close
more_vert
geoffrey_prime G
geoffrey_prime Feb 3, 2011 02:37:28
Replying to Merrick

Hi Merrick, I know I should learn, that whatever I say, you will take a left spin on it. Maybe I am "out of touch", but I think on my "generalist" points, they do pass the "man on the clapham omnibus" test.
That said, I do enjoy following the board... but appreciate I am in a minority.
I would hope that at some point you might feel inclined to recognise the good public service, that in many cases is provided and funded by government. I would also be interested to know, whether or not you feel the Police are doing a good job and working in favour of the citizen?
I have taken a second look at the several videos (via Youtube) covering the CS Gas incident in question.
My overiding view is that the protest is intimidatory, obstructive and there is clear verbal abuse to the Police. I don't see this as "peaceful protest"...but I haven't seen anything (on video) that supports the use of CS gas/pepper spray either.
As I wasn't there, I would recommend that if anyone did consider the Police response inappropriate, they should make a formal complaint.
I presume, if there is a case to answer, there will be witnesses - protestors and Boots employees, at least?

T The Sea Cat
The Sea Cat Feb 3, 2011 08:27:47
Replying to geoffrey_prime

geoffrey_prime wrote:
As I wasn't there, I would recommend that if anyone did consider the Police response inappropriate, they should make a formal complaint.
I presume, if there is a case to answer, there will be witnesses - protestors and Boots employees, at least?
Erm, excuse me for butting in here, but have you ever heard of Ian Tomlinson, Jean Charles De Menezes, or Blair Peach ? There were quite a lot of witnesses/evidence you know, and, here's the curious bit, guess what ?

Now if they can get away with murder...

M Merrick
Merrick Feb 6, 2011 10:21:37
Replying to geoffrey_prime

geoffrey_prime wrote:
if anyone did consider the Police response inappropriate, they should make a formal complaint.
As you seem to be missing the point of the football analogy - any such complaint is investigated by the police. They have a long and predictable history of exonerating themselves.

"Even allegations of serious criminal assault are now routinely left for investigation by the police, although just 1% of such complaints are upheld by the police."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/apr/08/police-complaints-commission

Very serious complaints - you usually have to be dead for this to happen - get investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

To take one case, they are the people who took the police's word for it that Ian Tomlinson hadn't had contact with them, who believed the rush-job autopsy, who believed the cops that there weren't any CCTV cameras in the area of Tomlinson's assault until citizens went round and pointed out the many that were pointing directly at the area concerned.

"the IPCC - whose task is to independently investigate the police - was able to show that organisations including the Police Superintendents' Association, the Association of Chief Police Officers and the Police Federation were "satisfied" with the IPCC's performance; but it had no idea how the people making the complaints found its service. The IPCC concedes this is a "weakness", but it is much more: it reveals an organisation that has failed completely to be outward-facing and customer-serving. It is culturally tilted towards the police forces it is supposed to monitor, and financially incentivised to rely on their resources."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/14/ipcc-ian-tomlinson-investigation