|
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by iaink
(Post 8463694)
Well, yes, the courts have adjucated, not a jury mind, but the courts.
My point is (in part) that due to the nature of the job and the fact they they deal with the arse end of society day in day out, police officers are perhaps more likely to think they are being threatened than the average bystander, and are certainly better trained than most in applying physical means to reduce that threat at an early opportunity, regardless of how it might have played out otherwise. I dont think that in this case that makes the police the best people to judge whether striking this woman with a metal baton was the appropriate course of action, annoying as she was. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree over what was appropriate in that case, I certainly wouldnt want to have been in either of their positions. Reading through this thread it seems that (generalisation alert) all the ex and current coppers think it was OK to beat her like that, but the majority of the rest think it was pretty out of order, so something about being a cop changes your perspective on this issue. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/ma...d-baton-charge If anything the policeman showed restaint in his actions taking into account the circumstances. The other perspective is that, in this thread, there appears to be a correlation between tolerance of Ms Fisher's action and sympathy for the political position of the G20 protesters. If it had been an "unsavoury" character from a far right organisation protesting about something who had been hit instead, I think some of those who are describing Ms Fisher as a victim now would be rather quiet instead. |
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by macadian
(Post 8463739)
I meant that having seen both sides, behaviour wise...I could be a little more objective, that was all. I thought that was clear...but perhaps not clear enough....I must give my proof reader a sound thrashing...first having provided her with some orange juice to take away....
|
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by jimf
(Post 8463797)
I doubt a fair jury would have come to a different conclusion. Theres not exactly an uproar in the media over the verdict.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/ma...d-baton-charge If anything the policeman showed restaint in his actions taking into account the circumstances. The other perspective is that, in this thread, there appears to be a correlation between tolerance of Ms Fisher's action and sympathy for the political position of the G20 protesters. If it had been an "unsavoury" character from a far right organisation protesting about something who had been hit instead, I think some of those who are describing Ms Fisher as a victim now would be rather quiet instead. By such logic, I assume you think it would be perfectly OK for a regular person to hit a "hoodie" with a stick if said hoodie screamed something in their face? I would agree with Iaink. The non police officers find the actions of the officer excessive, the police officers or former officers don't. Such would suggest that, given a jury of BE members, the officer would have been convicted, unless there were a sufficient number of police officers in the jury. When all is said and done, the Court has made its decision and I doubt any of us will know what evidence is actually produced. My experience is that, what the media says happened in a trial, is rarely what actually happened. |
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by iaink
(Post 8463694)
. Reading through this thread it seems that (generalisation alert) all the ex and current coppers think it was OK to beat her like that, but the majority of the rest think it was pretty out of order, so something about being a cop changes your perspective on this issue.
i am glad i was wrong, the norm prevailed and what i pointed out earlier would happen in a normal trial, happened here, case dropped due to lack of evidence. whether you like it or not this is a standard common assault case and what i should have expected happen, has happened, video not withstanding. as for the jury bit, the judge would have directed them accordingly or ended the case at the half way point due to a lack of case proved, so it would not have mattered whether it was before a jury or not. as for having him punished internally, as it appears the not guilty verdict is not good enough for some this is something i would expect. it will be tried on a civil base, proved or not on the balance of probabilities, rather than beyond reasonable doubt, a much lower standard. this again raises my point of the police being held to a much higher standard, not many professions would go through the wringer again internally when found not guilty by the courts. is this not enough! |
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by rae
(Post 8463866)
not many professions would go through the wringer again internally when found not guilty by the courts. is this not enough!
|
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 8463862)
I would agree with Iaink. The non police officers find the actions of the officer excessive, the police officers or former officers don't. .
the real issue is that some will never be happy with a verdict in court concerning a police officer, even if it was guilty some would moan no doubt that the punishment was too light, different if others would have been in the dock. why don't folk just be honest, some just don't like the police, nothing to do with anything other than that. lets just be frank about it that there are huge hypocrites in the world who hate and abhor every police action, but will happily telephone them for help when they want it. |
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 8463880)
Except lawyers, doctors etc:rofl::p
|
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by rae
(Post 8463889)
i don't think that is the case at all, others have contributed to this discussion and their profession past or current is not made clear.
the real issue is that some will never be happy with a verdict in court concerning a police officer, even if it was guilty some would moan no doubt that the punishment was too light, different if others would have been in the dock. why don't folk just be honest, some just don't like the police, nothing to do with anything other than that. lets just be frank about it that there are huge hypocrites in the world who hate and abhor every police action, but will happily telephone them for help when they want it. |
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 8463862)
The police officer showed restraint!
According to his testimony he took account of her size by holding back the first two times and the third time he minimised any injury to her by going low with the baton. Seems logical enough and it looks like the judge agreed. By such logic, I assume you think it would be perfectly OK for a regular person to hit a "hoodie" with a stick if said hoodie screamed something in their face? That would depend on what the hoodie screamed. Pressumably if it was "I'm going to kill you" that's assault and self defence is ok. I would agree with Iaink. The non police officers find the actions of the officer excessive, the police officers or former officers don't. Such would suggest that, given a jury of BE members, the officer would have been convicted, unless there were a sufficient number of police officers in the jury. I've no connection with the police and from what I've seen it wouldn't be assault. I'm just an average law abiding citizen who doesn't go around looking for trouble. If I'd seen what the defence witnesses saw I hope I would have also done the right thing and volunteered to make a statement and appeared as a witness, in contrast to Ms Fisher. When all is said and done, the Court has made its decision and I doubt any of us will know what evidence is actually produced. My experience is that, what the media says happened in a trial, is rarely what actually happened. |
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by rae
(Post 8463889)
why don't folk just be honest, some just don't like the police, nothing to do with anything other than that. lets just be frank about it that there are huge hypocrites in the world who hate and abhor every police action, but will happily telephone them for help when they want it.
|
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by rae
(Post 8463893)
yes of course, you have named two, do we really want to go into the two hundred who would not?
|
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by Alan2005
(Post 8463923)
Iaink is right, the non copper/copper divide here exists and is significant (contrary to what you might think, I don't hate the police; I just don't, as a general rule, consider them particularly trustworthy when compared to anyone else)
|
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 8463982)
Same applies to lawyers:p
|
Re: What a cop out...
as for the jury bit, the judge would have directed them accordingly or ended the case at the half way point due to a lack of case proved, so it would not have mattered whether it was before a jury or not. |
Re: What a cop out...
Originally Posted by rae
(Post 8464024)
I agree it exists I would say this divide would occur if it was doctors, lawyers, whomever up for discussion. The point is though it is not ALL police for and ALL non police against.
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 7:45 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.