Even if you feel justified in brandashing a weapon to protect your property.
1. You don't need to hold your finger on the trigger of a pistol 2. You can keep the safety on on your automatic weapon
Both of those acts are wreckless and could have resulted in a needless loss of life.
The only immediate threat to life was from the couple to the protestors who were clearly walking past the property on the way to their destination.
1. Yes 2. Yes
Were the guns loaded or blanks?
I don't think anything is clear here and this has been a bit of a side track from a bigger issue. We can only use our own perception on what we each think on what is happening.
Cammy
You just seem to be determined to ignore the blindingly obvious.
Mr Haysie can we stick to the Racism topic as per your post title.
At least two people ITT had attempted to move this thread along and one or two had changed the subject to get something going again.
Discussion and debate is healthy however things are maybe getting a little wearing for a few of us.
Have a good Sunday.
HAYSIE said:
» show previous quotes Whatever.
So guns are ok, but megaphones aren't.
I think that whether there was a megaphone or not is irrelevant.
Why would it be?
Many people in the US hate lawyers, and those that they hate the most are the ambulance chasing, personal injury lawyers.
We could go back and fore all day, but I cant be bothered.
You just cant seem to see it.
You seem to be sticking with, well there might have been a megaphone, and ignoring,
Their neighbours wrote supporting the protesters.
The authorities are only considering prosecuting the couple.
You have admitted that his claims were outrageous.
You are prepared to ignore their previous, when pulling a gun on an innocent neighbour.
They caused the confrontation.
None of their neighbours brandished weapons, or had a confrontation.
No damage was caused, other to the gate.
There was a suspicion that the couple had damaged the gate themselves as it was reported as being fine after the protesters entered the estate, and the damage was noted a day later.
So despite the fact that the authorities, their neighbours, the protesters, and the media are all critical of them, you are sticking with them.
There may perhaps, possibly have been a megaphone somewhere.
That's it for me, over and out.
Roger that!
On my 2nd headache of the week. Twice ITT
That's it for me.
Protesters return to St. Louis area where couple drew guns
Protest organizer Darryl Gray said on Friday, “Are we angry? Da mn right we're angry. But we're nonviolent.”
The police leave themselves wide open to criticism on times.
They could surely have dealt with this in a far better manner.
Although the guy was a bit of a Drama Queen, and seemed to exploit the situation.
Modern technology is probably responsible for reducing the number of these incidents.
It must be virtually impossible to get away with anything when you consider that we have body cams, dash cams, mobile phone cameras, CCTV, bus cams, security cams etc etc.
It makes you wonder why the worst of these incidents, like the death of George Floyd, can actually happen.
UK athlete shares video of police FORCIBLY removing her from car
If you want to avoid suspicion it’s probably better that you don’t act in a suspicious way. Bianca admitted in her radio interview this morning that they took a series of turns to avoid waiting at traffic lights, and then for some reason continued driving past their house which was the destination of the journey.
The police suggested that the couple had failed to stop the car when requested, though this was refuted by Bianca.
If individuals complied with law enforcement presumably less force would be required and a situation can be de-escalated. The more a narrative is peddled that any stop is racial profiling and unjustified, the more likely the individual is going to feel harassed and less likely to comply.
In the same interview (BBC R5) Bianca also says that they were never stopped when driving a Nissan Juke, but since the purchase of the BMW and then Mercedes with blacked-out windows they’ve been stopped a number of times.
How this proves racial profiling, particularly where police would need to see through blacked-out windows, I’m not so sure.
To me the windows seemed tinted. If they were truly "blacked out" then that is against the law and would justify a stop for a traffic offence. They don't appear to be have been a ticket for that (then or on previous stops) so I assume the tinting is within legal limits.
Why assume that something else suspicious was going on, or that it is the black people inside the car who are responsible for escalating a situation and nothing to do with the police officers' attitudes?
Neither of these examples were of a first ever stop.
Never stopped in a Nissan Duke and repeatedly stopped in a BMW and Mercedes and you don't think that seems like racial profiling?
I have been stopped 3 times in my life all between the ages of 18 and 23.
1 for driving an old banger that the police checked over and gave me a ticket for a broken wing mirror. I had to get it fixed and produce my documents at my local station.
1 for driving some drunken friends who decided to wave to our old school while there was a police car parked outside it. They followed and pulled me over and searched the car for drugs. They were very aggressive in tone "Are you known to us?", obviously thought my mates were taking the p*ss and waving at them.
1 for driving my car out of a residential estate in the early hours of the morning (had just dropped my gf home).
Haven't been stopped in 30 years since and driver nicer cars and tend not to have a car load of drunken mates and I am white.
I know black people who get stopped routinely without cause or charge and are fed up.
To me the windows seemed tinted. If they were truly "blacked out" then that is against the law and would justify a stop for a traffic offence. They don't appear to be have been a ticket for that (then or on previous stops) so I assume the tinting is within legal limits.
Bianca described the windows as "blacked out", I haven't seen the car but it's likely they are within legal limits since this isn't reported as an issue. Perhaps tinted windows is one of the profiling measures, I don't know.
Why assume that something else suspicious was going on, or that it is the black people inside the car who are responsible for escalating a situation and nothing to do with the police officers' attitudes?
Do you mean me or the police? Bianca stated that they left the normal route to avoid stopping at traffic lights. I don't know the route, but she said that they 're-joined the main road'. Not driving a direct route would again presumably be one of the profiling measures? It's not typical behaviour and could be seen as suspicious.
The police statement says that the car was breaking heavily then speeding off, being driven erratically. They also say the car had failed to stop when requested, which Bianca states in an interview with LBC where she said they wanted to get home first as they felt safer there.
Never stopped in a Nissan Duke and repeatedly stopped in a BMW and Mercedes and you don't think that seems like racial profiling?
The point was that if race was the only factor, they'd have been stopped in the Juke. What's changed is the car, not the colour of his skin. Perhaps it's an interaction of being young and having an expensive car, plus driving erratically (perhaps just 'enjoying' a sportier car?), plus seemingly taking strange turns to avoid the police.
1 for driving an old banger that the police checked over and gave me a ticket for a broken wing mirror. I had to get it fixed and produce my documents at my local station.
Sounds like the police did their job here since you were driving a vehicle that wasn't road-worthy. Did you escalate the situation by not pulling over initially, or refusing to leave the vehicle saying "what, what, I haven't done anything?"
1 for driving some drunken friends who decided to wave to our old school while there was a police car parked outside it. They followed and pulled me over and searched the car for drugs. They were very aggressive in tone "Are you known to us?", obviously thought my mates were taking the p*ss and waving at them.
Sounds like the police could have been less aggressive here, but made sense to pull you over since the chances of you having been drinking would have been higher given your friends drunken behaviour. Going to assume you stopped when asked, and complied with the officers despite their aggressive tone.
Haven't been stopped in 30 years since and driver nicer cars and tend not to have a car load of drunken mates and I am white.
I know black people who get stopped routinely without cause or charge and are fed up.
I have no doubt that if an individual is getting stopped routinely it's going to get on their wick. I still think the better option is to politely comply and explain how this keeps happening. Trying to de-escalate the situation by screaming at police doesn't seem a wise strategy.
The couple are accusing the police of racism in this case - although, it must be said, that no official complaint has yet been made - but Bianca has called for Cressida **** to resign?! Are you so convinced that this individual incident is racist in nature that you're happy for people to lose their jobs? You can't use other cases to back up the claim.
The police have a really tough job, why not make it easier by complying and talking to them? Seems they won't be able to talk to any black people in future for fear of being accused of being racist and shared all over social media.
Is it not for the couple to prove racism here rather than the police proving it isn't?
Do you have the proof you need to make a judgement?
To me the windows seemed tinted. If they were truly "blacked out" then that is against the law and would justify a stop for a traffic offence. They don't appear to be have been a ticket for that (then or on previous stops) so I assume the tinting is within legal limits.
Bianca described the windows as "blacked out", I haven't seen the car but it's likely they are within legal limits since this isn't reported as an issue. Perhaps tinted windows is one of the profiling measures, I don't know.
Why assume that something else suspicious was going on, or that it is the black people inside the car who are responsible for escalating a situation and nothing to do with the police officers' attitudes?
Do you mean me or the police? Bianca stated that they left the normal route to avoid stopping at traffic lights. I don't know the route, but she said that they 're-joined the main road'. Not driving a direct route would again presumably be one of the profiling measures? It's not typical behaviour and could be seen as suspicious.
The police statement says that the car was breaking heavily then speeding off, being driven erratically. They also say the car had failed to stop when requested, which Bianca states in an interview with LBC where she said they wanted to get home first as they felt safer there.
Never stopped in a Nissan Duke and repeatedly stopped in a BMW and Mercedes and you don't think that seems like racial profiling?
The point was that if race was the only factor, they'd have been stopped in the Juke. What's changed is the car, not the colour of his skin. Perhaps it's an interaction of being young and having an expensive car, plus driving erratically (perhaps just 'enjoying' a sportier car?), plus seemingly taking strange turns to avoid the police.
1 for driving an old banger that the police checked over and gave me a ticket for a broken wing mirror. I had to get it fixed and produce my documents at my local station.
Sounds like the police did their job here since you were driving a vehicle that wasn't road-worthy. Did you escalate the situation by not pulling over initially, or refusing to leave the vehicle saying "what, what, I haven't done anything?"
1 for driving some drunken friends who decided to wave to our old school while there was a police car parked outside it. They followed and pulled me over and searched the car for drugs. They were very aggressive in tone "Are you known to us?", obviously thought my mates were taking the p*ss and waving at them.
Sounds like the police could have been less aggressive here, but made sense to pull you over since the chances of you having been drinking would have been higher given your friends drunken behaviour. Going to assume you stopped when asked, and complied with the officers despite their aggressive tone.
Haven't been stopped in 30 years since and driver nicer cars and tend not to have a car load of drunken mates and I am white.
I know black people who get stopped routinely without cause or charge and are fed up.
I have no doubt that if an individual is getting stopped routinely it's going to get on their wick. I still think the better option is to politely comply and explain how this keeps happening. Trying to de-escalate the situation by screaming at police doesn't seem a wise strategy.
The couple are accusing the police of racism in this case - although, it must be said, that no official complaint has yet been made - but Bianca has called for Cressida **** to resign?! Are you so convinced that this individual incident is racist in nature that you're happy for people to lose their jobs? You can't use other cases to back up the claim.
The police have a really tough job, why not make it easier by complying and talking to them? Seems they won't be able to talk to any black people in future for fear of being accused of being racist and shared all over social media.
Is it not for the couple to prove racism here rather than the police proving it isn't?
Do you have the proof you need to make a judgement?
I think the police could have dealt with both these incidents more professionally.
However the common factor in both instances was a refusal to comply with the police instructions.
We surely have an obligation to comply, whether we agree with their decision to stop us, or not.
Even if you wanted to prove that the police were wrong, surely it is best to firstly comply, and make your point later.
Just making things difficult for the police does not help to prove any point.
I think the police lacked leadership, and common sense.
They should have put the onus on those they were stopping, rather than getting involved in a shouting match involving a number of officers.
Had the officer in charge clearly explained to the Drama Queen in the first clip that if he chose to continue to sit in the car with the doors locked, then they would be forced to smash his window and remove him forcibly from the car. They could have given him a minute to decide, and then if he chose to remain in the car, acted as they did. Many more people would have then thought it was his own fault. His surprise when they actually smashed the window suggest that this hadn't been made clear. Also his reaction to the window being smashed seem to suggest that he wouldn't have gone for this option.
In the second clip there was far too much shouting going on, by too many officers. Had the officer in charge dealt with them one at a time, and clearly pointed out that if they didn't comply, they would be forcibly removed from the car, it would have put the ball in their court. Most people would have grasped that had they been removed from the car, that it was their choice. Whatever the colour of your skin, compliance with the police is not an option, and having a particular skin colour doesn't give you preferential treatment.
Had they just done what they were told we wouldn't be having this debate.
They just make the difficult job the police do, more difficult, and more time consuming with all this nonsense.
The nature of the job means that some of the citizens pulled over in traffic stops will be innocent.
That is a fact of life that we all have to live with.
If every traffic stop that the police made were as time consuming as these two incidents, then more criminals would get away with their crimes.
Woman caught on camera attacking NHS care worker in Wetherspoons pub brawl 'for speaking too loudly in Polish' insists she is NOT racist and reveals she's been SACKED from her job as a recruitment consultant after the footage went viral Clare McCarthy insisted he hadn’t used those words and said she is not racist Anna Rutkowska was drinking at The Kingswood Colliers Wetherspoon in Bristol The 36-year-old recorded the attack on her mobile, before doormen intervened Man, believed to be female attacker's brother, wades in before woman kicks out Ms Rutkowska who works for the NHS, said it was due to them speaking in Polish Did YOU see the incident or know anyone involved? Email tips@dailymail.com
David Walliams' publisher says character in his children's book with 'big frizzy hair' that led to food writer Jack Monroe accusing him of 'horrific racism' is in fact WHITE
"With a workforce that is far less diverse than the actual population, police in England and Wales appear much more likely to target Black people with stop and search, use force against them and detain them under the Mental Health Act compared to White people.
Meanwhile, Black people are also far more likely to die either during or following police contact."
That doesn’t immediately translate to racism though does it?
We need to move past this equality of outcome definition of racism.
You can design a colour-blind model and find that your outcomes are racially biased. What are you going to do about that? If you’re Harvard and you’re trying solve the representation problem at one of the top universities in the world, then you create a biased/racist model/process that selects against Asian people and colour of skin once again becomes the most important factor in your application.
Could it be true that stop and search rates vary by area? Could it be that representation of ethnicity within those areas may not be representative of the average?
Does it come down once again to the propensity to be poor?
In the case above it is not clear they were stopped because of their skin colour. The police cited:
- area (Maida Vale, reports of violent crime there) - expensive car (perhaps tinted windows also a factor) - young (likely interaction with expensive car) - erratic driving style including wrong side of the road
Using this as evidence of a corrupt system is inflammatory and not necessary. They delayed their stop and then refused to cooperate. Then they filmed it all and called for the Met Chief to resign. It’s going to contribute to further angst the next time a Black person is stopped having been told how racist it all is.
Seems to be a game.
Would love the police to publish camera footage of their own.
If they had just complied there would not have been an issue?
Haysie made the point that the police appeared to handle the situations badly and I agree. In the first there appeared to be no warning about the window being smashed in. If you read the article below the driver.
a) Has been stopped around 20 times. b) He has no criminal record c) He was returning from a TV interview about a previous stop where we was cuffed and thrown to the ground and hurt. Which means he had reason to be fearful from experience and may well have been wondering if the reason for this stop was related to his TV interview. d) After his arrest he was even stopped on the street and asked what he was doing while walkng back to get his car from the pound.
In the 2nd incident with the 2 athletes and their 3 month baby, what possible excuse is there for dragging the mother out of the car? Why was everyone shouting?
I have been stopped 3 times in my whole life and yes I was compliant. If I was stopped 10 or 20 times over a short period of time, if I was cuffed and thrown to the ground, my guess is I would be less reluctant to comply and more inclined to film what was going on for my own protection.
People seem to want to excuse aggressive behaviour by white police officers against innocent black drivers and blame the drivers.
My vote goes to that being evidence of racial bias in the police force and in society in general.
I don’t think anyone in this thread is excusing aggressive behaviour by white police officers against innocent black drivers, or even black police officers against white guilty drivers. I also agree that the police handled it badly.
If we can’t be objective on an individual case given the facts at hand, then it’s all over.
The full video of the couple with the baby has him laughing before they are stopped. Having a ‘motherly instinct’ not to want to leave your child (who is safely strapped in a car seat) is not an excuse to refuse to comply with the police. If she wanted to protect the child’s emotions she should have refrained from all the screaming.
Perhaps BLM is right, perhaps the way to deal with this is to defund the police, rather than investing more in training to deal with non-compliance.
Could it be true that stop and search rates vary by area? Could it be that representation of ethnicity within those areas may not be representative of the average?
Of course it could, there is a breakdown of the stats in the 1st report and you can even download the full spreadsheet. You are good with numbers, have fun.
Statistics also indicate that there is a much higher percentage of charges brought following a stop and search on white people than black people. That smacks of racial bias to me. It seems the police need more reason to stop and search a white person or gang of white youths and stop proportionately more innocent black people than they do innocent white people.
In the case above it is not clear they were stopped because of their skin colour. The police cited:
- area (Maida Vale, reports of violent crime there) - expensive car (perhaps tinted windows also a factor) - young (likely interaction with expensive car) - erratic driving style including wrong side of the road
Using this as evidence of a corrupt system is inflammatory and not necessary.
So they could tell that the occupants were young through the (legally) tinted windows but they couldn't tell they were black, and skin colour was not a factor?
Driving style was debated by the couple, if it was that obvious then why don't they release the car camera and bodycam footage?
I am not claiming a corrupt system, I am claiming a racial bias exists. Anecdotal evidence from black people I know and black friends of my children supports that, the Government's own statistics support that.
I think you are arguing in bad faith. You’ve decided it’s racism and there’s nothing anyone can say to put doubt in your mind.
We progressed from me thinking the windows were blacked out so they couldn’t see in (due wholly to the description given in the interview), to that they are tinted according to your knowledge of legal limits. I don’t know if you can see through them but if they are claiming they can see skin colour they can probably also determine age. It’s also quite possible that they ran an insurance check and got his age that way. Who knows.
I have tried to explain how it is possible to get racially biased outcomes without a model or system looking at race. The Harvard Internship case is very interesting if you’ve not read about it.
There are lots of correlates with race in society, and these can all be reasons why the Government statistics skew. Racial bias in itself does not constitute a problem. It’s when the assertion is that the racial bias exists because of racism. I don’t think I can try to make this point any clearer.
It’s possible that the entire system is constantly looking out for black people to stop and then not prosecute, though seems a little inefficient use of time.
Regardless of the environment you still need to look at the facts in the individual case. If a jury determined racism on evidence of this nature then everyone with all their various privileges beware.
The athletes were stopped by a TSG who have a chequered history...
Officers in the TSG have faced criticism about their policing methods and complaints have been made against officers of the TSG.[11] Senior officers say that the type of work that the TSG are involved with, policing protests and performing drug raids makes them more likely to have complaints made against them.[12]
As the result of a freedom of information request made by The Guardian newspaper, it was revealed that more than 5,000 complaints were made against the TSG in 4 years but only 9 have been upheld. Commenting on these figures, a member of the Metropolitan Police Authority stated that officers in the TSG are "practically immune" from criticism.[12]
One ex-Metropolitan Police officer suggested that TSG members, "spend (their) days waiting for action, and far too many officers join seeking excitement and physical confrontation." Some officers are ex-military personnel and these are "the worst bullies" as "the laws of the battlefield are not appropriate to the streets of our capital".[13]
In 1997 a man was beaten by officers from the TSG in what was described as an "outrageous display of brutality",[14] which only stopped when the man pretended to be unconscious. The man was charged with assault and threatening behaviour over the incident but was cleared after photographs of his injuries showed the officers had lied about the case under oath. After the man's acquittal the officers went on trial accused of assault in 1999 but were later cleared.[15]
In 2003, six officers of the TSG performed what a judge in 2009 called a "serious, gratuitous and prolonged" assault on a terrorist suspect, Babar Ahmad, a 34-year-old IT support analyst who was not subsequently charged with any offence.[16] The officers involved had already been the subject of as many as 60 complaints about unwarranted assaults against other men.[17] A number of mail sacks containing these complaints were somehow lost.[18] The accusations were investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission[19] but that they were found to be unsubstantiated. Five of the six officers were still members of the TSG in 2009.[17] Babar Ahmed was later awarded £60,000 compensation, by the High Court, for the assault.[16] In August, 2009, it was announced that the police officers accused of attacking Babar Ahmad would face criminal charges.[20] However all four officers were found not guilty in June 2011 after a recording from listening device placed in Mr. Ahmed's home surfaced shortly before the trial which "proved the account originally given by these officers was correct and specific details of the complaint made by Mr. Ahmad were not present" [21]
In 2005 a Kurdish youth recorded an officer on his mobile phone telling him "If you say one more **** word, I'll smash your **** Arab face in" after he was stopped near Paddington Green police station.[22] The officer was suspended but denied the charge.[23]
Another investigation into six other officers of the TSG by the IPCC was launched following allegations made by three men that they were racially abused during an incident during June 2007 in Paddington.[24] A van of officers stopped after seeing youths mouthing obscenities towards them.[25] The officers appeared in court in December 2008 and were prosecuted; two for racially abusing the men, four of misconduct in a public office and one of racially aggravated assault.[26] The Guardian reported that a request may have been made to restrict reporting of the trial by the media.[27] The officer who was driving the van acted as a whistleblower during the trial.[25] One officer, a former Royal Marine, accused in this case was also involved in the assault of Babar Ahmed and has had 31 complaints lodged against him since 1993. In November 2009 he was cleared of all offences, along with the other officers, and returned to work with the TSG.[12][28]
During the 2009 G-20 London summit protests two officers of the TSG were suspended from duty following publication of videos which recorded alleged assaults on members of the public at the 2009 G-20 London summit protests and at a subsequent memorial.[29] In the first case, the member of the public, Ian Tomlinson, died shortly afterwards. In the second case, Sgt Delroy (Tony) Smellie was seen hitting Nicola Fisher. Following her complaint, the Crown Prosecution Service announced in September 2009, that there was sufficient evidence to charge Sgt Smellie with assault. He appeared in court on 16 November 2009 and was cleared of assault charges on 31 March 2010 at City of Westminster Magistrates' Court. However, he could still face misconduct proceedings over the incident.[30]
Video evidence shows that the officer seen hitting Ian Tomlinson had his face covered[31] and that the officers involved in both cases were not displaying their identification numbers.[29] Following the investigation into police handling of the protest, the human rights group Liberty called for further study of what it referred to as the "militaristic approach" used by the TSG.[32]
Comments
Protesters return to St. Louis area where couple drew guns
Protest organizer Darryl Gray said on Friday, “Are we angry? Da mn right we're angry. But
we're nonviolent.”
https://news.yahoo.com/protesters-return-st-louis-area-015424373.html
They could surely have dealt with this in a far better manner.
Although the guy was a bit of a Drama Queen, and seemed to exploit the situation.
Modern technology is probably responsible for reducing the number of these incidents.
It must be virtually impossible to get away with anything when you consider that we have body cams, dash cams, mobile phone cameras, CCTV, bus cams, security cams etc etc.
It makes you wonder why the worst of these incidents, like the death of George Floyd, can actually happen.
UK athlete shares video of police FORCIBLY removing her from car
POWER TO STOP AND SEARCH: GB ATHLETE BIANCA WILLIAMS ACCUSES METROPOLITAN POLICE OF RACIAL PROFILING
The police suggested that the couple had failed to stop the car when requested, though this was refuted by Bianca.
If individuals complied with law enforcement presumably less force would be required and a situation can be de-escalated. The more a narrative is peddled that any stop is racial profiling and unjustified, the more likely the individual is going to feel harassed and less likely to comply.
In the same interview (BBC R5) Bianca also says that they were never stopped when driving a Nissan Juke, but since the purchase of the BMW and then Mercedes with blacked-out windows they’ve been stopped a number of times.
How this proves racial profiling, particularly where police would need to see through blacked-out windows, I’m not so sure.
Why assume that something else suspicious was going on, or that it is the black people inside the car who are responsible for escalating a situation and nothing to do with the police officers' attitudes?
Neither of these examples were of a first ever stop.
Never stopped in a Nissan Duke and repeatedly stopped in a BMW and Mercedes and you don't think that seems like racial profiling?
I have been stopped 3 times in my life all between the ages of 18 and 23.
1 for driving an old banger that the police checked over and gave me a ticket for a broken wing mirror. I had to get it fixed and produce my documents at my local station.
1 for driving some drunken friends who decided to wave to our old school while there was a police car parked outside it. They followed and pulled me over and searched the car for drugs. They were very aggressive in tone "Are you known to us?", obviously thought my mates were taking the p*ss and waving at them.
1 for driving my car out of a residential estate in the early hours of the morning (had just dropped my gf home).
Haven't been stopped in 30 years since and driver nicer cars and tend not to have a car load of drunken mates and I am white.
I know black people who get stopped routinely without cause or charge and are fed up.
The police statement says that the car was breaking heavily then speeding off, being driven erratically. They also say the car had failed to stop when requested, which Bianca states in an interview with LBC where she said they wanted to get home first as they felt safer there. The point was that if race was the only factor, they'd have been stopped in the Juke. What's changed is the car, not the colour of his skin. Perhaps it's an interaction of being young and having an expensive car, plus driving erratically (perhaps just 'enjoying' a sportier car?), plus seemingly taking strange turns to avoid the police. Not relevant. Sounds like the police did their job here since you were driving a vehicle that wasn't road-worthy. Did you escalate the situation by not pulling over initially, or refusing to leave the vehicle saying "what, what, I haven't done anything?" Sounds like the police could have been less aggressive here, but made sense to pull you over since the chances of you having been drinking would have been higher given your friends drunken behaviour. Going to assume you stopped when asked, and complied with the officers despite their aggressive tone. Perhaps the residential area was known for drugs, perhaps they were just filling their time doing a routine stop. Who knows. Did you take offence? I have no doubt that if an individual is getting stopped routinely it's going to get on their wick. I still think the better option is to politely comply and explain how this keeps happening. Trying to de-escalate the situation by screaming at police doesn't seem a wise strategy.
The couple are accusing the police of racism in this case - although, it must be said, that no official complaint has yet been made - but Bianca has called for Cressida **** to resign?! Are you so convinced that this individual incident is racist in nature that you're happy for people to lose their jobs? You can't use other cases to back up the claim.
The police have a really tough job, why not make it easier by complying and talking to them? Seems they won't be able to talk to any black people in future for fear of being accused of being racist and shared all over social media.
Is it not for the couple to prove racism here rather than the police proving it isn't?
Do you have the proof you need to make a judgement?
However the common factor in both instances was a refusal to comply with the police instructions.
We surely have an obligation to comply, whether we agree with their decision to stop us, or not.
Even if you wanted to prove that the police were wrong, surely it is best to firstly comply, and make your point later.
Just making things difficult for the police does not help to prove any point.
I think the police lacked leadership, and common sense.
They should have put the onus on those they were stopping, rather than getting involved in a shouting match involving a number of officers.
Had the officer in charge clearly explained to the Drama Queen in the first clip that if he chose to continue to sit in the car with the doors locked, then they would be forced to smash his window and remove him forcibly from the car. They could have given him a minute to decide, and then if he chose to remain in the car, acted as they did. Many more people would have then thought it was his own fault.
His surprise when they actually smashed the window suggest that this hadn't been made clear.
Also his reaction to the window being smashed seem to suggest that he wouldn't have gone for this option.
In the second clip there was far too much shouting going on, by too many officers.
Had the officer in charge dealt with them one at a time, and clearly pointed out that if they didn't comply, they would be forcibly removed from the car, it would have put the ball in their court.
Most people would have grasped that had they been removed from the car, that it was their choice.
Whatever the colour of your skin, compliance with the police is not an option, and having a particular skin colour doesn't give you preferential treatment.
Had they just done what they were told we wouldn't be having this debate.
They just make the difficult job the police do, more difficult, and more time consuming with all this nonsense.
The nature of the job means that some of the citizens pulled over in traffic stops will be innocent.
That is a fact of life that we all have to live with.
If every traffic stop that the police made were as time consuming as these two incidents, then more criminals would get away with their crimes.
Clare McCarthy insisted he hadn’t used those words and said she is not racist
Anna Rutkowska was drinking at The Kingswood Colliers Wetherspoon in Bristol
The 36-year-old recorded the attack on her mobile, before doormen intervened
Man, believed to be female attacker's brother, wades in before woman kicks out
Ms Rutkowska who works for the NHS, said it was due to them speaking in Polish
Did YOU see the incident or know anyone involved? Email tips@dailymail.com
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8495375/Woman-attacked-care-worker-speaking-Polish-insists-NOT-racist.html
David Walliams' publisher says character in his children's book with 'big frizzy hair' that led to food writer Jack Monroe accusing him of 'horrific racism' is in fact WHITE
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8495623/Publisher-reveals-character-portrayed-racist-way-white.html
Government figures....
https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/crime-justice-and-the-law/policing/stop-and-search/latest
Meanwhile, Black people are also far more likely to die either during or following police contact."
https://www.inyourarea.co.uk/news/black-people-are-being-disproportionately-targeted-by-police/
We need to move past this equality of outcome definition of racism.
You can design a colour-blind model and find that your outcomes are racially biased. What are you going to do about that? If you’re Harvard and you’re trying solve the representation problem at one of the top universities in the world, then you create a biased/racist model/process that selects against Asian people and colour of skin once again becomes the most important factor in your application.
Does it come down once again to the propensity to be poor?
In the case above it is not clear they were stopped because of their skin colour. The police cited:
- area (Maida Vale, reports of violent crime there)
- expensive car (perhaps tinted windows also a factor)
- young (likely interaction with expensive car)
- erratic driving style including wrong side of the road
Using this as evidence of a corrupt system is inflammatory and not necessary. They delayed their stop and then refused to cooperate. Then they filmed it all and called for the Met Chief to resign. It’s going to contribute to further angst the next time a Black person is stopped having been told how racist it all is.
Seems to be a game.
Would love the police to publish camera footage of their own.
If they had just complied there would not have been an issue?
Haysie made the point that the police appeared to handle the situations badly and I agree. In the first there appeared to be no warning about the window being smashed in. If you read the article below the driver.
a) Has been stopped around 20 times.
b) He has no criminal record
c) He was returning from a TV interview about a previous stop where we was cuffed and thrown to the ground and hurt. Which means he had reason to be fearful from experience and may well have been wondering if the reason for this stop was related to his TV interview.
d) After his arrest he was even stopped on the street and asked what he was doing while walkng back to get his car from the pound.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jul/04/police-smash-car-window-ryan-colaco-tv-interview-racism
In the 2nd incident with the 2 athletes and their 3 month baby, what possible excuse is there for dragging the mother out of the car? Why was everyone shouting?
I have been stopped 3 times in my whole life and yes I was compliant. If I was stopped 10 or 20 times over a short period of time, if I was cuffed and thrown to the ground, my guess is I would be less reluctant to comply and more inclined to film what was going on for my own protection.
People seem to want to excuse aggressive behaviour by white police officers against innocent black drivers and blame the drivers.
My vote goes to that being evidence of racial bias in the police force and in society in general.
If we can’t be objective on an individual case given the facts at hand, then it’s all over.
The full video of the couple with the baby has him laughing before they are stopped. Having a ‘motherly instinct’ not to want to leave your child (who is safely strapped in a car seat) is not an excuse to refuse to comply with the police. If she wanted to protect the child’s emotions she should have refrained from all the screaming.
Perhaps BLM is right, perhaps the way to deal with this is to defund the police, rather than investing more in training to deal with non-compliance.
Statistics also indicate that there is a much higher percentage of charges brought following a stop and search on white people than black people. That smacks of racial bias to me. It seems the police need more reason to stop and search a white person or gang of white youths and stop proportionately more innocent black people than they do innocent white people. So they could tell that the occupants were young through the (legally) tinted windows but they couldn't tell they were black, and skin colour was not a factor?
Driving style was debated by the couple, if it was that obvious then why don't they release the car camera and bodycam footage?
I am not claiming a corrupt system, I am claiming a racial bias exists. Anecdotal evidence from black people I know and black friends of my children supports that, the Government's own statistics support that.
We progressed from me thinking the windows were blacked out so they couldn’t see in (due wholly to the description given in the interview), to that they are tinted according to your knowledge of legal limits. I don’t know if you can see through them but if they are claiming they can see skin colour they can probably also determine age. It’s also quite possible that they ran an insurance check and got his age that way. Who knows.
I have tried to explain how it is possible to get racially biased outcomes without a model or system looking at race. The Harvard Internship case is very interesting if you’ve not read about it.
There are lots of correlates with race in society, and these can all be reasons why the Government statistics skew. Racial bias in itself does not constitute a problem. It’s when the assertion is that the racial bias exists because of racism. I don’t think I can try to make this point any clearer.
It’s possible that the entire system is constantly looking out for black people to stop and then not prosecute, though seems a little inefficient use of time.
Regardless of the environment you still need to look at the facts in the individual case. If a jury determined racism on evidence of this nature then everyone with all their various privileges beware.
Officers in the TSG have faced criticism about their policing methods and complaints have been made against officers of the TSG.[11] Senior officers say that the type of work that the TSG are involved with, policing protests and performing drug raids makes them more likely to have complaints made against them.[12]
As the result of a freedom of information request made by The Guardian newspaper, it was revealed that more than 5,000 complaints were made against the TSG in 4 years but only 9 have been upheld. Commenting on these figures, a member of the Metropolitan Police Authority stated that officers in the TSG are "practically immune" from criticism.[12]
One ex-Metropolitan Police officer suggested that TSG members, "spend (their) days waiting for action, and far too many officers join seeking excitement and physical confrontation." Some officers are ex-military personnel and these are "the worst bullies" as "the laws of the battlefield are not appropriate to the streets of our capital".[13]
In 1997 a man was beaten by officers from the TSG in what was described as an "outrageous display of brutality",[14] which only stopped when the man pretended to be unconscious. The man was charged with assault and threatening behaviour over the incident but was cleared after photographs of his injuries showed the officers had lied about the case under oath. After the man's acquittal the officers went on trial accused of assault in 1999 but were later cleared.[15]
In 2003, six officers of the TSG performed what a judge in 2009 called a "serious, gratuitous and prolonged" assault on a terrorist suspect, Babar Ahmad, a 34-year-old IT support analyst who was not subsequently charged with any offence.[16] The officers involved had already been the subject of as many as 60 complaints about unwarranted assaults against other men.[17] A number of mail sacks containing these complaints were somehow lost.[18] The accusations were investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission[19] but that they were found to be unsubstantiated. Five of the six officers were still members of the TSG in 2009.[17] Babar Ahmed was later awarded £60,000 compensation, by the High Court, for the assault.[16] In August, 2009, it was announced that the police officers accused of attacking Babar Ahmad would face criminal charges.[20] However all four officers were found not guilty in June 2011 after a recording from listening device placed in Mr. Ahmed's home surfaced shortly before the trial which "proved the account originally given by these officers was correct and specific details of the complaint made by Mr. Ahmad were not present" [21]
In 2005 a Kurdish youth recorded an officer on his mobile phone telling him "If you say one more **** word, I'll smash your **** Arab face in" after he was stopped near Paddington Green police station.[22] The officer was suspended but denied the charge.[23]
Another investigation into six other officers of the TSG by the IPCC was launched following allegations made by three men that they were racially abused during an incident during June 2007 in Paddington.[24] A van of officers stopped after seeing youths mouthing obscenities towards them.[25] The officers appeared in court in December 2008 and were prosecuted; two for racially abusing the men, four of misconduct in a public office and one of racially aggravated assault.[26] The Guardian reported that a request may have been made to restrict reporting of the trial by the media.[27] The officer who was driving the van acted as a whistleblower during the trial.[25] One officer, a former Royal Marine, accused in this case was also involved in the assault of Babar Ahmed and has had 31 complaints lodged against him since 1993. In November 2009 he was cleared of all offences, along with the other officers, and returned to work with the TSG.[12][28]
During the 2009 G-20 London summit protests two officers of the TSG were suspended from duty following publication of videos which recorded alleged assaults on members of the public at the 2009 G-20 London summit protests and at a subsequent memorial.[29] In the first case, the member of the public, Ian Tomlinson, died shortly afterwards. In the second case, Sgt Delroy (Tony) Smellie was seen hitting Nicola Fisher. Following her complaint, the Crown Prosecution Service announced in September 2009, that there was sufficient evidence to charge Sgt Smellie with assault. He appeared in court on 16 November 2009 and was cleared of assault charges on 31 March 2010 at City of Westminster Magistrates' Court. However, he could still face misconduct proceedings over the incident.[30]
Video evidence shows that the officer seen hitting Ian Tomlinson had his face covered[31] and that the officers involved in both cases were not displaying their identification numbers.[29] Following the investigation into police handling of the protest, the human rights group Liberty called for further study of what it referred to as the "militaristic approach" used by the TSG.[32]
full source :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_Support_Group#:~:text=The Territorial Support Group (TSG,Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).&text=TSG units patrol the streets,call sign prefix "Uniform".