6 Policemen arrest a terminally ill man ,for mooning at a speed camera

[stripes39]

BS I get six police knocking on the door seems over the top. But let us step back and look at this from another perspective. A male of 55 years moons at a speed camera. Why, well we now know why, is it normal behavior? I would suggest not. Having identified the individual they would have done a risk assessment, checked out the individuals background, does he hold firearms, does he have criminal record for violent crimes etc. One should also be mindful that not everyone who has a gun is licenced, we see daily people who are not licenced commit the horrendous crime of murder. Rewind a little and let’s say he is no trace, then you would have to think why did he do what he did. Is he bating the police to lure them to a situation whereby they are ambushed or shot.

With the risk assessment complete someone decided to send six police officers to this males home. There is of course the possibility that each pair were paired due to one or more being in their probationary period and therefore not allowed to work solo. (probably not I admit but possible) however, they send three double crewed to the males address. Whoever made the decision must have thought there was no threat from gun violence as they appear not sent a ARV.

Once they got in and once someone fails to cooperate then they are trained to us reasonable force to detain. Six officers look at least four too many. But look at this from another perspective. The would need a head man, that is a officer who, while the male is taken to the ground ensures that males head is safe, i.e, he sustains no injury from the fall and the resulting continued struggle. They would also ensure the subject is able to breath and perhaps lastly, ensure the subject is unable to bite or spit at the officers.

Another officer will cuff the subject. Another will be assisting with the secondary arm (it can be extremely difficult cuffing a subject who is resisting so two officers is not excessive. You also have a leg-person who restrains the subjects legs from injuring the officers. There is a technic to all of those roles and every officer will be trained in them. It appeared these officers were trained as they struggled to restrain the male but did so successfully without injury I believe.

In theory one might say that there were two to many officer there. What if the subject had injured an officer. What if four were unable to restrain him. Remember this those officers can only use reasonable force so, the can use all sorts of restraint methods but, and here is the but, those restraint methods do not always work on everybody.

If you have ever been in a position where you a faced by a large male person who resists then I can understand criticism. Officers have a duty of care so will take every safeguard to ensure a persons safety whilst detaining someone. If it takes ten officers to do it safely then that it is better than five and someone sustains an injury.

There could be other reasonings behind six officers attending. Dealing with a resisting person can be extremely exhausting for any officer. Within a very short time any officer will feel exhausted. I know that sounds silly but you try it and I mean really try dealing with that type of situation and you will seem how exhausting it can be.

One other thing. When police have been injured/killed having been sent to a situation, I have read on this very forum words like, ‘why on earth did they only send two coppers, ‘ and that by the very same people who knock when the situation is reversed.

Policing today is very different from years ago. There are less officers now than say fift=en or so years ago. (You can thank Teresa May for that I guess) but today they have to deal with growing areas of criminality, serous domestic issues that were once swept under the carpet, child abuse now more reported that ever, both current and historical abuse, cyber crime and others. There are fewer officers dealing with more complex crimes than ever.

One last thing that posters get wrong on here is the police deal with law and the people who they perceive have broken the law, they do not prosecute those people that is down the CPS.

If there was any hint that this guy had firearms they would have sent an armed response team out.

This guy was an idiot, you really do have to question anyone who includes this on his bucket list after being told they're terminally ill.

That said, it's hardly surprising people are losing faith in the police and their priorities for tackling crime. They could have charged this guy with indecent exposure given we are constantly told they are low on resources. For me, it's all about degrees, is this worse than a mugging, a burglary or a violent assault? I think not. Not by some distance it isn't.

Sadly, the days of the local village copper are long gone. The new crop and their leaders seem incapable of using common sense and building trust with the public. Incidents like this really don't help their case.

[Baggiemadguern]

If there was any hint that this guy had firearms they would have sent an armed response team out.

This guy was an idiot, you really do have to question anyone who includes this on his bucket list after being told they're terminally ill.

That said, it's hardly surprising people are losing faith in the police and their priorities for tackling crime. They could have charged this guy with indecent exposure given we are constantly told they are low on resources. For me, it's all about degrees, is this worse than a mugging, a burglary or a violent assault? I think not. Not by some distance it isn't.

Sadly, the days of the local village copper are long gone. The new crop and their leaders seem incapable of using common sense and building trust with the public. Incidents like this really don't help their case.

I pointed out in my previous post, it would be unlikely he was a firearms holder as they would have had a different response level. The possibly of it being an ambush is always a possibility.

Police will not come to your house and charge you. You might be summonsed but not charged, there is a huge difference between the two. For this type of criminal act there is a requirement for the perpetrator to attend the custody area of a police station. Now they could have invited there I guess, most unlikely and most unusual, because upon an invitation the suspect is free to leave at any time.

Arresting any suspect is the usual way to proceed. This way the suspect will go through a custody procedure and then be interviewed in the presence of a legal representation should they choose. In this case the suspect would have had the opportunity to explain the reasoning behind his actions and the fact he is terminally ill. This mitigation could well assist the CPS in deciding whether or not it was in the public’s interest to charge the suspect or just caution them or even NFA the matter.

The village bobby appeal always makes me laugh. Imagine being at home when your young one walks in, tears streaming down their face because a police officer clipped his ear for some minor misdemeanor. There would be outrage so let’s get rid of this village copper love affair. It will not work with the righteous population of the UK today.

I know that if I saw a police officer ignore a person who exposed themselves to any member of the public then that would infuriate me more than seeing them dealing with the filthy minded person on the level they deserved. In the case we speak of the alleged victim of police brutality did not assist in any way at all and therefore, as I have said previously, he was a victim of his own stupidity.

[stripes39]

I pointed out in my previous post, it would be unlikely he was a firearms holder as they would have had a different response level. The possibly of it being an ambush is always a possibility.

Police will not come to your house and charge you. You might be summonsed but not charged, there is a huge difference between the two. For this type of criminal act there is a requirement for the perpetrator to attend the custody area of a police station. Now they could have invited there I guess, most unlikely and most unusual, because upon an invitation the suspect is free to leave at any time.

Arresting any suspect is the usual way to proceed. This way the suspect will go through a custody procedure and then be interviewed in the presence of a legal representation should they choose. In this case the suspect would have had the opportunity to explain the reasoning behind his actions and the fact he is terminally ill. This mitigation could well assist the CPS in deciding whether or not it was in the public’s interest to charge the suspect or just caution them or even NFA the matter.

The village bobby appeal always makes me laugh. Imagine being at home when your young one walks in, tears streaming down their face because a police officer clipped his ear for some minor misdemeanor. There would be outrage so let’s get rid of this village copper love affair. It will not work with the righteous population of the UK today.

I know that if I saw a police officer ignore a person who exposed themselves to any member of the public then that would infuriate me more than seeing them dealing with the filthy minded person on the level they deserved. In the case we speak of the alleged victim of police brutality did not assist in any way at all and therefore, as I have said previously, he was a victim of his own stupidity.

Sounds like hanging would be too good for him.

[Baggiemadguern]

Sounds like hanging would be too good for him.

The noose may be a little severe to be fair.

In the circumstances, I think a caution to all the charges that might be put to him would suffice. He was just an absolute idiot who did not think through the consequences of his actions.

[BaggieBlood]

The noose may be a little severe to be fair.

In the circumstances, I think a caution to all the charges that might be put to him would suffice. He was just an absolute idiot who did not think through the consequences of his actions.

To be fair poor prick is terminally ill.

[baggieal]

To be fair poor prick is terminally ill.

Totally agree and in that situation how can a person be rational or give a f uck!

[boingy]

Being terminally ill doesn't make you a nice guy. Your personality is still who you are sick or healthy. My wifes dad was a copper and he was tough but fair, back in the days when you could be. Now you are damned if you do and damned if you don't.

[baggieal]

Being terminally ill doesn't make you a nice guy. Your personality is still who you are sick or healthy. My wifes dad was a copper and he was tough but fair, back in the days when you could be. Now you are damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Don’t agree with - your personality is still who you are sick or healthy! I have seen first hand mental health issues where a person has hung them self from the stairs and believe me a persons normal personality goes out the window.

Nobody can see through the mind of a terminally ill person so no judgements can be made. Whatever actions a terminally ill or mentally ill person does is understandable although it might not be acceptable.

The huge amount of cancer patients who have not had life saving operations is shameless. Perhaps a cancer critical patient should take more of a priority than an individual who refuses to get jabbed. Don’t get me wrong - it’s up to the individual but you can’t have your cake and eat it!

[Baggiemadguern]

Not easy to detect someone is terminally ill in truth.

Mental illness is sad and without going into it to deeply, for a number of reasons I fully understand the effects on a family of mental health. No one goes around with a sign on their forehead to indicate they have mental health issues, the same can be said for the terminally ill.

We all want out law enforcement to be just that, yet at the same time some do not want to not do a job they are paid to do because of idiots like this university lecturer. The UK has what is wanted, a soft policing of the country which allows the criminal to have an upper hand. Who is to blame, well some might look closer to their own ideology for that reason.

He was an educated man, he was stupid educated man, he was the victim of his own stupidity, end of. If a person supports criminality on any level then that says as much about them as what he did about him.

[mickd1961]

Not easy to detect someone is terminally ill in truth.

Mental illness is sad and without going into it to deeply, for a number of reasons I fully understand the effects on a family of mental health. No one goes around with a sign on their forehead to indicate they have mental health issues, the same can be said for the terminally ill.

We all want out law enforcement to be just that, yet at the same time some do not want to not do a job they are paid to do because of idiots like this university lecturer. The UK has what is wanted, a soft policing of the country which allows the criminal to have an upper hand. Who is to blame, well some might look closer to their own ideology for that reason.

He was an educated man, he was stupid educated man, he was the victim of his own stupidity, end of. If a person supports criminality on any level then that says as much about them as what he did about him.

He was f u c k I n g stupid.

The police were f u c k I n g stupid!

FFS can we bring this dirge to a conclusion or wipe it off the f u c k I n g forum!?