O/T Andy Burnham on Mank incident

[UlleyMiller]

Same old, same old - in terms of how this has trickled through and subsequently been thrown around like a shining example of what numerous people already thought about others.

First video: Clearly needs context, but no officer should be stamping on anyone's head.
Second video: Clearly needs context, but nobody should feel they're ever okay to swing at police officers.

Loads more will follow, and plenty of people will us and abuse what's out there so far to whip up hysteria. It's pretty silly that the instant gratification mode kicks in and everyone 'solves the case' before seeing the full story.

[howdydoo]

Same old, same old - in terms of how this has trickled through and subsequently been thrown around like a shining example of what numerous people already thought about others.

First video: Clearly needs context, but no officer should be stamping on anyone's head.
Second video: Clearly needs context, but nobody should feel they're ever okay to swing at police officers.

Loads more will follow, and plenty of people will us and abuse what's out there so far to whip up hysteria. It's pretty silly that the instant gratification mode kicks in and everyone 'solves the case' before seeing the full story.

There's two earlier incidents that will provide the context. If it's out there people will try and 'solve' the case. It's an whodunnit presented in the format of Pulp Fiction. I'm happy with myself actually. Video 2 plays out roughly as I thought it would. Hope that's not too silly. I've got theories about No.1 and No.2 altercations too. Is it alright if I mention that to the missus even before the full story comes out?

A Greater Manchester Police constable has been advised he is under criminal investigation for assault over the incident, the IOPC said on Friday.

On Saturday, Manchester Evening News published new footage believed to be of the preceding events.

The video appears to shows a group of people standing by ticket machines in Terminal Two (T2) and a man in a light blue outfit is facing one of the machines.

It appears three officers approach him from behind and try to restrain him, with a male officer seemingly pushing his head down.

Another man, wearing a dark t-shirt, appears to grab the male officer and the two start to throw punches at one another.

The male officer seems to lower to the ground as the man repeatedly strikes him.

Meanwhile a female officer is restraining the man in blue, but he appears to break free and strike her and another female officer, with one ending up on the ground.

The male officer then seems to point his taser at the man in a dark t-shirt before the man in blue runs at him from behind.

They appear to grapple until the man in blue lies still on the ground, face-down, and a woman kneels by his side.

The officer then appears to kick and then stamp on his head, which was shown in the footage already widely circulated.

Greater Manchester Police has opened a public portal for more footage and it is appealing for witnesses to three incidents.

The first is "an altercation between passengers" from Qatar Airways flight QR023 that arrived at 7.20pm, which they said may have taken place on the flight or T2 baggage hall.

There was then a "violent altercation involving members of the public" in T2 at about 8.22pm, GMP said.

At 8.28pm at the terminal's car park pay point area three police officers were assaulted and left with head injuries including a broken nose, it added.

After Manchester Evening News published the latest footage, Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham said in a statement: "As I said on Thursday, this is a complicated situation with two sides to it.

[UlleyMiller]

There's two earlier incidents that will provide the context. If it's out there people will try and 'solve' the case. It's an whodunnit presented in the format of Pulp Fiction. I'm happy with myself actually. Video 2 plays out roughly as I thought it would. Hope that's not too silly. I've got theories about No.1 and No.2 altercations too. Is it alright if I mention that to the missus even before the full story comes out?

Okay....

[KerrAvon]

First video: Clearly needs context, but no officer should be stamping on anyone's head.

I think you are overstating the position there.

In English criminal law a person is allowed to use reasonable force in defence of themselves or others. Depending on the circumstances you don’t have to wait to be attacked and the law (section 76(7) of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008) expressly provides:

(a) that a person acting for a legitimate purpose may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action; and
(b) that evidence of a person's having only done what the person honestly and instinctively thought was necessary for a legitimate purpose constitutes strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken by that person for that purpose.

So, consider a hypothetical:

You and your work colleagues have been very violently assaulted. You have taken several significant blows to the head as have your colleagues to the point where you are unsure whether they are still ‘in play’ and able to defend themselves and others. There are at least two people present who have participated in the assault and you are unsure of the intentions of the others who are present. You are aware that you are carrying weapons that could, in the worst case scenario, be taken from you and turned against you and your colleagues.

You mange to take an assailant to the ground and could handcuff him to reduce the continuing risk that he poses, but doing so means making yourself very vulnerable by going to the ground yourself and turning your back on the other people present for several seconds.

In that situation, I think would want to make sure that the person I have taken to the ground stays there until the situation is under control and would take action to achieve that. For me, I think the notion that a person defending themselves and others ‘may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action’ comes to the fore in that scenario and the methods I might use to try to eliminate the immediate threat might be quite ugly.

The ‘optics’ of my actions in that scenario would probably not be good, but I don’t believe that would be a material consideration in the split second that I would have to react.

[Yak]

I’ve never had a problem at airports I comply with the rules and don’t put myself in a position to be confronted by anyone.
The police although it looks extreme did exactly the right thing imo.
If this was Tommy Robinson then a lot of people would be saying he deserved it and I’m no lover of him either but it’s relevant.
The police and other front line workers shouldn’t have to put up with a certain section of the public thinking they can do or say what they want.
Why haven’t they been arrested yet?
I think we know why dont we. We wouldn’t want any more riots in the street now would we.
Two tier policing as usual.

[KerrAvon]

I’ve never had a problem at airports I comply with the rules and don’t put myself in a position to be confronted by anyone.
The police although it looks extreme did exactly the right thing imo.
If this was Tommy Robinson then a lot of people would be saying he deserved it and I’m no lover of him either but it’s relevant.
The police and other front line workers shouldn’t have to put up with a certain section of the public thinking they can do or say what they want.
Why haven’t they been arrested yet?
I think we know why dont we. We wouldn’t want any more riots in the street now would we.
Two tier policing as usual.

Do you know that they weren't arrested?

[howdydoo]

Do you know that they weren't arrested?

They were definitely arrested.

I assume YAK is making the point, they haven't been charged with anything yet.

[Yak]

Apologies Kerr and Howdy is correct I meant charged yet.
Fast track them into court set an example if you abuse front line workers you will get locked up.

[KerrAvon]

Apologies Kerr and Howdy is correct I meant charged yet.
Fast track them into court set an example if you abuse front line workers you will get locked up.

No worries.

The lowest level of charge that is likely to be considered is ABH, which means the case will have to go to the CPS for a charging decision. They are likely to wait until the IOPC has investigated the officer. In my experience, the IOPC moves at a glacial speed when its in a hurry.

I suspect that the CPS will then defer the decision to the independent bar and probably Treasury Counsel given how ‘politicised’ the case has become.

I feel sorry for the prosecutor, Jury members and judge who will have to deal with this case (assuming that there are charges in the case of the last two). They will all know that whatever they do will criticised by those members of the audience who have already made their decisions and really don’t care about pesky stuff like evidence.

[UlleyMiller]

I think you are overstating the position there.

In English criminal law a person is allowed to use reasonable force in defence of themselves or others. Depending on the circumstances you don’t have to wait to be attacked and the law (section 76(7) of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008) expressly provides:

(a) that a person acting for a legitimate purpose may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action; and
(b) that evidence of a person's having only done what the person honestly and instinctively thought was necessary for a legitimate purpose constitutes strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken by that person for that purpose.

So, consider a hypothetical:

You and your work colleagues have been very violently assaulted. You have taken several significant blows to the head as have your colleagues to the point where you are unsure whether they are still ‘in play’ and able to defend themselves and others. There are at least two people present who have participated in the assault and you are unsure of the intentions of the others who are present. You are aware that you are carrying weapons that could, in the worst case scenario, be taken from you and turned against you and your colleagues.

You mange to take an assailant to the ground and could handcuff him to reduce the continuing risk that he poses, but doing so means making yourself very vulnerable by going to the ground yourself and turning your back on the other people present for several seconds.

In that situation, I think would want to make sure that the person I have taken to the ground stays there until the situation is under control and would take action to achieve that. For me, I think the notion that a person defending themselves and others ‘may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action’ comes to the fore in that scenario and the methods I might use to try to eliminate the immediate threat might be quite ugly.

The ‘optics’ of my actions in that scenario would probably not be good, but I don’t believe that would be a material consideration in the split second that I would have to react.

The first point was around context, and a wider view of the location, support options etc should be seriously considered, as should prior events (of which I've seen only one other video).

A couple of points around the hypothetical:
1) I'm amazed the threat of the weapon wasn't enough to deter this situation (the numbers involved, not necessarily one person trying their luck), and I'm still not clear why weapons aren't used as deterrents with greater efficacy. I'm not hoping to see an American approach to policing but the breach point must be extremely niche in the UK.
2) I'm not an officer, have no weapons, and don't have a particularly thorough understanding of training in situations like this. I'm aware of the extent to which officers are pushed when they're put in vehicles (and the limitations/expectations around that), so I can't imagine it's a token 2 day course. I've also had an insight into taser training, which seems like it's more than just a brief summary of rules and how to use.

I think it's inevitable that there will be a significant deal of scrutiny around the events and how things played out but in a time when the police face an unreasonable amount of public pressure already, I think the stamp will be a focal point. The optics are not good, and play into the hands of groups I alluded to in a prior post who will use this to whip up more hysteria and anti-police sentiment. I've no interest in knocking the efforts of our 'thin blue line', but there are tactics which should be more ingrained by training than instinct.