G20 protest - The Man who died (sens)

Thank goodness for the people who filmed all this brutality. I truly hope (but have no confidence) that the new law against photographing the police isn't misused (as other terrorist legislation has been) to stop this sort of thing coming out.

Good lord, have just seen this on the BBC. How utterly appalling.

And hopefully police who didn't display clearly visible identification numbers on their shoulders will be arrested for impersonating police officers.

Why this isn't a sacking offence already is quite beyond me - this issue last flared up during the miners' strike 25 years ago.

Good grief. How awful. I'm speechless.

I don't undertand this either. It's clear those officers went out with the clear intention of causing trouble, using the event as an excuse for meaningless violence. I have sympathy for the police managing these protests but this behaviour is unexcusable.

And Knownowt - there was a thread on the photo law the other day and people suggested the OP and some others of pretty much being paranoid IIRC - I think they are right to be concerned.

It is appalling but I do think wrongs were made but by both parties involved although its very sad that the man died because of the altercation.

What? Have you seen the footage?

My understanding (certainly as it has been reported in the London media) was that the man in question was not part of the protest, but was in fact on his way home from helping out in a shop. He was somehow penned into the disturbance, and what hapened to him was utterly tragic.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8004861.stm

He was nothing to do with the protest at all- as Hyacinth says, he was walking home after working in a shop- when he was assaulted from behind by a policeman in an unprovoked attack. Footage of the assault here on the bbc link.

I have sev eral times, I'm an ex PSU officer and so maybe I am seeing it from a tatical position as I can understand what the police were doing at the time etc. He totally ignored the verbals to move on and was wandering about with his hands in his pockets (not in a straight line) if I had been a civi and being told to get going, I would have been walking.

The reason no numbers on your clothing is that its fire retardant kit and the forces won't pay out for suitable id's, they have to be binned after so many wearings and so mount up to be alot of money which they can't find in their budgets for units like this, we were marked on our helmets only.

You think that constitutes a "wrong" on his part? Good grief.

Peanut - you're kidding right? So now not moving along deserves a beating from the police? Riiight.

(and "verbals" is a horrible sounding term)

I'm not sure what a PSU is,but I know a lot of people who work for the police (especially in support, and civilian employees, rather than front line interstingly) do get a bit millitant and "do what we say" after a while. I don't actually think it helps their repuation or their ability to police at all, but that is a personal opinion.

I thought it was a legal requirement to have identification visable? The police have to abide by the law as much as those they are arresting.

I admittedly have an alternative view of police behaviour and motivation as a direct result of when and where I grew up,but even I am stunned to read that anyone thinks this man's "behaviour" could have possibly led to him being beaten (to death). By a peeler.

Like KN says, thank Christ someone filmed this, even though this too is now illegal. I hope heads roll in the Met for this. Disgraceful, brutish, thuggish behaviour - in my view symptomatic of a Police Force that believes it is untouchable as anyone who dissents is labelled a terrorist and reminiscent of the worst excesses of public order enforcement that anyone of my age in NI will be familiar with.

My understanding of the ID numbers was that many were deliberately covered so that identification would be impossible. Like the wearing of balaclavas by a minority of protestors (something lambasted here previously I recall).

What I am trying to put across rather badly, is that none of us where there, its a blooming hard job, one that I didn't do long in as I found it was more mentally challenging that physical and swapped to child protection, It wasn't a beating, it wasn't by their batons, it was an open handed shove, the first line of action for any cop in that situation. Yes, it was a tad hard and the guy fell but it was a mistake by the officer, you have no idea the pressure involved, we are all good at tut tuting and judging people without knowing the full circumstances that surround events. right, I'm off to pack for my holidays, no doubt no one will agree with me but its a public forum, with everyone with an opinion of their own and the above is mine based on actual experience of being involved in something like G20. The guy didn't deserve to die, no one does, but neither does the cop need to be harrassed through the media like he has been for doing his job. See you all in 2 weeks?

Well, we'll agree to disagreee then. It clearly wasn't an open handed push - people don't fall to the ground and sustain interrnal bleeding from that.

Peanut, sorry but that is the most passive agressive post I've read on here ?

Can you please explain that to me then? I really don't see that he did anything wrong - even if he did, why the need to strike? There were enough of them present, he wasn't behaving aggressively or strangely , they could have been spoken to if they were concerned.

Your natural reaction may have been to move on, but do you know that he could clearly hear them? Thinking of how I have reacted in the past when I've felt threatened by someone behind me, I slow down to let them pass or to work out what is happening - the last thing I would do is speed of and start a chase or arouse suspicion. That would be especially true if it were the police right behind me. Ok, he wasn't walking in a straight line - could that not be due to the fact he was being pretty closely followed and was probably flustered?

If this man was disregarding police instructions to move out of the area, why didn't two policemen escort him physically by taking an arm/shoulder each and moving him on in that way - ensuring he was being quickly removed without any risk of danger or injury to either party? Why the need to shove in such a violent manner, particularly to someone who, as the footage shows, hadn't acted in any aggressive way at all?

I am sure policing these type of events is a damned hard and thankless task, but try as I might, I just can't see any line of reasoning which would make that police officer's actions justified.

Good grief, Peanut. If attitudes like yours are common in the police, I suppose it's not surprising this sort of thing happens.

I think being harrassed in the media is the least of the policeman's problem, TBH, given that he's facing a possible manslaughter charge.

I'm truly shocked that you consider the policeman was "doing his job" and that "the guy fell"- he was pushed violently to the ground.

If you weren't a regular, I'd assume you were a troll. I'm horrified.

Is that what police are trained to do? Resort to physical action even if the person they are dealing with shows no sign of aggression, physical reaction or fleeing?

Do you think I may win that award this year at the hitched awards?.. I never win anything ?

Seriously, I have to peel myself away and pack for the boat or before my H divorces me for failing to cook his dinner before 8pm!

I know my opinion will stink to most (or infact everyone here) but I am just a lonely old peanut that lives on a rock in the ocean off Scotland, what would I know about anything other than spinning yarn and quilt making ?

A blooming hard job? It wasn't a beating, it was a shove? We don't understand the pressure involved?

Wow.

It's the way you refuse to justify your opinion in any logical or reasonable manner which stinks, to be honest.

Actually having just watched the replay again, I'm even more angry. It wasn't an open handed push, From what I can see it looks as if the officer is holding a baton,or has something which is extending the force of his blow. He swings his arm/ baton, right back behind him before striking. why would one need to do that for an open handed push designed to move someone away? You would simply raise your hand and push,not swing back in what I can only describe as a "whollop" action.

Furthermore i think the footage shows relative peace in that area at the time he was struck-there are three people directly in front of him hugging eachother and other wandering past in a normal day manner.

If you must move immediatley out of the way when told (but not suddenly,I'm sure turning and running would be just as much of a reason to suspect you're up to something) I feel extremely sorry for deaf peopleor those whodon't understand english,but I'm sure they deserve to be murdered to(OK strong word,not sure if manslaughtered is actually a word)

I am a big supporter of the police,my Mum has worked for them for 20 years and I know many many excellent polieman. But they simply can not keep hiding behind lies and excuses when they make mistakes.

I (somewhat cyncially) wonder how long before some will be "leaked" to the media which shows this man in an unfavourable light, just as happened with John Charles de Mendes (rapist, coke head) and the three men injured during the blotched anti terror raid in east London (peodophiles).

What bothers me is the way you're presenting your horrible opinion that he acted correctly as fact. Police powers have changed a bit since my time at law school, I know, but I don't think there's any argument at all for that being anything other than an illegal assault.

Given that thinking like yours is what leads to this sort of thing (and the shameful leaks and misreporting that followed) I don't find the matter particularly funny either.

I don't think anyone is questioning whether or not policing is a hard job. Of course it is, and of course it's horrible seeing any profession you are associated with condemned in the press. (I used to feel very defensive about reading negative reports of the teaching profession, when I was a teacher). But the actions of this officer were clearly wrong. It doesn't mean ALL police are wrong, but it does mean that some of the police supposed to be protecting the public on this occassion were not.

If you look at the slowed down footage on youtube, it shows that the officer struck him with a baton on the back of the legs, BEFORE shoving him over. It was naked aggression and there is no covering it up. So there was beating involved with batons. It is fortunate it was caught on camera.

In my paranoid mind it makes me think that the police / government have an aggressive policing policy on purpose, so that there is a lower and lower turnout at each planned protest. WDYT?

I have seen the footage loads of times, and I honestly cant see when he was hit behind the knees!

I can see what looks like the police officer look as though he was doing it, but had he struck the guy at that point surely his knees would have buckled? And they didnt. And the he did push him. But the guy landed on his hands. Can you get an abdominal injury from falling and landing on your hands?

I am not asking this to start a fight, honestly, I just cant see these things that people are seeing. (probably me being stupid!)

http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&q=man+killed+at+G20+protests&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=ln

I'm not sure were you've seen it but I think this footage shows it quite well. The first strikke from the circled policeman shows him swinging then hit the man(below hip level I would say by the angle of the policeman)

People don't have to "buckle" in any kind of tradional way in response to certain hits, every person,situation and hit is different.

I am in no way condoning police brutality it is abhorrent and it is very sad that this man has died. However, I do not really believe that the footage can really tell us the whole story, for instance we cannot hear the "verbals" from either parties. A lot of the footage was at lower level, you cannot see upper body/head. There was accusations on this post of being passive aggressive. However, body langage can also be passive aggressive. Without the "soundtrack", who knows what was actually going on. I do agree that on the face of it the "shove", however it was administered, does appear to be pretty excessive, but how often have you done something with much more force than you meant to? Particularly if adrenaline has been involved? Admittedly the scene looks reasonably peaceful at that particular moment, but you do not know what the police officer (who is also a human being and therefore susceptible to human error as much as the next person) has had to contend with in the last 5 mins.. 10 mins..... half hour ... full shift?? The press have put a certain spin/take on it from the very beginning and, therefore, our minds tend to be coloured that way when considering this story.

I am not trying to defend anybody in any way, but be devils advocate and try to look at the situation from different perspectives.

As I said, there are too much missing information to know what the truth really is.

But if I hit someone with more force than I intended to,and they died, I would be sent to prison,and rightly so.

There are frequently cases where a stupid bar fight has ended in someone being punched, the punch has,for that one in a million time,caused a skull fracture and the person has died. The person who did it is still punished.

The cause of death will doubtless come to light.

Regardless.

Again the Met. Have been caught out lying to cover their own backsides. And enforcing their 'authority' with sticks in a situation where it was patently not required.

That happened here a lot at one stage.... And everybody involved had cause to regret it.