As the furore over the incident outside the Sheffield nightclub increases, the Chief of Yorkshire Police is pleading that the public do not condemn the officers involved and see things in context.
So what context exactly would that be? How many ways can we consider the fact that a slender 19 year old girl is shown on CCTV being held down by two policemen and a couple of nightclub staff while another policeman punches her repeatedly.
In the video, the limp unconscious girl is then dragged to a waiting police van with the teenager's trousers falling round her ankles.
The officer has admitted he hit her but claimed he acted in self-defence and only after extreme provocation.
When she kept resisting, he said, he hit her again. Trying to put her in handcuffs, he states that "I now struck her as hard as I was physically able in an attempt to deaden her arm ... In the end I had to use brute force."
Oh, i understand now what context that would be. The context that the officers involved are vicious thugs who deserve to be thrown out of the force and be dragged into a court for assault.
Heaven help us if the plan to arm these thugs ever comes to fruition.
53 comments:
Of course, the fact that the girl was shitfaced drunk, thrown out of a nightclub, damaging public property, grabbed an officer by the balls and wouldn't let go, and doesn't remember a thing because she was so shitfaced doesn't enter into the equation at all.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article1486603.ece
Bummer 'bout the underwear. That must have been just SO embarrassing for the poor dear...
That's the police line on things you just almost quoted. Lucky they beat her unconscious then wasn't it because a 5'4" girl weighing 8st could sure do lots of damage to 4 officers and 2 bouncers holding her down.
Sounds pretty bad, Lucy. Even two grown men trained as cops should be able to subdue a normal unarmed woman without that much violence. Most cops are good (I believe), but of course the idea of the uniform/power will attract some nasty types.
'Shit-faced drunk.' What a quaint expression. So eloquent.
Arming the police is no big deal. Australian police are armed. If the crims are armed, it evens the balance of power somewhat.
And of course, the British Police haven't got the Wild West background and a penchant for armed violence.
Cheers!
"That's the police line on things you just almost quoted. Lucky they beat her unconscious then wasn't it because a 5'4" girl weighing 8st could sure do lots of damage to 4 officers and 2 bouncers holding her down."
Since neither one of us was present we'll never really know the whole story, will we?
From the sound of the article, which may or may not be the "police line", there is more to the story than you presented sans links.
These things happen all the time. People with cameras catch the cops in America doing this type of stuff with astounding regularity. Remember the cops pounding on that old man in New Orleans, and the mounted cop trying to block the camera with his horse? Scumbag.
Now, I'll criticise America and Americans when it's warranted, but once again Daniel takes it to the level of dipshit bigotry. Do you think that Americans invented armed violence in the Wild West? Why don't you crack open a book and read some British history? You might be surprised at what your own countrymen have been capable of.
Mark - The CCTV is pretty conclusive, would not of seen much more if we had been there.
Not having seen the video, I can't really comment on it, but the notion that the police are capable of unwarranted brutality is certainly not a new one.
Is it on youtube?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/video/page/0,,2028548,00.html
The video stephen
Wow, talk about overkill.
Sorry. Hate to disagree, but what is not obvious is details. What I did see is one cop's arm going up and down exactly four times and no more.
If, as the officer asserts, that was because she had his balls in the proverbial kung fu grip, I can guarantee I would have hit her a couple of extra times for good measure after she released them.
I know, awful, isn't it?
As I said, none of us was there, but I didn't see much but a drunk, out-of-control girl fighting like a she cat and getting subdued, smacked four times and taken off to a paddy wagon.
It's hardly the stuff of lawsuit. No tasers, no batons swinging, no shooting.
Nothing to see here. Maybe she'll think twice about getting publicly shit-faced drunk next time.
Disagree. If the police were using restraint techniques that they are presumably trained to use, they wouldn't have needed four cops on her, and one of them woudn't havehad to punch her once, let alone repeatedly.
My remark aside about the extra whacks, Stephen, which was facetious and probably should not have been said, the assertion by the police is that they smacked her on the shoulder to get her to release her gfrip on the officers nards.
If there were twenty cops holding her down it still doesn't mean the cops are lying and her grip on an officer's dasnglies still woulkd have necessitated smacking het=r arm to get her to release them.
There wasn't anything remotely like the Rodney King video.
This just seems to be a typically-kneejerk anti-cop reaction.
Of course, this will play out in the courts and ultimately either you or I will be proved wrong.
There was no actual nad grabbing, the policeman said he was worried that it was what she was going to do. His gonads were never touched by human hand. The police are handing out pre-emptive beatings now?
Still the worst excuse to beat up a woman while she was being held down. No defence whatsoever.
"One officer, named as Pc Anthony Mulhall, was seen striking Ms Comer five or six times after claims that she had grabbed him by the genitals. He has been withdrawn from frontline duties, but not suspended, while the inquiry is carried out."
Whatever. To say that any beating of a woman is not justified is absurd, especially one that is drunk, disorderly, out of control, on god knows what kind of drugs and allegedly had a handful of scrote sack.
Jury's still out, to make sweeping judgements about the nature of this being police brutality is just plain wrong, especially from what we've seen on the video.
I agree, Lucy. The cop looked out of control and the whole scene screamed of incompetence. Why wasn't she immediately handcuffed and shoved into a police car? If a bunch of these guys can't restrain one unarmed person without beating them, maybe they need a refresher training course.
What I observed:
They were talking to her. She ran down the stairs (or fell). She was then grabbed and thrown down, then the officer pinned her. She struggled a LOT, kicking. Another officer arrived and pinned her legs. Movement as people came and went. The officer that had originally pinned her shifted position, then suddenly his arm flailed up and down rapidly a bunch of times. Eventually more officers arrived, and they attempted to get her upright. She appeared to be employing the "deadweight" technique to resist, at one point, the same way passive protesters in the US in the sixties would go limp to make it more difficult to carry them. When they finally got her up, she flailed and more officers arrived, they walked her, with her alternating between limpness and fighting, to the car that had arrived during all this.
The car was not there at first. My guess is the officer pinned her and called for assistance and attempted to keep her restrained until the car arrived. I don't know why he did not cuff her.
I disagree that it was excessive force. If you violently resist being arrested, you're gonna get hurt with as much force as necessary to subdue you. It's the price you pay, whether you're a small woman or a large muscular man, for resisting.
No way. If you are a police officer, you are trained to subdue people without resorting to violence. She shouldn't be able to kick her legs in the first place. If she's a small woman, there is no excuse for not doing that.
The fact that she was hit after she was subdued should be cause for investigation. If she had such a good grip on his balls, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have the umph to hit her as hard as he did. Balls or not, why did he hit her after she was subdued? That's what needs to be found out, imo.
"Balls or not, why did he hit her after she was subdued?"
Because he was more fond of his balls than he was of her at the moment?
I dunno, just a hunch...
Exactly, Jenny. He was clearly out of control.
"If she had such a good grip on his balls, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have the umph to hit her as hard as he did."
Spoken like someone without any balls. ;)
Does someone have some footage with a completely different camera angle than what's in the link Lucy posted? Maybe one where you can actually see what the hell happened? Sorry, folks, but if you're willing to convict based on that, remind me to hope you never get selected for jury duty. You have no idea what was going on there. You have no idea what the woman was doing. To brush it off and say, they're cops, they should be able to do better, is extremely myopic. There are countless documented cases of drugged-up individuals exhibiting ridiculous strength when being restrained. How many times have you guys put handcuffs on someone? How many times have you handcuffed someone who didn't want to be handcuffed? You have absolutely no clue how difficult that is. Newsflash: One cop cannot put handcuffs on someone who does not want to be handcuffed. If someone is resisting, proper protocol is to subdue that person until assistance arrives. If she grabbed that cop's testicles, I guarantee his immediate reaction would be to get her off by any means necessary, as it should be. Again, you guys could be right, and if you are, those cops deserve discipline. But I'm most certainly not willing to convict based on a camera recording from 40 feet away that shows a bunch of backsides.
Jeff - This has degenerated into nothing more than people disagreeing for the sake of being contrary.
Right, Mark. Everyone who disagrees with your take on this is simply being contrary. Lucy, Joe, Stephen, Jenny, me - none of us could possibly have a legitimate opinion.
Jeff, this isn't a court of law. Of course I wouldn't convict someone based ONLY on this piece of videotape - we're just giving opinions here. The cop hit her after she was subdued. Without more explanation, that looks pretty damn bad. The entire scene makes the cops look inept (to me). Of course you're free to withhold your opinion, but some of us feel like giving one. So what?
Paula, no, this isn't a court of law. It's the court of public opinion, and just like we were discussing regarding the Obama/Osama thing, the court of public opinion matters. That said, of course everyone is free to give their opinions. I certainly didn't mean to imply they're not. I just disagreed with some of the opinions given. When I read something like, "Heaven help us if the plan to arm these thugs ever comes to fruition," or even your statement that he was "clearly out of control," I think, man, that's an awfully harsh condemnation over something that's frankly hard to make out. Yes, I was a bit of a smart-ass in my comment about having another camera angle, but it doesn't seem clear to me at all. We can't see the woman once she's lying down, because the cops are blocking the camera's view. Just because someone's on their back doesn't mean they're subdued. She very well could have gotten a hand free and grabbed at the nearest thing(s), which provoked his response. Again, if it comes out that she was subdued and he was out of control (and I'm not saying that's not possible in the least), then throw the book at them. But I have close family members who are cops, and they put their lives on the line every single time they put on that uniform. I lost a cousin to a shooting -- he was wearing his vest but vest's don't protect brains -- during a routine traffic stop. With something like this, where the video is so completely inconclusive, I'm not willing to denigrate those officers or police in general.
Jeff, I'm usually not the one to condemn a cop, but (again) this looked pretty bad to me. In HB there was a recent thing over an 18 year old girl getting shot dead by a cop when lunging at him with a knife. People ragged on the two officers involved there, but that seemed life or death to me, so I supported the cops in that situation. Frankly, some of you who are reluctant to condemn have inadvertently strengthened my opinion with your "balls" remarks. He was pissed at her for grabbing at his crotch. Human, sure, but that doesn't excuse a beating when someone's down. They're supposed to have better control of their emotions than that.
To me, the bottom line is the policeman is a trained professional and should not be dishing out beatings like that, especially to a young girl who is restrained. He says she tried to grab him as he would to give himself a degree of cover and excuse himself, she said she never as she would to cover herself but she was not charged with reisisting arrest which would surely of come up at her trial, not after the complaint against the officer is taken up.
The question is, if the officers knew they were being filmed, would they have acted in the same way?
Lucy -
"He says she tried to grab him as he would to give himself a degree of cover"
And the article I quoted and provided a link for says she actually did have him by the balls. Let's not lose sight of two things, Lucy:
1. I have merely said that, GIVEN THE FACTS AVAILABLE, I wouldn't be so quick to judge the cops harshly and
2. Provide me a link that shores up your statement mand I'll gladly amend my post and opinion if it is warranted.
3. Compared to the Rodney King issue, this hardly seems like excessive force (absent the issue of her being struck) as I, like others, know what it is like to try and subdue a person that is inebriated and fighting. Can you and others say the same and tell me one person is enough?
ATD.
Peace y'all!
Jeff - Agree. Sounds like a great idea, all y'all!
Whatever the rights and wrongs of this particular issue... (and I can kinda see where all sides are coming from i.e. it looks to me as if it was excessive force, but the video didn't conclusively show whether or not he was having his meat and two veg rearranged - which is possibly just as well because I'm not into gay porn)... at the end of the day I completely agree with the moral of Lucy's story here: i.e. it will be a sad, terrible day in this country when the government sees fit to arm the police on a daily basis.
I, like others, know what it is like to try and subdue a person that is inebriated and fighting. Can you and others say the same and tell me one person is enough?
This wasn't some ordinary bozo trying to subdue his drunken girlfriend, these were (presumably) trained officers. As I stated, it looks like (at the least) a refresher course is needed.
Here you go Mark, i think this should end the meat and two veg grabbing bit...taken from the Policemans own statement.."As her hands became free she tried to grab handfuls of my genitals. At this point I struck her as hard as I was physically able with my right fist in an attempt to subdue her. There was no effect so I did it twice more."
Tried is not the same as grasping a pair of swingers.
Can people delete their own comments? I haven't deleted anything!!
I deleted mine cuz it posted twice.
Lucy - Got a link for the quote you posted?
I'd love to read it.
Until then, ATD.
We can see clearly from the video that the cop strikes the girl. The onus should be on him to explain why he did so.
I have nothing against the police in general. About ten years ago, I was the victim of a beating and mugging. I'm glad they're around. 99% do their job properly and don't abuse their power. I would say that we are in fact doing the police a favour by shedding light on the bad apples.
"I would say that we are in fact doing the police a favour by shedding light on the bad apples."
I can't argue with that, Stephen.
"The onus should be on him to explain why he did so."
I totally agree with this as well.
"As her hands became free she tried to grab handfuls of my genitals"
HandfulS? Someone's bragging.
Maybe he needs really big balls if he's gonna tell porky pies like that?!? :-p
ROFLMAO at Joe and Cheezy!
Gee, and here I thought the LAPD had the monopoly on thug cops and hardcore beatdowns.
But then even they might be embarrassed at four guys pounding on one drunk 19 year old girl. Still, a guy has to prove his manhood somehow, eh?
Especially those who brag or overcompensate for it (aka SUV drivers). And give this guy's "Handfulls" comment, he's definitely one of the compensators.
Ook ook
ATD?
Agree To Disagree.
Sorry Mark, i only just noticed your link request. The actual statement has been moved and i cannot find it but here is an article of it containing the statement.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/race/story/0,,2028870,00.html
You're dangerously close to hitting 50 comments here too, Lucy. And just to show that I'm not posting this comment for the sole purpose of pushing these comments over 50, I'll say that just the threat of someone grabbing for my Jeffsticles with anything other than a loving look in there eyes would compel me to start swinging.
Ack!
there eyes=their eyes
I did not do the "their" misuse just to be able to do another comment, btw, so stop 'cusing me.
Far from using this as an excuse to bump up the comment count by another one...JEFFSTICLES!!!
That has to be in the top 3 funniest things i have ever read on a blog.
Inspired.
What are the other two?
Yeah, I was pretty proud of that one myself.
Post a Comment