Labour MP's Aid To Sue Met Police

[DrFilth]

cctv cameras get them off the false charge and show up the police lies



http://news.sky.com/h...news/article/16148794

[Gromit]

It is getting to the point where there are no incentives anymore in joining the police.

Once upin a time, once you had gained your blue uniform it gave you license to beat up any student, miner, homosexualist or black person without fear of retribution.

Now those spoilsports with their camera phones, and cctv and YoTube have taken all the fun out of modern policing.

None of this happened in the 1950s before this new fangled gadgetry.

[elgreco]

Looks like two blokes getting arrested who don't want to be arrested. No sign of them being CS gassed or use of a baton. No-one can comment about the reasons for the arrests unless they were at the scene. I really dont see how the video gets them off 'false charges' and show up 'police lies'.

[flip_flop]

Contrary to what some people seem to think, the police do not go around indiscriminately beating up people they take a dislike to.

What I saw from the video, without the benefit of knowing what was said of course, is a policeman approach one man and the man push the policeman away, and then another man interfering in the restraint of the first man, resulting in him being restrained by a second policeman.

There is nothing on the video which appears wrong.

[Gromit]

Flip_flop

The prosecution against this MPs researcher collapsed because the Police Officers notebooks and version of events did not match what was revealed on the CCTV. In particular, the PCs said these men charged at them which is why they were arrested. No such thing took place, and their story was lies.

I can only assume the film only surfaced after the CPS had taken this to court. Once the film was shown in court and totally contradicted the Police version of events, the two men were aquitted on instruction of the Judge.

That alone gives them ground to Sue, and a good probability they will win compensation.

http://www.huffington...-bryce_n_1201616.html

[DrFilth]

>> and then another man interfering in the restraint of the first man, resulting in im being restrained by a second policeman. <<

>> There is nothing on the video which appears wrong. <<

the law must be different down south , the second person is thrown against the wall then flung to the ground for just walking up to see his mate

[DrFilth]

they idea of putting up cctv is to catch the baddies at work
>
<
>
everything else is a bonus

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ko3iBWphFDQ&feature=related

[flip_flop]

Then you and I saw something different - I saw the second man interfering in the restraint of the first man.

For all the second policeman knew, the second man could have been armed.

[Gromit]

Flip_flop

Maybe you couldn't be bothered reading the HuffPost link, so here are the details...

// The police then claimed that Bryce's civil partner ran away from police up a busy street, although CCTV footage subsequently showed Ian Feis walking calmly up Bridge Street, with no other pedestrians in sight. Cameras then recorded one of the officers seizing Ian Feis and pinning him to the wall, before bringing him to the ground.

In court the officers were unable to justify why they took this course of action, and why the CCTV was unable to support their version of events.

Alex Bryce then joins his partner in the CCTV images, and is also brought to the ground. At one point in the CCTV footage one of the officers is clearly seen punching Alex Bryce in the face as he remained pinned to the floor.

The district judge presiding over the case is said to have suggested the prosecution abandon the trial. It is unclear why the CPS allowed the trial to go to court when the CCTV images so clearly contradicted statements made by the two officers. The defendants had requested the CPS release to their counsel the CCTV images before the trial. Despite this the first time the defendants were able to view the footage was on the first day of their trial.

[flip_flop]

There is obviously more to this than meets the eye.

Perhaps I view our police through rose tinted specs (I don't think I do) but I just don't buy the notion that two coppers would pick-on a couple of blokes just for the sheer hell of it.

There must have been something happening to warrant the restraint of the two men concerned.

[DrFilth]

i think that they get used to making things up as they go along and this shows up when they write their reports
>
<
here is an example of the police making the law up as he speaks to a photographer
>
<
>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsEr2m-84fg

[Messi_Ten]

Yep...put an idiot in a uniform and that's what you get!