Parliament Square Police vindicated

A

avalcalab

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 September 2006
Messages
68
Visit site
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5344516.stm

At long last justice has been done. It was a disgrace to bring charges against these officers who were doing their best to control the drunken marauding yobbo hunters outside Parliament.

Pros: you may hate the ban but please don't take out your anger on the police. If you start to see the red mist go for a long run or perform some energetic physical jerks.
 
S

severnmiles

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 November 2005
Messages
10,261
Visit site
Why were they hitting the pros on the head?

That is my question. We have two friends in the force, my sisters OH works in security and mum used to work in a secure hospital.

Never under any circumstances are you to hit (using batons) to the head area.

Those police were very unprofessional. When its football hooligans they get sprayed with water, our lot, women included were beaten.
 
C

CARREG

Well-Known Member
Joined
26 July 2004
Messages
248
Visit site
11:00 - 15 September 2006
Western Morning News photographer Richard Austin, who witnessed the chaos outside the Houses of Parliament on September 15, 2004, told of the scenes he saw on the day of the protest. Mr Austin, who was forced to hand over all the pictures he took that day by the Independent Police Complaints Commission, said: "I saw police officers lashing out at campaigners with wooden batons who were trapped at the front by the barriers. All they could do was put their arms up. Person after person was being taken away.

"Protesters at the front were being struck by those police officers - you cannot get better evidence than that.

"I thought the police were only supposed to use their batons in defence - but not at any time did I see a member of the public attack an officer."

He said the main problem was that it was difficult to identify the officers because they were wearing balaclavas.

He said: "There were missiles and orange smoke flares being thrown from the back, but there was no reason to lash out at people at the front. They were totally stuck and there was nothing they could do."


I understand that over 300 formal complaints were made against the Police.

About 40 of those complaints were from Hunt Supporters taking part in the protests.

The rest - over 200 - were from independent witnesses, passers-by, and even from horrified members of the public watching "their" Police force beating-up unarmed peaceful women live on TV.

Needless to say, charges against individual policemen have been unsuccessful due to "lack of evidence".

On the other side, there has only been one successful conviction for violence on the part of the many thousands of hunt supporters in Parliament Square - hardly a crime rate sufficient to justify the policing methods used...
 
brighteyes

brighteyes

Pooh-Bah
Joined
13 August 2006
Messages
13,032
Location
Well north of Watford
Visit site
Thing is, the police should have been battering the antis over the head for throwing the missiles from behind the hunt supporters and getting them into trouble. Typically they stayed well back and sabbed like the cowards they are.

Well, that's the only explanation I can come up with for the trouble. Might I be correct?
 
A

avalcalab

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 September 2006
Messages
68
Visit site
No, you're wrong brighteyes. Hunters attacked police in front of Parliament, the cradle of democracy, with bottles, fireworks and fists. If they had won and defeated the police, it would have been a victory for violence and intolerance. Fortunately the thugs thought better of it when they'd received a few well-aimed cracks as a last resort from the brave officers and, like all bullies, made a humiliating retreat. My main criticism of the police is that, if anything, they didn't use enough force to repel these repulsivos.
 
A

AlanE

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 January 2004
Messages
102
Visit site
Avalcab: You obviously were not there. I was, and what I saw that day has probably changed my perception of the police forever. The police lacked experienced control. They were acting , if I may use the example, like a bunch of balaclava clad yobbos such as the' hunt sab' creeps. They were wildly over-reacting because they had had tremendous pressure put on them from their political masters who were quaking in their boots in the face of the possibility of justice and right usurping their corrupt intrigues,
 
D

Doreys_Mum

Well-Known Member
Joined
9 December 2005
Messages
3,957
Visit site
What sums it up for me is that when the surrey union hunt supporters present arrived home to watch the news, they were horrified at the images of this huge riot... and NONE of them twigged this was the 'riot' they'd just come home from...

A couple of drunken louts swore at police and in return, anyone in their path was clobbered.

Long time coming if you ask me. I've never attended a london protest because of the threat of violence from the police. Seems they were too cowardly to pick on the liberty and liverlihood march... too many witnesses?
 
C

CARREG

Well-Known Member
Joined
26 July 2004
Messages
248
Visit site
".....No, you're wrong brighteyes. Hunters attacked police in front of Parliament, the cradle of democracy, with bottles, fireworks and fists. If they had won and defeated the police, it would have been a victory for violence and intolerance. Fortunately the thugs thought better of it when they'd received a few well-aimed cracks as a last resort from the brave officers and, like all bullies, made a humiliating retreat....."

LIAR..............Carreg
 
R

rosita

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 September 2005
Messages
111
Location
A Field
Visit site
Don't let him wind you up, gives him something more to get off on! Have greatly lost respect for the police after the incident. It would seem their training did not include how to deal with largely peaceful protesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top