Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Interview with the disabled protester who was pulled form his wheelchair Watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Jesus Christ, what a rebel, I can see why they had to quickly take him out... What in the world is going on in our Country?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Seeing this footage of four policemen dragging a disabled person out of a wheelchair and across the ground is really terrible. The media interview is confusing the issue here which is of complete disregard for humanity. If this footage had been ,say, in China, the media and govt would be in outrage.
    If the person had been a threat the policemen could have wheeled him away.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mann18)
    Murder includes an intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm where there is a high probability of death resulting, whereas attempted murder depends on an intention to kill, and an overt act towards the homicide. Attempted murder is only the planning of a murder and acts taken towards it, not the actual killing, which is the murder.

    So... attempted murder then.

    But it's hard to prove, he'll most likely get off on a lesser charge.
    intention is the key word, the police officer would not have intended to cause grevious harm, the weapons police carry are not designed to kill, but to deter and help protect officers, the most the police officer is likey to have expected is a concussion, therefore there was no intent to cause as much harm as there was, and avoiding any attempoted murder charge
    and in the situation of extreme violence, with rocks and stuff being chucked at police in a highly charged atmosphere + i very much doubt the guy injured was just an innocent by stander, he almost certainly provoking, and therefore means the police officer acted in self defence
    theres no way any judge would even think about pinning an attempted murder charge on this
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    just watched it on tv: 'jody should have understood the risks' and then something about if he wants to be treated equally he has to take the rough with the smooth. dragging someone out of their wheelchair is an act of idiocy. these demonstrations are turning more and more into a place where the police can relieve their anger, like we're some giant stress ball or something
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by f00ddude)
    intention is the key word, the police officer would not have intended to cause grevious harm, the weapons police carry are not designed to kill, but to deter and help protect officers, the most the police officer is likey to have expected is a concussion, therefore there was no intent to cause as much harm as there was, and avoiding any attempoted murder charge
    and in the situation of extreme violence, with rocks and stuff being chucked at police in a highly charged atmosphere + i very much doubt the guy injured was just an innocent by stander, he almost certainly provoking, and therefore means the police officer acted in self defence
    theres no way any judge would even think about pinning an attempted murder charge on this
    I completely agree, the prosecution would probably not seek to impose such a charge, especially against a police officer.

    If he's brought to court, GBH would be a possibility I assume, not attempted murder. If the man in question were to die from their injuries, manslaughter, rather than murder would be sought.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The deluded idiot shouldn't have been there.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PerigeeApogee)
    Is the interviewer a ****ing idiot?
    Yes he is an idiot.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I believe the vast majority of the police force are good intentioned and hard working people. However there is clearly a sizeable minority who do not and or cannot live up to the standards we deserve from our 'peace' officers. I hope those responsible for unjustifiably dragging this differently abled man are fired.

    Secondly regarding the BBC interview it self. What the hell?! was this really a BBC anchor or some Sky news replacement? shamefully bias and unsympathetic. I cannot believe he DARED to imply he was a threat to the police. Its sickening.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You gotta be pretty brave/stupid going to a demonstration when you're in a wheelchair, and can barely talk. Like the fella quite rightly says though, he's not the real victim this time.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Disabled protestor totally owned the news reporter.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PerigeeApogee)
    Is the interviewer a ****ing idiot?

    Firstly he asks whether Jody was 'rolling towards the police', as if to say that Jody having done so would justify the police pulling him out of his wheelchair and dragging him across the street.

    Then, when Jody describes the student who suffered internal bleeding in his BRAIN as a result of a Police truncheon and needed emergency brain surgery to keep him from dying, he interrupts and suggests that the students were DESERVING of some treatment owing to the missiles, etc, they were throwing at the police.

    Then at the end, he's continually pushing the point - asking him if he was shouting anything abusive, or provoking the police. Does the not get it? This guy could do NOTHING - NOTHING that would justify several police officers doing what they did.

    I thought this moron was supposed to be impartial? And yet here he is trying to justify the police dragging a helpless disabled man out of his chair and attempting murder (yes, I'm counting it as attempted murder) on protestors.

    I'm disgusted.
    Being impartial does not mean accepting whatever all and sundry say as gospel, however tempting it may be to do so. It means asking difficult questions to everyone, just as a prosecuting barrister would ask leading questions to a defendant who may well be innocent and who may well find such questions offensive.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by goewyn)
    Bah, don't believe that for a second. When everyone panics and there are cowards about, it's the easier targets that are turned on first.
    So disable-ist
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Installation)
    So disable-ist
    :rolleyes:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by f00ddude)
    im gunna go ahead and say, he must have been doing something
    his answer to "reports saying you were rolling towards them" was very avoidant, he has clearly spoken to a lawyer about not incriminating himself
    the fact he didnt launch a formal complaint untill now also implies it was not a simple matter of police see him police shove him off his wheel chair
    another issue being, he could have been refusing to move for vehicles or something and the cop was moving him to get him out of the way, admittedly in a very wrong fashion
    He said that he is unable to move his wheelchair himself and has to be pushed, so surely the right thing to do in that situation would be to stop the person pushing his chair from doing so? If he was refusing to move then push his wheelchair?

    It was also apparently happened twice that day, with the same officer involved in both incidents.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiwiguy)
    He is being charged with attempted murder of a police officer.
    From the BBC The man, who comes from Reading and studies at Anglia Ruskin University, in Cambridge, was questioned on suspicion of violent disorder.

    A group emerged on the roof of 30 Millbank,
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PerigeeApogee)
    Is the interviewer a ****ing idiot?

    Firstly he asks whether Jody was 'rolling towards the police', as if to say that Jody having done so would justify the police pulling him out of his wheelchair and dragging him across the street.

    Then, when Jody describes the student who suffered internal bleeding in his BRAIN as a result of a Police truncheon and needed emergency brain surgery to keep him from dying, he interrupts and suggests that the students were DESERVING of some treatment owing to the missiles, etc, they were throwing at the police.

    Then at the end, he's continually pushing the point - asking him if he was shouting anything abusive, or provoking the police. Does the not get it? This guy could do NOTHING - NOTHING that would justify several police officers doing what they did.

    I thought this moron was supposed to be impartial? And yet here he is trying to justify the police dragging a helpless disabled man out of his chair and attempting murder (yes, I'm counting it as attempted murder) on protestors.

    I'm disgusted.
    EXACTLY! I repped you

    I was under the impression that the Police could use appropriate force or equal force to the threat that is posed, this is definitely a case of excessive force.

    I completely agree with you. I was watching the video thinking 'so what if he was hurtling towards the police in his wheelchair hurling foul abusive language!? It's hardly justification for literally dragging him out of his wheelchair '

    I agree about the attempted murder part too, I think if I hit another person with enough force that I know that they could die, then that's attempted murder, sadly that's not reality. Laws such as 'assault with a deadly weapon' shouldn't even exist.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by laurie:))
    just watched it on tv: 'jody should have understood the risks' and then something about if he wants to be treated equally he has to take the rough with the smooth. dragging someone out of their wheelchair is an act of idiocy. these demonstrations are turning more and more into a place where the police can relieve their anger, like we're some giant stress ball or something
    Because the demostator don't try to take their anger out on the police or failing that buildings and hone boxes.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arekkusu)
    I'm sure the police guy didn't mean to cause such injuries; what on earth would be the point?

    It's clear that "reasonable force" is, and should be, more based on intention than on outcome.

    If you're in a fight and punch the other guy and he falls and cracks his head on the concrete and dies, it's all very sad and unfortunate, but I'm afraid that accidents happen and you should certainly not be tried as some sort of murderer.
    However your last sentence is more or less what the law states. I was there. The police were terrible.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Because the demostator don't try to take their anger out on the police or failing that buildings and hone boxes.
    The police kept saying that on the day: you knew the risks by coming to the protest. I was tempted to say so if someonecalls you saying they've been raped after walking stupidly down a dark alley way you would say the same?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by f00ddude)
    intention is the key word, the police officer would not have intended to cause grevious harm, the weapons police carry are not designed to kill, but to deter and help protect officers, the most the police officer is likey to have expected is a concussion, therefore there was no intent to cause as much harm as there was, and avoiding any attempoted murder charge
    and in the situation of extreme violence, with rocks and stuff being chucked at police in a highly charged atmosphere + i very much doubt the guy injured was just an innocent by stander, he almost certainly provoking, and therefore means the police officer acted in self defence
    theres no way any judge would even think about pinning an attempted murder charge on this
    *******s!

    The weapons that Police carry might not be designed to kill, but they're not designed to hit people over the head with either. Police are not trained to hit people over the head with batons. If it was the officers intention to hit him over the head then it was also his intention to significantly hurt him as far as I'm concerned.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 18, 2010
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.