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:
    (Original post by anti-duck)
    *******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.

    so naive
    and yeh, he aimed to hurt, but not to cause serious injury

    (Original post by DaveSmith99)
    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.
    so you honestly believe a cop just saw a guy in a wheel chair and just went "HA look at that guy, he cant walk LOL! lets beat him up for ****s and giggles"?

    you never know, he coule have insulted the cops mother
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by f00ddude)
    so you honestly believe a cop just saw a guy in a wheel chair and just went "HA look at that guy, he cant walk LOL! lets beat him up for ****s and giggles"?

    you never know, he coule have insulted the cops mother
    So you honestly believe that the disabled protester could have posed a threat big enough to justify the cops actions?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaveSmith99)
    So you honestly believe that the disabled protester could have posed a threat big enough to justify the cops actions?
    yes
    your view on disabled people is quite shocking really, just because hes disabled it means he is incabable of causing any threat what so ever?
    im guessing it was a simple matter of him getting in the way preventing police, or maybe in the path of danger, so they simply carried him away, admittedly not in the best fashion but still doesnt warrent this amount of hate
    as you can see in the video, there is no real violence and he is moved to the side of the road for all we know it could have been for his own protection
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by f00ddude)
    so you honestly believe a cop just saw a guy in a wheel chair and just went "HA look at that guy, he cant walk LOL! lets beat him up for ****s and giggles"?
    It seems you are the naive one.

    (Original post by f00ddude)
    there is no real violence
    What part of being pushed out of his wheelchair, and dragged along the floor to the side of the road does not constitute violence? If I did that to someone I'd be done for assault.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince Rupert)
    Why couldn't you stay on your planned route then? Someone please answer this ffs
    what kind of an anul question is that?

    the point of a protest is to cause maximum disruption or else do it on TSr or facebook. This way it will constitute the best type of protest that will meet with police approval.

    BTW: are you a troll?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by f00ddude)
    yes
    your view on disabled people is quite shocking really, just because hes disabled it means he is incabable of causing any threat what so ever?
    im guessing it was a simple matter of him getting in the way preventing police, or maybe in the path of danger, so they simply carried him away, admittedly not in the best fashion but still doesnt warrent this amount of hate
    as you can see in the video, there is no real violence and he is moved to the side of the road for all we know it could have been for his own protection
    Hoe exactly could be be a threat to the police? The nature of his disability means that it would be very difficult for him to be a threat serious enough to warrant what the police did.

    Moved to the side of the road would be pushing him in his chair to the side of the road, not tipping him out of it and dragging him away with quite some force :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I am so shocked that anyone could be in support of this. What the hell were the officers meant to do? clamp him? He was giving them abuse and if it was someone standing they would have floored them and arrested them so just because hes got cerebal pausey he shouldn't be treated differently. If its such a threat then WHY THE **** DID HE GET INVOLVED?????

    I agree with some of the agression shown at the riots but you can't go round smashing things up and hurling abuse at officers without consequences. I personaly think people need to stop pussy-footing around disabled matters and get the hell on with it equal rights and what not. Can't fight for equality in the work place but expect to be treated differently in other situations
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I wonder if the police were scared he was going to do this;

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hollyone)
    what kind of an anul question is that?

    the point of a protest is to cause maximum disruption or else do it on TSr or facebook. This way it will constitute the best type of protest that will meet with police approval.

    BTW: are you a troll?
    Right, so you admit the intention of these 'protests' is is to deviate off planned routes? That's ILLEGAL I'm afraid. The police are entitled to control illegal activity in ANY and EVERY method they see fit, kettling is just one of them. The end

    I'm a tax payer btw, I get up everyday to pay taxes so students can get pissed every night and whinge over tuition fees

    Come back when you know what a job and taxes actually are, maybe then you'll understand why the pubic have no sympathy for this protest
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by badger-man)
    The purpose of kettling is to restrict movement and prevent further damage to property. I don't know why but some people don't like their shops and offices being trashed :rolleyes: The police therefore kettle protesters in areas where they can't cause as much damage and hope to keep them contained until most of them are tired and want to go home.
    The police have to make a decision between kettling or more traditional riot control methods. So far they have opted for kettling but I've heard rumours that they're preparing to use tear gas if there are any more violent protests. The police are actually quite liberal. In most European countries the police would have started using water canons and bean bag shotguns the moment it got violent.
    *******s. The police will not use tear gas or a water canon in the narrow streets in and around oxford street etc. Protesters are already getting wise to police tactics and breaking into small groups. If tear gas etc was used in those enviroments they'd affect shoppers more than protesters, and the water canon would smash shop windows etc. Its not an option. Rightly or wrongly kettling flares up the situation. The protests will end if either the government or the protesters back down, kettling will not stop anything, only raise the stakes.

    The police are only liberal compared to Columbia etc.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince Rupert)
    Right, so you admit the intention of these 'protests' is is to deviate off planned routes? That's ILLEGAL I'm afraid. The police are entitled to control illegal activity in ANY and EVERY method they see fit, kettling is just one of them. The end

    I'm a tax payer btw, I get up everyday to pay taxes so students can get pissed every night and whinge over tuition fees

    Come back when you know what a job and taxes actually are, maybe then you'll understand why the pubic have no sympathy for this protest
    you work 7 days a week? Students get drunk every night - even the teetotalers? I also believe that rather than just whinging about fees there are people actully doing something about it - protesting, occupying, writing letters to MPs etc.

    Calm your reactionary self.
    Offline

    14
    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.
    The interviewer did seem to come off as a bit of a *******. When he was suggesting that the guy was throwing missiles I thought wtf? Here is a guy whose condition is quite observable. Now I know jack about Cerebral Palsy bar it effects the movement of the muscles, but judging by what he was like in the interview, I seriously doubt whether or not he is able to throw anything of a significant threat to justify what was done to him. I felt he perhaps wasnt in complete understanding of the reforms but I thought he made a particularly excellant point on Alfie Meadows and the reaction of the media and how they would have reacted if it was a policeman. I also thought he did well to counter the interviewers attempts to discredit what he was saying by bringing up that whole revolutionary thing.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by badtothebone)
    Protesters are already getting wise to police tactics and breaking into small groups.
    No they're not. A few small groups broke off but the majority stuck together, making them an easy target.

    (Original post by badtothebone)
    If tear gas etc was used in those enviroments they'd affect shoppers more than protesters, and the water canon would smash shop windows etc.
    They obviously assess the situation before using controlling tactics. It will be used to stop violent protestors, not crowd control so they will therefore be targeting select groups not a whole area.

    (Original post by badtothebone)
    The police are only liberal compared to Columbia etc.
    You clearly haven't seen how a lot of other countries, such as France and Germany, control public disorder.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Installation)
    It's called equal treatment, finally the disabled have achieved it.
    This has nothing to do with equal treatment. The police are meant to use appropriate and proportional force. Why was it necessary to remove this man from his wheelchair and drag him along the ground when he did not seem to present a threat to the police?

    Totally nonsensical.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Some protesters had metal poles and were trying to hit police with them and throwing lumps of concrete. In a situation like that if the officer feels threatened it would likely been seen as reasonable.

    The fact is we do not know what happened so we are just going to have to wait to see what the boy/officer/ipcc all say until we can speculate.
    If the videos showing unprovoked police violence did not exist, the police would claim that they were trying to help the injured people and then the crowd attacked them. See Tomlinson cover up. Even the IPCC covered it up. Lies, lies, lies.

    In this case, the man in the wheelchair was not physically able to push his own wheelchair. Do you really think he was throwing things at the police?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JordE)
    Its also interesting that if you look closely at the footage you see another police officer step in and literally drag the offending officer away by his jacket, using some force.
    Yep. Even the policeman's colleague has to drag him away. He probably noticed people filming the events.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rant)
    Seriously? People are defending the police? Sheltered little fools, go to a protest and see what happens for yourselves.

    As for the BBC interviewer, well, what can you expect from propaganda peddlers?
    This.

    Before I went to the 9/12 demo, I never understood why people felt hostile towards the police, why people called the pigs or murderers. I respected police and thought they were there to do a job and protect people from crime.

    After seeing how they behaved at the protest, I was very shocked to see that the role the police took on was to quell public demonstration against government through whatever force necessary.

    Watching how the police behaved has totally changed my feelings towards the police. I was very ignorant and sheltered until I saw how they behave. It was an eye opener and it is no exaggeration to call them uniformed thugs.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fuzzel)
    I don't think anyone is suggesting that it was reasonable force, it was blatantly excessive force. But it's also unfair to call it attempted murder, I mean, if he'd really wanted to kill him then he could have hit him again. If the student had died, then the police officer would have been way more likely to be charged with manslaughter than murder.
    Nah, the police and IPCC would pretend that Meadows was injured by a protester, the pathologist would be crooked and then later a video showing Meadows being beaten by police would emerge and history would repeat itself. Oh and the policeman gets away with a slap on the wrist
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by No Future)
    If the videos showing unprovoked police violence did not exist, the police would claim that they were trying to help the injured people and then the crowd attacked them. See Tomlinson cover up. Even the IPCC covered it up. Lies, lies, lies.

    In this case, the man in the wheelchair was not physically able to push his own wheelchair. Do you really think he was throwing things at the police?
    I know he was not throwing things at police however he was directing people to attack police lines.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    I know he was not throwing things at police however he was directing people to attack police lines.
    Then why drag him from wheelchair, why not just wheel him away from the crowd?
 
 
 
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
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    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.