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

Police Taser race relations group founder in the face. Watch

Announcements
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    That video clearly shows Adunbe being uncooperative, obstructive and aggressive with two police officers who are calmly and reasonably asking him to provide ID, and explaining the reason for requesting this.
    Perhaps the taser was premature or excessive, but that does not change the dynamics of the incident. It was escalated from a simple ID confirmation to a violent confrontation by Adunbe, not by the police.

    Police (calmly): "How do I know that you're not Mr X"
    Adunbe (shouty): "Because you don't know who the **** you're talking to!"

    Duh, no **** Sherlock! So why don't you tell him who he's talking to, soft lad? After all, that is the only thing that they asked you.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    The guy filming it is so annoying.
    Oi, that was totally unnecessary.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    That video clearly shows Adunbe being uncooperative, obstructive and aggressive with two police officers who are calmly and reasonably asking him to provide ID, and explaining the reason for requesting this.
    Perhaps the taser was premature of excessive, but that does not change the dynamics of the incident. It was escalated from a simple ID confirmation to a violent confrontation by Adunbe, not by the police.

    Police (calmly): "How do I know that you're not Mr X"
    Adunbe (shouty): "Because you don't know who the **** you're talking to!"

    Duh, no **** Sherlock! So why don't you tell him who he's talking to, soft lad? After all, that is the only thing that they asked you.
    He never touched the police until they grabbed when he was entering he property. They were the first to get physical.

    Do you constitute pushing someone off you as violent?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Indeed he is, but he is doing a public service in documenting poor policing.
    Demonstrating obstructive and aggressive behaviour by a member of the public, more like.
    The only arguably "poor" part of their performance was the use of the taser. The rest was entirely reasonable and justified.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Demonstrating obstructive and aggressive behaviour by a member of the public, more like.
    The only arguably "poor" part of their performance was the use of the taser. The rest was entirely reasonable and justified.
    Must be why they dropped the charges, because of their stellar police work.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StrawbAri)
    Well what do you think should be done then?
    Incidents like this keep happening, the person keeps getting arrested mistakenly, the person keeps suing, tax payers money continues to be wasted.

    And I'm not saying they shouldn't stop people that fit the description, just that they should be informed of who mr Adunbi exactly is so anytime he's the particular one they spot they won't go to Harass him.
    It all really depends on
    1. How alike they even look
    2. How many Rastamen are there in Bristol that fit that description (Im guessing really not that many since the same person was mistaken twice)
    I doubt he'll be able to sue now over this, i'm afraid. They have clamped down on what they provide legal aid for, and rightfully so!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    They attacked him before even suggested that they were arresting him. They acted unlawfully.
    WTF? Are you deliberately trolling?
    About 2 mins before the taser, and a minute before the scuffling, the male officer said "So I have no choice then but to arrest you" (in response to Adunbi's refusal to identify himself in the context of offences being committed)

    Now get back under your bridge.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    As I have said, that is likely to be the weak point of the police's position. I suspect there will turn out to be no warrant in fact outstanding for the other man's arrest and the police officers will turn out to have no reasonable belief (belief not suspicion) that there was a warrant outstanding.
    You say it is likely to be the 'weak point' - This isn't the case at all. If the officers state and can justify (which they no doubt will) that they had reasonable belief that the gentleman was wanted, no one can really dispute that. If anything, this suspicion formed the basis of the questioning of the gentleman - Whether he was the 'right' man or not is of no consequence, they have lawful duty to ascertain the facts.

    Why would the officers stop him if they did not have reasonable suspicion that he was in fact the man that they were indeed looking for? It doesn't make any sense otherwise. The police are hard-stretched as it is, they do not have the time or resources for stopping people without the belief that they have/had committed a crime.

    Belief and suspicion, in this case, are entirely the same.

    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    If the arrest is unlawful, he has every right to use reasonable force to resist it. Moreover, what is reasonable concerns the amount of force needed to successfully resist the unlawful arrest not the relative consequences of the application of force as against the consequences of being unlawfully arrested. If follows that if it reasonably necessary to use deadly force to resist an unlawful arrest, that is justifiable homicide even if the consequences of the unlawful arrest would merely be that the arrestee spends a couple of hours in police cells until the causes of the wrongful arrest are ironed out.
    If the arrest is unlawful, he has many LEGAL avenues of solution that he can follow. None which include struggling violently with officers and resisting arrest. He could for instance hire an appropriate solicitor, contact the IPCC, contact the Home Office, etc. It is not for the arrestee to decide whether their arrest is lawful or not at the time, it is for the authorities to deal with their complaints after they have been arrested.

    Never will it ever be reasonably necessary within Britain to use 'reasonable force' against any police officer, as this will result in charges for the offending party - as seen in this case.

    Oh, and I think you've been watching too many American TV shows - Justifiable homicide is no longer present within the British legal system - The closest thing to it is manslaughter, but I assure you that the killing of a police officer is tantamount to unlawful killing, and they would most certainly throw away the key.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    WTF? Are you deliberately trolling?
    About 2 mins before the taser, and a minute before the scuffling, the male officer said "So I have no choice then but to arrest you" (in response to Adunbi's refusal to identify himself in the context of offences being committed)

    Now get back under your bridge.
    Arrested for not providing a name? Wonder how that would play out in court...
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Charges dropped, innocent man.
    One does not necessarily imply the other.
    However, the police obviously are going to try and smooth this over, given all the ridiculously one-sided press over the incident.
    I mean, they don't want another round of impromptu urban remodelling and freestyle shopping - as often happens after such occasions of "racist police brutality".
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Arrested for not providing a name? Wonder how that would play out in court...
    It wouldn't go to court. He was arrested for failing to provide his name, and therefore the officers could not ascertain whether he was in fact the man they were looking for - They're hardly going to let a potential criminal get away, are they?

    Once taken back to the station and when he begins to co-operate, the officers would be able to ensure that he was not in fact a wanted man. After this, if the officers decided not to charge him for assault/resisting arrest, he would be released to go about his merry business.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Merfie)
    It wouldn't go to court. He was arrested for failing to provide his name, and therefore the officers could not ascertain whether he was in fact the man they were looking for - They're hardly going to let a potential criminal get away, are they?

    Once taken back to the station and when he begins to co-operate, the officers would be able to ensure that he was not in fact a wanted man. After this, if the officers decided not to charge him for assault/resisting arrest, he would be released to go about his merry business.
    Well that didn't out for them the last time they lost the wrongful arrest case.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    One does not necessarily imply the other.
    However, the police obviously are going to try and smooth this over, given all the ridiculously one-sided press over the incident.
    I mean, they don't want another round of impromptu urban remodelling and freestyle shopping - as often happens after such occasions of "racist police brutality".
    Well that is what happens when you have an officer hip firing a Tazer like shes a cowboy.

    Name:  Capture.jpg
Views: 22
Size:  52.0 KB
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Yes, but he is under no duty to do so.
    He is if there is reasonable suspicion of an offence having been carried out. They had such reasonable suspicion (they thought he was Mr X, and clearly explained this to him). He aggressively refused to cooperate and forcibly attempted to avoid egaging with the police.
    Clear grounds for arrest (if not necessarily for using a taser).
    • Offline

      17
      (Original post by Merfie)
      It wouldn't go to court. He was arrested for failing to provide his name, and therefore the officers could not ascertain whether he was in fact the man they were looking for - They're hardly going to let a potential criminal get away, are they?

      Once taken back to the station and when he begins to co-operate, the officers would be able to ensure that he was not in fact a wanted man. After this, if the officers decided not to charge him for assault/resisting arrest, he would be released to go about his merry business.
      Then the next day, the same man is arrested again for being suspected of being the same wanted man, they're mistaken, he's released and the cycle goes on.
      Offline

      3
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by StrawbAri)
      Then the next day, the same man is arrested again of being suspected for being the same wanted man, they're mistaken, he's released and the cycle goes on.
      I don't decide the system. However, after the fuss this idiot has kicked up I doubt his face is going to be forgotten any time soon by the Avon and Somerset constabulary.
      Offline

      3
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Willy Pete)
      Well that is what happens when you have an officer hip firing a Tazer like shes a cowboy.

      Name:  Capture.jpg
Views: 22
Size:  52.0 KB
      She hit the target. It can be argued that if she was trained/is comfortable firing from that position, and hits the target, then they'res nothing to complain about.
      Offline

      3
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Merfie)
      I don't decide the system. However, after the fuss this idiot has kicked up I doubt his face is going to be forgotten any time soon by the Avon and Somerset constabulary.
      They shouldn't have forgotten the last time he took them to court. They obviously don't learn from their mistakes.
      Offline

      21
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Merfie)

      Oh, and I think you've been watching too many American TV shows - Justifiable homicide is no longer present within the British legal system - The closest thing to it is manslaughter, but I assure you that the killing of a police officer is tantamount to unlawful killing, and they would most certainly throw away the key.
      Well actually I have been practising law for 30 years this year and whilst the term justifiable homicide has been updated (it is now lawful killing) it certainly does remain in place in English law and is not by any means the equivalent of manslaughter.

      If you want an example of the lawful killing of a police officer by a member of the public, see the example of Kenneth Noye who was found not guilty on the grounds of self-defence of the killing of DC John Fordham who was hiding in the bushes of Noye's home conducting surveillance on him. Noye was 10 years later himself convicted of an unrelated murder and remains in prison.
      Offline

      3
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Merfie)
      She hit the target. It can be argued that if she was trained/is comfortable firing from that position, and hits the target, then they'res nothing to complain about.
      You should never discharge a firearm without aiming. She is incompetent in the extreme.
     
     
     
    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: February 2, 2017
  1. 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.

  2. Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
  3. 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.

  4. 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.