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

Police Taser race relations group founder in the face. Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Charges dropped, innocent man.
    because of the context of wrongful arrest, yes. because it wouldn't make sense to be charged for resisting arrest for a crime no committed, like I said. I never said he deserved charged, I DID say that he deserved to be downed though if he wasn't complying with police officers who are merely doing their job, not trying to jail him unfairly. it's up to court, not a spectator to determine guilt and innocence, and rightfully, he WAS found innocent.
    but that's not to JUSTIFY him resisting arrest in this kind of way
    if you resist arrest in THAT kind of stupid way, you are absolutely begging for it. if you do that, it's only going to make the police suspicious, clearly.
    let's compare this to crimes I think shouldn't be crimes - possession. if the police THINK you possess drugs and they tell you "open your pockets" - even if I think it is wrong, I will have to let them and then challenge them later, i.e. by filming the incident.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    not if they think you're breaking the law or have broken the law, or else how on earth are they ever going to catch potential criminals? I'm not *encouraging* policemen going into people's homes - it's the precedent I'm talking about - you cannot just say the police can't enter your home given the fact that they think you're breaking the law. all these things can be held to account by a court of law - and that's EXACTLY what happened here, wasn't it? so why did he resist arrest (because he obviously did, they probably just dropped the charges) - it would be a matter of obvious equity to not charge you for resisting WRONGFUL arrest.
    Probably because they had done this to him before and he was fed up of being wrongfully arrested for another case of mistaken identity for the same guy as before.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Probably because they had done this to him before and he was fed up of being wrongfully arrested for another case of mistaken identity for the same guy as before.
    why would you suppose that?
    because of your possibly stereotypical view of "racist police"?
    and if they thought it was him before, why wouldn't they have arrested him *then*? or attempted to do so? if they did this before, they'd have had materials to suggest that he was either the man they thought or not, so it's far more reasonable to suppose that this wasn't the second time

    also, can we talk about the fact that police can and are allowed to be reasonably mistaken? like I said earlier?
    if you looked identical to a known criminal and the police thought "this man looks like the suspect - we ought to arrest him to make sure it is or isn't" - is that REALLY so unreasonable? again, this is why you can't just become your own legal vigilante - you can't just side step the legal process - you must comply because everybody else must.
    so if you give the police more and more reasons to suspect that you ARE this criminal that you are not (i.e. refusing to give your identity that will help them prove your innocence in that case), it is unreasonable to resist arrest, right?!
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by l'etranger)
    Is matching the description of a suspect and refusing to give his name grounds for arrest? (I'm asking this is good faith.)
    Yes, if the police reasonably believed Mr X was wanted and they reasonable believed Adunbi was Mr X.

    However, when the full details come out, I suspect we will find that there was no warrant outstanding for Mr X's arrest and the two police officers did not believe there was. I suspect we will find that the police simply give Mr X some grief every time they come across him because they believe him to be a drug dealer. No doubt Mr Adunbi bears some resemblance to Mr X.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    why would you suppose that?
    because of your possibly stereotypical view of "racist police"?
    and if they thought it was him before, why wouldn't they have arrested him *then*? or attempted to do so? if they did this before, they'd have had materials to suggest that he was either the man they thought or not, so it's far more reasonable to suppose that this wasn't the second time

    also, can we talk about the fact that police can be mistaken? like I said earlier?
    if you looked identical to a known criminal and the police thought "this man looks like the suspect - we ought to arrest him to make sure it is or isn't" - is that REALLY so unreasonable? again, this is why you can't just become your own legal vigilante - you can't just side step the legal process - you must comply because everybody else must.
    so if you give the police more and more reasons to suspect that you ARE this criminal that you are not (i.e. refusing to give your identity that will help them prove your innocence in that case), it is unreasonable to resist arrest, right?!
    I have already said that I don't think the police are racist so I don't know where you got that idea from.

    They did arrest him back in 2009 and he took them to court for wrongful arrest and won. READ THE ARTICLE.

    They should have been a lot more careful about arresting a suspect since they had already ****ed it up before.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Yes, if the police reasonably believed Mr X was wanted and they reasonable believed Adunbi was Mr X.

    However, when the full details come out, I suspect we will find that there was no warrant outstanding for Mr X's arrest and the two police officers did not believe there was. I suspect we will find that the police simply give Mr X some grief every time they come across him because they believe him to be a drug dealer. No doubt Mr Adunbi bears some resemblance to Mr X.
    Of course they thought he looked like him they thought that in 2009 and found themselves losing a wrongful arrest case.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    I have already said that I don't think the police are racist so I don't know where you got that idea from.

    They did arrest him back in 2009 and he took them to court for wrongful arrest and won. READ THE ARTICLE.

    They should have been a lot more careful about arresting a suspect since they had already ****ed it up before.
    that was almost a decade ago!
    they didn't "**** it up before" - it was a different crime
    you can't just brush over the fact that this man might look like a lot of other men who happen to be criminals - that could be a sad fact of reality.
    also - he was awarded compensation before in 2009 so why wouldn't he have thought he'd get MORE compensation in THIS case? again, he can't just use violence - he needs to use the legal process - he could have proven his own innocence and been compensated for it - but instead he thinks he can just side step it, like I said. that's ridiculous. even if I was wrongly arrested before and I'm wrongfully arrested again, if I resist arrest, I'll be pwn'd, so why would I? the police have the right to do it because they're the police - we give them that power because who else is going to wield it?
    again, you're talking to a libertarian here who thinks that most things ought to be legal. but this isn't to say that resisting arrest is an intelligent move or a glamorous "civilly disobedient" one - if you screw around with the police, they have rights against you like this. and if you want to tango with the people with the weapons, you are retarded even IF you are innocent.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Of course they thought he looked like him they thought that in 2009 and found themselves losing a wrongful arrest case.
    And I suspect the reason they lost in 2009 was again that they had no lawful grounds to arrest Mr X and so it was irrelevant how reasonable was their belief that Adunbi was Mr X; any arrest of Adunbi has to be unlawful.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    that was almost a decade ago!
    they didn't "**** it up before" - it was a different crime
    you can't just brush over the fact that this man might look like a lot of other men who happen to be criminals - that could be a sad fact of reality.
    also - he was awarded compensation before in 2009 so why wouldn't he have thought he'd get MORE compensation in THIS case? again, he can't just use violence - he needs to use the legal process - he could have proven his own innocence and been compensated for it - but instead he thinks he can just side step it, like I said. that's ridiculous. even if I was wrongly arrested before and I'm wrongfully arrested again, if I resist arrest, I'll be pwn'd, so why would I? the police have the right to do it because they're the police - we give them that power because who else is going to wield it?
    again, you're talking to a libertarian here who thinks that most things ought to be legal. but this isn't to say that resisting arrest is an intelligent move or a glamorous "civilly disobedient" one - if you screw around with the police, they have rights against you like this. and if you want to tango with the people with the weapons, you are retarded even IF you are innocent.
    It is the same case of mistaken identity. They ****ed it up because they went after the wrong person twice.

    Innocent until proven guilty is the rule of law, not guilty until proven innocent.

    The police don't have the right to arrest who ever they like.

    There is no reason he had to give them his name and no rule of law which forces him. Exercising your rights should not make you a target for police.

    They ****ed up and that is why they dropped the charges, why are you so keen to defend them when they know they did wrong, which is why they referred the case to the IPCC voluntarily.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Considering he's a founder of a race relations group, you'd think surely through his previous co-operation with the police he would have realised that by answering simple questions given to him by officers he would have been immediately cast from their suspicions.

    The gentleman in this video is clearly struggling with police, pushing a gate against them, shoving and resisting officers whilst they are attemping to carry out their legal and lawful duty. He initiated all phsyical contact.

    As for whether the Taser-armed officer should've deployed Taser, that's a question for the IPCC, if he chooses to make an official complaint. Officers only use Taser when they feel they are endangered, or if they have a struggling prisoner that they believe they cannot overpower and detain safely. So in that respect, as long as the PC involved can justify their use of force then this 'public outcry' is really going to amount to nothing.


    "I thought I was dying and I was think 'my children and my grandchildren need me'"

    Has anyone ever seen such an overreation? You were Tasered, not shot you fool.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I forgot to add, the gentleman was going to be arrested for A; Assaulting two police officers, B; Because the officers had REASONABLE suspicion that he was a wanted criminal, and this suspicion was reinforced when he failed to provide his name - A SIMPLE QUESTION -

    These officers acted completely within the law; whine all you want.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Merfie)
    Considering he's a founder of a race relations group, you'd think surely through his previous co-operation with the police he would have realised that by answering simple questions given to him by officers he would have been immediately cast from their suspicions.
    Yes, but he is under no duty to do so.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    It is the same case of mistaken identity. They ****ed it up because they went after the wrong person twice.
    from almost 10 years ago? what's the criminal's name? let me look this up

    Innocent until proven guilty is the rule of law, not guilty until proven innocent.
    arresting somebody isn't guilt. sentencing you is guilt. arresting somebody is to put you under assessment. if there is no evidence to prove your guilt, you are innocent. so it IS innocent until proven guilty. to simply detain and apprehend somebody isn't a judicial sentence.

    The police don't have the right to arrest who ever they like.
    they have the right only to arrest people who they reasonably believe are guilty
    just because they are wrong in their beliefs it doesn't justify trying to violate the legal process, like I said. it could be the case that you are entirely correct and the police are entirely wrong, but if you don't allow the police to at least CHECK this case, then how are you proving your innocence via violence? that is crazy. that makes no sense. "I'm so not guilty! I'll prove it by beating up the police!"

    There is no reason he had to give them his name and no rule of law which forces him. Exercising your rights should not make you a target for police.
    if they think you are the suspect, then what else can you do to prove that you are NOT said suspect? and jesus, look at the lengths you are going here to defend this man's resistance to arrest - if the police have reasons to suspect you (i.e. your uncanny resemblance to another man who is a criminal) then they have a right to be empiricists in that respect and hold you for further evidencing. this process actually allows a person to stand up to the police by getting compensation if the police are wrong. but resisting arrest is not civil and it is not a universal precedent that you can establish or else the police would never be able to arrest anybody on the grounds that no knowledge can be proven 100%

    They ****ed up and that is why they dropped the charges, why are you so keen to defend them when they know they did wrong, which is why they referred the case to the IPCC voluntarily.
    I'm not! I know they dropped the "resisting arrest" charges - because you can't be charged for resisting a wrongful charge! but AGAIN: this doesn't justify his resistance to the legal process! I am telling you: the police DID **** up. but the man was idiotic to resist arrest. the police are allowed to **** up to later compensate you. you can't just gamble like this with criminal cases - what if the man WAS the suspect?! the fact that they wrongfully held him before means that he is now able to commit any potential crimes without the law being able to stop him simply because they don't want to incur the wrath of "potentially wrongfully arresting him a second time"? get real. that would make for a terribly flawed justice system whereby anybody mistaken once can roam free to do anything they want.

    also: you're forgetting that the policemen in this case were obviously not the police of the case from 2009. so it's not like these people are just senile. there was obviously some grounds for their mistake.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    from almost 10 years ago? what's the criminal's name? let me look this up.
    Read the ****ing article.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Yes, but he is under no duty to do so.
    The point is not that he is 'under duty' the point is that as a 'revered' head of a race relations group that works closely in co-operation with the police, he would understand that co-operating with the officers would have resulted in an agreeable conclusion.

    Instead he chose to assault two officers and resist arrest - he's under the duty to not act like a common hooligan, especially considering he has considerable standing within the local community.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    answer the rest of my message too.
    also, note that I was talking about the man who WASN'T this guy who was wrongfully arrested.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Merfie)
    "I thought I was dying and I was think 'my children and my grandchildren need me'"

    Has anyone ever seen such an overreation? You were Tasered, not shot you fool.
    Just try imagining being 63 years old and having electrified barbs shot into your face.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Just try imagining being 63 years old and having electrified barbs shot into your face.
    I don't have to imagine because I'm not stupid enough to have ended up in the situation this gentleman found himself in.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    answer the rest of my message too.
    also, note that I was talking about the man who WASN'T this guy who was wrongfully arrested.
    What guy?

    They mistook him twice for the same criminal.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    What guy?

    They mistook him twice for the same criminal.
    ...the same criminal...from almost a decade ago...?
    imagine my scepticism?
 
 
 
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
  • 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
  • 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.