Turn on thread page Beta

Police Taser race relations group founder in the face. watch

Announcements
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Well given that they had done it before you would think they would be a little more cautious, rather than getting themselves involved in another court case.
    who's "they"? again, it's obvious that these aren't the same policemen from a decade ago - they're clearly not trying to bully random people for no reason - it's really very obvious that they're simply trying to do their job - the job that keeps us all protected and in a society of law and order. the people who protect us are human beings just like we are - I'm not saying they *should* be mistaking people's identities, I am saying that if it happens twice it's not like a miracle from the bible - it *is* possible, and the response to that possibility shouldn't, surely, be violence, right? I don't know what the response ought to be in a universal sense - are the police allowed to make mistakes provided compensation is awarded as a remedy?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Merfie)
    Because the officers had REASONABLE suspicion that he was a wanted criminal,
    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.

    (Original post by Merfie)
    he's under the duty to not act like a common hooligan,
    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.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    who's "they"? again, it's obvious that these aren't the same policemen from a decade ago - they're clearly not trying to bully random people for no reason - it's really very obvious that they're simply trying to do their job - the job that keeps us all protected and in a society of law and order. the people who protect us are human beings just like we are - I'm not saying they *should* be mistaking people's identities, I am saying that if it happens twice it's not like a miracle from the bible - it *is* possible, and the response to that possibility shouldn't, surely, be violence, right? I don't know what the response ought to be in a universal sense - are the police allowed to make mistakes provided compensation is awarded as a remedy?
    Do police not hold records? You would think that there would be a note on the criminal's record that they need to be cautious about who they arrest since they ****ed it up before.

    They police should be held to a higher standard since they have been entrusted with the public's protection. Everyone makes mistakes, but they should learn from those mistakes. Rather than costing the taxpayer more because of their continued **** ups.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    they're clearly not trying to bully random people for no reason
    They are not trying to bully Adunbi but I suspect they were trying to harass the man they thought Abundi was.

    It looks like he was a known drug dealer and I guess the police do a stop and search on him every time they see him. The problem is that the police will not have grounds to arrest him unless he fails to co-operate with the search or the search turns up some drugs. If they didn't have grounds to arrest the other man at the point they tried to arrest Abundi, it doesn't matter if their suspicion that Abundi was the other man, was a reasonable one.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Charges dropped, innocent man.
    Cba shifting through all the posts but

    Are you saying he didn't resist arrest or didn't commit a crime worthy of arrest?

    Because even if you're innocent you can't start messing with the police
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 1010marina)
    Cba shifting through all the posts but

    Are you saying he didn't resist arrest or didn't commit a crime worthy of arrest?

    Because even if you're innocent you can't start messing with the police
    He didn't resist arrest, he defended himself. He in fact committed no crimes at all.

    If you are innocent the police shouldn't be messing with you. But they will be learning that one again when this gets taken to court.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Do police not hold records? You would think that there would be a note on the criminal's record that they need to be cautious about who they arrest since they ****ed it up before.

    They police should be held to a higher standard since they have been entrusted with the public's protection. Everyone makes mistakes, but they should learn from those mistakes. Rather than costing the taxpayer more because of their continued **** ups.
    I completely agree - they obviously did make a mistake, and it's really surprising that this even happened twice - but, like I've suggested, I honestly don't see violence against the police, even if they're mistaken, as viable as a rule of justice, because it could essentially negate it
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    I completely agree - they obviously did make a mistake, and it's really surprising that this even happened twice - but, like I've suggested, I honestly don't see violence against the police, even if they're mistaken, as viable as a rule of justice, because it could essentially negate it
    I'm not sure pushing someone off you constitutes violence. He was certainly aggressive but not violent.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Palmyra)
    Why not? :sly:
    LOL
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    He didn't resist arrest, he defended himself. He in fact committed no crimes at all.

    If you are innocent the police shouldn't be messing with you. But they will be learning that one again when this gets taken to court.
    If you are innocent the police shouldn't be messing with you.

    So using your logic, the police should only mess with guilty people.

    As most police officers are not psychic do you not think that only messing with guilty people would not severely hamper their ability to deal with suspected criminals?
    Offline

    17
    (Original post by joe cooley)
    If you are innocent the police shouldn't be messing with you.

    So using your logic, the police should only mess with guilty people.

    As most police officers are not psychic do you not think that only messing with guilty people would not severely hamper their ability to deal with suspected criminals?
    I'm sure you've read the thread and seen the full video and understand the situation so why are you still adamant in arguing this?
    There's not much point because nearly everyone has accepted this whole incident was a **** up on the part of the police.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    Can't be many old black rastas in Bristol.
    You've never been to Easton then.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StrawbAri)
    I'm sure you've read the thread and seen the full video and understand the situation so why are you still adamant in arguing this?
    There's not much point because nearly everyone has accepted this whole incident was a **** up on the part of the police.
    I commented directly upon the nonsense statement that:

    If you are innocent the police shouldn't be messing with you.

    You do not agree that it is a nonsense statement?

    ............

    As stated before, anyone innocent or guilty resisting arrest is an idiot.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    To all those criticising the police here, what do you think they should have done?

    Obviously they should not have misidentified the bloke, but after that mistake was made what were they to do?

    "I'm not telling you my name!"
    "Oh, all right, carry on then."

    Should they just have left him when he walked away and shut the gate on them?

    The news reports say they tried to arrest him as he walked into his garden. This part seems to be cut from the video. If that's true (the bodycams will show), then surely he was resisting arrest?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chazwomaq)
    To all those criticising the police here, what do you think they should have done?

    Obviously they should not have misidentified the bloke, but after that mistake was made what were they to do?

    "I'm not telling you my name!"
    "Oh, all right, carry on then."

    Should they just have left him when he walked away and shut the gate on them?

    The news reports say they tried to arrest him as he walked into his garden. This part seems to be cut from the video. If that's true (the bodycams will show), then surely he was resisting arrest?
    I am afraid you are looking at it the wrong way.

    When they initially asked whether he was the other bloke, Abundi denied it. Either that was a lie or it was true. If the police thought it was a lie, what grounds did they have to arrest the other man? If they thought the answer was true what grounds did they have to arrest the unknown (to them) man? Obviously none. They then asked the unknown man his name. He refused to give it. What grounds did they now have to arrest this unknown man. What crime did they have reasonable belief that he had committed? Obviously none.

    The lawfulness of Abundi's arrest always comes back to whether they were justified in arresting the man they thought it was.
    Offline

    17
    (Original post by chazwomaq)
    To all those criticising the police here, what do you think they should have done?

    Obviously they should not have misidentified the bloke, but after that mistake was made what were they to do?

    "I'm not telling you my name!"
    "Oh, all right, carry on then."

    Should they just have left him when he walked away and shut the gate on them?

    The news reports say they tried to arrest him as he walked into his garden. This part seems to be cut from the video. If that's true (the bodycams will show), then surely he was resisting arrest?
    What the police should/shouldn't have done:

    1. Before leaving to search for a criminal wanted since 2009, they should have been properly briefed about the incident that took place that year, which was the accidental arrest due to mistaken identity of Mr Adunbi. ( He was mistaken for the same man again)
    2. The policewoman handling the taser gave no warning of her use of the taser that the person could realistically respond to.
    3. She did not take proper aim
    4. They should have approached the man in a non antagonistic and aggressive way as Mr Adunbi said himself that if they came up to him calmly and asked questions he would have responded better. He only became annoyed and tried to go back into his home because of the accusatory manner in which they were treating him which is within his rights given his past experience.

    It's incompetent policing especially No. 1, 2 and 3. It was a perfectly avoidable situation and now when Mr Adunbi gets his justice (again) it will cost the taxpayer.

    If you watch the full video which I will link below, you will see that he was not arrested till they had tasered him.

    (Original post by joe cooley)
    I commented directly upon the nonsense statement that:

    If you are innocent the police shouldn't be messing with you.

    You do not agree that it is a nonsense statement?

    ............

    As stated before, anyone innocent or guilty resisting arrest is an idiot.
    But he wasn't under arrest till the after they tasered him. When you analyse this video, you will see that he was trying to get back into his garden and the only remotely "violent" action he carried out was pushing the male police officer off him. They had not told him he was under arrest prior to tasering him so he acted within his rights.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    It's disgusting. There are more psychopaths in the police than any other profession
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StrawbAri)
    What the police should/shouldn't have done:

    1. Before leaving to search for a criminal wanted since 2009, they should have been properly briefed about the incident that took place that year, which was the accidental arrest due to mistaken identity of Mr Adunbi.
    I am sorry but this is wholly misleading. This wasn't an operation to arrest a long wanted criminal. This was a regular patrol which has come across a man they believe to be a known drug dealer.

    Either this man was wanted or they wished to stop and search him in the hope that he was carrying something. My guess, but it is only a guess, is that it was the latter.
    Offline

    17
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    I am sorry but this is wholly misleading. This wasn't an operation to arrest a long wanted criminal. This was a regular patrol which has come across a man they believe to be a known drug dealer.

    Either this man was wanted or they wished to stop and search him in the hope that he was carrying something. My guess, but it is only a guess, is that it was the latter.
    The BBC article (or any article I've read) wasn't very specific about the situation and only stated he was mistaken for the same man in 2009 so it is easy to assume this is someone the police have been looking for for a while.
    Also in an earlier post of yours, you implied that this is just what you suspect.
    Either way, the police clearly have records of what happened in 2009. There must be records showing Mr Adunbi is not in fact the actual drug dealer/criminal?
    How many more times will they have to harass Mr Adunbi before they realise he may not be the actual criminal?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by james813)
    It's disgusting. There are more psychopaths in the police than any other profession
    SJW juvenile nonsense.

    Unless of course you can provide evidence to back up such a stupid claim?

    LOL,as if.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
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
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

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

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