Police officer faces sack after ramming moped thief Watch

username4454836
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#61
Report 2 months ago
#61
(Original post by Andrew97)
In a court of law, this is not a court of law.
The officers still hit an innocent person in the eyes of the law.
0
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#62
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#62
(Original post by Decahedron)
The officers still hit an innocent person in the eyes of the law.
They hit eachother. The moped could have stopped. The officer believed the suspect was guilty at the time. That’s enough to stop them.
Last edited by Andrew97; 2 months ago
0
reply
jameswhughes
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#63
Report 2 months ago
#63
(Original post by Decahedron)
This is not about what is in the public interest, it is a matter of ensuring police procedure is followed correctly to ensure innocent people don't get hurt. The IOPC has a duty to ensure police standards are maintained and investigated where necessary.

It is for the CPS to decide whether it is in the public's interest to prosecute.

The 17 year old that got hit broke his leg, he was not charged or even arrested. So the officer hit an innocent person.

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/new...ffic-box-moped
Who gives a toss? If you’re on your way to commit a murder, and you end up under a police car first then it’s your own stupid fault.
0
reply
username4454836
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#64
Report 2 months ago
#64
(Original post by jameswhughes)
Who gives a toss? If you’re on your way to commit a murder, and you end up under a police car first then it’s your own stupid fault.
Would you prefer it if the police were free to do what ever they like to whom they like without fear of repercussions?

Have you ever heard of reasonable force?
1
reply
username2923348
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#65
Report 2 months ago
#65
(Original post by Decahedron)
Would you prefer it if the police were free to do what ever they like to whom they like without fear of repercussions?

Have you ever heard of reasonable force?
Nothing we do is without repercussion, every time we use force we have to justify it, every time we ram a car it has to be justified, every time we pull out CS it has to be justified. Just because it isn't justified to the public, doesn't mean it isn't in the background.

Reasonable force is an ambiguous term. Reasonable force is any force that is used to prevent/stop the crime without causing unnecessary injury. In the case of hitting people on mopeds, well that is the only force that can be taken to stop them with a car, so it comes under "reasonable"
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#66
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#66
Name:  EF16FAB2-DDCC-4A18-BB00-A007398FECB9.jpeg
Views: 15
Size:  53.2 KB

I’d have these attached to the wheels of police cars. Boudicca defeated the entire Roman army using these, Coventry’s finest therefore should easily be able to defeat a couple of stolen yobbos in a stolen Corsa
0
reply
theunknownx
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#67
Report 2 months ago
#67
it is the guy on the moped fault if he stopped for police then the officer would not face the sack
1
reply
username4454836
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#68
Report 2 months ago
#68
(Original post by TheRealSquiddy)
Nothing we do is without repercussion, every time we use force we have to justify it, every time we ram a car it has to be justified, every time we pull out CS it has to be justified. Just because it isn't justified to the public, doesn't mean it isn't in the background.

Reasonable force is an ambiguous term. Reasonable force is any force that is used to prevent/stop the crime without causing unnecessary injury. In the case of hitting people on mopeds, well that is the only force that can be taken to stop them with a car, so it comes under "reasonable"
I'm not saying there isn't repercussion I was asking the poster if that is what they would prefer. The IOPC is proof that there can be repercussions, although very rarely.
0
reply
jameswhughes
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#69
Report 2 months ago
#69
(Original post by Decahedron)
Would you prefer it if the police were free to do what ever they like to whom they like without fear of repercussions?

Have you ever heard of reasonable force?
I’d like the police be able to stop criminals without fear of repercussions.

Is knocking someone off a bike if they’re going to kill someone unreasonable force?
0
reply
username4454836
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#70
Report 2 months ago
#70
(Original post by Andrew97)
I’d have these attached to the wheels of police cars. Boudicca defeated the entire Roman army using these, Coventry’s finest therefore should easily be able to defeat a couple of stolen yobbos in a stolen Corsa
Boudica failed to defeat the Romans... :facepalm2:
0
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#71
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#71
(Original post by Decahedron)
Boudica failed to defeat the Romans... :facepalm2:
I am aware of history. It was clearly a joke.
0
reply
username4454836
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#72
Report 2 months ago
#72
(Original post by jameswhughes)
I’d like the police be able to stop criminals without fear of repercussions.

Is knocking someone off a bike if they’re going to kill someone unreasonable force?
If there is reasonable suspicion that someone is going to murder than by all means use reasonable force. Extra judicial violence should never be encouraged.
0
reply
The RAR
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#73
Report 2 months ago
#73
(Original post by Decahedron)
If there is reasonable suspicion that someone is going to murder than by all means use reasonable force. Extra judicial violence should never be encouraged.
That's what the officer was suspecting, and the officer has every single right to arrest or detain you on suspicion of committing crimes, they don't need evidence. If you try to resist, expect the officers to use force. The moped if really innocent would have just complied with the officer and they would have let him go, but by running away he was resisting the officer's action on detaining him, hence I think ramming him was justified. Of course don't run them over.
1
reply
username4454836
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#74
Report 2 months ago
#74
(Original post by The RAR)
That's what the officer was suspecting, and the officer has every single right to arrest or detain you on suspicion of committing crimes, they don't need evidence. If you try to resist, expect the officers to use force. The moped if really innocent would have just complied with the officer and they would have let him go, but by running away he was resisting the officer's action on detaining him, hence I think ramming him was justified. Of course don't run them over.
The driver of the moped was neither arrested nor charged, seems like ramming him was utterly pointless.
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#75
Report 2 months ago
#75
(Original post by jameswhughes)
I’d like the police be able to stop criminals without fear of repercussions.

Is knocking someone off a bike if they’re going to kill someone unreasonable force?
If the police have a genuine reasonable belief that someone driving a moped is about to commit murder then of course not. But that's an extreme example and you're playing a very dangerous game if you start arguing the police should be able to use potentially lethal and unlimited force the second they think someone may be about to commit any crime.

Fortunately in this country, unlike in America, the police don't tend to go in all guns blazing and seek to handle situations responsibly and proportionately.
1
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#76
Report 2 months ago
#76
A pat on the back with a ploddie car perhaps?
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#77
Report 2 months ago
#77
He said: 'They were being driven at such a speed that the collision caused the rider, Mr G, to come off the moped and the moped to be considerably damaged.
Is the moped beyond repair?
0
reply
iodo345
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#78
Report 2 months ago
#78
I wouldn't exactly care if they ended up getting severly injured for being rammed off their moped tbh just one less yob off the streets. They wouldn't care to injure anyone else so who cares about them?
2
reply
jameswhughes
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#79
Report 2 months ago
#79
(Original post by DSilva)
If the police have a genuine reasonable belief that someone driving a moped is about to commit murder then of course not. But that's an extreme example and you're playing a very dangerous game if you start arguing the police should be able to use potentially lethal and unlimited force the second they think someone may be about to commit any crime.

Fortunately in this country, unlike in America, the police don't tend to go in all guns blazing and seek to handle situations responsibly and proportionately.
It’s not that extreme. If someone’s on a moped with a knife there’s a high chance they’ll use it. These people would absolutely deserve to be shot dead in the street too if that was required to stop them.
0
reply
TheStupidMoon
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#80
Report 2 months ago
#80
These are scooters they're riding around on. Mopeds can only go just under 30mph.

(Original post by jameswhughes)
It’s not that extreme. If someone’s on a moped with a knife there’s a high chance they’ll use it. These people would absolutely deserve to be shot dead in the street too if that was required to stop them.
What happens if it's bear grylls and he's rushing to his next campsite?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Are you tempted to change your firm university choice on A-level results day?

Yes, I'll try and go to a uni higher up the league tables (161)
17.54%
Yes, there is a uni that I prefer and I'll fit in better (81)
8.82%
No I am happy with my course choice (546)
59.48%
I'm using Clearing when I have my exam results (130)
14.16%

Watched Threads

View All