UK Policeman Suspended After Kneeling on Kneck of Black Man

Watch
Brutal Bee
Badges: 22
#81
Report 2 weeks ago
#81
(Original post by nathan_nacu)
but sir, how would you be stabbed when his hands are already cuffed would he use his teeth?
I- :rofl3:
4
reply
Underscore__
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#82
Report 2 weeks ago
#82
(Original post by nathan_nacu)
That’s your personal problem with your respectability politics.

This is the definition of a choke
Attachment 930802

He was very clearly choked in his neck for a short amount of time so ?
You keep using this phrase ‘respectability politics’ - what does it mean?

From the video it’s not clear to me at all that he had ‘severe difficulty breathing’
0
reply
JOSH4598
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#83
Report 2 weeks ago
#83
(Original post by nathan_nacu)
The Met Chief, who is an expert even condemned this method of restraint so what is your point?...Even the police admitted that this treatment was wrong (therefore agreeing with me) but hey, ignore the experts.
I never agreed with the use of a neck restraint. The officer quite clearly used his body weight to keep Marcus Coutain on the floor, given his violent history of assaults. The officer used his knee, likely in the spur of the moment given the threat, while Coutain was having the cuffs put on. It's obviously not an official method of restraint, thus the suspension. I said in an earlier post...
(Original post by nathan_nacu)
I don't condone kneeling on his neck - but using force by taking him to the floor is completely justified.
Restraining Coutain on the floor is justified force. Using the knee is not. But the media and yourself are so focussed on this issue of kneeling, while completely ignoring the violent history of Coutain. Keeping him pinned on the floor was more than reasonable until further resources could be diverted to assist.

My only suggestion would have been to hold him face-down on the floor as restraint techniques could be applied to his back and legs. I don't know why these officers decided to hold him on his side, given it makes it harder to apply restraint techniques. However it's a fair conclusion to draw, that if Coutain had been compliant and quietly allowed the officers to carry out their duties, there would be no need to restrain him at all.
0
reply
nathan_nacu
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#84
Report Thread starter 2 weeks ago
#84
(Original post by Underscore__)
You keep using this phrase ‘respectability politics’ - what does it mean?

From the video it’s not clear to me at all that he had ‘severe difficulty breathing’
Well i would assume kneeling on one’s neck restricts the oesophagus’ airflow

Name:  69F585BA-6677-496B-BCC0-7D13C1FC068A.jpg.jpeg
Views: 16
Size:  51.7 KB

Name:  0FF825E1-DD06-41F3-A95C-926927DE9CBC.jpg.jpeg
Views: 16
Size:  54.6 KB
0
reply
nathan_nacu
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#85
Report Thread starter 2 weeks ago
#85
(Original post by JOSH4598)
Restraining Coutain on the floor is justified force. Using the knee is not. But the media and yourself are so focussed on this issue of kneeling, while completely ignoring the violent history of Coutain. Keeping him pinned on the floor was more than reasonable until further resources could be diverted to assist.

My only suggestion would have been to hold him face-down on the floor as restraint techniques could be applied to his back and legs. I don't know why these officers decided to hold him on his side, given it makes it harder to apply restraint techniques. However it's a fair conclusion to draw, that if Coutain had been compliant and quietly allowed the officers to carry out their duties, there would be no need to restrain him at all.
Yeah, you spent a whole mini paragraph trying to give excuses. “In the spur of the moment” he made a BAD and WRONG choice and only got suspended. He’ll probably make another wrong choice and has made many others off camera. This is what is annoying, cops are allowed to make the wrong choices “in the spur of the moment” but if I did that I’d get tazed, baton wacked etc. How fair.

You repeated my point lol, it wasn’t wrong to put him to the ground. By the way you can’t use hypotheticals to justify the acts. “If Coutain had complied” is a dense argument, he didn’t and not complying isn’t an excuse. In fact, it even showed the lack of police ability to make rational decisions “in the spur of the moment” as they should be well trained to do. Not exactly the beat job of that.
0
reply
nathan_nacu
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#86
Report Thread starter 2 weeks ago
#86
(Original post by Brutal Bee)
I- :rofl3:
Everyone keeps mentioning the knife but he was in cuffs💀 the knife is not a factor at this point
0
reply
nathan_nacu
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#87
Report Thread starter 2 weeks ago
#87
(Original post by Occitanie)
Funny how those calling this ‘excessive force’ are yet to explain how a police officer should have dealt with an armed criminal.

Anyone care to explain what the officer is meant to do?
He had a knife, he is already in cuffs, therefore knife is rendered useless. The knife can then be removed. They seemed to have gotten past step 1 then somewhere otw to step 3 (removing the knife) they got lost.
0
reply
mgi
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#88
Report 2 weeks ago
#88
(Original post by Brutal Bee)
I- :rofl3:
That's far too logical a question for people who still think the man's neck and head need kneeling on! I worry about some of the posters on tsr threads; the compassion , where has it gone?
1
reply
JOSH4598
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#89
Report 2 weeks ago
#89
(Original post by nathan_nacu)
Yeah, you spent a whole mini paragraph trying to give excuses. “In the spur of the moment” he made a BAD and WRONG choice
Well here's another mini paragrpah for you. "In the spur of the moment" when dealing with a violent offender during a 14 hour shift, sometimes mistakes will be made. It's very easy to throw the officers under the bus, alike their senior management is doing in pursuit of public perception, without cutting them some slack. We could play devil's advocate and state that two officers successfully detained a violent offender and protected the public that day. Of course it wasn't the textbook restraint, hence why it's being investigated. I can assure you the officer involved likely regrets the decision, made in the spur of the moment, to place his knee on Coutain's shoulder and neck. I'm sure armed officers who shot terrorists in London in recent years acted "in the spur of the moment" knowing that the suspect in front of them has killed people and is intent on killing others. When it's a matter of protecting yourself and the wider public from an imminent threat, the 'textbook approach' may not be at the forefront of their minds.

(Original post by nathan_nacu)
... and only got suspended.
Presumably you're suggesting the officers should face criminal charges? There's no way this would reach court, given Coutain received no injuries and given the fact he was in possesion of a weapon. His defence would be so weak the case would be thrown out of court. Disciplinary action is as far as any repercussions would go, and even then I can't envisage the IOPC doing much about this.
(Original post by nathan_nacu)
By the way you can’t use hypotheticals to justify the acts. “If Coutain had complied” is a dense argument.
It wasn't a hypothetical, more a reasoned conclusion. The police don't throw people to the floor if they are compliant. People ought not to fear police so long as they are calm and compliant. It's always best to do as officers say and submit a formal complaint afterwards if necessary. Coutain was actively trying to fight police and get away, hence why he was restrained. Coutain could have avoided this altercation by complying and the officers would likely be more than amicable with him. You seem to suggest officers love rolling round on the floor with suspects, when that's far from te truth. I have no sympathy for him - if I was being approached by officers questioning me about a report they've received, I would answer their questions and allow them to deal with me. I wouldn't end up rolling around on the pavement with two police officers and the incident will be resolved much quicker. There's nothing 'dense' about that argument.
1
reply
nathan_nacu
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#90
Report Thread starter 2 weeks ago
#90
(Original post by JOSH4598)
It wasn't a hypothetical, more a reasoned conclusion. The police don't throw people to the floor if they are compliant. People ought not to fear police so long as they are calm and compliant. It's always best to do as officers say and submit a formal complaint afterwards if necessary. Coutain was actively trying to fight police and get away, hence why he was restrained. Coutain could have avoided this altercation by complying and the officers would likely be more than amicable with him. You seem to suggest officers love rolling round on the floor with suspects, when that's far from te truth. I have no sympathy for him - if I was being approached by officers questioning me about a report they've received, I would answer their questions and allow them to deal with me. I wouldn't end up rolling around on the pavement with two police officers and the incident will be resolved much quicker. There's nothing 'dense' about that argument.
Sorry but in a career like law enforcement there isn’t room for mistakes. Mistakes can cause death, mistakes can cause problems. Imagine if a plane crashed and the airline said “oh well it was a 14hr flight, we make mistakes often but most of our pilots are good” How well do you think that would go? They must do better otherwise it becomes difficult to trust them. I can’t cut them slack for doing the job they chose.
If the textbook approach which works within the law isn’t at the forefront of your mind when it should be then I question your decision making skills and ability to work under pressure as an athlete.

That’s pretty unfair, if i did that there’d be charges so long I couldn’t count them.

Police do that all the time lol. They escalate situations when people comply all the time. “People ought not to fear the police”, well they don’t give us much reason not to with actions like this.
Lmaooo you have a one track mind. You keep your sympathy, nobody wants it from people like you.
Last edited by nathan_nacu; 2 weeks ago
0
reply
Underscore__
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#91
Report 2 weeks ago
#91
(Original post by nathan_nacu)
Well i would assume kneeling on one’s neck restricts the oesophagus’ airflow

Name:  69F585BA-6677-496B-BCC0-7D13C1FC068A.jpg.jpeg
Views: 16
Size:  51.7 KB

Name:  0FF825E1-DD06-41F3-A95C-926927DE9CBC.jpg.jpeg
Views: 16
Size:  54.6 KB
Maybe it is restricting his airflow, maybe it’s just forcing him to bend his neck. It’s not immediately obvious that he’s having trouble breathing, something you would imagine he’d say.

Oh yes, that’s exactly what I’m doing; I’m saying don’t carry a deadly weapon and the likelihood of the police putting their knee on your neck for 10 seconds will be dramatically reduced. I think not carrying a knife is a pretty reasonable way to expect people to conform.
0
reply
The RAR
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#92
Report 2 weeks ago
#92
(Original post by mgi)
Why? How does that approach make sense? You do realise that the Met Police itself does not recommend the use of the neck restraint method that police officer used? So given that fact, what other information would you need?
Emphasis on the word recommend meaning the officer can still use such force if they feel their life is being threatened or the suspect is being very aggressive. For all I know the guy could have attacked the officers with a weapon and could have tried to keep attacking them even whilst being restrained on the floor.
And the officer did quickly remove his knee once the suspect appeared to calm down, so in all honestly I see nothing wrong with how the officers deal with the situation.
1
reply
mgi
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#93
Report 2 weeks ago
#93
(Original post by The RAR)
Emphasis on the word recommend meaning the officer can still use such force if they feel their life is being threatened or the suspect is being very aggressive. For all I know the guy could have attacked the officers with a weapon and could have tried to keep attacking them even whilst being restrained on the floor.
And the officer did quickly remove his knee once the suspect appeared to calm down, so in all honestly I see nothing wrong with how the officers deal with the situation.
What , while his hands were cuffed? How? with his head? his shoulders? his forehead? his hair? lool!! are you actually serious?
0
reply
The RAR
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#94
Report 2 weeks ago
#94
(Original post by mgi)
What , while his hands were cuffed? How? with his head? his shoulders? his forehead? his hair? lool!! are you actually serious?
He was still begin rather aggressive when I saw the video so....yeah? I mean I don't have any alternate propositions to how the officers could have dealt with it differently so I do not criticise them as I don't know what they were actually dealing with.
Last edited by The RAR; 2 weeks ago
1
reply
mgi
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#95
Report 2 weeks ago
#95
(Original post by The RAR)
He was still begin rather aggressive when I saw the video so....yeah? I mean I don't have any alternate propositions to how the officers could have dealt with it differently so I do not criticise them as I don't what they were actually dealing with.
You are making this up now. "rather aggressive " In what way?He has no access to a weapon. Is cuffed hands behind his back. And you seriously can"t think of anything else the officers could now do apart from kneel on his neck or head? If police officers generally think like you then there is no reason for black people to trust the police! Goodness me!
0
reply
mgi
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#96
Report 2 weeks ago
#96
(Original post by nathan_nacu)
Well i would assume kneeling on one’s neck restricts the oesophagus’ airflow

Name:  69F585BA-6677-496B-BCC0-7D13C1FC068A.jpg.jpeg
Views: 16
Size:  51.7 KB

Name:  0FF825E1-DD06-41F3-A95C-926927DE9CBC.jpg.jpeg
Views: 16
Size:  54.6 KB
Yes. Interesting. I wonder whether we could add the idea that black people must perform twice as well as everybody else to get the same or less reward? "High performance bias"?
0
reply
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#97
Report 2 weeks ago
#97
(Original post by nathan_nacu)
Not really, my point was they are still human, still eligible for basic human rights. People’s perception of that is irrelevant as it is still a fact.
It's interesting you think monsters are eligible for rights. I mean, its manifestly not true in many cases - just look at what happens to terrorists.
I think you'll find the court of public opinion holds more sway than you give it credit for. Especially as it is decidedly not 'a fact'.
0
reply
nathan_nacu
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#98
Report Thread starter 2 weeks ago
#98
(Original post by mgi)
Yes. Interesting. I wonder whether we could add the idea that black people must perform twice as well as everybody else to get the same or less reward? "High performance bias"?
Yes that would be a good addition
0
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#99
Report 2 weeks ago
#99
(Original post by nathan_nacu)
Kneeling on somebody’s neck is not ‘enforcing the law’ it’s assault. Loool you’re telling me I don’t know what it’s like ‘out there’ ? 😂😂 I grew up in Nigeria sir, you really have no idea my experiences. I have been beaten up, stolen from, had my house broken into and a litany of other things. I’ve stated this on a previous thread. Police didn’t help me very much. And you need to stop ur backwards thinking of “if u don’t break the law it won’t affect u”. A simple stop and search can escalate so far. Why are police above the law? They abuse their power and are untrustworthy.

While I appreciate you may have been through a lot, that doesn't change the fact that our police are not untrustworthy, nor do they abuse their power. It is not backwards thinking at all to say 'if you don't break the law it won't affect you.' It is correct. If you get pulled over in a car, or get stopped and searched if you cooperate fully then the police have absolutely no reason to get physical. In this case specifically they were dealing with a violent criminal who was resisting arrest. While kneeling on his neck is not the preferred method, and horrendously timed in this case, if they criminal in question had simply cooperated from the start, then this would not have happened. It's as simple as that.

Oh wow, so there are no racist police? Have u met every single police officer for that justification? Have you read the Macpherson Report, a government enquiry that outlines the Met’s institutional racism and canteen culture? They are institutionally racist, idk about weak. The police being hopeless has nothing to do with this thread. We’re talking about what they did being wrong and you’re coming here to discuss funding and irrelevant topics. Were you not the same one condemning the black lives matter movement because you generalised the whole movement by some negative acts or protests????? but when the police do something wrong you’re automatically defensive, “not all cops, my police aren’t racist”. You’re a hypocrite. Of course they don’t seem racist to you, you’re (probably) not a person of colour. You’re not exactly the typical racism victim 🙃

The Macpherson report was based off many years ago. There may have been some institutional racism in the past but there is 100% not now. There are several cases of anti-white bias, but we won't go into them too much, such as recruitment drives for BAME officers only, or BAME staff. The police, in all counties have gone head and shoulders above to try to even the balance, even if this means not at times recruiting the best person for the job.

Secondly, the BLM protests were completely hijacked by the radical left wing. That is a fact. The real message was lost, and it led to them being nothing more than a left wing publicity stunt, which has done absolutely nothing for equality, and has helped fuel division. Seeing innocent businesses burn down, looting, rioting; it's done nothing for race relations.

Thirdly, in Britain specifically statistics completely back up the fact that there is no racial bias. I've quoted statistics in another thread to another poster, and cannot be bothered to post them here, but they do show absolutely no racial bias. If anything, as admitted by a former police chief, they tend to avoid searching black teenagers so that they don't appear racist. His rhetoric, not mine. Our police aren't racist, they're just useless.
Answers in bold.
(Original post by mgi)
You said: " The thing I find so ironic about this is you literally have no clue what it's like out there. " Now how exactly would you know any such thing without meeting me? And let me remind you of a few facts, black police officers complain of racism within the police force. Black people, criminal or not, are far more likely to stopped under suspicion that white people, criminal or not! Blacks more likely to die in police custody than whites in terms of proportion.

Yet you come to the conclusion the police force is not institutionally racist? how? why? If you are clued up like you claim, then tell us when was the last time you put these views of yours to a selection of black people or black police officers then?
One black police officer. One, who posted an opinion piece.

I've had this debate with you before. White people are most likely to die in police custody in the UK. You're wrong.

Lastly, you seem to have the idea that if a black person is arrested, or if statistics show that they're more likely to be arrested it must be racist. It must be racism that has fuelled these arrests. Not the actual fact that most of the time it's a justifiable arrest. You also, as usual, fail to include any socio-economic factors. BAME, through at times no fault of their own, tend to find themselves in more economic issues. Now, while this isn't an excuse for crime, it does explain some reason for arrests.

You are going down a slippery road. You are assuming that because a black person is arrested, it is racism. Heaven forbid they actually committed a crime in the first place.

Deluded.
(Original post by Occitanie)
Funny how those calling this ‘excessive force’ are yet to explain how a police officer should have dealt with an armed criminal.

Anyone care to explain what the officer is meant to do?
They can't, because they haven't got a clue. I'm absolutely certain they think they could just simply talk a violent criminal down, or perhaps give them a cookie and a hug and everything would be fine.
0
reply
nathan_nacu
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#100
Report Thread starter 2 weeks ago
#100
(Original post by imlikeahermit)
They can't, because they haven't got a clue. I'm absolutely certain they think they could just simply talk a violent criminal down, or perhaps give them a cookie and a hug and everything would be fine.
Explain to me how all the institutional racism just got up and left 🤨 did it disappear because u asked nicely? 20 years is not a long time ago.

Police are very untrustworthy, there are plenty of videos of them planting drugs on people. Ah you see your problem, you’re applying simple logic to reality. If you fully cooperate there should be no reason for violence but sometimes the police instigate disagreements and provoke you, but the gag is you’re not allowed to be offended and react, but if u provoke them suddenly they can use all their ‘reasonable force’. There are many examples of them abusing their power, it’s your choice to convince yourself it never happens.

No such thing as positive discrimination. Did u know out of 800+ magic circle partners in London only 8 are Black? That’s 1%, now guess who makes up over 80% 🙈 so how is it anti-white when white partners make up 80x the amount of black ones and companies decide to decrease the lack of diversity? How is that anti-white when the prominence of whiteness in the workplace and lack of representation is the reason for this......... i-

The message was never lost, u chose to cherrypick the negative aspects of the movement and summarise it on this but for some reason expect everyone to ignore negative aspects of police, ironic. You can’t fuel what was already present, not all protests were violent. You see what i mean? Now if i said all cops are bad you would criticise me. I had a whole thread dedicated to this hypocrisy, lmao.

Um sorry but racial bias can’t be judged by statistics. Ever heard of Positivism and Interpretivism? U can’t easily quantify racial bias because: it is not always reported (i never reported mine for instance), how do you quantify being racially profiled? You must post these statistics to back your claim

By the way, i am *DEMANDING* all your proof and evidence and a sound logical point explaining how institutional racism is “100% gone without a trace” you cannot make claims like this. I also find it weird how white people in the UK have this obsession with telling BAME people that racism doesn’t exist when they aren’t the target victims and then proceed to try to use statistics to prove such. My life experiences can’t be statistically written sir.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
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

What are you most likely to do if you don't get the grades you were expecting?

Go through Clearing (35)
41.67%
Take autumn exams (30)
35.71%
Look for a job (2)
2.38%
Consider an apprenticeship (3)
3.57%
Take a year out (11)
13.1%
Something else (let us know in the thread!) (3)
3.57%

Watched Threads

View All