Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Tasers.

All matters involving criminal law

Re: Tasers.

Postby dls » Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

We should at least be grateful that we are not in the US. The arrestee may well have died in such an incident.

Officers do a very difficult job. There is a disconnect between the officers' awareness that once such a process starts, they really do not know where it might lead, and the innocent person whi is stopped having every reason to know that he poses no risk. Given the risks they face there is a clear conflict between a need to be in control of a situation, and the need not to throw away the goodwill toward them of the public, and to respect the individual rights of the citizen.

They lost it here. They did huge damage to the general reputation of the police.

I recall many times in practice where completely law abiding families come first into conflict with the police, where an officer's momentary weakness destroys the desire of dozens of people ever to help the police.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11494
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Tasers.

Postby diy » Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:02 am

Without derailing the thread in to what is wrong with the police thread.. I do think certain things in the last 10-15 years have made things worse. We've always had corruption, so I don't think that is the issue. In society there will always be a %age of the population who will interact with the police, perhaps 10% of which something like 5% end up in jail? When those interactions stray in to 15% or even 20%, then something is wrong. In the US for example I think they lock up 10% of the population.

Its worth remembering that as individuals its always very difficult to accept we are wrong, we can always justify our actions even if it was a cold blooded murder. Therefore if the interactions exceed more than a small minority and leave a feeling of pettiness or being wronged then it becomes a problem. Whether that is a speeding ticked for 35 in a 30, or being arrested for reacting to the pointy finger of a police officer who probably deliberately provoked it, it leaves a larger number of the population disapproving on the police. To me its purely a numbers thing.
My suggestions are not legal advice
User avatar
diy
 
Posts: 2206
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:06 pm

Re: Tasers.

Postby 3.14 » Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:05 pm

From today's news...http://news.sky.com/story/two-officers- ... l-10777515

On Wednesday it said it had served two officers with gross misconduct notices as part of its investigation.
Hide in the noise. #hackerwisdom
User avatar
3.14
 
Posts: 1964
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 2:58 pm

Re: Tasers.

Postby atticus » Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:13 pm

"It" being the IPCC.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 18063
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Tasers.

Postby Hairyloon » Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:57 pm

3.14 wrote:From today's news...http://news.sky.com/story/two-officers- ... l-10777515

On Wednesday it said it had served two officers with gross misconduct notices as part of its investigation.

I would expect most normal organisations to say "dismissed for gross misconduct", "served with gross misconduct notice" sounds to me like "not sacked".
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 8907
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Tasers.

Postby 3.14 » Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:59 pm

Hairyloon wrote:
3.14 wrote:From today's news...http://news.sky.com/story/two-officers- ... l-10777515

On Wednesday it said it had served two officers with gross misconduct notices as part of its investigation.

I would expect most normal organisations to say "dismissed for gross misconduct", "served with gross misconduct notice" sounds to me like "not sacked".

It sounds like they are investigating and are required to serve a notice in advance of dismissing them.
Hide in the noise. #hackerwisdom
User avatar
3.14
 
Posts: 1964
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 2:58 pm

Re: Tasers.

Postby atticus » Wed Feb 22, 2017 2:03 pm

The IPCC is not these officers' employer.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 18063
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Tasers.

Postby Hairyloon » Wed Feb 22, 2017 2:05 pm

Fair point. Thank you.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 8907
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Tasers.

Postby shootist » Wed Feb 22, 2017 4:18 pm

Hairyloon wrote:I would expect most normal organisations to say "dismissed for gross misconduct", "served with gross misconduct notice" sounds to me like "not sacked".


I think the organisation has this quaint idea that the case against the officers should be properly found proven in the appropriate venue and that the notice is one part of the process of getting them to that venue.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death my right to be offended by it."
User avatar
shootist
 
Posts: 2987
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Tasers.

Postby atticus » Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:35 pm

Does the IPCC have power to terminate employment?
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 18063
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

PreviousNext

Return to Crime

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest