Are Police immune from being held accountable??

[DarloRich]

You can't assume either they or the system are infallible though!

I don't. Trust me. I have a fair bit of knowledge of jury trials but still consider this system to be the best we will get. The alternative is to go to some form of "Diplock" Court which, to me, lacks the level of social normality offered by a randomly selected, representative, and lay jury of your peers.

it is odd people complain about judges being out of touch but would be happy for them to sit alone in judgement of a case that may involve you going away for a long time.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I don't. Trust me. I have a fair bit of knowledge of jury trials but still consider this system to be the best we will get. The alternative is to go to some form of "Diplock" Court which, to me, lacks the level of social normality offered by a randomly selected, representative, and lay jury of your peers.

it is odd people complain about judges being out of touch but would be happy for them to sit alone in judgement of a case that may involve you going away for a long time.

I don't imagine that the best alternative is simply the judge making their own call with no advice from the jury. However, there is the fact that at the moment that police brutality has become a major political issue (kickstarted in America, but it's spread over here). It's well-known that trials on instances that are perceived as part of a wider, controversial issue can leave jurors voting on their own political beliefs on the issue, rather than on the actual case at hand. This suggests that a better system is needed, and it doesn't mean the only alternative is not to abolish juries and let the judges do it themselves. However, the system needs to be mindful of this phenomenon.

I'm also mightily suspicious of the fact that they weren't shown all the evidence, either.

 

[DarloRich]

And yet the jury heard the evidence and acquitted. What evidence did they not hear? Why did the prosecution not offer this evidence? it is convenient that "secret" evidence that hasn't been presented would have created a verdict you DID believe in.

What is your solution? Have a jury trial but if you don't like it have the judge decide?

 

[Dave1987]

I notice that an officer has been found to have contributed to the death of a man in Manchester through his over use of a taser stun gun on the man. He has be put on restricted duties. There seems to be a serious trend in officers being overly aggressive recently.

 

[Yew]

I notice that an officer has been found to have contributed to the death of a man in Manchester through his over use of a taser stun gun on the man. He has be put on restricted duties. There seems to be a serious trend in officers being overly aggressive recently.

Personally, I think its a long term trend, a retired police officer I knew used to talk about having a special pocket in their trousers for their baton, so it was not visible. Contrast with today, were police walk around in stab proof vest, with utility belts full of pepper spray, handcuffs and tasers.

 

[Flamingo]

Why do you think Stab Vests have become mandatory?

 

[the sniper]

Sorry, but are people now trolling Dave or actually supporting his argument? It's a fine line...!

 

[TheEdge]

I notice that an officer has been found to have contributed to the death of a man in Manchester through his over use of a taser stun gun on the man. He has be put on restricted duties. There seems to be a serious trend in officers being overly aggressive recently.

Recently as in two years ago, another lone incident of one officer? There is also a disturbing trend of 777s falling out of the sky... :roll:

Contrast with today, were police walk around in stab proof vest, with utility belts full of pepper spray, handcuffs and tasers.

Are you actually being serious?

 

[Dave1987]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-33373531

Here is the case I am referring to with the taser (not in a position to post the link properly) man was tasered for 8 seconds by the officer as a "distraction" technique even though the man was offering little resistance.

 

[Chew Chew]

Recently as in two years ago, another lone incident of one officer?

The narrative is pretty much always that it is one lone officer doing something that he or she shouldn't be doing. I would suggest that the facts are somewhat different and that the police close ranks after an incident occurs.

Look at the number of deaths in police custody.

 

[the sniper]

Yet he was then still able to resist arrest after he'd been tasered...

 

[DarloRich]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-33373531

Here is the case I am referring to with the taser (not in a position to post the link properly) man was tasered for 8 seconds by the officer as a "distraction" technique even though the man was offering little resistance.

is this result appropriate accountability? Is accountability for a police officer only acceptable if found guilty?

 

[Dave1987]

is this result appropriate accountability? Is accountability for a police officer only acceptable if found guilty?

Well he has already been found to have used an inappropriate amount of force and contributed to the death of a suspect.

 

[the sniper]

According to this BBC article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-33099585 :

The jury heard that medical assessments concluded Mr Begley suffered a cardiac arrest about two minutes after the Taser was deployed, but it did not or was "unlikely" to have contributed to the heart attack he suffered.

The episode was more likely to have been linked to alcohol intoxication and the stress of being restrained, the jury heard.

I appreciate you go by evidence rather than the verdict of a jury Dave, but this evidence seemed to indicate the use of the taser was not or was unlikely to have been a contributing factor in his death?

 

[TheEdge]

I appreciate you go by evidence rather than the verdict of a jury Dave, but this evidence seemed to indicate the use of the taser was not or was unlikely to have been a contributing factor in his death?

I suspect Dave will only be happy if the police officer is held accountable by his standards, that being found guilty of everything and strung up for pelting with fruit.

Apparently being taken to court and put in front of a jury questioning the manner in which their duties were discharged is not accountable... :roll:

 

[Smudger105e]

I think a lot of people are taking Dave's views a little black and white, and perhaps reading things into them that have not been said.

 

[Dave1987]

I suspect Dave will only be happy if the police officer is held accountable by his standards, that being found guilty of everything and strung up for pelting with fruit.

Apparently being taken to court and put in front of a jury questioning the manner in which their duties were discharged is not accountable... :roll:

So one presumes you ok with police brutality and would quite happily see them taser people at will? Police officers have a great deal of powers and weapons at their disposal. With that though comes responsibility. So what about that blind man that was tasered was that acceptable in your eyes? No action was taken against him even though he tasered a perfectly innocent man! Acceptable collateral? Clearly it must be :roll:

 

[DarloRich]

So one presumes you ok with police brutality and would quite happily see them taser people at will? Police officers have a great deal of powers and weapons at their disposal. With that though comes responsibility. So what about that blind man that was tasered was that acceptable in your eyes? No action was taken against him even though he tasered a perfectly innocent man! Acceptable collateral? Clearly it must be :roll:

don't be silly of course people do not accept police brutality.

It seems you have issues with the old bill, fair enough lots of people do, but in all the examples you have given the police office has been held accountable for his actions. What hasn't happened in all cases is a guilty verdict.

Is that the real problem?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think a lot of people are taking Dave's views a little black and white, and perhaps reading things into them that have not been said.

I am not! He said the policeman in the original posting was not held accountable for every single shot he fired.

There was a criminal trial at the Old Bailey and he was cleared by a majority verdict of the jury - that looks like accountability to me. Does it look like accountability to you?

 

[Dave1987]

don't be silly of course people do not accept police brutality.

It seems you have issues with the old bill, fair enough lots of people do, but in all the examples you have given the police office has been held accountable for his actions. What hasn't happened in all cases is a guilty verdict.

Is that the real problem?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I am not! He said the policeman in the original posting was not held accountable for every single shot he fired.

There was a criminal trial at the Old Bailey and he was cleared by a majority verdict of the jury - that looks like accountability to me. Does it look like accountability to you?

Yes they were found not guilty at the Old Bailey but that does not mean they were held accountable. There seems to be a perception that the police should have far more leniency given to them. How do know this wasn't the same for the jury at the Old Bailey?

So why did the Police officer who tasered that blind guy have no action taken against him? I remember the blind guy was livid when no action was taken against the officer. Justice given or Policeman let off the hook?

I am against the increase in Police aggression we see now in modern life. I believe that aggression that has now become the norm is probably something to do with the increase in incidents in which people are injured or killed due to contact with the police. We are definitely heading towards an American style of policing.

 

[Greenback]

The way I understand being held accountable is having to explain my actions, give reasons for the decisions I've made, so that a view can be taken as to whether I acted correctly given the training I had received, the circumstances in which I had to make a decision, and any other facts that may be relevant.

I don't think it means that action must always be taken. Clearly, that would only be the case if it was decided that the individual was at fault in some way, and there are a range of responses and actions available if the decision is that some blame is attached to that person.

I don't see that this is process has not been followed in any of the situations mentioned in this thread, so my conclusion is that the police are being held accountable, but the result of this is not to Dave1987's liking.

 

[TheEdge]

So one presumes you ok with police brutality and would quite happily see them taser people at will? Police officers have a great deal of powers and weapons at their disposal. With that though comes responsibility. So what about that blind man that was tasered was that acceptable in your eyes? No action was taken against him even though he tasered a perfectly innocent man! Acceptable collateral? Clearly it must be :roll:

Do you want to tell that to the enormous majority of police who have never done anything like this and who are the decent people who find themselves in difficult situations? How about the my relative who in 20 years of front line policing never drew his truncheon in anger?

No, of course tasering an innocent person is wrong. However we immediately go in to the details of that story go back to the on the spot choice about what is being held in the hand?

As to your ever increasing amount of deaths by the police....

http://www.inquest.org.uk/statistics/deaths-in-police-custody

Note how while you are claiming an ever growing number of deaths while that set of statistics gives the opposite, 50-80 deaths annually throughout the 90 and early 00s. From about 2008 onwards they are down to about 20-30. Note these stats are not police custody deaths, they are police contact deaths so include pursuit and RTI deaths.

 

[Chew Chew]

I wonder how accountable Police Scotland will be found in the case of Lamara Bell and John Yuill?

 

[DaleCooper]

This seems to demonstrate that the police are held accountable.

PCs guilty of assault on man in city park

Two police officers could be jailed after being found guilty of assaulting a man in a Peterborough park.

http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/...ilty-of-assault-on-man-in-city-park-1-6844774

 

[Smudger105e]

Again, not firearms officers, and I have to still agree with Dave1987s view.

 

[DarloRich]

Again, not firearms officers, and I have to still agree with Dave1987s view.

we shall have to agree to disagree then. I can not see how anyone can be held anymore accountable than a murder trial at the Central Criminal Court!

I can see an issue with the jury perhaps being more inclined to believe the word of a police officer over a more colourful character but under our system the policeman HAS been held accountable. That he hasn't been found guilty seems to be the issue. That doesn't mean he hasn't been held to account for his actions.

 

[Smudger105e]

I think your observation regarding the Jury believing a Police Officer more than a "career criminal" (my words!) is a valid one.

The process through which this Officer has gone has been a long and undoubtedly stressful one, but a not guilty verdict is not a verdict of innocence.

In July 2013 the judicial inquiry found that the*Authorised Firearms Officer*who fired the fatal shots had "no lawful justification" for opening fire.*

So is he innocent of wrongdoing even though found not guilty by a Jury? This is the crux of the matter in my opinion.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I think your observation regarding the Jury believing a Police Officer more than a "career criminal" (my words!) is a valid one.

The process through which this Officer has gone has been a long and undoubtedly stressful one, but a not guilty verdict is not a verdict of innocence.

In July 2013 the judicial inquiry found that the*Authorised Firearms Officer*who fired the fatal shots had "no lawful justification" for opening fire.*

So is he innocent of wrongdoing even though found not guilty by a Jury? This is the crux of the matter in my opinion.

I believe we should introduce the verdict "not proven" as exists in Scottish law, frankly. It's especially useful in cases where it can't be shown beyond reasonable doubt, but it would be inappropriate to deem the defendent "not guilty".

 

[Tetchytyke]

I think a better example was that of Ian Tomlinson. The Inquest jury found that he was unlawfully killed by PC Harwood, who had used excessive and unreasonable force towards his victim. The Met paid substantial damages to the family of Tomlinson because of Harwood's actions.

Harwood was never convicted of any offence, being acquitted after a jury decided the first autopsy provided "reasonable doubt", and is still walking around a free man having shown no remorse for his behaviour.

 

[reb0118]

........ a not guilty verdict is not a verdict of innocence....

What school did you go to?

Or as we say north of the Wall: Yer Maw!

 

[Smudger105e]

What school did you go to?

Or as we say north of the Wall: Yer Maw!

I'm sorry I don't understand your comment or the interest in my schooling.

But as you asked I attended the Hove County Grammar School for Boys.

Would you kindly translate "Yer Maw" into English in order that I can understand it? I get the feeling that it is a dig at me but without a translation, I am unable to ascertain the exact meaning of your post.