Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

Police Station attacked in apparent retaliation for Heavy-handedness

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
BBC Video Report

Text report

The two Beeb reports tell two completely different stories; nothing in the text report about allegations of police heavy-handedness. While I appreciate that the apparent disorder outside the Police station is a serious matter; once again the Police are rendered unaccountable, and steamed in with their numbers covered.

There are also reports of the Police refusing to hand over the numbers of officers involved, in order to pursue and investigate these allegations.

This happened at Leeds 2002 (where I personally witnessed a Policeman lean out of the window of a Land Rover, and randomly whack a young kid round the back of the head with a truncheon); it happened at Download 2006 and again its happened here.

We cannot stand for or accept situations in which police use of force against the public is unaccountable to the population.

UPDATE: In a true example of lazy journalism, The Guardian and several local news outlets are circulating EXACTLY the same report from the Press Association, which makes no mention of Police actions, or allegations therefrom.

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm not sure of your point.

    Are you suggesting that its alright to riot and attack police stations because of allegations of heavy handedness?

    Now sometimes the police are heavy handed, but its also a staple of people at raves to claim the police were brutal even if they gone round and handed out tea and scones.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Firstly; yeah sorry if it read a little confusingly (I could'nt modify the title after i'd poster it either), for clarity I'll re-state: Its not OK to attack police stations, and it is not OK for Police to cover their numbers.

    On your second point about ravers always claiming this; actually what you are saying doesn't alwyas tally with previous evidence. For example (on my way out the door so I hope you'll excuse me not digging links and citations up for you until this evening); about 6 months back there were a spate of Raves around Norwich and Ipswich which the Police pursued a policy of monitoring so long as they kept to themselves. This was praised by party-goers (now whether or not you agree with Police tactics is a different issue, but this highlights that what you are suggesting isn't always the case).

    I would also say this; you claim that this is a 'staple of people at raves', but there is plenty of evidence of heavyhandedness from previous events, less so on the tea and scones front. And where scone-distribution may have been consistent with the overall Police tactics (such as the events highlighted above) this appears to have been recognised by party goers.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    lol i've never been to a rave with tea and scones, in fact the last one i was at they were handing out batons and teargas, feel like i'm missing out :(
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    lol i've never been to a rave with tea and scones, in fact the last one i was at they were handing out batons and teargas, feel like i'm missing out :(

    :lol:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If somebody attempts to resist arrest, then force has to be used - i.e. the gas they use to sting your eyes, or a truncheon. It's when the culprit doesn't resist arrest that officers shouldn't be able to use force. The only exception I can think of is when the police are after an armed suspect, then they can use guns and shields.
  • Options
    SkiveSkive Posts: 15,284 Skive's The Limit
    I've seen it too many timea at raves, where the old bill have steamed in and been overly aggressive and only cause more toruble than needed.

    I accept that some party organisations leave a mess and some are set up too close to peoples properties, but the vast majority I've ben to are set up be experienced oraganisers who know that to keep going they have to tidy up and to avoid the police they have to set up in the middle of nowhere.

    We had a party last weekend with over 1000 people, two stages and loads of cars. The old bill turned up but thankfully they let it go, and there was no trouble all nigth. A couple of complaints of noise were made, but what's one night a year?

    I'd fr rather go to these illegal parties, than risk the over priced, overheated clubs that attract the attention of agressive binge drinkers, where I have to dress up and pay for water. Those sorts of places are far more dangerous and anti social.
    Weekender Offender 
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    spot on, it appears that hippie bashing has become a popular past time for the police and in a lot of cases it is unwarranted. that being said if you start throwing bottles at a police station you can't really complain when they come out batons swinging, we weren't there so we can't really comment but i know how the bbc tend to report these stories and it's hardly balanced or neutral....
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/20/nravers120.xml

    Telegraph gives a different order.

    Men arrested for on suspision of car theft (who were taking equipment to a rave)

    Crowds gathers outside police station.

    Crowds go to rave

    Police break up rave at 10am (about 10 hours after the incidents at the police station).
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Skive wrote: »
    We had a party last weekend with over 1000 people, two stages and loads of cars. The old bill turned up but thankfully they let it go, and there was no trouble all nigth. A couple of complaints of noise were made, but what's one night a year?

    Which suggests that the police take a balanced view and don't go steaming into all raves.

    That said as I mentioned on another thread if the police do need to go in they need to go in tough. Whilst it would be lovely to believe that the police could just go and whispher in someone's ear they're nicked and off they go, in reality people tend to resist arrest and do so with loads of other people also deciding it would be fun to get involved.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Flashman's Ghost
    Which suggests that the police take a balanced view and don't go steaming into all raves.

    I'm sorry mate but I've noticed this on a couple of threads; I'll get talking to you, make a point or counter-point, and you'll completely ignore it and go on to something else. As I posted the original topic, I'd like to refer you back to my original contention; Police should not have their numbers covered while in pursuit of any duty, and must be accountable at all times.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Police should not have their numbers covered while in pursuit of any duty, and must be accountable at all times.

    :yes:
    why cover the officers id no in the first place?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Telegraph gives a different order.

    Men arrested for on suspision of car theft (who were taking equipment to a rave)

    Crowds gathers outside police station.

    Crowds go to rave

    Police break up rave at 10am (about 10 hours after the incidents at the police station).

    Thats an interesting development because it appears that The Telegraph have actualy investigated this rather than copying out the press association's homework. It also means what the Police are saying doesn't tally up either, for their Officer who made the original statement inferred that this was a retaliation on the part of party-goers.

    The Telegraph's statement, taken on face value, seems in my view to support the last part of the report in which ravers who gave statements to the press had no knowledge of the violence. That would be consistent with what you have presented.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Flashman's Ghost


    I'm sorry mate but I've noticed this on a couple of threads; I'll get talking to you, make a point or counter-point, and you'll completely ignore it and go on to something else. As I posted the original topic, I'd like to refer you back to my original contention; Police should not have their numbers covered while in pursuit of any duty, and must be accountable at all times.

    I'm sorry I don't give you my undivided attention.

    However, I thought the discussion was about how police deal with public order situations in which case my comments seem reasonably on topic. given that your second post even agrees with my quote above about police not always going in mob handed...

    I agree that police should always have their numbers uncovered. Did they or did they not at this time - perhaps, perhaps not. We have an allegation that they didn't - but without being there I'm not naive enough to say that is neccessarily the truth.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm sorry I don't give you my undivided attention.

    No just addressing the original point would have been good; and I didn't say you were off topic, I said you didn't pick up the original thread of contention...
    given that your second post even agrees with my quote above about police not always going in mob handed...

    Quite right... and by that logic I have never claimed otherwise.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Thats an interesting development because it appears that The Telegraph have actualy investigated this rather than copying out the press association's homework. It also means what the Police are saying doesn't tally up either, for their Officer who made the original statement inferred that this was a retaliation on the part of party-goers.

    The Telegraph's statement, taken on face value, seems in my view to support the last part of the report in which ravers who gave statements to the press had no knowledge of the violence. That would be consistent with what you have presented.

    If you want the gods honest truth in cases like these its often hard to say who did what and when. If you want my intepretation based on a limited amount of knowledge

    1) Police pick up sound system (11.30)

    2) Kick off at police station. Some minor violence - one PC hurt and somes cars damaged. Most, if not all, rioters have fucked off before police arrive. (kick-off starts at 0000, play stopped about 0100)

    3) Police arrive at rave. decide not to intervene for risk of starting a larger kick off than can be safely handled. some of the ravers will have been at the police station, others won't have been there but will have heard and others were neither there or heard. (first officers around 0100, more arriving through night)

    4) Minor aggro for rest of night - drunks making V signs and police and trying to wind them up.

    5) Early morning enough people have fucked off that police find it manageable and go into make arrests (those they think organsing it and a few troublemakers) (about 10.00)

    6) some individual police cover their numbers (any senior officer who noticed them and didn't do anything would be in serious trouble - its a disciplinary offence)

    7) Police charge in. a few people takes swings at them, but are quickly subdued, though some suffer some minor injuries in the process. It's not totally one-sided as WPC is injured (assuming she was in riot gear she'd be unlucky to be injured by foot or fist so probably some sort of weapon). Those who aren't casuing trouble and aren't being targetted for arrest flee.

    8) A few policemen take the chance to have a crack at those who've been winding them.

    9) one of the people being targetted runs and is chased by a police dog handler. The dog as trained to do takes her down. She may have had a few nips as the dog went for her clothing but the dogs are trained not to savage defenceless people on the ground. this is translated to BBC news as the dog handler letting the dog bite her.

    10) Prisoners carted off about 1030

    I don't know what happened but from the info we know that seems a reasonable possibility (albeit not the only one).
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    At the moment that would be plausible; but I would remain sceptical of the police in these circumstances because, as we have stated, there is a mixed history.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    At the moment that would be plausible; but I would remain sceptical of the police in these circumstances because, as we have stated, there is a mixed history.

    So do ravers...
Sign In or Register to comment.