Greater Manchester Police brutality

There really won’t. There aren’t many officers who think it’s ok to kick a prone person in the head or stamp on their head, regardless of what happened beforehand. I’ve discussed it at length within my Policing circles and no one thinks it’s ok. There will be no mutiny.

Yes you may be right. People need to think carefully whether they want police to be present at all

If the officer is charged there'll be a mutiny in the police force.

Hopefully you’re right on this

Fifth'd actually.

Having watched it again in slo mo it is very clear that every one of those blows connected with his head, AND he has been throttled, AND it was clear that the lunatic thug was not going to be kept down by the tasseling and was already coming round. Plus he had to prevent either of them from taking his firearm.

So that's an awful lot of mitigation, in fact.

If you want cops to think clearly and act by the book, don't try to give them a head injury or compromise their oxygen supply, is the lesson.

It would take a public trial for everyone to understand exactly what happened, because frankly, two short videos don't tell us anything except two men violently resisted arrest and a police officer reacted in what could be seen as violently. No context is known beyond that

That would be the right result

That's exactly what I said in my post.
And the officer being suspended is standard procedure.

🙏

I really hope you are right @whatnow123 although I’d prefer it if the police officer isn’t even charged with any offence, given the circumstances.

I'll bookmark this thread for when it's all been through court. I think the officer will be charged and found not guilty by a jury, he'll keep his job and the two other men will be given lengthy custodial sentences.

A similar thought did cross my mind.

Actually, the decision to suspend the officer is pretty routine and should not be used to predict the outcome of any potential investigation,

@LiterallyOnFire

In a sane world, conduct like that would ruin his professional career. It makes you wonder why he's happy to behave like that.

Plays to his consumer base. He'll get more work off the back of this.

Money I guess he says he’ll defend anyone and it was good publicity

Those who have been through the same training, have encountered similar experiences and are subject to the same rules certainly can comment. The fact that their decision has been to suspend this officer speaks volumes.

That lawyer was absolutely despicable.

He very nearly succeeded in inciting a race riot on Friday.

In a sane world, conduct like that would ruin his professional career. It makes you wonder why he's happy to behave like that.

No one .... literally no one can comment on how they would act in this situation, unless you have encountered something similar. These were split second decisions by these officers to protect themselves and the public around them. There are all sorts going through your mind in these instances. Personally , I haven't heard any audio from the latest footage. But , apart from the assault to Police,these lot could have been saying anything... 'ie - I'm having your gun' etc.

MyGladEagle
I've no idea why people on here have suddenly become experts on behaviour in violent situations when the most violent situation they've encountered is likely to be a spider biting them.

I was brought up in an extremely violent home. I know that kicking a prone person in the face then stepping on their head is wrong.

On the BBC website, the family of the man are expressing 'real concern for any injured officers'. I bet they bloody are. They've also hired a different lawyer. Tossers.

can you explain the parallels please

Your stance implies that officers should hesitate, even when facing immediate threats, and in this case involving firearms. This hesitation can cost lives, both theirs and the public'c, so your view is unrealistic and dangerous. Overly harsh criticism of necessary force undermines police morale and emboldens violent criminals. Officers need confidence, not constant second-guessing. Supporting law enforcement means understanding the harsh realities they face daily. Your expectations are detached from these realities and jeopardise effective policing.

In short, your approach encourages a weak response to violent crime, putting everyone at risk.

It's essential to balance accountability with the practical needs of law enforcement.

@Usercyzabc what part of 'I hope they are convicted', 'they are violent criminals' or 'they are a disgrace' leads you to believe that I am excusing them?

It's not a case of someone being wrong and someone else being right. Both can be wrong.

Yes I accept that it was an overwhelmingly chaotic and dangerous situation. Yes I accept that the officer is only human and will make mistakes. Yes I understand that the officer was attacked and witnessed his colleagues being attacked. Yes I accept that sometimes reasonable and proportionate force will be extreme force.

All of this provides context that leads me to understanding how the officer came to make the decision to kick the perpetrator in the head.

None of this changes my view that the kick was not justified in the circumstance that it occurred.

Others (like you) don't agree, and that's fine. But it doesn't mean that I support violent criminals and you don't. It just means that we have different expectations of the police.

I would leave the specifics of his punishment yo those who understand the stresses of the job.

@Usercyzabc

n August last year PC Jagruti Chhaganlal was on duty in Beaumanor Road, Leicester, when she was approached by James Nutting, a man she had previous dealings with after reports of him racially abusing and making homophobic remarks towards neighbours.
Nutting, 44, of Beaumanor Road, Leicester, launched a violent attack on PC Chhaganlal, punching and then kicking her multiple times as she lay on the floor before walking off. He was subsequently arrested nearby.

Unprecedented?