Man-handling climate change protestors

[Leafyhouse]

Anyone else watch with horror as a climate change protestor was forcefully removed by Mark Field from the Mansion House speech? I mean, I'm no fan of political activism, 'direct action' and so on, but she wasn't presenting him with any direct threat, just shouting and being annoying. AIBU to think that his behaviour was totally unacceptable there?

I read it and I am torn.
I thought it looked brutal, then DS said it was reasonable force in response to a perceived threat.
She had a reasonable size bag with her which could have contained acid/a knife/ or at a pinch a milkshake.
I am still surprised that in the video the protesters are seen walking up the stairs and into the hall without being challenged at all.

DS has an SIA licence and trains door staff. His take on it is that it was reasonable and necessary force as he perceived her as a genuine threat. He thought it was executed quite well for a man with no training.

Your DS may need some more training on the law. You can only use force in these circumstances if you reasonably believe someone is a genuine threat. Field would have massive problems with this because clearly no-one else who saw her was alarmed, he knew she didn't have weapons, and he let her go when he got her outside. If you think someone is dangerous, surely you hand them over to security or the police?

The police still haven’t decided whether to charge him. I wonder what his defenders will say if they do?

I think he knows the law. He thought Mr Field perceived her as a threat.
As I said in a previous post I am sure there will be a lot of discussion about this in the security industry.

Isatis, that is a really good point about him letting her go when he got outside. Why on earth would he do that if he thought she had broken the law?

Basically he’s a nasty thug: ‘This is what happens to people like you who disturb our dinner.’

Where we’re the security?! Someone had to get her out, so he did

Security were dealing with all the protesters.

Why did someone have to get her out just then? He must have known she didn't present any dangers. The security guards managed to get all the others out without assaulting them in this way.

She had no right to be there.

How do you know?

He didn’t know if they were armed or what their intentions were

Yes, he did. He knew that she would have come through airport-style security and that there was nowhere where she could have been hiding arms. He knew her intentions because she kept telling him.

If you think he seriously believed she was armed, how come he let her go once she was outside? How come no-one else thought she was?

He did no lasting damage, indeed significantly less than a milkshake which the woke left thought was fine on Farage.

How do you know? And are you seriously saying assault is OK so long as the bruises will fade? Or that damage from a thrown milkshake is more serious than an attack on someone's neck?

You don’t have a right to protest on private land, if you do this you run risks and they were happy to take their chance.

You run the risk of lawful steps to eject you. You don't run this risk.

The video proves she had intent...
The group was causing a disturbance...
Any security guard near by would have stopped her....
This is to do with the way she was stopped, not fact she was stopped.
Also in the video she tried to continue once stopped, which then allows for more force to be used....
Therefore she caused her own self to be restrained.

Ladymargaret, no doubt your DS does think Field perceived her as a threat. That doesn't change the fact that the perception must by law be reasonable. Field would massively struggle to demonstrate that that is the case when no-one else shared his perception, when he didn't bother to disable her arms so that, if she had a weapon, she could access it, and he let her go afterwards.

I thought it looked brutal, then DS said it was reasonable force in response to a perceived threat.
She had a reasonable size bag with her which could have contained acid/a knife/ or at a pinch a milkshake

Bollocks. She’d been through tight security, bag checks etc. You can’t get in a room full of government ministers without one.

mummmy2017, the video showed she had the intent to give papers to Hammond. How does that cause her to be the subject of unlawful restraint.

I would completely agree that this is to do with the way she was stopped. The security guards stopped other protesters without using these methods. Why do you think Field's were acceptable?

As for your suggestion that it's OK to use more force when the victim of your unlawful attack resists, you seriously need to think about the logic of that.

If he genuinely thought she had a weapon, what good was it doing grabbing her by the neck? Her hands were still free, so she could have grabbed the weapon and used it. It would have made more sense to grab her hands. He didn’t look like a frightened or concerned man, he looked absolutely furious. That’s not someone that was concerned about this woman causing harm, that’s someone who has the ‘how fucking dare you!” attitude.

Oh Jilly your post has confirmed my view. Thank you.

Oh smile and yours has confirmed mine. You believe that women who don’t agree with you are ‘sad’, and that we should all share your viewpoint, and you can’t see how ideologically driven that view is because you’re too deeply entrenched in it.

I used to be in that particular ideological grip too. It’s quite an eye-opener when you emerge from it.

Imagine what it’s like being Janet Barker and coming across this thread. You have spent 20 years (that’s half your life) campaigning to try to get governments to act meaningfully on climate change. As part of that you have attended dozens of protests and handed out thousands of leaflets. Two days ago, while engaged in those activities, you were assaulted by an angry man. You still have the marks, you’re still shaken. Maybe you’ve been assaulted before, making this particularly traumatic. Most women aren’t strangers to male violence. All you want is to play your part in highlighting the dangers to the planet, so there is actually a planet left for future generations.

Mumsnet is a safe space, you think. Then you come across this thread and see some - not all, thank goodness - posters saying that you got what you deserved and that angry men have a perfect right to slam you against a pillar as you walk behind them and then grab you by the neck for ‘spoiling his dinner’. .

If I was Janet Barker - a woman who’s spent 20 years trying to make the world better - I think I’d feel utterly betrayed by some of the comments on here. It seems for every violent man there’s a small bunch of colluding women cheering him on and agreeing that courageous women should be shoved firmly back into their place.

Apparently, anyone who dares suggest this is a security issue that was badly handled is a person who condones domestic violence and abuse of women , is against the right to protest and is particularly against protests about climate change.

I saw footage of police officers manhandling female protesters when they were protesting in London a month or so back. Really forcibly removing them and little was said. So is the issue what Mark Fields did or because of who he is?

I do think given the circumstances he over reacted but I also feel that these so called peaceful protests open up all sorts of issues and people are right to be wary. Bottom line is they shouldn't have been in there and were removed.

No one forced her to break away from the group....
She had intent towards Hammond...
This is not an I was doing nothing and was attacked.
Stop pretending.....

Surely though the difference is that police are there to enforce the law and protect people, they are trained to do so safely and legally and Mark Fields is not, just as any other civilian is not. Unless in a situation where there is an immediate threat, or in self defence, you can't just attack people.

Supermarkets are private property, but it wouldn't give a cashier the right to assault a protestor reading a speech about animal rights, because they might be carrying a bomb, when there is no reason to suggest that could be true.

I saw footage of police officers manhandling female protesters when they were protesting in London a month or so back. Really forcibly removing them and little was said. So is the issue what Mark Fields did or because of who he is?

There is a clear difference between a police officer using force during a police operation, and unprovoked violence by a civilian against an individual who does not pose a direct threat to the protagonist.

It's possible to disagree with the actions of the police on some occasions, but still believe that they have the right to use force in certain circumstances, to uphold the law or to protect public order.

But private individuals do not have the right to take the law into their own hands, unless they are personally under direct threat of harm, and especially not if they use an inappropriate degree of violence. This is particularly the case if the individual concerned is both a trained lawyer and a law-maker who therefore has a greater obligation than other citizens to uphold the rule of law.

I don't think that last point can be emphasised enough. Field is a member of Parliament, he makes our laws. All the more reason why he should be seen to uphold the rule of law. Britain is not, yet, a failed state where citizens can take the law into their own hands and can commit assault without fear of consequences.

The first time I saw the video, I thought she had something in her hand and she was heading for Hammond...
I honestly thought thank God someone stopped her before anyone got hurt....

Mistigri, you make an excellent point. Because of his position, it’s particularly important that Mark Field displays high standards of public conduct. This is the worst public display of behaviour I’ve ever seen by an MP.

The first time I saw the video, I thought she had something in her hand and she was heading for Hammond...
I don't think a piece of paper is a threat to anyone? A phone could be a bomb detonator, but if he thought that, why would he allow her to hold it whilst he 'escorted' her from the room?

I just realised how much man hating there is in this thread.
Mark Fields dressed up to go to a private dinner, eat a meal, drink some wine and go home.
The woman planned to attend an event uninvited, dressed up to cause herself to be seen, deliberately left the main group and headed in an agressive manor towards Hammond, when stopped from reaching her goal she resisted and tried a third time while being removed....
She was not innocent....

"A phone could be a bomb detonator, but if he thought that, why would he allow her to hold it whilst he 'escorted' her from the room?"
Maybe he didn't see that she appeared unarmed until he had manhandled her. Or was he just full of blood lust because he looks like a wife beater