The BBC are reporting another disturbing police attack on a civilian.
This time the thug is Sergeant Mark Andrews.
The fuller video is here:
The victim was found asleep in her car.
The victim was taken to the police station, where the assault occurs.
She is said to have been terrified; she was taken to hospital.
He has now been convicted of ABH, but remains on full pay although suspended.
Something seems very wrong with our police at the moment, and it does not inspire confidence.
COMMENTS MODERATION
No purely anonymous comments will be published; always use a name for ease of reference by other commenters.
Sunday, 5 September 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
21 comment(s):
The pure woman! =(
Has he been suspended on full pay for two years? Or working normally since this happened? =S
That is one of the most distressing things I've seen for a while, trumped only by the US police shooting dead an unarmed man who they already have on the ground on a platform at Bart train station. I think he got off as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmJukcFzEX4
We are is heading for a dark place.
Suspended on full pay for 2 years? A 2 year holiday in other words!!!??
In any other job/profession/organisation the video footage alone would be sufficient to justify instant dismissal for gross misconduct.
The fact he's been given a 2 year holiday and not a 2 year sentence is probably the location of the problem: the Police are not playing by the rules of decent people.
Lord knows how unexceptional this behaviour is, in particular towards more vulnerable people who might be the wrong colour.
I agree Julius. It is entirely unnecessary to wait for a criminal conviction before dismissing an employee; in fact the employer only needs a reasonable belief of guilt.
It also seems from some reports that Pamela was not prosecuted for the offence of failing to provide a speciment. I have never heard of this offence being dealt with other than by prosecution, so this surely means she did not commit the offence as claimed.
> Something seems very wrong with our police at the moment, and it does not inspire confidence.
One cannot draw that conclusion: as with all crimes, all we know, surely, is that the *proven* incidences are increasing.
The police have behaved like this - and worse - for many years, if one believes the tales which one hears. Perhaps the difference is now that CCTV is proving it?
Ten years ago, she would have "fallen in her cell", and no charges would have been brought.
SKZSKZ
He knew the CCTV was recording the assault, and he still seemingly felt safe doing what he did.
And this incident didn't involve CCTV. If you or I had crashed the car, would have been arrested on suspicion of careless or dangerous driving by now. The BBC story only mentions the possibility of taking without consent.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-11187747
A couple of months ago I saw three policeman on foot, apparently en route from the nearby police station to somewhere else. "Swaggering" was an accurate description as they were walking three abreast, talking and laughing. People had to walk on the road to pass them. I briefly thought of photographing them, but that's hardly safe nowadays, is it?
No, sorry. I didn't see the police as people to be feared, ten years ago.
The Mail On Sunday article is a little more enlightening on the circumstances.
It appears she was thrown on the cell floor when being forcibly returned to her cell, having walked out of the cell on the initial arrival of the police doctor.
That is not shown on video - other than by the Sgt running from the custody desk to the cell area.
There are large time jumps in the video and all her responses are muted on the tape.
It is hardly the most balanced view of what has occurred.
@Madam Miaow - to draw a parallel with a man being shot dead is disingenuous and/or naive.
@Julius - The footage shows possibly criminal activity - to sack him prior to the completion of a criminal trial would prejudice any case.
Tang0
One thing I note from the DM article is that it was a PCSO who presumably spotted her asleep in her car and called in support. I would have thought that unless that smelt alcohol and had other clues that she was drunk that the more obvious situation of a woman in distress was more likely. But then PCSOs aren't trained and do cause a lot of problems - witness all the "you can't film me I'm a policeman" calls which are mainly from PCSOs.
With her failure to provide a breath sample, and working on the assumption that she was drunk, what's the stance on just being in the drivers seat of a car, when you're intoxicated?
Obviously the police brutality is appalling, but surely they can't just take someone in for sleeping in their car, without reason to believe they'd present a risk to public safety, i.e drunk. Does a car actually have to be seen in transit, for the driver to be arrested for driving under the influence? Or is just being in the driver's seat, enough?
Anonymous, that's not a parallel, it's a comparison, and a clearly stated subjective comparison about my gut feelings regarding disturbing videos of police brutality doing the rounds. Your judgement call is a non sequitur. What's more, it doesn't follow.
I find all casual brutality and abuse of power horrendous. A big man dragging a tiny distressed woman around the floor as a warm-up to smashing her face against the floor says a lot about the sadism and arrogance at work here.
Something seems very wrong with our police?
It appears from the BBC report that this assault came to light because a colleague reported the behaviour of the sergeant in question.
Is that wrong?
Due process was followed. Evidence will have been secured by the officer's colleagues (the officer arrested and interviewed, CCTV seized, statements taken etc), a file will have been built, and the officer appeared in court and was convicted.
Is that wrong?
Other than the obvious answer of Sgt Andrews not committing the assault in the first place, what exactly did you want to happen differently?
It's not like the officer was acquitted unanimously by a jury who had heard all of the evidence as were two officers in the case of Aspinall that you wrote about in July. You called that jury's decision to acquit 'sickening and disappointing' and have still offered no qualification. Due process? Fairness? Liberal?
The assault of which Sergeant Mark Andrews was convicted can no more be taken to typify the behaviour of 'the police' than a solicitor emptying a client's account proving that all lawyers are bent, an asylum-seeker being convicted of rape meaning that all immigrants are criminals, or a Baghdad hotel receptionist being beaten to death that all British soldiers are murderers.
There are approximately 200,000 police officers in the UK. Yes, they have coercive powers which can be abused. Do you honestly believe that we will ever reach a position where none will ever do so? Do you recognise the good work that so many of them do do? Do you believe that we need a police service at all?
You tagged this post 'Police Reform'. What exact reforms are you proposing, other than that all liberal critical thinkers agree that 'the police' are composed entirely of cartoon-like evil thugs constantly baton-charging peaceful demonstrators?
Conor,
thanks for the reply.
CCTV stands for Closed Circuit TeleVision, and the footage looks very much as if it is of that type of technology.
Appeal to personal memories isn't a very strong argument, especially when you limit your sample size to one. Various other people were scared of the police ten or more years ago, including:
- The Birmingham Six
- Black people living in South London (and other areas)
My original point is that it is not possible to tell if it is getting better or worse. If you have an good evidence to support your view that it is getting worse, I'm all ears.
When I see these sort of posts, I go and see what is being said on some police blogs. Sometimes it is as if JoK (I much prefer that name for the blog, BTW - why the change?) and those blogs are on different planets. On this one, though, Inspector Gadget is not standing behind Sgt Andrews, though some other purported police officers are (I say purported simply because I can't know).
I am sickened by the grossly disproportionate violence and aggression apparently shown by the treatment of the woman shown. CCTV images, when taken out of context particularly with 'out of camera eye' actions presumed to have caused physical injury are problematic. However, such behaviour would not be tolerated either on or off camera should fellow officers not 'turn a blind eye'. I understand from previous comments that it was a fellow officer who reported this abuse and find that at best heartening. Bilbo B.
Sentence of 6 months imprisonment has been handed down by a District Judge (Magistrates' Courts) and an appeal is a possibility.
Assault occasioning actual bodily harm is triable either-way and I am somewhat surprised that any magistrates' court retained jurisdiction in the case given ther maximum sentencing power of 6 months imprisonment. Also, having found him guilty, I wonder why the magistrates' court did not commit him to Crown Court for sentence. A further point relates to compensation which a magistrates' court is able award and must give reasons if it does not award it. I have seen no mention of that.
The disciplinary hearing has yet to be held so we must wait and see what the outcome is.
I noted that the Police "apologised" to the victim. I do not think that I would accept a mere apology and it is not really clear whether she has either. Damages ought to be awardable in a civil action and perhaps exemplary damages.
In reply to Laudanum's earlier question about drink driving law, I know nothing about the specifics of this case, but from what I've read in the media it seems likely that this was an arrest under S4 (or possibly S5) of the Road Traffic Act 1988, which can be read here:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/part/I/crossheading/motor-vehicles-drink-and-drugs/enacted
'Being found asleep in a car' could describe an almost limitless variety of circumstances, from someone reeking of alcohol, snoring and drooling over the steering wheel with the engine running but in neutral, in the middle of a country road (I've seen that) - to being parked quietly in a layby, asleep across the back seat covered with a blanket, with the engine clearly cold and the car keys left in the boot.
Actual driving does not have to be witnessed. Both sections relate to driving or 'being in charge' of a motor vehicle.
Both sections contain a defence that the person shall be deemed not to have been in charge of the vehicle if they can prove that there was no likelihood of their driving whilst unfit through drink or drugs, or over the drink drive limit.
Factors such as the position of the vehicle, the position of the person in the vehicle, their actions and demeanour, the whereabouts of the car keys etc can therefore be of great significance in such cases.
Rory, thank you.
Dear pc Rory lol apolagies if indeed ur not an officer of the law or if I have ur rank wrong. In regards to ur comments which basically said that u can't tar a whole community with the same brush based on the actions of a few and I would have to agree with u..however that principle cannot be applied when it comes to the police I'm afraid and it is extremely naive of u to suggest this. I mean come on sir we hold u guys or should I say the police in the highest regard in spite of the negative feedback the police receives and yes maybe the police do deserve more support and encouragement from the public but at the end of the day they are the nearest thing to super heroes we have and the first people we call on for help. To us their not just an emergency service they are the police the law the good guys the super heroes a force to be reckoned with...or at least they're supposed to be so how can u compare them the police to anyone when we the people they serve entrust them with our lives more so than we trust any other service or profession?! I'm sorry but u and I'm afraid lots of police officers underestimate the huge responsibility that comes with being an officer of the law in fact it far outweighs the responsibility of any other profession. It's not just any old job and there the problem lies I think too many people who join up think of it merely as nothing more than a job and that kind of lax attitude is just a disaster waiting to happen because when they mess up they don't just go to the job centre with their p45 they go to prison and that's when the real trouble starts just look at the case of ex commander Ali Dezai who is still serving his 4 years for corruption and the poor man has been assaulted on numerous occasions in prison he's been moved for his safety now but not before he was knocked out and had excrement poured on his head and his belongings including family pictures! Two wrongs don't make a right. I just hope he is ok now and allowed to complete the remainder of his sentence without anymore physical or verbal abuse because let's not forget he is in prison and that's punishment enough for any human beings apart from pedophile's and evil sex offenders and evil murderer's who I think should be subject to capital punishment but hey that's my personal opinion. Look the bottom line is the police are our super heroes so of course we're going to be upset when they fail us by beating the very people they put their lives on the line to serve and protect as is the case of this poor woman and u have the audacity to compare them to meer mortals how dare u! Lol. Good day to u my good fellow may u see sense now. God bless u.
P.s Madame Miaow u are 1 seriously hot lady! ;-)
@Rory look pc plod u guys are supposed to be our heroes so don't insult our intelligence by trying to compare the police to meer mortals! We as the public by large hold the police in the highest regard possible and the police burden the biggest responsibility possible to protect and serve us! That's what u get paid for and more crucially get the accolade of police officer and if anyone doesn't know what that means then they are not law officer material. He was a Sargent yet spoke to her like she was a piece of rubbish and then disturbingly dragged her round and threw her down like a rag doll. Face it he totally lost it.
He is now on unconditional bail and back on full pay.
I recall a gentleman who twittered jokingly that he was going to blow up an airport in frustration due to the ash cloud over Britain, he lost his job when prosecuted by the police.
Yet this guy has been suspended on full pay, up to the trial, then been found guilty and sent to prison where so far he has spent 6 days. Aparently he will miss out on pay for the duration he was in prison.
So this convicted criminal is now in receipt of police pay. I'd love to see the reason for the appeal, it's got to be an absolute peach.
I wonder what you have to do as a police officer to have the full force of the law actually applied. Although a Special Constable was convicted for smashing someones face into a road recently its worth noting he wasnt a full time police officer yet his fellow full time officers conduct during the assualt didnt result in any sanctions.
Rory quite rightly points out that there are bad apples in every profession, however in the police profession it appears the bad apples have an advantage when facing due legal process over the rest of us mere mortals.
All the people working for the police I have met have been genuinely honest and commited people. Thankfully Ive never falen foul of one of these bad apples. While there is still percieved inequality between police and citizens under the rule of law, the liberal skeptics will be able to assert that there are wrongs in the system that will tar all officers no matter how unfair that appears to be.
Sergeant Andrews name came up on the news today, so I thought I would at least check up and see whether, in the interests of objectivity and honesty, it had been pointed out here that his conviction was, last month, overturned on appeal. Hasn't stopped his force from booting him out, which after the comments made by the Deputy Chief Constable at the time of the original trial is hardly surprising, he had hardly left himself any get-out option in the event of this successful appeal.
What worries me is that someone arrested for failing to supply a sample for alcohol analysis, who the appeal court felt was behaving in a manner difficult enough to justify Sgt Andrews actions. Apparently the case against her was dropped through lack of evidence, which for such an alleged offence I find difficult to understand: Either someone did or did not supply a sample when requested.
I find it hard not to wonder if the lesson from this case is that, if you are arrested, create enough difficulties for the police that you suffer an injury, and you stand a chance of your own alleged offence being forgotten in the aftermath. And just think how much aggro you create for the police in the meantime.
I am quite happy to wish Sgt Andrews all the best in his appeal against his sacking.
Post a Comment