Just caught the last few seconds of Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight. He 'summarised' the above, in a manner as if it was breaking news. Nothing on the main news websites. Anybody got any further information and/or footage?

can you not give us a bit more detail then?

Outside Niche, last July:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/6428865.stm

Well, there's an interesting part story :rolleyes:

We don't seem to have any information on the police officer's injuries, although the pair seem to have fallen down a flight of stairs :suspect:

i seen the punches on the news a minute back, it's no wonder people are critiscising the police.
if vigliante action is not to be tolerated, neither should police who conduct themselves in the manner a vigliante would

you can see a woman on the ground with an officer laid on top administering 5 punches towards the head of the woman, with other officers surrounding.

No indication as to how she came to have her trousers around her ankles then?

The Guardian seem to have quite a bit about it all

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2028849,00.html

The Guardian seem to have quite a bit about it all

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2028849,00.html


They have the video on that page as well.

If anybody is interested, you can right click the bottom of the stairs and 'zoom in' for a better view of the incident itself

Utterly disgraceful. A total failure on the part of the police. The woman was lying down on her back at the time and could and should have been handled differently.

Is anyone actually surprised by the behaviour of the police? Its nothing new is it?.

Utterly disgraceful. A total failure on the part of the police. The woman was lying down on her back at the time and could and should have been handled differently.

Having now read the recently released news reports and viewed (several times) the footage, that is a massive presumption on your behalf.

Were you personally present at the incident? Have you spoken directly to those involved? Were you at the Court hearing that ultimately led to the release of the video? Have you read the comments of the female who, quite openly, states that she had been drinking brandy and can't remember anything of the incident? Even her Father admits that her epileptic fits can cause her to be violent.

I can assure you that the IPCC will be proverbially 'licking their lips' at the thought of conducting a thorough investigation into the incident and if the Officer is found guilty of misdemeanor, then he shall deserve whatever punishment they think fit.

However, I doubt very much that a SYP spokesperson would openly state to the press - prior to such an investigation - that the organisation was "satisfied with the way the incident was handled and happy with the conduct of the Officer" if that was not the case.

See the PC crowd have jumped to conclusion already :rolleyes:

To summarise: a person (Later convicted of the crime she is accused of at the time of the video) resists arrest and the police have to use force to handcuff her.

No story here, oh until we bring the race card into play that is. Now it's in the Guardian and on the BBC with "race relations" types stirring it up as well.

Sorry but this is a storm in a PC teacup.

Having now read the recently released news reports and viewed (several times) the footage, that is a massive presumption on your behalf.

Were you personally present at the incident? Have you spoken directly to those involved? Were you at the Court hearing that ultimately led to the release of the video? Have you read the comments of the female who, quite openly, states that she had been drinking brandy and can't remember anything of the incident? Even her Father admits that her epileptic fits can cause her to be violent.

No, no and yes to your questions. I've a lengthy career in psychiatry behind me, the last few years in a secure unit so I have a fair deal of experience in situations like the one in this video. Those officers failed to contain a woman who, although clearly agitated and distressed, was in no position to offer a major threat to their safety. There isn't any kind of officially sanctioned behaviour management strategy that I know where repeatedly punching a person is a legitimate option. It was an assault.

See the PC crowd have jumped to conclusion already :rolleyes:

To summarise: a person (Later convicted of the crime she is accused of at the time of the video) resists arrest and the police have to use force to handcuff her.

No story here, oh until we bring the race card into play that is. Now it's in the Guardian and on the BBC with "race relations" types stirring it up as well.

Sorry but this is a storm in a PC teacup.

'Scuse me barny, but since when did resisting arrest (she was already on the ground when she was punched!) deserve being repeatedly smacked around?
If she was your girlfriend who'd gone a bit bonkers would you still be happy to see her treated that way?

No, no and yes to your questions. I've a lengthy career in psychiatry behind me, the last few years in a secure unit so I have a fair deal of experience in situations like the one in this video. Those officers failed to contain a woman who, although clearly agitated and distressed, was in no position to offer a major threat to their safety. There isn't any kind of officially sanctioned behaviour management strategy that I know where repeatedly punching a person is a legitimate option. It was an assault.

Perhaps the Officer was 'agitated and distressed' Halibut.

Was her behaviour 'an assault' on the officer?..... in his mind?

Perhaps the Officer was 'agitated and distressed' Halibut.

Was her behaviour 'an assault' on the officer?..... in his mind?

May well have been, but that doesn't make it Ok for him to repeatedly punch her. I'd like to think that people who are paid to protect the public would try and do that without recourse to excessive violence.

Having zoomed that in twice to get a closer look....

Wasn't she face down at the time? :huh:

Halibut, you've answered no, no and yes, but you were asked four questions, so what did the 'yes' relate to?

Having zoomed that in twice to get a closer look....

Wasn't she face down at the time? :huh:

Halibut, you've answered no, no and yes, but you were asked four questions, so what did the 'yes' relate to?

If she was face down that's even more inexcusable. I did mess up on the no and yes thing. No to the first three, yes to the last - I have heard at least some of what the woman said.

May well have been, but that doesn't make it Ok for him to repeatedly punch her. I'd like to think that people who are paid to protect the public would try and do that without recourse to excessive violence.

I may be mistaken, and am always eager to add to my knowledge base: my understanding is.......


They are not paid to 'protect the public'.

They are paid to enforce the laws of Queen Elizabeth the Second.

They are the last means of enforcement that exist short of the young man in green with a rifle.

no one can accuse me of being one of the "PC" brigade as halibut will probably say (we have locked horns once or twice) but this is a copper over-reacting and as per usual it being whitewashed over yeah a woman on her back really needed battering

bull **** anyone who would have done this without a police uniform on would have been charged with assult at the least

No, no and yes to your questions. I've a lengthy career in psychiatry behind me, the last few years in a secure unit so I have a fair deal of experience in situations like the one in this video. Those officers failed to contain a woman who, although clearly agitated and distressed, was in no position to offer a major threat to their safety. There isn't any kind of officially sanctioned behaviour management strategy that I know where repeatedly punching a person is a legitimate option. It was an assault.

Don't want to appear sarcastic, but I asked four questions yet only received three responses:-"No, No, Yes" - replying to which questions I am unsure.

However, the Officer gave an account (under oath) that he was being spat at; attempts were made to bite him; efforts were made by her to grab and kick him in the genitals.

I'm sorry, but if I had been subjected to such a horrendous attack then I would have resorted to whatever form of self defence I could have thought of at that particular moment, whether it was "officially sanctioned behaviour management strategy" or not.

Reasonable self defence in a particular circumstance, as you will be aware, does not constitute "an assault".

bull **** anyone who would have done this without a police uniform on would have been charged with assult at the leastJust to poke a fly into the ointment here - if they'd have done alot of other things the police did that night, they'd also have been done for false imprisonment and kidnapping, so that arguement doesn't work I'm afraid

However, the Officer gave an account (under oath) that he was being spat at; attempts were made to bite him; efforts were made by her to grab and kick him in the genitals. A well trained person can manage that without resorting to punching.
I'm sorry, but if I had been subjected to such a horrendous attack then I would have resorted to whatever form of self defence I could have thought of at that particular moment, whether it was "officially sanctioned behaviour management strategy" or not. A horrendous attack from a woman lying down beneath you? Who is possibly drunk, possibly post epileptic seizure? When you have plenty of back - up from other men armed with batons?
Reasonable self defence in a particular circumstance, as you will be aware, does not constitute "an assault".If you think that looks lke reasonable self defence I dread to think what unreasonable would look like[/QUOTE]

Just to poke a fly into the ointment here - if they'd have done alot of other things the police did that night, they'd also have been done for false imprisonment and kidnapping, so that arguement doesn't work I'm afraid

so you agree that the police can do whatever they want? i hope your never on the rough end of such treatment from the boys in blue, i never had such treatment from police and would never like to, i hope this woman gets the police officer to court his actions were unacceptable he used more than 'reasonable' force one maybe two hits on the woman's arm would have caused her arm to be "deadened" NOT five!

When you have plenty of back - up from other men armed with batons?Ah, you think she would have been better off walloped with a baton then? :confused:

....he used more than 'reasonable' force one maybe two hits on the woman's arm would have caused her arm to be "deadened" NOT five!given a utopian set of circumstances, maybe

She was, however, drunk, high on adrenaline, and fighting tooth and nail to resist arrest. Somehow I doubt she was lying perfectly still so the first 'deadening' blow could be landed accurately


PS - I haven't made a judgement here - I've merely raised issues


This thread is a very interesting testimony as to why juries shouldn't be selected from the public at random :suspect:

I watched the Newsnight program and caught this and the question seems to be did the officer use more force than was required. Lots of people seem to be really upset that this was a woman who according to the police had to be punched or hit forcefully on the arm to deaden it so they could get it round to handcuff her. If she was attempting to really hurt him then he did nothing wrong a violent individual had to be restrained, end of story.

A well trained person can manage that without resorting to punching.
A horrendous attack from a woman lying down beneath you? Who is possibly drunk, possibly post epileptic seizure? When you have plenty of back - up from other men armed with batons?
If you think that looks lke reasonable self defence I dread to think what unreasonable would look like[/QUOTE]

Whether I ,or indeed yourself, consider that the Officer's actions in the difficult circumstances he was presented with were reasonable or otherwise, are merely our points of view.

As I mentioned earlier, the good folk of the IPCC shall ultimately make the decision.

if she had committed a more serious offence, a beating might have been in order

if she had committed a more serious offence, a beating might have been in order

Stop wasting bandwidth. Clown.

Stop wasting bandwidth. Clown.

this post being a perfect example of how not to :confused: :hihi:

no one can accuse me of being one of the "PC" brigade as halibut will probably say (we have locked horns once or twice) but this is a copper over-reacting and as per usual it being whitewashed over yeah a woman on her back really needed battering

bull **** anyone who would have done this without a police uniform on would have been charged with assult at the least

and that is correct...actually, it would have been assault and battery..

tut tut tut a very sad affair

Someone pass a tissue - I'm drowning in bleeding hearts :rant:

All those who have chosen to criticise the police, please explain how they are supposed to arrest people who don't want to "come quietly".

No doubt next time someone upsets Halibut or Meaks' sense of right and wrong, you will insist someone comes round and gives them a jolly good seeing to. Get real.

It used to be an old school tactic to pull trousers down to stop people kicking out in the good old days.
I spent a few years working with people with quite severe epilepsy as a carer and it is true that they can become very violent before what everybody thinks is an epileptic seizure.
There are many different types of Epilepsy, most people are aware of the " fall on the floor with jerking movements" but there are 20 or 30 differing types of seizure. The most common comment about somebody having a seizure in a club or pub is that they shouldn't be there because of flashing lights ect but photosensitive Epilepsy isn't very common from what I remember.
It does depend on the type of epilepsy. If she is Epileptic it sounds like an absence seizure, it only has to last a couple of seconds but the person involved has no control or memory of what has happened and those seconds can be violent.
Of cause what she did could also be a result of an alcohol blackout which can also lead to violence and in my experience is very similar.

It would be interesting to find out how long the security bloke has been at niche and it the policeman had been up the stairs before. Most times I've seen stuff like this happen it has been in a blind spot.

Bloody hell, I've just read that back and i sound reasonably sensible.

i agree with an earlier poster - if this person didn't have on a police uniform, everyone would be up in arms (can you imagine if they were asian and the woman was white?). and it as nothing to do with PC, in fact, my guess is that most people who refer to 'PC' have no idea what it actually is and are simply referring to the commonly held perception of it that is purported by a right wing media.

anyone with any degree of restraint training would not need to punch a woman repeatedly when she's laying face down. if she's resisitng arrest she could easily be dealt with from that position, high on adrenalin or not. sorry, but i'd be surprised to hear anyone with any knowledge of restraint/martial arts/combat training say any differently.

Whilst it looks like the police may have taken the restraint of this young woman too far, I think there's another issue here.

The young woman in question claims to be epileptic, and she is the mother of a two year old child. It appears she was drunk (is that safe when you epilepsy?), violent and had committed a crime. If she hadn't been behaving this way she surely wouldn't have been in this position, would she?

Her family must be really proud of her.

there talkin about this story on gmtv now

I may be mistaken, and am always eager to add to my knowledge base: my understanding is.......


They are not paid to 'protect the public'.

They are paid to enforce the laws of Queen Elizabeth the Second.

They are the last means of enforcement that exist short of the young man in green with a rifle.

Aren’t the police here to "protect and serve";
Utterly disgraceful, you can plainly see the officer at her feet knelt down only using 1 hand/arm to restrain her, surely if she was resisting arrest that much all officers would have been using both hands.

Hang on, what's not excusable is being so obnoxious that you get chucked out of a club, smashing all the windows in somebodies car, ignoring your mate who's trying to calm you down, then resisting arrest, then smacking a Police officer in the face, then trying to run away.

Frankly, at that point I personally couldn't care less what treatment they get.



Epileptic fit? Yea right! Excuse me if I appear sceptical.

ive just seen this (and the cctv footage) on the bbc, and am absolutely disgusted by the behaviour of the police officers in question. i know northern women can be strong as oxes, but does it really take that number of large, trained men to restrain one woman, who is of pretty slight build? punching someone five times is uncalled for, especially when on the video it can be seen very clearly that the punches follow each other in quick succession, so the officer in question has hardly waited to check the impact that his punches have had on the woman. having seen sheffield police in action on many occassions, i can say im not suprised by this, im just pleased that theyre being pulled up for such behaviour with such publicity. yes, the woman committed a crime, but does that give police the right to batter her? god help us all if that is what is classed as reasonable force.

Anyone who thinks the policeman acted reasonably is as bad as him in my opinion.

Why should a woman be punched 5 times by a man 'attempting to restrain her'???? He has been quoted as saying he hit her as hard as he was physically able. That must be pretty hard!!

If 3 coppers can't restrain one woman between them then at the very least they need retraining. The copper who did the punching should be thrown out of the police force. But no that won't happen because punching a woman doesn't seem to be that bad, at least according to some of the views on here.:loopy:

i think that the fact that none of the other officers did anything when he was punching her tells us a lot -- they didnt think that it was excessive, otherwise surely at least one of them would have pulled him off?

Hang on, what's not excusable is being so obnoxious that you get chucked out of a club, smashing all the windows in somebodies car, ignoring your mate who's trying to calm you down, then resisting arrest, then smacking a Police officer in the face, then trying to run away.

Frankly, at that point I personally couldn't care less what treatment they get.



Epileptic fit? Yea right! Excuse me if I appear sceptical.

I totally agree Tony, but no doubt the "let's have a dig at the coppers" brigade will keep up the rant about police brutality until they get the bobby in question sacked.

Having had to deal with people who are violent and trying to resist arrest I can assure the bleeding hearts that five blows rarely register in their minds, all they are interested in doing is hurting you so they can escape.

Hang on, what's not excusable is being so obnoxious that you get chucked out of a club, smashing all the windows in somebodies car, ignoring your mate who's trying to calm you down, then resisting arrest, then smacking a Police officer in the face, then trying to run away.

Frankly, at that point I personally couldn't care less what treatment they get.

Epileptic fit? Yea right! Excuse me if I appear sceptical.

Well said Tony. I find it hard to have any sympathy for someone who has a medical condition yet throws brandy down her neck. It happens in every town on every weekend and I'm sick of it. Sick of having a night out spoilt because a moron doesn't know their limit and then has a fight or throws up or smashes property.

She said "I've got a 14-year-old son, he's actually seen this footage. How do I explain to him that this is justified, regarding the police?" . Perhaps she should be explaining her own anti-social behaviour.

Yes, the police were too heavy handed, but if she hadn't done what she did, she wouldn't have been arrested.

Finally, to all the amateur Clouseaus out there - the video footage on the web is of poor quality at best. Leave it to the professionals to study.

I heard about this on the radio on my way to work, knowing full well this arguement would ensue! You could even put money on who would be screaming 'police brutality'!

We do not have the full facts, but I am inclined to agree with the sentiment from Tony 100%...

Hang on, what's not excusable is being so obnoxious that you get chucked out of a club, smashing all the windows in somebodies car, ignoring your mate who's trying to calm you down, then resisting arrest, then smacking a Police officer in the face, then trying to run away.

Frankly, at that point I personally couldn't care less what treatment they get.

Epileptic fit? Yea right! Excuse me if I appear sceptical.

Hang on, what's not excusable is being so obnoxious that you get chucked out of a club, smashing all the windows in somebodies car, ignoring your mate who's trying to calm you down, then resisting arrest, then smacking a Police officer in the face, then trying to run away.

Frankly, at that point I personally couldn't care less what treatment they get.



Epileptic fit? Yea right! Excuse me if I appear sceptical.

So the woman concerned may have behaved badly? Ok. Does that really make Ok for a policeman to punch her repeatedly when she's in no position to defend herself? If we follow that line of logic then every person who gets chucked out of a club is fair game for a good beating. Is that really what you want to see?

[QUOTE=alchresearch;2024498]
She said "I've got a 14-year-old son, he's actually seen this footage. How do I explain to him that this is justified, regarding the police?" . Perhaps she should be explaining her own anti-social behaviour.
QUOTE]


?eh? The girl is question is TWENTY!!!!! Think you should read the thread and reports properly first before commenting!!!

I think that the police are still human and can let their emotions get carried away with all the adrenaline etc.

I was once a witness to police "action" - luckily for the guy concerned I was able to detail exactly waht happened - needless to say no charges were made against the guy but there again nothing was done to the police either and I never heard anything from the police regarding the incident either!!!!

So not everything is as black and white as it might at first seem.

So the woman concerned may have behaved badly? Ok. Does that really make Ok for a policeman to punch her repeatedly when she's in no position to defend herself? If we follow that line of logic then every person who gets chucked out of a club is fair game for a good beating. Is that really what you want to see?

I bet she doesn't do it again.

Hang on, what's not excusable is being so obnoxious that you get chucked out of a club, smashing all the windows in somebodies car, ignoring your mate who's trying to calm you down, then resisting arrest, then smacking a Police officer in the face, then trying to run away.

Frankly, at that point I personally couldn't care less what treatment they get.



Epileptic fit? Yea right! Excuse me if I appear sceptical.

I have to agree with you there Tony, If the copper was trying to hurt her or was doing other than he claims i.e trying to restrain her, he would not have limited his actions to punching her arm.
I am listening to radio Sheffield at the moment and it's now become a race issue. The news team have trotted out every "ethnic" spokesman they can find to try and put a racial spin on the story, one pillock even started banging on about slavery! For goodness sake the woman was out of order and the police did what they had to do to arrest her. They did not carry on beating her after she was under control as with the incident in Los Angeles a few years ago which the race card team are comparing these events to.

So we have another devisive police against ethnics story which is rubbish but it will add fuel to the fire and further strain on the fabric of our society just because the media need to big up the story to fill the news.

Fault in my my opinion lies with the girl for commiting the crime, the police man for not knowing when to stop or how far to go but the main blame lies with the media.
The picture they are painting is of a poor victim who was in the wrong place at the wrong time and not a criminal who was commiting a crime.
If she was at home looking after her kids then this wouldnt have happened but still, 5 punches to the arm seems a little bit too much.
And the racisim angle is a joke but typical. I mean, why ask one of the top black cops in the country what he thinks about it unless they are playing the good old fashioned race card?

didnt the women admit and get convicted for the criminal damage?if so then the details of the crime and the arrest will have been disclosed to the court and her solicitor i should imagine that the officer put in his evidence that he struck her as she was resisting arrest, so why didnt she try to sue the force then? the only reason she is doing it now is because of the cctv fotage which doesnt show clearly what happened all shes after is some compensation for the situation that she caused.

After seeing the video, reading about her actions (in the club, outside to the security guards car, and to the poilce officer arresting her), IMO SHE GOT WHAT SHE DESERVED!

If she hadn't put herself in that position, and she had acted within the law when told to, this wouldn't have happened.

She only has herself to blame.

Interestingly though:

1. Why would this only cause such a storm in our country?

2. Why is she doing TV interviews? If anything like this had happened to me I'd be morified about my idiotic, thug like behaviour, hang my head in shame and hide away.

So the woman concerned may have behaved badly? Ok. Does that really make Ok for a policeman to punch her repeatedly when she's in no position to defend herself? If we follow that line of logic then every person who gets chucked out of a club is fair game for a good beating. Is that really what you want to see?

She should not be trying to defend herself, if she had surrended to arrest when first challenged she would not have been in the position at the bottom of the stairs with a copper hitting her. Don't try to read more into the events than what happened, she was out of order and the police did what was necessary to arrest her end of story

The young woman in question claims to be epileptic, and she is the mother of a two year old child. It appears she was drunk (is that safe when you epilepsy?), violent and had committed a crime. If she hadn't been behaving this way she surely wouldn't have been in this position, would she?

Her family must be really proud of her.

You took the words right out of my mouth!

If she'd gladly given herself up for arrest in the first place none of this would've happened. She's now talking about a personal prosecution, perhaps she would also like to pay more tax than us for taking up all them officers due to her stupidity :rant:

I bet she doesn't do it again.

Here, here.

I agree that the force used by officer with the last 4 or 5 punches seems rather excessive. But the fact stands that if she had behaved her self in the first place and not done what she did, the Police wouldn't have been called, typical modern day spoilt little brat.

Is anyone actually surprised by the behaviour of the police? Its nothing new is it?.

No...the miners saw a lot of that a few years ago......

you can see a woman on the ground with an officer laid on top administering 5 punches towards the head of the woman, with other officers surrounding.

how can you say that it was towards her head?? all u can see is the punches, the women has no facial marks, this was at her arm..


YES it was totaly bang out of order, and that much force on a young women is NOT needed, was he a whimp and could'nt control a 9stone women:loopy:

Hang on, what's not excusable is being so obnoxious that you get chucked out of a club, smashing all the windows in somebodies car, ignoring your mate who's trying to calm you down, then resisting arrest, then smacking a Police officer in the face, then trying to run away.

Frankly, at that point I personally couldn't care less what treatment they get.


Epileptic fit? Yea right! Excuse me if I appear sceptical.

well i'm glad i'm not related top you then.. your a mod, aren't you supposed to mod this board, instead of making stupid remraks like that!!

i take it you know nothing about this !!

smashin ALL windows on somebodys car??
ignoring mates who were calming her down??
resisting arrest??
epileptic fit??

please get ALL your facts together

2. Why is she doing TV interviews? If anything like this had happened to me I'd be morified about my idiotic, thug like behaviour, hang my head in shame and hide away.


She's after the sympathy vote, she obviously thinks that all the UK populous are as naive as her to believe that she is an innocent party and is trying to get a public servant sacked.

well i'm glad i'm not related top you then.. your a mod, aren't you supposed to mod this board, instead of making stupid remraks like that!!


Being a mod doesn't mean that he is not allowed to join in with a debate. Just because he doesn't have the same view point as you doesn't mean it is less valid.

an absolute disgrace. i wonder how he could explain that to his wife or his mother.

well i'm glad i'm not related top you then.. your a mod, aren't you supposed to mod this board, instead of making stupid remraks like that!!



Moderators are allowed to post on topics on here.

What they don't have to put up with is abuse from you or any other suers. Now, chill out - Tony can be quite patient but I'm not currently renowned for that positve character trait.

I would be ashamed to appear on TV if I were her, as it said, she took exception to being thrown out of a club, and in retaliation decided to smash up the (I guess bouncers) car, If I saw anyone doing that to any car, I would gladly see them get a beating.
Then she resisted arrest, which in turn made them both fall down the stairs, this could have caused far more injury than a dead arm (broken neck etc) so at this point I assume she didnt care for her own safety.

you can see a woman on the ground with an officer laid on top administering 5 punches towards the head of the woman, with other officers surrounding.
Wow, despite the CCTV footage providing no clues where she was hit, and despite the commentator an expert also saying it depends where she was hit, you know from your arm chair it was on the head, your in the wrong job! (unless your already a physic :hihi: )

They said this was by the Niche nightclub.

It looks more like the loading bay behind Corporation.



Just heard on Hallam "A black girl was punched..."

Why do reporters bring the race card up on every available occasion.

Most violent crime involves alcohol.

This was a violent, drunk and dangerous person who needed to be restrained. If she had been badly hurt then her sort would have been quick to see a solicitor and get her damaged face photographed so she could get some "compo".

I would like to see this kind of action taken against every dangerous drunk until we have the streets safe for decent people again.

Meanwhile, PC Daniel Cofill aged 21 yrs lies in a vegetative state at his home, being cared for 24/7 by his family. This lad, a young officer, tried to deal with an incident whilst off duty in Bromley in July last year. For his trouble, he was knocked to the ground and kicked unconcious and probably will never regain any real measure of life and health. His attackers were sentenced to nine and five and a half years, which were both reduced on appeal, they will be out in five years - whilst Daniel will still have many , many years of dependant care and no quality of life.

At the same time, assaults on Police are being looked at as a potential fixed penalty fine with no court appearance.

Unless you were at the scene of the job on CCTV, you may have an opinion - and you are entitled to that. Please remember that the job of the Police is difficult, and they are victimised too - there may be far more to the CCTV job than any of you know.

Why did I mention Daniel here? Because officers like him need bearing in mind when anything like this takes place. Policing the streets is horrendously difficult and dangerous, and your officers are all aware of the threats to them and their health - and from there to their familys future.

No doubt, if there is blame to be put to anyone, the IPCC will do their best with the enquiry. If there was any major concern - the SYP would hardly come out and make the comments that they have.

She's after the sympathy vote, she obviously thinks that all the UK populous are as naive as her to believe that she is an innocent party and is trying to get a public servant sacked.

I absolutely agree.

Yes the police were in the wrong (going on that video footage) but this woman is by no means innocent. I wonder how much compensation she will get?

This does look like it happened behind what was Berlins (in my day!!)

well i'm glad i'm not related top you then.. your a mod, aren't you supposed to mod this board, instead of making stupid remraks like that!!

i take it you know nothing about this !!

smashin ALL windows on somebodys car??
ignoring mates who were calming her down??
resisting arrest??
epileptic fit??

please get ALL your facts together

Tonys Remarks seem to be perfectly reasonable to me, he is entitled to his opinion on the subject and he is just as entitled to contribute to the thread as anyone else and does not deserve personal insults from you. I don't agree with what you have posted on this thread and may offer my interpretations and thoughts in return, what I won't do is insult you and I as a forum member expect the same curtesy in return. The mods may wish to have a word with you on this.

After seeing the video, reading about her actions (in the club, outside to the security guards car, and to the poilce officer arresting her), IMO SHE GOT WHAT SHE DESERVED!

If she hadn't put herself in that position, and she had acted within the law when told to, this wouldn't have happened.

She only has herself to blame.

Interestingly though:

1. Why would this only cause such a storm in our country?
It wouldn't. Remember Rodney King?
2. Why is she doing TV interviews? If anything like this had happened to me I'd be morified about my idiotic, thug like behaviour, hang my head in shame and hide away.[/QUOTE]
Why the hell not? Maybe she's kind of p'ed off at receiving a beating from the police?

a) if she didn't resist arrest it wouldn't have happened.
b) if she wasn't breaking the law in the first place she wouldn't need to be arrested, therefore it wouldn't have happened.

This is just ANOTHER attempt for a bit of compensation with the 'race card' thrown in for good measure.

I think that too many Police where involved for such a small incident, however after watching the clip a few times, it appears that these are not punches to the face/head they appear to be an attempt made for the "criminal" to release their grip.

:thumbsup: to the Police.

In response to the "what if it was your girlfriend/wife?" post, I would be absolutely appauled - but my other half wouldn't be vandalising cars or being arrested in the first place!!

they interviewed a guy on gmtv this morning Ruggie Johnson claiming that this was a racist attack as the girl was black

I listened to the report on The World Tonight on R4 yesterday. They had some guy saying she was punched in the head...Untrue. They also said she'd drunk a full bottle of brandy before the incident! Call me picky, but what is an epileptic doing drinking a full bottle of spirits? BTW, she had no recollection of the incident.

Most violent crime involves alcohol.

This was a violent, drunk and dangerous person who needed to be restrained. If she had been badly hurt then her sort would have been quick to see a solicitor and get her damaged face photographed so she could get some "compo".

I would like to see this kind of action taken against every dangerous drunk until we have the streets safe for decent people again.

KenH your first two sentences are absolutely correct. I've highlighted the most important part, however. Restraint. I have personally been involved in many restraints of violent individuals and never once have myself or my colleagues felt it neccessary to repeatedly punch a person to subdue them. It simply isn't neccessary and there are plenty of techniques available to restrain even the most aggressive of individuals which don't involve inflicting major violence upon them.

Anyone who thinks the policeman acted reasonably is as bad as him in my opinion.


If you think that sort of remark is going to alter anyones opinion, you are deluded as to your own importance.

The woman demonsrated herself to be a danger to both people and property, she resisted arrest and assaulted a police officer. The video does look shocking but the important fact, which most people have missed, is that the woman was uninjured in the arrest. Surely a police officer punching someone five times in the head, as is alledged, would result in considerable injury and probably unconciousness?

This is yet another case of a person who thinks they can behave how they like in public, knock people about and damage peoples property, and then want to complain when they get some of it back.

I bet if she had got home and found her car vandalised, she would have been straight on the phone to the police! :rant:

Maybe she's kind of p'ed off at receiving a beating from the police?

It's interesting how a few more snippets are emerging isn't it? It's also interesting how the SY Police Chief Constable is not having any nonsense and is standing four square with his officer. I wonder what else he knows about the event?



Maybe when the Police Officer thumped her arm he was a bit p'ed off because she was trying to rip off his testicles at the time?

It's going to be an interesting few days.

Tonys Remarks seem to be perfectly reasonable to me, he is entitled to his opinion on the subject and he is just as entitled to contribute to the thread as anyone else and does not deserve personal insults from you. I don't agree with what you have posted on this thread and may offer my interpretations and thoughts in return, what I won't do is insult you and I as a forum member expect the same curtesy in return. The mods may wish to have a word with you on this.


None of the facts that he has pointed out are correct though, there was an incident involving a car, not smashing ALL the windows, her mates weren't claming her down, and she wasn’t having a fit

It's interesting how a few more snippets are emerging isn't it? It's also interesting how the SY Police Chief Constable is not having any nonsense and is standing four square with his officer. I wonder what else he knows about the event?



Maybe when the Police Officer thumped her arm he was a bit p'ed off because she was trying to rip off his testicles at the time?

Maybe so Tony, but I still maintain that there are other ways of restraining a violent individual without needing to punch them repeatedly.

What would you do if a wild drunk was resisting arrest whilst trying to remove your manhood?

Maybe so Tony, but I still maintain that there are other ways of restraining a violent individual without needing to punch them repeatedly.

Why should we care? If the violent drunk underclass attack people and damage property then why should we care if the police have to be a bit tough in return?

She comitted Criminal damage. She then ressisted arrest which is a criminal offence. Why is she suddenely a victim? her actions make her a criminal and as such she loses her liberty when arrested, the officer has done his job to the letter of the law and it is now up to a court of law to decide if he has acted irresponsibly.

Why should we care? If the violent drunk underclass attack people and damage property then why should we care if the police have to be a bit tough in return?

We should care because the police are there to protect and serve - if we all sit around saying 'oh well,fair do's, the lass was asking for it' we're approving of the police using excessive and unreasonable force.

So we have another devisive police against ethnics story which is rubbish but it will add fuel to the fire and further strain on the fabric of our society just because the media need to big up the story to fill the news.

Have to agree with that. I had 'Breakfast' TV on this morning and the BBC were making a five course dinner out of this story.

The officer concerned though does seem to have made a serious error in claiming his punching of the girl was in 'self defence'. The series of fast repeated punches seen in the video clip suggest that he lost his temper whilst trying to handcuff her and whilst she was being restrained by himself and four others.

And why was she dragged to the van like a sack of spuds with her trousers round her ankles ? There were enough of them to frog-march her; unless of course she was unconcious, - in which case an ambulance should have been called.

Hopefully this incident will remind the police that CCTV is a double-edged sword and discourage the use of gatuitous violence.

Well firstly, I don't see this as a racist attack, this sort of behaviour seems fairly typical of South Yorkshire police and is meted out to people of all ethnicities. At least this was my experience from growing up in Sheffield.

Secondly, while the notion that 'she deserved it' is quite sickening, it is entirely irrelavent. We need to look at this in terms of proportionality and it appears from the footage that the force exerted was above and beyond what was called for. Five policemen, one drunk women.

It's clear that if the police feel that this amount of force is necessary in these situations then they need to review their restraint training otherwise no policemen would be safe unless he is with four colleagues. Surely this is a misuse of resources.

Something has gone very badly wrong with the whole process here and it's very peculiar that this CCTV footage has not been viewed by the Chief Constable of SY Police.

protect and serve -

That's exactly what the Police were doing when they locked her up. As RazorSHarp says, she gave up her rights the instant that she chose to become a criminal.

Why should we care? If the violent drunk underclass attack people and damage property then why should we care if the police have to be a bit tough in return?

Spot on Ken.

The police have to put up with being punch bags for every drunk who wishes to avoid arrest these days, and then they have to listen to the bleeding hearts screaming about police brutality towards the ethnic minority after the bobby has had to use force to detain the violently abusive drunk.

She comitted Criminal damage. She then ressisted arrest which is a criminal offence. Why is she suddenely a victim? her actions make her a criminal and as such she loses her liberty when arrested, the officer has done his job to the letter of the law and it is now up to a court of law to decide if he has acted irresponsibly.

She did indeed lose her liberty when arrested RazorSHarp, but what has that to do with the price of fish? Are we to tolerate a situation where it becomes acceptable for the police to be able to assault detainees willy-nilly, just becuase they want to?

She's a victim because she was violently assaulted. Pretty straigtforward really.

Hang on, what's not excusable is being so obnoxious that you get chucked out of a club, smashing all the windows in somebodies car, ignoring your mate who's trying to calm you down, then resisting arrest, then smacking a Police officer in the face, then trying to run away.

Frankly, at that point I personally couldn't care less what treatment they get.



Epileptic fit? Yea right! Excuse me if I appear sceptical.

FINALLY! A VOICE OF REASON ON THIS THREAD.

It is situations like these that scum can commit crimes without fear of punishment. Everyone on this thread is playing right into this 'poor victims' plot to drum up more sympathy that will probably culminate in a huge payout at the tax payers expense.

What about this poor Officer. He is upholding the law and comes across a young person (doesn't deserve the title of a lady) who refuses arrest and is causing criminal damage and to top it off assaults on officer. Can he make a claim against her? No, absolutely not. I would like to found some sort of fund towards this officer so that the real victims get the real support.

/rant.

That's exactly what the Police were doing when they locked her up. As RazorSHarp says, she gave up her rights the instant that she chose to become a criminal.

Tony, with respect that's b*llocks. Would you care to expand on that idea a little - ''she gave up her rights when she chose to become a criminal''?
No, she didn't and you can't point to any legislation that says otherwise.

Are we to tolerate a situation where it becomes acceptable for the police to be able to assault detainees willy-nilly,

That's quite a good turn of phrase, because assaulting the Police officers willy nilly appears to be exactly what she was doing to cause him to hit her arm.

I think that I also might have hit her arm a few times if she was wrenching my gonads off. What would you do?

She did indeed lose her liberty when arrested RazorSHarp, but what has that to do with the price of fish? Are we to tolerate a situation where it becomes acceptable for the police to be able to assault detainees willy-nilly, just becuase they want to?

She's a victim because she was violently assaulted. Pretty straigtforward really.

Let's turn that on it's head. Are the police supposed to put up with a violent criminal (she has been convicted) assaulting them? Are we really saying that it is acceptable for a violent drunk to try to grab a police officers testicles, whilst he does nothing about it?

I think not :nono:

Tony, with respect that's b*llocks.

There's another appropriate phase! (Please don't swear though ;))

She's a victim because she was violently assaulted.

You don't know that. Do you?

I bet she doesn't remember it either.

Have to agree with that. I had 'Breakfast' TV on this morning and the BBC were making a five course dinner out of this story.

The officer concerned though does seem to have made a serious error in claiming his punching of the girl was in 'self defence'. The series of fast repeated punches seen in the video clip suggest that he lost his temper whilst trying to handcuff her and whilst she was being restrained by himself and four others.

And why was she dragged to the van like a sack of spuds with her trousers round her ankles ? There were enough of them to frog-march her; unless of course she was unconcious, - in which case an ambulance should have been called.

Hopefully this incident will remind the police that CCTV is a double-edged sword and discourage the use of gatuitous violence.

I have to disagree with your second sentence if the officer had lost his temper he would not have punched her arm he would have picked another target. As for the trousers down business, the answers simple you can't kick out if your trousers are round your ankles, or walk hence you get dragged to the van.

So the woman concerned may have behaved badly? Ok. Does that really make Ok for a policeman to punch her repeatedly when she's in no position to defend herself? If we follow that line of logic then every person who gets chucked out of a club is fair game for a good beating. Is that really what you want to see?

"DEFINATELY !!!

She did indeed lose her liberty when arrested RazorSHarp, but what has that to do with the price of fish? Are we to tolerate a situation where it becomes acceptable for the police to be able to assault detainees willy-nilly, just becuase they want to?

She's a victim because she was violently assaulted. Pretty straigtforward really.

So this perfectly legislates for her criminal behaviour beforehand? I suppose if it was your car being smashed to bits you would still have the same opinion?

Don't be such a blind liberal. As said before, the only victim in this is the poor police officer who had to nullify a violent criminal irrespective of sex with appropriate action...and he did.

What would you do if a wild drunk was resisting arrest whilst trying to remove your manhood?

In the video footage the girl is lying face down on the floor while she is being punched and not in a position do do very much about the officer's 'manhood'.
There are also two other officers and two 'bouncers' helping to restrain her.

the police are trained to use whatever reasonalble force is nessecary to resolve the situation, in the officers opinion i would think that if she was resisting arrest and trying to grab his testicles he considered it reasonable to punch her in the arm, he could have also used his cs gas or baton.
all his evidence will have been documented and passed to her solicitor at the time she was convicted of the criminal damage so why didnt she say anything then?
i think the officer needs congratulating for what he did and not the race card been brought out,does anybody no what race the officer is?

That's exactly what the Police were doing when they locked her up. As RazorSHarp says, she gave up her rights the instant that she chose to become a criminal.

I find that a shocking statement. There are clearly defined rights that even criminals have when arrested by the police.

That's quite a good turn of phrase, because assaulting the Police officers willy nilly appears to be exactly what she was doing to cause him to hit her arm.

I think that I also might have hit her arm a few times if she was wrenching my gonads off. What would you do?


I'd do what I was taught and restrain her in such a fashion as to make it impossible for her to assault me or my colleagues without causing her damage or assaulting her. It's perfectly possible to do so. I know, because I've done it a number of times.

Come on... you're losing this one Halibut. I've a lot of respect for your opinions but I really think you're completely wrong on this one.

Like you've been there and done that a thousand times? ;)

No, not a thousand Tony, but over the course of a twenty year career I've been involved in dozens of restraints, so I know what I'm talking about.

I'd do what I was taught and restrain her in such a fashion as to make it impossible for her to assault me or my colleagues without causing her damage or assaulting her. It's perfectly possible to do so. I know, because I've done it a number of times.

Have you done it at half past stupid o'clock in the morning with a violent drunk who has been damaging cars, then just rolled you down a metal staircase and tried to rip your gonads off? I wonder if you would be so level headed then?

That's quite a good turn of phrase, because assaulting the Police officers willy nilly appears to be exactly what she was doing to cause him to hit her arm.

I think that I also might have hit her arm a few times if she was wrenching my gonads off. What would you do?

Ah, but remember Halibut is an expert in restraining violent drunks, he uses the vulcan death grip or some such. Perhaps he should offer his services to the South Yorkshire Police and join their training staff, obviously the millions of pounds we spend training officers each year is not being correctly targetted.

I have to disagree with your second sentence if the officer had lost his temper he would not have punched her arm he would have picked another target. As for the trousers down business, the answers simple you can't kick out if your trousers are round your ankles, or walk hence you get dragged to the van.

I don't see what evidence there is that he lost his temper. He hit her a few times on the arm in order for her to move her arm off his genitalia into a position where he could cuff her. I don't care if her trousers were round her ankles as he had no dignity in the first place otherwise she wouldn't be out drinking and smashing cars.

And why does anyone care if she was black or white? She was of the class "chav" and of the sub-class "drunken violent chav", being black doesn't have any bearing.

this is nuts. :loopy:

The officer was being assaulted. Not only does he say this, the other officers on the scene coroberate his story. Are they saying that police can't defand themselves?

Sure, there are probably less brutal ways of dealing with such situations but these officers have to make split second descisions and clearly the officer made his. In my opinion he made the correct one as well. Police in this country aren't issued with Tazers. If they were, that would have been the solution ZAP! she's down. Pepper spray wouldn't have done anything, she's drunk and highly enraged. Spraying a burning chemical in her eyes is just going to anger her further.

At the end of the day the officer had to make a choice. End the situation in a crude way or be possibly seriously injured by a suspect resisting arrest.
I bet he wishes he could have ended it without all this mess but police in the UK aren't equipped to handle violent criminals. Maybe thats why I was afraid to take my phone out of my pocket while I was walking up the hill from the Ibis hotel on the weekend.

The Tazer is the perfect solution. I don't give a toss how big and strong and violent you are. If you get hit with a tazer, you will go down without a fight.

I'd do what I was taught and restrain her in such a fashion as to make it impossible for her to assault me or my colleagues without causing her damage or assaulting her.

Yes I am sure she was the perfect voice of reason that night Halibut. Maybe he should have said "Go on lass, smash the windscreen and then lets have a chat about this over a nice cup of tea".

She'd have had a gun in the back of her neck in most other countries.

Comment from the SY Police Chief Constable. Note the last para:

"The Deputy Chief Constable, to ensure independence from myself, has decided that the officer will be withdrawn from public duties but not suspended.

"The officer draws a salary from the public purse and we will make use of his expertise and talent. But I don't want him put in a position where his welfare will be put at risk because he'll be dealing with the public.

"And also I want public confidence restored.

"The public needs to understand that there is more to this story, a full independent investigation must take place in order that the full facts can be placed before the public."

Maybe so Tony, but I still maintain that there are other ways of restraining a violent individual without needing to punch them repeatedly.

Quite right. He should have sprayed pepper spray into her eyes until she stopped being violent!

She'd have had a gun in the back of her neck in most other countries.

And in another coincidence, these countries don't have drunken violent yob cultures. Since visiting Egypt I have nothing but respect for the powers their law enforcements have without fear of explaining their actions after.

I can't believe people are making this girl out to be some sort of comic book super monster. And where did the idea come from that she was going for his balls?

This is clearly an emotive issue so we shouild stick to what we know. If we take a view based just on what the law states rather than our own prejudices it is clear that the girl was guilty of drunken aggressive behaviour for which she was arrested, charged and tried. The polieceman looks to have also acted in a questionable way ACCORDING TO THE LAW but has escaped any sort of disciplinary action. Justice has to be seen to be done.

So far it hasn't.

yes, the woman committed a crime, but does that give police the right to batter her? god help us all if that is what is classed as reasonable force.

Well she might not do it again! Probably the best thing for her and free's up the cells for other people.

This woman used to live near me and went to my old secondary school before she got kicked out. She has always been the same, violent and obnoxious - there's just no need for it.

And where did the idea come from that she was going for his balls?


The police officer stated this in his statement.

Have you done it at half past stupid o'clock in the morning with a violent drunk who has been damaging cars, then just rolled you down a metal staircase and tried to rip your gonads off? I wonder if you would be so level headed then?

The stupid o'clock bit - yes
The violent drunk bit - no, but mentally ill people can be just as aggressive and irrational as drunks.
Staircase, cars etc? - No, but having seen one of my colleagues violently assaulted, yes.

And in another coincidence, these countries don't have drunken violent yob cultures. Since visiting Egypt I have nothing but respect for the powers their law enforcements have without fear of explaining their actions after.

The Egyptian Police are notorious torturers, you really think the British Police should follow their example? Peruse this list and think again....

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=egyptian+torture&meta=

Yes I am sure she was the perfect voice of reason that night Halibut. Maybe he should have said "Go on lass, smash the windscreen and then lets have a chat about this over a nice cup of tea".

No, of course she wasn't, but that's not an excuse for assault.

You keep using this word "assault", but;
No officer has been charged
The Chief Constable is backing his officer in advance of an IPCC investigation.
That very footage was used in evidence in court to convict HER.
The Officer reported what happened immediately after the event in the custody suite.
The overwhelming evidence seems to be that he was trying to stop her seriously attacking him!

Come on Halibut.. get with the plan mate. ;)

Tazers ;) I tell thee

Tazers ;) I tell thee

No, bad plan. Significant number of Tazer related deaths in the USA.

but do the police get a grilling for using them? No.

One less crim' to worry about...

Sorry I got a bit carried away there. ;)

Everyone on this thread is playing right into this 'poor victims' plot to drum up more sympathy that will probably culminate in a huge payout at the tax payers expense.


Actually, if you read all the posts you'll see that the overwhelming majority of posters support the police. Unfortunately, the minority speak with a very loud voice in this country.

The Tazer is the perfect solution.

Not while someone's got hold of your goolies :hihi:

One less crim' to worry about...

Sorry I got a bit carried away there. ;)

Yes, you did. A bit like the policeman in the video.

http://news.aol.co.uk/cctv-captures-police-beating-woman/article/20070308041809990001

Good to see the comments by the Chief Constable on this issue - good indication of support and the full facts needing to come out.

Actually, if you read all the posts you'll see that the overwhelming majority of posters support the police. Unfortunately, the minority speak with a very loud voice in this country.

Yes, they have to sometimes or they'd get ignored. I support the police as it happens Chumley - they do a very difficult job pretty well most of the time. I just don't like it when they overstep the mark.

Not while someone's got hold of your goolies :hihi:

Thats just it. If they had tazers they wouldn't have needed to get too close to her.

Thats just it. If they had tazers they wouldn't have needed to get too close to her.

If they were properly trained ( or applied their training correctly ) the need wouldn't have arisen.

It's interesting that Nick Clegg has jumped on the bandwagon, condemning the "shocking violence" of the police. And only two weeks after putting a leaflet through my door trying to claim the Lib Dems were going to get tough on crime.

True colours always shine through.

It's interesting that Nick Clegg has jumped on the bandwagon, condemning the "shocking violence" of the police. And only two weeks after putting a leaflet through my door trying to claim the Lib Dems were going to get tough on crime.

True colours always shine through.

Being tough on crime and applying excessive violence to a woman on the ground aren't quite the same thing are they?

i think that the fact that none of the other officers did anything when he was punching her tells us a lot -- they didnt think that it was excessive, otherwise surely at least one of them would have pulled him off?

There's a time and place for that sort of behaviour.

I just don't like it when they overstep the mark.

You can't say that, you have no proof of what he did or what she did during the scuffle.

I support the police as it happens Chumley - they do a very difficult job pretty well most of the time. I just don't like it when they overstep the mark.

Then show some support! I've watched the footage a couple of times and frankly I can't see anything wrong. I've seen police officers all over the country administer much harder blows, with fists or batons, to get people to succumb.

Toni Comer is not Rodney King. She's a very naughty girl.

She comitted Criminal damage. She then ressisted arrest which is a criminal offence. Why is she suddenely a victim? her actions make her a criminal and as such she loses her liberty when arrested, the officer has done his job to the letter of the law and it is now up to a court of law to decide if he has acted irresponsibly.

Emboldening the word 'criminal' doesn't make your point any more convincing, y'know.

If what you said was true then it would be fine for officers arresting speeding drivers to tazer them as a matter of course because they'd done something criminal.

Just because she's done something criminal might result in her losing her liberty, but it no way gives the arresting officer the legal right to do anything he sees fit with her - the officer also has to work within the bounds of the law. Besides, police officers are not there to enforce the law - that's up to the judicial system - they're there to "keep the Queen's peace".

While I agree that officers are allowed to use "reasonable force" when arresting suspects, I don't believe it is reasonable for 4 officers to kneel on someone significantly smaller than themselves while another officer repeatedly punches them as hard as he can with his right fist (his words, not mine) in an effort to 'subdue' her. I can think of a great many names and phrases for actions of that nature, and 'legalised brutality conducted by a group of smug idiotic thugs' is only one of them.

South Yorkshire police may be happy with their officer's conduct - I for one am not.

You can't say that, you have no proof of what he did or what she did during the scuffle.

I can say that. I've been involved in dozens of violent restraints over the years. If the officer was having his genitals grabbed at there are several more reasonable ways of stopping that from happening than punching the woman.

?eh? The girl is question is TWENTY!!!!! Think you should read the thread and reports properly first before commenting!!!.

Apologies, I missed up my quoting from the BBC website. It should have read that the father should explain the anti social behaviour of the boy's sister.

It's interesting that Nick Clegg has jumped on the bandwagon, condemning the "shocking violence" of the police. And only two weeks after putting a leaflet through my door trying to claim the Lib Dems were going to get tough on crime.

True colours always shine through.

Wait until he sees this thread. ;)

To be fair, he's a pretty good politician, but it this thread does show the dangers of jumping on a bandwagon too early.

Note to Nick: Don't turn on mobile that journos have access to until you've read the Forum.

If they were properly trained ( or applied their training correctly ) the need wouldn't have arisen.

That's unfair.

They're city cops not the god damn SAS. They are trained as well as can be expected for the budget they are given.

Here's what I see happening (Without reading any other posts, so my judgement isn't twisted!)

The woman runs into the car park (Running away from the police?) and moves a black bag (?) and picks something up from the floor then runs upstairs. The police officer chases her and looks to be making the arrest speech or talking to her.

Some guy comes running in who doesn't look like a police officer and is followed away from the scene, when the 2nd officer is a distance away she makes a run for it pulling the other one down the stairs who when at the bottom sweeps her legs out from under her to stop her getting away, she struggles and they are joined by one the doormen and the other policeman, I don't see any punches yet...

More officers arrive and then there are 5 clear punches, they get the cuffs on and stand her up when she struggles again but is easier to control because of the cuffs and they walk her to the car when her trousers fall down because of the struggle and being pulled not pulled down deliberately.

The verdict?

She ran away at least twice, resisted arrest violently and was a danger to the officer - What did she pick up? The 5 blows were controlled and did the trick in getting the cuffs on when she tried to escape again. I don't think anything wrong was done here.

You don't know that. Do you?

I bet she doesn't remember it either.


... and here it is:

"She admitted being drunk at the time of the arrest, about which she had no memory. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/08/nbeat208.xml)"

and:

"Ms Comer, who is epileptic and remembers nothing of the incident, (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2029081,00.html)"

well, after watching the video numberous times with zoom these are my thoughts, when they came down the stairs did she not assult the officer first, making him force her to the floor, if he wanted to punch her because of her race wouldnt he have done it then, when no one was around to see it, if he had punched her in the head at that force, would there be no head/facial injury to the female? When she was getting dragged away, presumably whilst having a fit, did she not take the first 4 steps on her own accord, before they used force and dragged her. If the officer has done wrong then he should be thrown out of the force for such behaviour, but since the woman involved has already admitted she was drunk and violent then i reserve judgement

Toni Comer is not Rodney King. She's a very naughty girl.

Quite true. The attempt by race relations expert Ruggie johnson to turn this into some sort of race issue is quite wrong. What kind of race relations is he trying to encourage? It's purely a criminal matter, whatever the race of police and member of public. I believe the police are perfectly capable of using excessive force, whatever your race.

"But local race relations manager Ruggie Johnson, who first obtained the CCTV tape, said: "It is absolutely shocking indeed to think that images like these could be coming out of South Yorkshire.

"This is not the deep south, this is South Yorkshire." "

That's unfair.

They're city cops not the god damn SAS. They are trained as well as can be expected for the budget they are given.

Unfair? I think not. I was 'only' a Registered Mental Nurse and my team never had to beat anybody into submission. You don't need to be in the SAS to manage violence effectively and safely.

If she has no memory of the incident, how does she know the cuts and bruises were not done inside the club and not by the copper....

Selective memory anyone :D

You're talking like they laid into her face with steel toed boots! He punched her in the arm to stop her grabbing at his nuts! She's got "cuts and bruises" (probably just from the overall scuffle) I don't even think the force was excessive.

If she has no memory of the incident, how does she know the cuts and bruises were not done inside the club and not by the copper....

Selective memory anyone :D

I bet her memory gets better when the £'s signs start to flash up from her race relations "advisor's" :(

You're talking like they laid into her face with steel toed boots! He punched her in the arm to stop her grabbing at his nuts! She's got "cuts and bruises" (probably just from the overall scuffle) I don't even think the force was excessive.
She has probably caused more damage herself - another poster has already said that she is known to be violent.....

She should not get any compensation.....in fact she should be given the bill from the police :thumbsup:

Or even better, the cop involved should counter claim :hihi:

my team never had to beat anybody into submission.

did they ever have to restrain people who break the law and openly resist arrest? AFTER being hit in the face first?

Ruggie Johnson, from civil rights organisation The Monitoring Group North, which obtained the CCTV footage, said the images echoed those of the infamous beating of black motorist Rodney King by officers from Los Angeles in 1991.

He said: 'Images of a young woman being beaten to the ground by the police, stripped from the waist down and having dogs barking at her. It's absolutely disgraceful. This is not the Deep South, it's South Yorkshire.'

shame. I'd pay money to see the entire S.Yorks police mounted contingent dressed up in KKK garb and burning a cross at the top of Fargate.

I bet her memory gets better when the £'s signs start to flash up from her race relations "advisor's" :(Just to give the pot a quick stir - So why shouldnt the cop claim it was a racial attack on him ?

Why does everything have to be about race these days, it wasnt even bought up till that Ruggi Johnson or whatever his name is starting comparing Shefield to the deep south :huh:

No, not a thousand Tony, but over the course of a twenty year career I've been involved in dozens of restraints, so I know what I'm talking about.


Yes but have you been involved in restraints outside of a dodgy nightclub in the middle of the night?

This event did not happen in a controlled environment, say a hospital or prison, it was in an open environment with any number of posibilites that could put the officers life at risk.

Imagine you are that police office, you are trying to restrain a girl who is drunk and fitting outside of a club in the middle of the night. You know she has committed a crime and your job is to subdue her asap. Does she have any friends looking for her who would be more than happy to attack a cop? Does she have a knife concealled or gun?

I think the police did what was necessary in this instance.

Say this happened in a police station then I would not feel the same. It is a controlled enviroment where the officer doesn't really have to worry about their own safety.

I also don't agree with police using brutal force on criminals who have 'given' themselves up.

However, this girl was resisting arrest, quite violently. The police must have absolute powers to keep us all safe and if they now have to worry about how much force to use when somebody resists arrest then we are heading down a very sorry road.

For all the police officre knew, the girl could have had a needle on her with contaminated with HIV. I think he did the right thing.

And I'm sorry if this upsets some people, but don't do the crime if you can't handle the repercusions. THis girl was a criminal and even though I do agree to simply label all criminals as evil is wrong. Rehabilitation does work in many instances. However at the time of the event, I don't care how they are brought in, just get the scum off the streets.

Racially motivated - ********
Epileptic fit? How convenient. - ********.

Here's what I see happening (Without reading any other posts, so my judgement isn't twisted!)

The woman runs into the car park (Running away from the police?) and moves a black bag (?) and picks something up from the floor then runs upstairs. The police officer chases her and looks to be making the arrest speech or talking to her.

Some guy comes running in who doesn't look like a police officer and is followed away from the scene, when the 2nd officer is a distance away she makes a run for it pulling the other one down the stairs who when at the bottom sweeps her legs out from under her to stop her getting away, she struggles and they are joined by one the doormen and the other policeman, I don't see any punches yet...

More officers arrive and then there are 5 clear punches, they get the cuffs on and stand her up when she struggles again but is easier to control because of the cuffs and they walk her to the car when her trousers fall down because of the struggle and being pulled not pulled down deliberately.

What you've failed to mention in the "More officers arrive" bit is that when the blows to her head are delivered she's being knelt on by at least 4 people. What purpose do the blows serve seeing as she's being knelt on? Why doesn't being knelt on by 4 people count as being sufficiently subdued?

Oh, and she's probably easier to control in virtue of being punched in the head 5 times as hard as the officer could. I expect you'd be quite easy to control if you'd been punched in the head 5 times by a big burly bloke too.


The verdict?

She ran away at least twice, resisted arrest violently and was a danger to the officer - What did she pick up? The 5 blows were controlled and did the trick in getting the cuffs on when she tried to escape again. I don't think anything wrong was done here.

Oh well as long as the blows were 'controlled' that's OK then. Mr. Menezies was killed by being shot but it's all OK because the officer did it in a controlled fashion. Germany invaded Poland, but it was just fine because they controlled what they did and there was no danger of anyone being killed in an uncontrolled fashion. Terrorists crashed some planes into some buildings but it was all alright because at no point were they out of control of their actions. What utter nonsense! If anything the fact that he actually /decided/ to punch her in the head as hard as could he makes it worse.

It doesn't matter that she was under quite heavy restraint at the time and didn't look to be in any danger of running away again. It wasn't a police officer unnecessarily releasing his frustration on someone who'd made his job a bit harder (my heart bleeds for him, it really does) at all. No! It was all controlled.

What a fantastic excuse! I'll have to remember that one when I've been caught speeding - it's OK officer at no point was I out of control of my vehicle: The fact that my actions were entirely inappropriate is completely beside the point - at no time while driving my vehicle at 70mph in a 30mph zone did I ever make a snap or irrational decision - I was calm and controlled throughout.

Yes. I'm sure that will swing all future convictions in my favour.

Jeez.

who'd want to be a copper in modern britain? While I can't condone violence this girl is low life. Criminal damage and assault, her dad asking how he's to explain the action of the police to her 14 year old brother. Start by telling him just what his sister is. Maybe to much force was used and if the IPCC investigation finds the officer in the wrong then the full weight of the law must come down on him. However he's been removed from duties and must be going through a hard time now and for just doing his job. If people just stay on the right side of the law and have some respect then we wouldn't be having this debate.
Read somebodys post asking how you'd feel if it was their girfriend. Well if it had been my mrs, the locks would have been changed by now.

I'm not sure I would remember much if I had been punched in the head five times.

Anyway, it cuts both ways. Can I commit criminal acts as long as my victims don't remember them?

Before all you would be vigilantis get too carried away with your fantasies of saving the world through personal violence, think of this:

What if the government made alcohol illegal. If you were caught sneeking a quick can of beer would that justify the police assualting you? It reminds me of the german poet:

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

When your civil liberties are attacked, as an opponent of civil libertarianism who would help you? Thank god this girl has some people willing to speak up for her.

Racially motivated - ********
Epileptic fit? How convenient. - ********.

Translation :

1. Racially motivated - I want compensation

2. Epileptic Fit - I was drunk as a skunk, got violent and now trying to worm my way out of it (because of point 1)

yeah... thats about right....

Where does this punching "in/to the head" come from?

You cannot see the blows landing on the video.
The officer says that he punched her arms.
Ms Comer says that she cannot remember anything.

Were you there .. and saw something that we don't know about?

Just because she's done something criminal might result in her losing her liberty, but it no way gives the arresting officer the legal right to do anything he sees fit with her -


Check your laws again, I think you'll find he has the power to use whatever force necessary.

Why does everything have to be about race these days, it wasnt even bought up till that Ruggi Johnson or whatever his name is starting comparing Shefield to the deep south :huh:

Look at their website (http://themonitoringgroupnorth.org.uk).

"TMGN has obtained a small amount of funding to look at the long-term sustainability of the organization.
This work has just commenced and it is hoped that we will be able to identify sources of income, develop a business plan which will enable TMGN to tender for contracts. "

They obviously felt this chance of publicity was just too good to miss.

What I can not understand is, why a police man has to punch a girl 5 times. PUNCHING not slapping. Surely they could have used a more grappling means of force but no the Police yet again took measures into there own hands and hopefully justice will be served on them. Looks like deep south yorkshire red neck behaviour to me.

I'm not sure I would remember much if I had been punched in the head five times.



She wasn't punched in the bloody head!!! At very worst, they don't know where she was punched. The cop says in the arm. Why not believe him?

What I can not understand is, why a police man has to punch a girl 5 times. PUNCHING not slapping. Surely they could have used a more grappling means of force but no the Police yet again took measures into there own hands and hopefully justice will be served on them. Looks like deep south yorkshire red neck behaviour to me.

If you have nothing sensible to add to a debate dont!!!

Outside Niche, last July:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/6428865.stm


from the above link.... "As her hands became free she tried to grab handfuls of my genitals....."

:hihi: Thinks alot of himself doesn't he?

Look at their website (http://themonitoringgroupnorth.org.uk).



Shame they couldn't have got her name right:

"Toni Corma .... "

I see the need for officers to restrain someone acting in a violent manner, for self-preservation and for the protection of others... but the police officer admits to "hitting her as hard as I could", which could be looked upon as UN reasonable force.

we cannot prove that this woman was/ wasn't having a seizure at the time of the incident, but, speaking as someone who has epilepsy, I do think this woman was, perhaps imprudent, in going to a nightclub, where flashing lights can, in photosensitive epilepsy, induce a seizure and getting drunk (which she admited to being) ...again:- excess alcohol, plus epilepsy is NOT a wise mixture.

My personal take on it is that it the blame is to be shared, perhaps, 50-50:- the policeman was possibly a bit heavy-handed, but, had she not been intoxicated and violent, the police would not have been there in the first place, dealing with her vandalism of the bouncers' car.

Let's not forget, as well, that this happened at Niche!!! the police had to assume she was carrying at least one form of offensive weapon.

The beating the police gave that young woman was WRONG. No matter what she had done she did not deserve that. How many policeman do you need to restrain a young little lass ? The South Yorkshire Police need to be held to account over this awful incedent. Simple as that. The world is watching.

Shame they couldn't have got her name right:

"Toni Corma .... "


I know her cousin Colin Tikka-Masala.....

IMO the force the officer used was a little bit harsh but on the other hand he also has a right to defend himself and the fact there were other officers around does not change that. If they had stepped in and struck her there would probably be the same debate just involving him rather than the officer on top of her.And as for race why does that have to be brought into it did he make some sort of racist comment or something? not as far as im aware so where does that come into it?

If you have nothing sensible to add to a debate dont!!!

Who gives you the right to comment on whos sensible or not. Its no point having a debate if there is only one side to it.:loopy:
Seems like you condone the punching of girls. If a police officer can not out muscle a GIRL then he should not be in uniform. Regardless of how strong the girl is she should have been wrestled into cuffs, NOT punched.

Look at their website (http://themonitoringgroupnorth.org.uk).

"TMGN has obtained a small amount of funding to look at the long-term sustainability of the organization.
This work has just commenced and it is hoped that we will be able to identify sources of income, develop a business plan which will enable TMGN to tender for contracts. "

They obviously felt this chance of publicity was just too good to miss.
Just to play devils advocate, I wonder what would have happened if it had been a black officer and a white girl.

Bet I can guess......

... need to restrain a young little lass ? ..
Not like she is 12 is it?
20(something) and fueled on booze (possibly drugs for all the coppers know bvut that's pure speculation on my part ;) )

I've just watched the footage again and it is excessive. At the time the officer throws the punches Toni Comer is already on the floor with three other officers around her, one of whom appears to have her legs restrained. They already had control of her at that stage. Why couldn't one of them knelt on her back and the other two taken an arm each? Four trained police officers should be able to restrain a young woman without having to punch her several times.

Even if the police officer who threw the punches is being genuine about only punching her in the arm (and there's no way of knowing either way) then it doesn't take five punches to give someone a dead arm. He lost his temper and decided to dish out some of his own justice.

Regardless of the girl's character or what had happened up to that point, the police are required to keep their cool in situations like this. The officer in question didn't do this and should have been suspended. That he hasn't been simply adds to the growing frustration many people have with a perceived lack of police accountability.

:(

The beating the police gave that young woman was WRONG. No matter what she had done she did not deserve that. How many policeman do you need to restrain a young little lass ? The South Yorkshire Police need to be held to account over this awful incedent. Simple as that. The world is watching.

the woman was not a "young little lass", she was drunk and violent...

I worked in a pub, and I have seen women "kick-off" like the "tazmanian devil" cartoon when in drink.

My ex was a bouncer, and he used to say that women were worse than blokes when it came to fighting dirty.

Yes but have you been involved in restraints outside of a dodgy nightclub in the middle of the night?

I have and can say without a shadow of a doubt that it all depends on the arresting officer. Some officers over-react and start being all heavy-handed. Some officers are quite calm and get on with the job.


This event did not happen in a controlled environment, say a hospital or prison, it was in an open environment with any number of posibilites that could put the officers life at risk.


Like what? There are any number of factors that could put an officer's life at risk in a hospital! Besides - being a police officer is a risky job - don't do the job if you can't stand the risk!



Imagine you are that police office, you are trying to restrain a girl who is drunk and fitting outside of a club in the middle of the night. You know she has committed a crime and your job is to subdue her asap. Does she have any friends looking for her who would be more than happy to attack a cop? Does she have a knife concealled or gun?


If officers gave in to every sneaking suspicion they have about suspects they're arresting then it would be perfectly fine for them to belt any suspect round the head with their truncheon before arresting them just in case, wouldn't it? Suspicion is not enough to establish guilt.



I think the police did what was necessary in this instance.


I don't agree - if the police did this to one of my kids me and my solicitor would be paying him and his line manager, the police complaints commission and anyone else who would listen a visit shortly thereafter. I think the father's quite right to make a huge fuss.


Say this happened in a police station then I would not feel the same. It is a controlled enviroment where the officer doesn't really have to worry about their own safety.

I also don't agree with police using brutal force on criminals who have 'given' themselves up.

However, this girl was resisting arrest, quite violently. The police must have absolute powers to keep us all safe and if they now have to worry about how much force to use when somebody resists arrest then we are heading down a very sorry road.


The police must under no circumstances have 'absolute power' to 'keep us safe' - that's a recipe for disaster, especially when officers believe it's OK to decide to punch someone in the head as hard as they can when they're being knelt on by 4 other people.


For all the police officre knew, the girl could have had a needle on her with contaminated with HIV. I think he did the right thing.


Suspicion isn't enough to establish guilt.


And I'm sorry if this upsets some people, but don't do the crime if you can't handle the repercusions. THis girl was a criminal and even though I do agree to simply label all criminals as evil is wrong. Rehabilitation does work in many instances. However at the time of the event, I don't care how they are brought in, just get the scum of the streets.

She's not scum, she's a rowdy 20-year-old who's a lot like a lot of other rowdy 20-year-olds. If anyone's scum it's the moralizing finger-wagging brigade with their "I would /never/ have behaved like that". There but for the grace of God ...

The police officer decided it was OK to punch this girl in the head - if he'd done it while he was off-duty (even if the girl had got rowdy with him) he'd have been flattened by a bouncer - and quite right too. He's got away with it simply because he's got a uniform on.

What a wonderful piece of editing on Sky News. :rolleyes:

Earlier on this morning I saw the Chief Constable of SY stating that when he first saw the footage he was concerned, but after seeing the WHOLE of the footage it painted a different picture and he was keen for teh independent Police Complaints Commission to do their stuff.

Sky have just shown the first words of the comments he made about being concerned, then killed the sound and allowed the image of him continuing to speak show but without sound.

Rather changes the tone of the whole thing, and no need to do it for time reasons because they still showed him as a mute 'talking head' for a few seconds, and they did have time to show the woman who was arrested walking along saying nothing.

So...cock up or conspiracy - whichever soemone needs a slapped head for messing around with a high profile, highly emotive story.

I'm tempted to ask....what else is happening in the world that warrants a 7 month old piece of CCTV footage being their number one story... :rolleyes:

What a wonderful piece of editing on Sky News. :rolleyes:

Earlier on this morning I saw the Chief Constable of SY stating that when he first saw the footage he was concerned, but after seeing the WHOLE of the footage it painted a different picture and he was keen for teh independent Police Complaints Commission to do their stuff.

Sky have just shown the first words of the comments he made about being concerned, then killed the sound and allowed the image of him continuing to speak show but without sound.

Rather changes the tone of the whole thing, and no need to do it for time reasons because they still showed him as a mute 'talking head' for a few seconds, and they did have time to show the woman who was arrested walking along saying nothing.

So...cock up or conspiracy? Whichever it is, someone needs a slapped head for messing around with a high profile, highly emotive story.

I'm tempted to ask....what else is happening in the world that warrants a 7 month old piece of CCTV footage being their number one story... :rolleyes:

No, no and yes to your questions. I've a lengthy career in psychiatry behind me, the last few years in a secure unit so I have a fair deal of experience in situations like the one in this video. Those officers failed to contain a woman who, although clearly agitated and distressed, was in no position to offer a major threat to their safety. There isn't any kind of officially sanctioned behaviour management strategy that I know where repeatedly punching a person is a legitimate option. It was an assault.
bbc radio sheffield.7 am news
the woman had been ejected from the night spot by the door staff,she damaged one of the door mens cars,the police were called,the officer trying to restrain her received injuries,"she had a handfull of my genitles,i tried to release her grip,i punched her as hard as i could as she was resisting arrest while fighting with officers,the punches were aimed at her arms so as to try to break her grasp on me" one officer lay accross her upper body then and another on her legs to prevent her kicking out again,her trousers came down as she was bieng taken to a police vehicle

the woman later claimed to be having an epilectic fit,now night clubs have bright flashing lights,hardly the place an epilectic would be comfortable in im sure,had this happened on an estate to some drunken chav i dont think it would have made page five in the star

Yes but have you been involved in restraints outside of a dodgy nightclub in the middle of the night?

Yes - and quite often how the situation develops depends as much on the arresting officer as on the person being arrested.


This event did not happen in a controlled environment, say a hospital or prison, it was in an open environment with any number of posibilites that could put the officers life at risk.

Imagine you are that police office, you are trying to restrain a girl who is drunk and fitting outside of a club in the middle of the night. You know she has committed a crime and your job is to subdue her asap. Does she have any friends looking for her who would be more than happy to attack a cop? Does she have a knife concealled or gun?


Suspicion isn't enough to establish guilt. Besides being a police officer is a risky job - so don't do it if you don't want the risk.



I think the police did what was necessary in this instance.

Say this happened in a police station then I would not feel the same. It is a controlled enviroment where the officer doesn't really have to worry about their own safety.

I also don't agree with police using brutal force on criminals who have 'given' themselves up.

However, this girl was resisting arrest, quite violently. The police must have absolute powers to keep us all safe and if they now have to worry about how much force to use when somebody resists arrest then we are heading down a very sorry road.


The police must in no way have absolute power, no matter what the justification. That way lies madness.

They have quite enough power as it is - what's in question isn't their power but their judgement. IMO it is inappropriate to decide to punch someone in the head when they're being knelt on by 4 other people.


For all the police officre knew, the girl could have had a needle on her with contaminated with HIV. I think he did the right thing.


Suspicion is not enough to esablish guilt.



And I'm sorry if this upsets some people, but don't do the crime if you can't handle the repercusions. THis girl was a criminal and even though I do agree to simply label all criminals as evil is wrong. Rehabilitation does work in many instances. However at the time of the event, I don't care how they are brought in, just get the scum off the streets.

She's not scum, she's a rowdy 20-year-old who's a lot like other rowdy 20-year-olds. If anyone's scum it's the moralizing finger-wagging brigade trotting out the "I would /never/ have acted like that" line. There but for the grace of God ...

you can see a woman on the ground with an officer laid on top administering 5 punches towards the head of the woman, with other officers surrounding.

Not on the footage on the BBC. You cant make out where he's hitting her because he's in the way

Just to play devils advocate, I wonder what would have happened if it had been a black officer and a white girl.

Bet I can guess......

So so true.....

officers believe it's OK to decide to punch someone in the head as hard as they can

Why do you keep repeating this? There is no evidence, or even suggestion as far as I can tell, that she was punched in the head.

. How many policeman do you need to restrain a young little lass ? .

You've obviously never seen a drunken female gypsy fight. I would suggest about 3.

Why do you keep repeating this? There is no evidence, or even suggestion as far as I can tell, that she was punched in the head.

So it is ok for a man to punch a woman. Anywhere else then?????
The police officer was out of order and should have used grappling techniques to control her. Obviously he was not as strong and he punched her instead.

I'm just watching the news conference with the woman concerned.

Her answers seem to be along the lines of 'I don't know, I can't remember, I had an epilectic seizure, I don't understand why he did this...'

I'm sorry - this stinks of set up.

The media are making a huge fuss about something that should be dealt with through the proper channels. I get the feeling that a few people are trying to generate some tension here when it's not actually warranted.

I hope that the media chills out and gets rid of this non-story.

Suspicion isn't enough to establish guilt. Besides being a police officer is a risky job - so don't do it if you don't want the risk.


...


Yes and if you don't want the risk of being man handled or punched, don't comitt the crime and then don't resist arrest!!

To be honest I find the fact that people want to come down so hard on the officer ridiculous.

Was the girl injured? No. She had cuts and bruises that may have (most probably were) incurred while either still in the club or when she was taken down when she tried to run.

Was it racially motivated? There is no evidence of that so I'll have to say no.

Was she having an epileptic fit at the exact time the officers were restraining her, conveniently absolving her from any guilt implied by her thrashing about? Probably not, no. But even if she was, the police had no way of knowing that! Come on, for all they knew she was just being plain violent and unco-operative and she needed to be dealt with as such.

Should the officer have punched her? Probably wasn't necessary, no but again If she had hold of his testicles I can imagine he was in a great deal of pain and what he did was simply a reflex reaction so even if it is determined that he used excessive force it shouldn't result in the loss of his job.

ok - so what's REALLY going on in the world today? :suspect:

This is all very suspect - it's a total non-story. And Sky News have been going on about it non-stop.

And it happened 7 months ago....

Hmmm..... the whole thing stinks

StarSparkle

Well, it certainly doesn't help that she can't remember. It gives the police free rein to embellish their accounts (let's face it, the police have an excellent track record for manipulating evidence).

The fact that she was drunk is irrelavent. The fact that she can't remember is irrelavent.

The fact that no disciplinary action has been taken against the officer is not just relevant but essential to this injustice.

If you look very carefully at the footage, you can clearly see Princess Diana , Lord Lucan and Shergar in the back of the third car on the right. It's a comspiracy, I tell you........

lmao!!!!!!

Just caught the last few seconds of Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight. He 'summarised' the above, in a manner as if it was breaking news. Nothing on the main news websites. Anybody got any further information and/or footage?

Cant see the copper being done for that, as they protect themselves when the poo hits the fan. They will just warn him of his future conduct I suppose and just let it go, like all coppers who get done for speeding

Why do you keep repeating this? There is no evidence, or even suggestion as far as I can tell, that she was punched in the head.

Beed quoted the arresting officer as saying "I decided to punch her in the head as hard as I could with my right fist" on Breakfast News this am.

If you look very carefully at the footage, you can clearly see Princess Diana , Lord Lucan and Shergar in the back of the third car on the right. It's a comspiracy, I tell you........

And JFK! And Two Men In Black arresting a small martian.

Why is this being stirred up now, though?

This is a non-story. Something like this probably happens every Friday and Saturday evening in Sheffeld. What I find irritating here is that someone who cannot remember what's happened - she seems to have a total blank between entering the club and coming around under arrest - this is quite bizarre.

I just wonder WHY the media are so interested in this story - it just seems to be a wste of airtime, bandwidth and police time.

Well, it certainly doesn't help that she can't remember. It gives the police free rein to embellish their accounts (let's face it, the police have an excellent track record for manipulating evidence).

The fact that she was drunk is irrelavent. The fact that she can't remember is irrelavent.

The fact that no disciplinary action has been taken against the officer is not just relevant but essential to this injustice.

Would you like to explain to us all - as it seems you are a fountian of all knowledge in this field - just HOW in these circumstances, the Officers are going to embellish their evidence?

They provided written evidence after the incident, which was submitted to and will still be held by, both the Prosecution and the accused's Defence team. This evidence was then presented, under oath, in a Court of law - evidence which was then accepted by the accused and her Defence team in the form of a 'guilty' plea by her at Court.

Come on then, explain yourself. Just how are they going to embellish their evidence?

As I have said, very early on in this thread, the IPCC shall be proverbially "licking their lips" at the prospect of such an investigation. I also added that a SYP spokesperson was quoted as stating last night, before all this furore blew up, that the organisation "was satisfied with the way the incident was handled and happy with the conduct of the Officer". I can assure you that it is highly unusual that such comments are made PRIOR to the inevitably thorough investigation by the IPCC.

Yes and if you don't want the risk of being man handled or punched, don't commit the crime and then don't resist arrest!!

If the officer had simply manhandled her into the back of the van there wouldn't be such a furore!

He may well be entitled to arrest someone who's committing criminal damage but he's not entitled to punch that someone unless punching them can be construed as "reasonable force". I don't believe a definition of "reasonable force" would include cases where 4 people kneel on someone and a 5th punches them in the head.

I certainly wouldn't expect to be punched in the head while being restrained, and neither would you.

Well, it certainly doesn't help that she can't remember. It gives the police free rein to embellish their accounts
She appeared quite able to give a statement and sign it on the night. It's only after the event that she suddenly has "no memory". Yea, right. We all know what's going on here.

$$$ Kerching! Kerching! $$$

I know her maybe I should not say more :| i dont want to be accused of ruining any investigation.

So it is ok for a man to punch a woman. Anywhere else then?????
The police officer was out of order and should have used grappling techniques to control her. Obviously he was not as strong and he punched her instead.

I'd like to think grappling techniques would have been a better form of restraint. However when somebody has hold of your bits you tend to act more out of instinct to get them of. This officer hit her arms i suppose that is a level of control given the circumstances.

Darkoak,

This isn't quite right. The court case was concerned with the girl's vandalism, not the policeman's assualt.

Now that an investigation will have to take place (only because agencies external to SYP have found out about the assault) i'm sure that the policeman and his mates will have their stories straight and say what they think will get them off the hook.

M

Do you honestly think that they would have brought a prosecution and allowed that CCTV to be shown in court if they were trying to cover something up? Come on Mattski. ;)

If the officer had simply manhandled her into the back of the van there wouldn't be such a furore!

He may well be entitled to arrest someone who's committing criminal damage but he's not entitled to punch that someone unless punching them can be construed as "reasonable force". I don't believe a definition of "reasonable force" would include cases where 4 people kneel on someone and a 5th punches them in the head.

I certainly wouldn't expect to be punched in the head while being restrained, and neither would you.

Have you ever tried to manhandle someone who doesn't want to be manhandled? It's not easy - if they don't handcuff the person concerned and they make a bolt for it or, worse, grab a weapon and have a go at soemone, then there would be Hell to pay.

Sharp punches to the arm will deliver the equivalent of a 'dead leg' to the arm and thus make the person easier to handle.

And if I'd allegedly smashed a car up and was resisting arrest, I would expect to get a thumping - and that's one of the reasons why I don't get myself in to positins where I'm being arrested.

As has been pointed out - if people break the law they should expect to either accept arrest in a peacable manner or get treated with whatever force is appropriate to ensure that an arrest takes place.

Tony,

Presumably it wasn't until the next day that she was interviewed and at that point couldn't remember anything. She probably signed just to get out of there. That makes her hasty and stupid rather than guilty.

If she signed a statement just after her arrest it would have been inadmissable because of state she was in i.e. drunken and concussed from assualt.

I certainly wouldn't expect to be punched in the head while being restrained, and neither would you.

I'd punch them if they were squeezing my balls!

:gag:

I'd like to think grappling techniques would have been a better form of restraint. However when somebody has hold of your bits you tend to act more out of instinct to get them of. This officer hit her arms i suppose that is a level of control given the circumstances.

Actually, if someone had me by the balls and I was in the position the cop was in I'd have doen the thing guranteed to get my testicles out of her grip - punched her in the face, hard, repeatedly.

The fact that the policeman was restrained in his approach is commendable and I hope that he gets a suitable apology after all this goes away.

If the officer had simply manhandled her into the back of the van there wouldn't be such a furore!

He may well be entitled to arrest someone who's committing criminal damage but he's not entitled to punch that someone unless punching them can be construed as "reasonable force". I don't believe a definition of "reasonable force" would include cases where 4 people kneel on someone and a 5th punches them in the head.

I certainly wouldn't expect to be punched in the head while being restrained, and neither would you.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE Sleepyhead, will you WAKE UP and read the ENTIRE thread - SHE WAS NOT PUNCHED IN THE HEAD ! If I had any external genitals and someone tried to rip them off , I don't consider that a few punches to the offenders arm in an attempt to make them stop could ever be construed as being 'excessive force'.

Why is this being stirred up now, though?


Probably a 'bad news' diversion. Has Tony Blair been arrested ?

No it wouldn't be that - no point in suppressing good news :hihi:

Presumably it wasn't until the next day that she was interviewed and at that point couldn't remember anything. She probably signed just to get out of there. That makes her hasty and stupid rather than guilty.

I understand that she was interviewed in the custody suite when she was taken to the station under arrest, but it was the CCTV of her;
-smashing up a car
-smacking a police officer in the face
-resisting arrest
-and last but not least being convicted and sentenced in court

that makes her guilty. ;)

(as well as stupid)

'Scuse me barny, but since when did resisting arrest (she was already on the ground when she was punched!) deserve being repeatedly smacked around?
If she was your girlfriend who'd gone a bit bonkers would you still be happy to see her treated that way?

Well they had the ex head of the flying squad on newsnight. He stated it is normal to punch someone on the arm to force to stop them flailing their arms around and resisting arrest. Of course no-one on here has the facts, and in the video you cant even see what he is hitting (head? arms?) but it wont stop people jumping to conclusions!

bbc radio sheffield.7 am news
the woman had been ejected from the night spot by the door staff,she damaged one of the door mens cars,the police were called,the officer trying to restrain her received injuries,"she had a handfull of my genitles,i tried to release her grip,i punched her as hard as i could as she was resisting arrest while fighting with officers,the punches were aimed at her arms so as to try to break her grasp on me" one officer lay accross her upper body then and another on her legs to prevent her kicking out again,her trousers came down as she was bieng taken to a police vehicle



If someone (anyone) had a handful of my balls then I think I could be justified to strike their arm to make them release.
Especially when she was being violent anyway.

Cant people just let the coppers get on with their work?
She deserves nothing from this. What a waste of time.

There's another appropriate phase! (Please don't swear though ;))


******** isn't a swear word as the 1977 case about the Sex Pistols album proved:

"Never Mind the ******** was met by a hail of controversy in the U.K. upon its release. The first documented legal problems involved the allegedly 'obscene' name of the album, and the prosecution of the owner of a Nottingham record shop (and label owner Richard Branson) for having displayed it in a window. However, at Nottingham Magistrates' Court on 24 November 1977, defending Queen's Counsel John Mortimer produced expert witnesses who were able to demonstrate that the word "********" was actually a legitimate Old English term originally used to refer to a priest, and which, in the context of the title, meant "nonsense"."

Darkoak,

This isn't quite right. The court case was concerned with the girl's vandalism, not the policeman's assualt.

Now that an investigation will have to take place (only because agencies external to SYP have found out about the assault) i'm sure that the policeman and his mates will have their stories straight and say what they think will get them off the hook.

M

Please check your facts on how such an investigation is run before making inaccurate comments as above.

The statements made by the Officers who attended the scene, shall be the same written documents that the IPCC will be viewing. Do you really think that the Officers will want to even think of the need to "embellish" these, bearing in mind they have already sworn on oath in a Court of Law in respect of them?

If the officer had simply manhandled her into the back of the van there wouldn't be such a furore!

He may well be entitled to arrest someone who's committing criminal damage but he's not entitled to punch that someone unless punching them can be construed as "reasonable force". I don't believe a definition of "reasonable force" would include cases where 4 people kneel on someone and a 5th punches them in the head.

I certainly wouldn't expect to be punched in the head while being restrained, and neither would you.


I would expect the police use what ever force they deem necessary if I am RESISTING arrest...just like the girl was.


If I was punching and kicking a copper and they beat me to the ground in order to subdue me, yes I wouldn't like it and would whine to all my friends about police brutality but deep down I would know I deserved it.

Its about time people start excepting responsibilty for the actions. The officre has not denied his actions...well done.

Wouldn't it be nice if the girl in question admitts that she was committing the crime and resisting arrest and the police were simply doing their job.

Tony,

Presumably it wasn't until the next day that she was interviewed and at that point couldn't remember anything. She probably signed just to get out of there. That makes her hasty and stupid rather than guilty.

If she signed a statement just after her arrest it would have been inadmissable because of state she was in i.e. drunken and concussed from assualt.

Ho hum, here we go again.

She would not have been interviewed about the damage allegation until she was sober and no longer violent (probably the following morning).

Furthermore, all SYP Custody Areas are covered by CCTV (both sound and vision), for the protection and integrity of all visitors - voluntary or otherwise.

Part of the police officers physical restraint training does involve striking someone to subdue them, if they are resisting arrest. There is a traffic light system red, amber and green. Green would be striking some one in muscular areas such as the upper arm, this has a lower potential of injury. Obviously red would involve striking someone on the head, police officers can do this if they feel sufficiantly threatened and can also justfy its use.

The young lady in question was obviously hit on her upper arm area, if she was hit in her face hard 5 times I am sure there would be evidence of cuts and bruises.

I feel the action took was appropriate for the young lady, she was acting in an unpredictable manner, resisting arrest.

Who gives you the right to comment on whos sensible or not. Its no point having a debate if there is only one side to it.:loopy:
Seems like you condone the punching of girls. If a police officer can not out muscle a GIRL then he should not be in uniform. Regardless of how strong the girl is she should have been wrestled into cuffs, NOT punched.

You stated "Police yet again took measures into there own hands", well of course they did it's their job to respond to a reported offence/incident. Thats why I highlighted that part of your post, it made zero sense and added nothing to the debate.

Secondly when did I say puching a girl was OK?
And Police officers do not become employed on merit of how hard they are !!

Alright I've read enough Page 2 of 4 sorry if the debate has gone on since then. The police officer punched the female because she had hold of his crown jewels. He continued to punch until she let go reasonible....I think so. Here's a test gents get a violent female to grab hold of your plums and see how long you can stay restrained for. Ladies give it a go I can guarantee a game similar to bucking bronko

Link to the statement by the SYP Chief Constable on the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6430000/newsid_6430000/6430033.stm?bw=bb&mp=rm).


That's a man that's 100% comfortable with what happened, and who would be hauled over the coals if he's wrong.

Why is this being stirred up now, though?

Presumably because yesterday was the first time the tape had been shown in public, when the case was in court.

i have just watched this on channel 5 live news an they girl who he hit had just had a epileptic fit thats whgy her behaviour was so bad the police officer has no ryt to go off like he did he deserves a gd beatin

]

Many people believe that by condoning official brutallity, and being on the side of the offending agency, they are assuring their own safety - you know the kind of thing - from school days;- 'Hi Mr Bully, can I lick your arse please - - ?'
I am amazed and apalled at the number of people who think it's o.k. to beat people - never mind women - when the threat to themselves is minimal.
My fathers' word for women beaters was fairly brief - COWARDS.

Is anyone seriously saying that several burly coppers couldn't restrain a small woman without resorting to punching?

LOOK AT THE FILM - IT IS CLEAR THAT THE BULLY COPPER WAS WAY OUT OF ORDER. Don't start lying to support your pathetic arguments.

Fascists got lots of support during the thirties simply because people were sh*t scared of them - look what resulted.

I know many of you are on the side of the police for these very reasons - FEAR.
But remember that the actions of this appalling bully reflect across the whole of the police force - most of whom would not have reacted in this horribly violent way - most of whom are decent people who strongly oppose
this behavior.

If someone (anyone) had a handful of my balls then I think I could be justified to strike their arm to make them release.
Especially when she was being violent anyway.

Cant people just let the coppers get on with their work?
She deserves nothing from this. What a waste of time.

The police officer claimed that she had hold of his genitals and also claimed that he punched her on the arm. That's not to say 100% that either of these two statements are true. Neither are clear from the video clip. Anyone can lie, especially when they've been caught on CCTV punching someone repeatedly and it's then blown up into a headline news story.

I still don't think five punches to the upper arm constitutes a beating.

]

Many people believe that by condoning official brutallity, and being on the side of the offending agency, they are assuring their own safety - you know the kind of thing - from school days;- 'Hi Mr Bully, can I lick your arse please - - ?'
I am amazed and apalled at the number of people who think it's o.k. to beat people - never mind women - when the threat to themselves is minimal.
My fathers' word for women beaters was fairly brief - COWARDS.

Is anyone seriously saying that several burly coppers couldn't restrain a small woman without resorting to punching?

LOOK AT THE FILM - IT IS CLEAR THAT THE BULLY COPPER WAS WAY OUT OF ORDER. Don't start lying to support your pathetic arguments.

Fascists got lots of support during the thirties simply because people were sh*t scared of them - look what resulted.

I know many of you are on the side of the police for these very reasons - FEAR.
But remember that the actions of this appalling bully reflect across the whole of the police force - most of whom would not have reacted in this horribly violent way - most of whom are decent people who strongly oppose
this behavior.


That is possibly the worst excuse for an argument ever, not only have you tarred everyone with the same brush, you have completely ignored the fact there was an offence commited here and it is a story of two sides.

I'm pretty sure that a lot of people will agree punching a female is way out of order and not acceptable in many cases but sometimes there are good reasons to defend an action and a reaction.

The Police are not there to be feared but RESPECTED.

Have you ever tried to manhandle someone who doesn't want to be manhandled? It's not easy - if they don't handcuff the person concerned and they make a bolt for it or, worse, grab a weapon and have a go at soemone, then there would be Hell to pay.

There were 4 of them kneeling on top of her! It's not as if we've been shown CCTV footage of 1 officer struggling to get her in the van and out of sheer frustration hitting her a couple of times - I might just about be able to stomach that in some circumstances. 4 people on 1 with a 5th punching her in the head. This is not acceptable behaviour from police officers.


Sharp punches to the arm will deliver the equivalent of a 'dead leg' to the arm and thus make the person easier to handle.


And if I'd allegedly smashed a car up and was resisting arrest, I would expect to get a thumping - and that's one of the reasons why I don't get myself in to positins where I'm being arrested.

Bully for you. The question is - how far does it go? What if you resist arrest for a traffic offence? Is it ok to be knocked about a bit by the arresting officer to make you more compliant? Is that reasonable?
As has been pointed out - if people break the law they should expect to either accept arrest in a peacable manner or get treated with whatever force is appropriate to ensure that an arrest takes place.

No - they should expect a response that's in keeping with a policeman's legal entitlement to do their job. That job entitles them to reasonable force - 4 people kneeling on one while a 5th punches them in the head is not reasonable, especially when she's a lot smaller than any of them.

the girl in question is a thug and at school was a bully, it does not suprise me one bit that she tried to fight with police. But to punch her in the head when she is clearly face down is wrong, would this have been classed as a racist attack if this had been a white girl and the police officer a black guy????, would it have even made the news, i very much doubt it. if she does suffer from epilepsy ( numerous people i know went to school with her and to their knowledge did not suffer from this at school :suspect: ) why was she in a club drunk and surrounded by flashing lights are these not factors in bringing on attacks????

Alright I've read enough Page 2 of 4 sorry if the debate has gone on since then. The police officer punched the female because she had hold of his crown jewels. He continued to punch until she let go reasonible....I think so. Here's a test gents get a violent female to grab hold of your plums and see how long you can stay restrained for. Ladies give it a go I can guarantee a game similar to bucking bronko

Does the phrase 'Cricket Box' mean anything to you?

i agree with SUPERTYKE's comments....

Of course the actions of the officer were way out of order. I don't know why the majority on here are defending his actions...

No woman should deserve to go through what that girl has - You think how you would feel if an officer did that to your daughter!!

Shameful!!

I'd punch them if they were squeezing my balls!

:gag:

I might too. But if I was out arresting people one of the things I'd expect is for them to try and resist using any means possible. One of those means would probably to kick me in the balls. One way of preventing that having any effect would be to wear a box.

And it's not as if the police aren't aware that people try and prevent officers from arresting them - they clip-on ties to prevent them being strangled - why not employ similar precautions with other delicate areas?

No, no and yes to your questions. I've a lengthy career in psychiatry behind me, the last few years in a secure unit so I have a fair deal of experience in situations like the one in this video. Those officers failed to contain a woman who, although clearly agitated and distressed, was in no position to offer a major threat to their safety. There isn't any kind of officially sanctioned behaviour management strategy that I know where repeatedly punching a person is a legitimate option. It was an assault.

Don't agree with you on many things Halibut,but in this case i totally agree.

Woman beaters are indeed cowards. Force the cop used was probably excessive but think of it this way:

You're enjoying a beer in a bar when some chav (I'm not implying sex here) comes up to you and starts punching/kicking/grabbing youre genitals. You obviously are going to defend yourslef. Now, lets say you simply shove the person off in a sort of reflex action, they slip and crack their head open on the bar and they die. Are you guilty of Murder? No. I'm not saying you're not guilty of anything but certainly acting out of reflex/instinct should absolve you of some degree of guilt. I know If my spuds were being squeezed I'd be pretty quick to lash out.

i agree with SUPERTYKE's comments....

Of course the actions of the officer were way out of order. I don't know why the majority on here are defending his actions...

No woman should deserve to go through what that girl has - You think how you would feel if an officer did that to your daughter!!

Shameful!!


And she was a total angel who couldn't even remember what she'd done until she saw it on film.

The reason the majority on here are defending the cop's actions is that she had done wrong, was resisting arrest, had already committed criminal damage and was so out of it she couldn't recall anything between entering the club and finding herself under arrest.

Like many people, she needs to get her head around the fact that if you break the law you will be arrested, and if you resist arrest then appropriate force will be used to make that arrest.

]

'Hi Mr Bully, can I lick your arse please - - ?'


It seems very clear who the bully was in this case, and like most bullys she didn't like being stood up to.


Is anyone seriously saying that several burly coppers couldn't restrain a small woman without resorting to punching?


They are allowed and do regularly hit people to subdue them, to allow them to safely put handcuffs on; without braking wrist etc.

LOOK AT THE FILM - IT IS CLEAR THAT THE BULLY COPPER WAS WAY OUT OF ORDER. Don't start lying to support your pathetic arguments.

There is no need to shout. I've seen the film, she was rightly hit in her upper are. An area least likely to cause damage.

Fascists got lots of support during the thirties simply because people were sh*t scared of them - look what resulted.

A laughable comment, since where is arresting some one who has caused seious criminal damage comparable to fascism.

I know many of you are on the side of the police for these very reasons - FEAR.
But remember that the actions of this appalling bully reflect across the whole of the police force - most of whom would not have reacted in this horribly violent way - most of whom are decent people who strongly oppose
this behavior.

I haven't heard and critisim of the girl from you, if she hadn't commited her crime the incident would not have happened. If she had not resisted arrest the incident would not have happened. She is responsible for her actions.

For me this young girl is the bully, like most bullys she seems to know all her rights without understanding any of her responsibilties.

It looks brutal, and she doesn't seem to be attacking him but it is unclear. But at the end of the day I don't think a 9st 5ft 6 woman needs to be restrained with 5 punches when she's on the floor by a man trained to deal with criminals.

It would have been interesting to have seen the woman's injuries after the incident to see how hard he actually hit her.

What you've failed to mention in the "More officers arrive" bit is that when the blows to her head are delivered she's being knelt on by at least 4 people. What purpose do the blows serve seeing as she's being knelt on? Why doesn't being knelt on by 4 people count as being sufficiently subdued?
Jeez.

You've clearly seen a different videoto everyone else!

the girl in question is a thug and at school was a bully, it does not suprise me one bit that she tried to fight with police. But to punch her in the head when she is clearly face down is wrong, would this have been classed as a racist attack if this had been a white girl and the police officer a black guy????, would it have even made the news, i very much doubt it. if she does suffer from epilepsy ( numerous people i know went to school with her and to their knowledge did not suffer from this at school :suspect: ) why was she in a club drunk and surrounded by flashing lights are these not factors in bringing on attacks????



so u know this girl do you well i think u better watch ya comments cos have u ever thought she may come on here or her family or friends then u wud be in trouble

No - they should expect a response that's in keeping with a policeman's legal entitlement to do their job. That job entitles them to reasonable force - 4 people kneeling on one while a 5th punches them in the head is not reasonable, especially when she's a lot smaller than any of them.

Doesn't matter; if she's so out of it that she cannot remember what she's doing later, and she's being violent, then you use the force needed to restrain her without long term harm.

If she didn't want to get arrested, then don't commit an arrestable offence.

Many policemen have commented to the media that they saw nothing wrong with the way that the arrest was carried out on the footage, so I'm not going to argue the toss there.

She did wrong, got nicked, and needs to just take the punishment rather than wailing about how unjust it all is.

so u know this girl do you well i think u better watch ya comments cos have u ever thought she may come on here or her family or friends then u wud be in trouble

lol.... o please r you making threats

No woman should deserve to go through what that girl has - You think how you would feel if an officer did that to your daughter!!

Shameful!!

I would think that she deserved arresting for being a drunken criminal.

Well done the copper for doing what you get paid to do. You arrested a lawbreaking criminal.:thumbsup:

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE Sleepyhead, will you WAKE UP and read the ENTIRE thread - SHE WAS NOT PUNCHED IN THE HEAD ! If I had any external genitals and someone tried to rip them off , I don't consider that a few punches to the offenders arm in an attempt to make them stop could ever be construed as being 'excessive force'.

Then the office should wear a box, for heaven's sake. It's not as if people don't try and kick each other in the nuts when they're annoyed is it? He's using his own lack of foresight in what can hardly be that uncommon a situation to a police officer to justify his use of force.

As to where she got punched: CCTV footage is unclear as to where she was punched, the Beeb quoted him as saying he punched her in the head (Breakfast News this am), the officer contends he punched her in the arm.

At any rate he "Punched her as hard as physically possible". While she was being knelt on. By 4 people. That's not reasonable.

so u know this girl do you well i think u better watch ya comments cos have u ever thought she may come on here or her family or friends then u wud be in trouble

i actually stated that she didn't deserve to be punched in the head, and in fact the actions of the officer are appalling! :loopy:

Why is it that people with no respect for the law always expect the law to bail them out when someone (in their eyes) breaks the law in return?

And she was a total angel who couldn't even remember what she'd done until she saw it on film.

The reason the majority on here are defending the cop's actions is that she had done wrong, was resisting arrest, had already committed criminal damage and was so out of it she couldn't recall anything between entering the club and finding herself under arrest.

Like many people, she needs to get her head around the fact that if you break the law you will be arrested, and if you resist arrest then appropriate force will be used to make that arrest.

She also needs to realise that she cant go drinking, because she is a menace to herself and others. Perhaps she could join the knitting group instead?

so u know this girl do you well i think u better watch ya comments cos have u ever thought she may come on here or her family or friends then u wud be in trouble

Two things - try using English and not text speech, and if this IS a threat to another user you can stop it now or experience a nice long holiday.

Why is it that people with no respect for the law always expect the law to bail them out when someone (in their eyes) breaks the law in return?

Well said that man.

I wonder why I've never been subjected to 'police violence' despite spending inordinate amounts of time in bars and clubs over the last 20 or so years? :huh:


/irony mode off.

Having seen a picture (http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42653000/jpg/_42653817_comer2_203.jpg) of the woman concerned, I have to say that her facial injuries look horrific. Oh no, hang on........