The behaviour of UK police officers.

[Wudang]

Am I losing it or does that link now go to a different video? This what I see now

 

[Andy_Ross]

A police call handler who leaked information to a cocaine gang to try to keep them out of jail has been jailed along with three drug dealers.

Cameron Clifford, who worked for Durham Police, was given a false tip about his criminal associates by suspicious investigators which he then frantically tried to pass on to the gang, Teesside Crown Court heard...

In January 2022, a covert investigation was launched amid suspicions he was "passing on confidential information to criminals", the court heard.

An undercover officer posing as a member of the public rang 101 and was put through to Clifford, the court was told.

That information "hit particularly close" to home for Clifford, O'Brien said, as the call handler had previously bought drugs from both men, who operated in Stanley and Consett with Brandon Wales.

"Literally immediately" after the call ended, Clifford accessed force records about Chappell and Smith on his computer, the court heard.

Within two minutes, Clifford had moved to an unoccupied side room from where he sent Snapchat messages to the men's drugs hotline saying he needed to speak to them urgently...

Clifford also used his phone to take and send photographs of digital intelligence records on his police computer screen, an act "clearly forbidden by police policies and procedures"...

Later that evening, covert officers saw Clifford leave his home and get picked up by a VW Golf at a pub car park, the court heard.

Police stopped the car and found Clifford, Smith and Wales inside as well as two bags of cocaine worth up to £600, which Clifford said was for his own personal use, and the burner phone used by the gang to run the drugs line...

Smith and Wales, both 25, were each jailed for three and a half years while Chappell, 28, was jailed for four years.

Durham Police call handler leaked info to Consett cocaine gang

He was caught when suspicious colleagues gave him a false tip which he frantically tried to pass on.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[bluesjnr]

Am I losing it or does that link now go to a different video? This what I see now
View attachment 75575

If you are referring to the link to that reel I posted then it still works for me.

 

[Wudang]

If you are referring to the link to that reel I posted then it still works for me.

Ah! If I open it while NOT signed in to FB it goes to the account I think with a different video but same caption "first violence from a leftist". I pasted it into a browser I'm logged into FB on and it's the original video you referenced.
I'm still not clear what happened. I'll try a couple more times.

 

[Wudang]

BTW any comment on why the girl is described as a "leftist"?
And I have no problem with people who disagree with my politics. A close friend is a racist right-winger libertarian who is unfailingly polite to any people of the ethnicity he dislikes. He simply chooses to avoid them where possible. He has no ill will to them. People who's voiced policies do intend harm to others based on ethnicity I have a problem with.

 

[Rolfe]

To me that was the most bizarre thing about the video. We don't call people "leftists" in Glasgow.

 

[bluesjnr]

BTW any comment on why the girl is described as a "leftist"?
And I have no problem with people who disagree with my politics. A close friend is a racist right-winger libertarian who is unfailingly polite to any people of the ethnicity he dislikes. He simply chooses to avoid them where possible. He has no ill will to them. People who's voiced policies do intend harm to others based on ethnicity I have a problem with.

I thought I was clear when I stated that the politics of the players is irrelevant in this thread. We are, I think, dealing with the behaviour of police officers.

 

[Wudang]

I see a young woman crossing the road and a masked older guy trying to film her for some reason. She drops her phone and he runs in on her, then the viewpoint moves away. It moves back as she, I don't know shoved him, his camera maybe. Yes, apparent assault. She then crosses the road to get away from him or to continue her journey to Pret.
If that was my daughter I'd have some fairly pressing questions about why he was wanting to film young women while masked.
From the cops point of view, I suspect they see these guys are looking to provoke trouble.
I'm on my Mac and VLC doesn't seem to have all the audio controls. I'll try another.

 

[Wudang]

Better sound card. She's not foreign.
"That's assault"
"I don't care".
Otherwise the noise makes it too hard to make much out.
The cops obviously left with a he said/she said scenario and meanwhile the group he's supposed to be policing are moving away.
I'd like to see the footage the guy who was shoved/had his camera knocked took.

 

[Wudang]

I'm running it through a noise filter to see if I can clear up the sound. It maybe a while.

ETA: only a small improvement. When the camera turns away from the initial confrontation I can hear a Glasgow male yelling something like
"I bet..I bet....<unclear> I can make you go you a pals house"? Not sure if that's the guy in question though.

 

[bluesjnr]

I seen an assault. I seen a police officer ignoring the report of an assault. Anything else leading up to it is just wind and pish. We're not here, or shouldn't be here, to apportion blame. We're here, well I am, to discuss the behaviour of UK police officers.

 

[Nessie]

I seen an assault. I seen a police officer ignoring the report of an assault. Anything else leading up to it is just wind and pish. We're not here, or shouldn't be here, to apportion blame. We're here, well I am, to discuss the behaviour of UK police officers.

We see the lady drop her phone and the man with the camera turn towards her. They are then out of view and when we see them again she is behind him and he is turning as his phone is falling to the ground and she is turning to walk away. You would struggle to prove assault from that. I would guess she knocked the phone out of his hand. The police officer is right to prioritise the protestors moving along the street, than a disputed, minor, assault.

In my time, at football matches and marches, I had people complain about alleged abuse, fights and assaults, and it was clear at the time, what ever had happened, if anything, was exaggerated and appeared to be intended as a distraction. The bottom line is that the police often do not have enough resources at such events, so that they can lose officers to minor crime or incidents. Then, when they do have the resources, they can get criticised for over reacting, depending on whose side people are on.

 

[Mojo]

The reasons why were most migrants were not used to a police who were not politicised and an arm of the government and when they made a complaint about the local neds, the police would take action and arrest the neds. That made the migrants feel safe.

See? Two-tier policing! They should have arrested the migrants!

 

[bluesjnr]

We see the lady drop her phone and the man with the camera turn towards her. They are then out of view and when we see them again she is behind him and he is turning as his phone is falling to the ground and she is turning to walk away. You would struggle to prove assault from that. I would guess she knocked the phone out of his hand. The police officer is right to prioritise the protestors moving along the street, than a disputed, minor, assault.

You really don't need to describe what's going on, especially when you leave bits out that don't help the way you've coloured it in. Like this bit where we see the male walking along the road not looking at her at all. She is on his left, he is looking to his right.


Or this bit where we see that she has moved across to his right and is saying something to him. There's a 3 sec gap between the first frame above and this one. That'll be the point, for some, where the guy who was ignoring her 3 seconds ago carried our some heinous action which prompted her to approach him aggressively.


Below is the point where she has dropped her phone and is picking it up. She's got the males attention and he's stopped and is filming her. I'm betting that that is what caused her to kick off.



Less than 1 sec later something causes this guy to turn around and look in their direction.

Within a couple of seconds here, below, is another guy turning to see what is going on, can you recognise him? That's right, it's officer, "go away", who said he didn't see anything. Lying bastard.

Here we see that male has turned away from the girl and has his camera in both hands. Her elbow is just in the frame. His elbow is raised and it looks like he is pulling away from her as he leans to his left. This is right after she assaulted him.



Here we see that she is still moving towards him and not slowly as her hair indicates. The assault has already occurred at this point.


Just filling on some gaps for you. Isn't it great what we can see?

In my time, at football matches and marches, I had people complain about alleged abuse, fights and assaults, and it was clear at the time, what ever had happened, if anything, was exaggerated and appeared to be intended as a distraction.

Clear how?

The bottom line is that the police often do not have enough resources at such events, so that they can lose officers to minor crime or incidents.

Not Joe Public's problem. "Sorry sir were you assaulted? Due to our lack of resources, even though officers were only feet away, you can "go away".

Then, when they do have the resources, they can get criticised for over reacting, depending on whose side people are on.

Maybe they shouldn't over react then? Never mind whose side people are on, if their behaviour mirrored the articles of their oath of attestation, swearing to serve the Crown and act with impartiality "without fear or favour", such accusations wouldn't exist.

It is clear that the officers involved here decided to ignore the assault.

What about taking a second to have a quick advisory with the woman, or even both of them? Both of them are in the march, both of them are involved in some sort of infraction, both of them were involved in an incident that could have inflamed things.

 

[Nessie]

....

It is clear that the officers involved here decided to ignore the assault.

What about taking a second to have a quick advisory with the woman, or even both of them? Both of them are in the march, both of them are involved in some sort of infraction, both of them were involved in an incident that could have inflamed things.

I have explained why that happened. In the ideal world, there would be more police and she could have been arrested and investigated for assault.

 

[bluesjnr]

I have explained why that happened. In the ideal world, there would be more police and she could have been arrested and investigated for assault.

You have, but you haven't taken a millisecond to explain why, in normal day to day policing, that officer couldn't have taken 60 sec's to speak to the girl and the bloke and left them both with the proverbial flea in their ear.

His decision to instruct complainers to, "go away, is dismissive, possibly partisan and erodes public trust. People need to know that if they bring a complain to a police officer, on the scene, it'll be dealt with even if, summarily

Why does it need, to quote you, "the likes of" me to point his out to a retired career officer?

 

[Rolfe]

A long thread with multiple examples of the police facilitating masked (mainly male) "counter-protestors" to attack and disrupt organised women's rights meetings.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2099019419217272895

This isn't just one or two aberrant individuals making a poor call, this is policy. It was particularly blatant with Tom Harlow in Edinburgh because of the position he took up, but support for the screaming mob arriving to attack women's events is SOP.

 

[Nessie]

You have, but you haven't taken a millisecond to explain why, in normal day to day policing, that officer couldn't have taken 60 sec's to speak to the girl and the bloke and left them both with the proverbial flea in their ear.

His decision to instruct complainers to, "go away, is dismissive, possibly partisan and erodes public trust. People need to know that if they bring a complain to a police officer, on the scene, it'll be dealt with even if, summarily

Why does it need, to quote you, "the likes of" me to point his out to a retired career officer?

What was happening, was not normal day to day policing. It was a gang of masked males marching through the city centre, which has a history of large scale trouble. The cops could not risk getting separated from the main group.

 

[bluesjnr]

What was happening, was not normal day to day policing. It was a gang of masked males marching through the city centre, which has a history of large scale trouble. The cops could not risk getting separated from the main group.

It was a protest march. The police should be concerned about those following the march, but not participating in it, being accosted and attacked by people not participating in it.

You're getting fair bit of subtle support for your position. I'm appalled that, "go away", as a response to an accusation of assault is garnering such approval.

What is happening here?

 

[Nessie]

It was a protest march. The police should be concerned about those following the march, but not participating in it, being accosted and attacked by people not participating in it.

You're getting fair bit of subtle support for your position. I'm appalled that, "go away", as a response to an accusation of assault is garnering such approval.

What is happening here?

The cop should have done better and said sorry we cannot deal with such a minor incident right now. You can still report it by phone of online.