truman Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 They should be more like the yanks. Why did she refuse to give evidence but thought nothing of flashing the flesh at the media? I'm sure the £ sign never entered her mind. Maybe if the police and courts were tougher she wouldn't have done what she did in the first place. Yep,we could be like China I suppose...is that what you want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobydotcom Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 I've watched the video several times, and have yet to see this bit where she is being threatening towards him....perhaps you could find the video then tell us to look at the video at a certain time where she is being threatening? 17 secs 20 secs 26 secs 29 secs - when she was struck i counted she was told to "go away" 4 times at least Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 17 secs 20 secs 26 secs 29 secs - when she was struck i counted she was told to "go away" 4 times at least Why not arrest her? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amaranthus Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 They should be more like the yanks. Why did she refuse to give evidence but thought nothing of flashing the flesh at the media? I'm sure the £ sign never entered her mind. Maybe if the police and courts were tougher she wouldn't have done what she did in the first place. It's irrelevant what she has in her past... everyone has things in their past that they wouldn't want being smeared all over the news by the jackals reporters. Disorderly conduct requires an arrest, not a physical attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipex Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 17 secs 20 secs 26 secs 29 secs - when she was struck i counted she was told to "go away" 4 times at least You know aswell as i do she was in the wrong. These do-gooders will argue forever in a day she was miss innocent. No wonder the police are soft on criminals with people we get on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul2412 Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 It's irrelevant what she has in her past... everyone has things in their past that they wouldn't want being smeared all over the news by the jackals reporters. Disorderly conduct requires an arrest, not a physical attack. But she was happy to be interviewed as a poor victim for weeks on end when it happened. Why not to give evidence? She was part of an aggressive crowd that the police were trying to control, she had a chance to move off and chose instead to approach the officer in an aggressive manner. If she was arrested on the spot, it would have caused more trouble from the hooligans protestors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobydotcom Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 No, i asked for instances of "threatening" behaviour, not when she refused police instructions (for which she could possibly be arrested, but not attacked) well unfortunalty for you, you are wrong, the law states if you feel threatened then you are allowed to protect youself ESPECIALLY if you are a police officer! she was acting in a threatening manner so got what she deserved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amaranthus Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 You know aswell as i do she was in the wrong. These do-gooders will argue forever in a day she was miss innocent. No wonder the police are soft on criminals with people we get on here. If she was, in the officer's opinion, acting aggressively, he should have arrested her. Simple. The violence was unnecessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 You know aswell as i do she was in the wrong. These do-gooders will argue forever in a day she was miss innocent. No wonder the police are soft on criminals with people we get on here. Why was she a criminal? Do you think the police should beat everyone up ..why was she in the wrong? What's wrong with a non-violent demo..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobydotcom Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 But she was happy to be interviewed as a poor victim for weeks on end when it happened. Why not to give evidence? She was part of an aggressive crowd that the police were trying to control, she had a chance to move off and chose instead to approach the officer in an aggressive manner. If she was arrested on the spot, it would have caused more trouble from the hooligans protestors. yep, arresting her on the spot would have probably esculated the incident Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.