rickiethecat Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 I'm amazed there's been no mention of it here, but an inquiry has revealed that a disabled militant protestor at the violent demonstrations against tuition fees has been proved to have lied about being attacked by the police. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-13578369 The inquiry has found that the police acted entirely legally in removing him from his wheelchair and, far from attacking him, were actually doing it for his own safety. Given how many column inches were wasted on the Ian Tomlinson incident, I'm sure that the left wing press will give just as much space to this story for the sake of balance. I look forward to front page headlines in the Guardian and the Independent and major features on the BBC news showing that more often than not, the police get it right when attempting to control violent left wing demonstrations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex3659 Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Why am I not suprised? Tip him out of his wheelchair. Why not puush it?. Hit him with a baton. Oh we didn't mean to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Jody Mcintyre being pulled from his wheelchair for his own safety : (contains some bad language) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bethwebb Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 I'm amazed there's been no mention of it here, but an inquiry has revealed that a disabled militant protestor at the violent demonstrations against tuition fees has been proved to have lied about being attacked by the police. Where does it say that he lied? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickiethecat Posted May 31, 2011 Author Share Posted May 31, 2011 Where does it say that he lied? It doesn't need to. He says he was attacked and an inquiry has found that he wasn't, therefore his claim that he was attacked is a lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubydazzler Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 The inquiry has found that the police acted entirely legally in removing him from his wheelchair and, far from attacking him, were actually doing it for his own safety.Mr McIntyre isn't actually his own best friend, given his aggressive attitude whenever I've seen him being interviewed, but this 'inquiry' was hardly likely to be unbiased, is it? Given that it seems from the article to have been the police probing themselves ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Dont you just love Maggie..ye reap what ye sow and Maggie sowed the seeds when she paid the muscle and gave them the power during the miners strike,she set the trend of beating them into submission the Miners were beaten so Im damned sure the students have very little chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex3659 Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 It doesn't need to. He says he was attacked and an inquiry has found that he wasn't, therefore his claim that he was attacked is a lie. The police say he was lieing investigating themselves, how am I not suprised. I always remember the Stephen Waldorf case where they pistol whipped him and shot him in the head when they mistook him for David Martin, they were found not guilty of attempted murder. What do you have to do to try and kill someone?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 The police say he was lieing investigating themselves, how am I not suprised. I always remember the Stephen Waldorf case where they pistol whipped him and shot him in the head when they mistook him for David Martin, they were found not guilty of attempted murder. What do you have to do to try and kill someone?. Who was found not guilty of murder ? I would imagine a individual would have to be charged and to come to a guilty verdict if said individual was acting under orders from a superior would be difficult to prove without undermining the basic structure of a system such as the police. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bethwebb Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 It doesn't need to. He says he was attacked and an inquiry has found that he wasn't, therefore his claim that he was attacked is a lie. Have you seen the video? Clearly not lying, and it doesn't really say that anyway... It says they were justified in their actions to attack him, which is clearly very subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.