Police Brutality

[skitzee2k]

The autopsy found nothing (surprise surprise). Whitewash.

An autopsy was carried out by the lawyers acting on behalf of the family

After the first one removed the evidence?

...with the help of the Lizard people perhaps?

You think coroners dont interfere with evidence and collude with the police?

You really are naive to the point of absurdity.

Have a look at the case of Sally Clark. The convictions were based solely on the analysis of the deaths by the Home Office Pathologist Alan Williams, who failed to disclose relevant information about the deaths, and backed up by the paediatric professor Sir Roy Meadow, whose opinion was pivotal in several other child death convictions, many of which have been overturned or are in the process of being disputed. In 2005 Williams was found guilty of serious professional misconduct and barred from practicing pathology for 3 years.

Furthermore, the government has now given itself the powers to take over a coroners inquest, hold it in secret and put in its own obedient yes man to make the findings it wants.

And look at the David Kelly case - Lord Hutton has sealed the papers for 75 years, in order to stop 6 doctors carrying out there own post mortem.

And you still have faith in the findings of government run inquests and post mortems? You need to wake up and smell the coffee, we are having the wool pulled over our eyes all the time!!! The Establishment prtects itself and makes sure nothing untoward gets out!!

Yet here you are, wow, you succeeded where no official could. Imagine that, they have all that power, but you still powered through...i bet you had to go into hiding and everything just to type that, after all they keep things quiet...
...but wait a sec...you feel happy enough to post this on the internet in a open to all forum which logs your IP, which leads to your identity, address etc...you don't seem that scared.

 

[imamartian]

This country really is in a shocking state... and a lot of you are to blame....

OK, let's get rid of the police, so they don't brutalise us (i.e. slap a non-compliant protestor) anymore, and what will happen? Well let's just assume too, that the army needs disbanding, otherwise, they will just become the coppers but with guns.... So, it's Monday morning, and no more coppers... well all you plumbers will have your vans nicked... and those of you with shops... well you don't have one anymore. Oh and your daughters and wives are getting raped by that gang that just showed up with lots of guns.... and you with nice houses... well you better run and find a shanty town... etc etc..

So i guess what i'm trying to say is that this society works because of law and order...but some of you lot (and those idiots at the front of the riots) just want rid of it.... what you gonna do for controlling the scum of society?

Human beings aren't perfect, by a long way, but this society thing we have here is pretty good all things considered....

But you always get the individual who think they're better than the whole - take the human rights fiasco... human rights are important, but the human right of the individual shouldn't outweigh the human rights of the many...

The police don't brutalise (re the OP) they (very) occasionally get things wrong - JCD was a nightmare example... but what are you doubters gonna put in it's place? and can you guarantee 100%?

That silly woman who recently got a slap at a demo and she certainly wasn't brutalised, but like most of the idiots who stay at a protest march once the pushing and shoving starts, and the bottles and bricks start to fly, well they deserve a baton round up their rectums !!!

Mistakes will always happen, but if we had a bit more respect in this society... things would get better...

Get rid of the Police bad apples and Bully Boys and they might get a bit more eh?

I'd say that's exactly what this society stands for... bad appales and bullies are NOT appreciated or tollerated anywhere... but you're dealling with a non perfect system, so errors will always get in... if you get things into perspective, there is without doubt the odd innappropriate action by an officer of the law.... but then there is the 'odd' member of the religious fraternity who will sexually abuse young boys... and the 'odd' childminder who will take 100's of indecent photo's of babies and toddlers, and the 'odd' tradesman who will lie to pensioners about the amount of work needed to be done to their roof, and i'm guessing many many people in respected positions who have abused that position.

And you say that when the police have cleaned up their act (no bullies or bad apples) and are 100%, they might get more respect? well what's wrong with giving the respect up front? or as i said, are there people who think they're bigger and better than the law?

Respect is a foundation stone of this society, and it's being eroded almost daily... we're heading for a difficult future...

 

[Lincsbodger]

...but wait a sec...you feel happy enough to post this on the internet in a open to all forum which logs your IP, which leads to your identity, address etc...you don't seem that scared.

I havent succeeded anywhere, i just relayed to you information freely available on the net and in the papers. You should try doing your own research.

and im not, i post through an anonymous proxy when i want to keep my stuff private...............and i use a VPN tunnel.....I worked in IT 20+ years, i know more about internet privacy than you'll ever know......

and what do you think there going to do to me for posting on an open forum, you really are an idiot............I presume, now you have resorted to sarcasm and pointless ridicule, you've run out of real arguments ?

 

[skitzee2k]

...but wait a sec...you feel happy enough to post this on the internet in a open to all forum which logs your IP, which leads to your identity, address etc...you don't seem that scared.

I havent succeeded anywhere, i just relayed to you information freely available on the net and in the papers. You should try doing your own research.

and im not, i post through an anonymous proxy when i want to keep my stuff private...............and i use a VPN tunnel.....I worked in IT 20+ years, i know more about internet privacy than you'll ever know......

and what do you think there going to do to me for posting on an open forum, you really are an idiot............I presume, now you have resorted to sarcasm and pointless ridicule, you've run out of real arguments ?

No, i am pointing out that if the government wanted to cover something up or keep something quiet, they are obviously doing a really bad job. Makes me think that maybe you are seeing patterns and reasons where there are none.
...I know enough about computers to know that the first 17+ years of your experience is redundent now and that no matter what you do it is easily trackable.

 

[Lincsbodger]

...but wait a sec...you feel happy enough to post this on the internet in a open to all forum which logs your IP, which leads to your identity, address etc...you don't seem that scared.

I havent succeeded anywhere, i just relayed to you information freely available on the net and in the papers. You should try doing your own research.

and im not, i post through an anonymous proxy when i want to keep my stuff private...............and i use a VPN tunnel.....I worked in IT 20+ years, i know more about internet privacy than you'll ever know......

and what do you think there going to do to me for posting on an open forum, you really are an idiot............I presume, now you have resorted to sarcasm and pointless ridicule, you've run out of real arguments ?

No, i am pointing out that if the government wanted to cover something up or keep something quiet, they are obviously doing a really bad job. Makes me think that maybe you are seeing patterns and reasons where there are none.
...I know enough about computers to know that the first 17+ years of your experience is redundent now and that no matter what you do it is easily trackable.

well there not, they have sealed Kellys papers for 75 years, they did an excellent job of hiding the truth. Hiding the truth and knowing they hid the truth without knowing what it was is two different things. Ditto Tomlinson, you will never know the truth because you would never be allowed to conduct another inquest on him. On the other hand, why would you pass a law so you can do inquests in secret unless you were planning to hide something?

Doesnt take many brains to put all this together and spot a pattern. Takes even less brains to fail to see whats in front of your eyes. The pattern of truth evasion was very entertaining and illuminating at the Iraq Enquiry, for example, especially from Blair.

 

[skitzee2k]

[

well there not, they have sealed Kellys papers for 75 years, they did an excellent job of hiding the truth. Hiding the truth and knowing they hid the truth without knowing what it was is two different things. Ditto Tomlinson, you will never know the truth because you would never be allowed to conduct another inquest on him. On the other hand, why would you pass a law so you can do inquests in secret unless you were planning to hide something?

Doesnt take many brains to put all this together and spot a pattern. Takes even less brains to fail to see whats in front of your eyes.

What I am saying is that if they wanted to cover it up they would have released the files but edited them.

If they wanted to cover something up they would make a show of it not being covered up.

I've got a feeling that the government might have people that could of worked out that putting something in the classified file for 75 years is only gonna make any shock come out in 75 years.

Come on. Think about it.

 

[Lincsbodger]

[

well there not, they have sealed Kellys papers for 75 years, they did an excellent job of hiding the truth. Hiding the truth and knowing they hid the truth without knowing what it was is two different things. Ditto Tomlinson, you will never know the truth because you would never be allowed to conduct another inquest on him. On the other hand, why would you pass a law so you can do inquests in secret unless you were planning to hide something?

Doesnt take many brains to put all this together and spot a pattern. Takes even less brains to fail to see whats in front of your eyes.

What I am saying is that if they wanted to cover it up they would have released the files but edited them.

If they wanted to cover something up they would make a show of it not being covered up.

I've got a feeling that the government might have people that could of worked out that putting something in the classified file for 75 years is only gonna make any shock come out in 75 years.

Come on. Think about it.

No, thats the irony of it. The stupid british public has voted for them four times. Brown et al have got to the point of utter contempt for the electorate, they think we will keep voting for them no matter what. Even now, Brown wheels out the usual BS a lies he spouts at every election, knowing full well its a load of cobblers and he has no intention of sticking to any of his promises. As a result, they dont give a **** that we know there lying and hiding the truth, they're so brazen about it. Doesnt matter, they think, the stupid people will continue to vote for us no matter what.

Can you not see that - they dont give a **** what you or me think, as long as we cant prove anything. They dont care about our opinions. And they know propel will still vote for them.

And sealing the papers for 75 years means when the truth does come out, all and anyone involved will be long dead, so it doesnt matter.

 

[skitzee2k]

[

well there not, they have sealed Kellys papers for 75 years, they did an excellent job of hiding the truth. Hiding the truth and knowing they hid the truth without knowing what it was is two different things. Ditto Tomlinson, you will never know the truth because you would never be allowed to conduct another inquest on him. On the other hand, why would you pass a law so you can do inquests in secret unless you were planning to hide something?

Doesnt take many brains to put all this together and spot a pattern. Takes even less brains to fail to see whats in front of your eyes.

What I am saying is that if they wanted to cover it up they would have released the files but edited them.

If they wanted to cover something up they would make a show of it not being covered up.

I've got a feeling that the government might have people that could of worked out that putting something in the classified file for 75 years is only gonna make any shock come out in 75 years.

Come on. Think about it.

No, thats the irony of it. The stupid british public has voted for them four times. Brown et al have got to the point of utter contempt for the electorate, they think we will keep voting for them no matter what. Even now, Brown wheels out the usual BS a lies he spouts at every election, knowing full well its a load of cobblers and he has no intention of sticking to any of his promises. As a result, they dont give a s**t that we know there lying and hiding the truth, they're so brazen about it. Doesnt matter, they think, the stupid people will continue to vote for us no matter what.

Can you not see that - they dont give a s**t what you or me think, as long as we cant prove anything. They dont care about our opinions. And they know propel will still vote for them.

And sealing the papers for 75 years means when the truth does come out, all and anyone involved will be long dead, so it doesnt matter.

If there was no long term plan, there would be no point.
While I agree that Brown is a **** I just don't buy into the 'they have made it obvious...you know, to hide it' argument. Anyone with any intelligence would be able to hide something so we wouldn't even be debating it.

 

[Lincsbodger]

[

well there not, they have sealed Kellys papers for 75 years, they did an excellent job of hiding the truth. Hiding the truth and knowing they hid the truth without knowing what it was is two different things. Ditto Tomlinson, you will never know the truth because you would never be allowed to conduct another inquest on him. On the other hand, why would you pass a law so you can do inquests in secret unless you were planning to hide something?

Doesnt take many brains to put all this together and spot a pattern. Takes even less brains to fail to see whats in front of your eyes.

What I am saying is that if they wanted to cover it up they would have released the files but edited them.

If they wanted to cover something up they would make a show of it not being covered up.

I've got a feeling that the government might have people that could of worked out that putting something in the classified file for 75 years is only gonna make any shock come out in 75 years.

Come on. Think about it.

No, thats the irony of it. The stupid british public has voted for them four times. Brown et al have got to the point of utter contempt for the electorate, they think we will keep voting for them no matter what. Even now, Brown wheels out the usual BS a lies he spouts at every election, knowing full well its a load of cobblers and he has no intention of sticking to any of his promises. As a result, they dont give a s**t that we know there lying and hiding the truth, they're so brazen about it. Doesnt matter, they think, the stupid people will continue to vote for us no matter what.

Can you not see that - they dont give a s**t what you or me think, as long as we cant prove anything. They dont care about our opinions. And they know propel will still vote for them.

And sealing the papers for 75 years means when the truth does come out, all and anyone involved will be long dead, so it doesnt matter.

If there was no long term plan, there would be no point.
While I agree that Brown is a **** I just don't buy into the 'they have made it obvious...you know, to hide it' argument. Anyone with any intelligence would be able to hide something so we wouldn't even be debating it.

Well they thought they got away with the Kelly affair, until six doctors tried to use the law to get another inquest and post mortem, so they government was forced to get Hutton to seal the papers. It wasnt very subtle, but then since it was checkmate, is didnt have to be subtle, it was game set and match to the government. ive no doubt there other stuff gets buried quietly we never get to hear about. And again some stuff gets a bit of a hearing and they have to be less subtle to bury it. But they arent really arsed either way, as long as they control what gets out and what gets buried

But the lengths the government has gone to to cover it up, convinces me Kelly was murdered, without me know the actual truth.

As Fraser in Dads Army used to say, "There ne smoke withoot fire, cap'n mannering, ne smoke withoot fire...."

 

[skitzee2k]

Well they thought they got away with the Kelly affair, until six doctors tried to use the law to get another inquest and post mortem, so they government was forced to get Hutton to seal the papers. It wasnt very subtle, but then since it was checkmate, is didnt have to be subtle, it was game set and match to the government. ive no doubt there other stuff gets buried quietly we never get to hear about. And again some stuff gets a bit of a hearing and they have to be less subtle to bury it. But they arent really a***d either way, as long as they control what gets out and what gets buried

Ok, agree to disagree on the conspiracy stuff i think. If we are debating it, in my opinion it doesn't exist.
Not saying they don't cover stuff up, but a government conspiracy when they could have just sacked a junior policeman for pushing someone over?? Nah, don't buy it....after all the police are independent so any **** would have landed on them...not the government so they would have no need to do this.

 

[Lincsbodger]

Well they thought they got away with the Kelly affair, until six doctors tried to use the law to get another inquest and post mortem, so they government was forced to get Hutton to seal the papers. It wasnt very subtle, but then since it was checkmate, is didnt have to be subtle, it was game set and match to the government. ive no doubt there other stuff gets buried quietly we never get to hear about. And again some stuff gets a bit of a hearing and they have to be less subtle to bury it. But they arent really a***d either way, as long as they control what gets out and what gets buried

Ok, agree to disagree on the conspiracy stuff i think. If we are debating it, in my opinion it doesn't exist.
Not saying they don't cover stuff up, but a government conspiracy when they could have just sacked a junior policeman for pushing someone over?? Nah, don't buy it....after all the police are independent so any s**t would have landed on them...not the government so they would have no need to do this.

Yes but the police arent independent. Labour has spent 14 years putting yes men into prominent positions in the Police Forces of this country, Every single member of the ACPO is a Blair yes man. Labour has bought them by allowing the ACPO , an government quango, to operate like a private commercial business, channeling police business (and taxpayers money) to private companies with ACPO members as shareholders.

Who does the Speed Awarenes Courses the police send you on if you get clocked by a speed camera doing just over the limit? Why a company owned by the ACPO!! and no one else gets the business!! And whats more, because its a private company, its unaccountable to us, so we do not know exactly how much of the taxpayers money ends up lining the pockets of the members of the ACPO (and ex-members, and there mates). (but we do know its a fair wad).

Blair bought the police, ten years ago, they are just the enforcement arm of the labour party. Thats why the goverment covers there backs, because they know the police will cover there. Look at Sir Ian Blair, who ran the Met, did exactly what he was told by the government, and was protected by the government over the Menedez affair.

 

[skitzee2k]

I'll say it in slightly clearer language...the PM, the Home Sec., the Chief of Police, The regional Commander... Does not giving a flying f**k about the average peeler on the beat and wouldn't bother to cover it up. They have nothing to lose. He was probably a standard copper on 22k a year. He was just a number to them.
It would have done them well on PR if they HAD strung him up, but they didn't... because justice was done.

 

[Lincsbodger]

I'll say it in slightly clearer language...the PM, the Home Sec., the Chief of Police, The regional Commander... Does not giving a flying f**k about the average peeler on the beat and wouldn't bother to cover it up. They have nothing to lose. He was probably a standard copper on 22k a year. He was just a number to them.
It would have done them well on PR if they HAD strung him up, but they didn't... because justice was done.

I read it entirely differently. The police will not tolerate criticism, because any weaknesses will be exploited by those wishing to diminish the police powers. They would never admit they were wrong to shoot menedez, because that an admission anti terrorist laws are wrong, they will never admit culpability to any criminal act by any officer .

The only time they feed a lowly copper to the wolves is if hes bang to rights and its too messy or public to cover. With Menedez, the blame would have fallen on Cressida D1cks, and she is a high flyer career copper, she was worth saving. Similarly, they wernt going to feed anyone from SO9 to the mob either, since its ammunition (pardon the pun) for the anti gun lobby.

 

[joe-90]

I'd say that's exactly what this society stands for... bad appales and bullies are NOT appreciated or tollerated anywhere... but you're dealling with a non perfect system, so errors will always get in... if you get things into perspective, there is without doubt the odd innappropriate action by an officer of the law.... but then there is the 'odd' member of the religious fraternity who will sexually abuse young boys... and the 'odd' childminder who will take 100's of indecent photo's of babies and toddlers, and the 'odd' tradesman who will lie to pensioners about the amount of work needed to be done to their roof, and i'm guessing many many people in respected positions who have abused that position.

So if you agree that priests should clean up their act, and childminders should be jailed then surely it follows that brutal police officers that attack people should also be jailed? It seems that we are in agreement eh?

 

[skitzee2k]

I'll say it in slightly clearer language...the PM, the Home Sec., the Chief of Police, The regional Commander... Does not giving a flying f**k about the average peeler on the beat and wouldn't bother to cover it up. They have nothing to lose. He was probably a standard copper on 22k a year. He was just a number to them.
It would have done them well on PR if they HAD strung him up, but they didn't... because justice was done.

I read it entirely differently. The police will not tolerate criticism, because any weaknesses will be exploited by those wishing to diminish the police powers. They would never admit they were wrong to shoot menedez, because that an admission anti terrorist laws are wrong, they will never admit culpability to any criminal act by any officer .

The only time they feed a lowly copper to the wolves is if hes bang to rights and its too messy or public to cover. With Menedez, the blame would have fallen on Cressida D1cks, and she is a high flyer career copper, she was worth saving. Similarly, they wernt going to feed anyone from SO9 to the mob either, since its ammunition (pardon the pun) for the anti gun lobby.

I still think you are in Dan Brown territory