Be Excellent To Each Other

Not really. It's the police's job to prove I'm Naughty Person before arresting me, not my job to prove I'm not.

Actually, that's not true at all. They can arrest you on suspicion of something (and always do, I believe) and hold you for 24 hours while they try and prove it.

I mean, sure - but 'acting like an arse' is surely an unacceptable justification for use of a taser?

Not really. It's the police's job to prove I'm Naughty Person before arresting me, not my job to prove I'm not.

My uncle (who is a barrister) has told me that if a policeman ever asks me anything, my answer is "I want my lawyer present." and to shut my fucking mouth.

Then you'd likely be arrested until it was clear you weren't Murderous Mugging, just a good lookalike.

I meant purely on the basis of giving up my name / ID - I'm not going to do that just because I might get arrested.

It's not stated what the crime is, but it could well be a violent crime.

My uncle (who is a barrister) has told me that if a policeman ever asks me anything, my answer is "I want my lawyer present." and to shut my fucking mouth.

Let's taser a man because he could be a guy that might have done a violent crime?

Seriously?

Let's taser a man because he could be a guy that might have done a violent crime?

Seriously?

I'm the opposite, I'll quite happily hand over any details that a police officer requests of me. Hasn't done me any harm yet, despite repeated dealings with them.

If he was struggling a bit and there existed a risk of not just him getting pepper sprayed, then light him up. I don't think the police want a fair dust up, they don't want one at all, so end it sharpish.

I always give your details, too.

If he was struggling a bit and there existed a risk of not just him getting pepper sprayed, then light him up. I don't think the police want a fair dust up, they don't want one at all, so end it sharpish.

Not at all. They tasered him because he was fighting back and the officer presumably thought they had exhausted other means of control.

They could at least aimed for the centre body mass though. Jesus. She was a piss poor shot.

They could at least aimed for the centre body mass though. Jesus. She was a piss poor shot.

How pointy are the barbs?

I'm sure as shit glad you weren't there the night Helen and I were attacked.

I mean, sure - but 'acting like an arse' is surely an unacceptable justification for use of a taser?

My uncle (who is a barrister) has told me that if a policeman ever asks me anything, my answer is "I want my lawyer present." and to shut my fucking mouth.

Screenshot of the video right before the taser was fired.

Note how far the man is from the female officer, that he has his arms down by his side and neither officer are in contact with him or vice versa. Where is the attempt at control that has been exhausted here?

(If you watch the vid, she has her taser pointing at him from the beginning. This wasn't a last resort, it was a persistent threat.)

And here's the video exactly 2 seconds before that screenshot. You can't tell shit from a still.

Screenshot of the video right before the taser was fired.

Note how far the man is from the female officer, that he has his arms down by his side and neither officer are in contact with him or vice versa. Where is the attempt at control that has been exhausted here?

(If you watch the vid, she has her taser pointing at him from the beginning. This wasn't a last resort, it was a persistent threat.)

One would imagine the thinking might be because there had been a struggle, then there was likely to be another, putting the police at risk. So it's Christmas tree time.

I'm not clicking on a Daily Mail article to give them money, but I've seen a version of this film that was quite lengthy.

In the version I saw, the officers are speaking to the man, asking him who he is. His reply is "I'm not telling you". They calmly reply to him that if he doesn't tell then who he is, then they are going to arrest him as they believe he is (censored).

This continues, male still refuses to tell them.

They arrest him. Male refuses to accept this and tries to get into his driveway.

They physically block him and continue to tell him that he's arrested. He begins to struggle with turn and start pushing them.

They struggle with him, until he breaks away from them at which point one of the officers pulls a taser and fires it.

For me, this appears to be a perfectly lawful use of force.

The male is suspected of an offence. He is clearly told this, and why (we think you are "this person").

Rather than do the common sense thing of saying - "No officer, that's not me. I live right here and so have numerous ways to prove who I am, would you like me to show you", he goes with the option of belligerently refusing to tell them who he is.

They tell him he has been arrested. He refuses to accept this. You cannot do this. Regardless of whether you are innocent, an arrest can still be perfectly lawful and you cannot resist arrest just because you believe or know it to be wrong.

He offers a degree of physical resistance to then that is effective in preventing them arresting him. The officers are now in a position where they have to use force.

They first try going hands on, and this falls. He struggles with them, appears strong, and breaks away from them. At this point the female officer pulls her taser and fires it, bringing the matter to an end and enabling the arrest.

That's the media manipulation of taser for you!

I was a taser officer for some time before being a dog handler.

The dogs have a social media output. Whenever we get a good job - normally a bite - it's advertised. You get an outpouring of public appreciation. "Great work!" "Give that dog a steak" "Hope he doesn't catch anything" "Four legs faster than two" etc etc. Don't get me wrong, I think it's great, it's appreciated and it's positive.

However... I'm not going to different jobs as a dog officer than I was as a taser officer. To go all mathematical, a dog handler is going to a subset of the jobs I went to before. As a dog handler I've detained domestic offenders, burglars, violent people utilising the dog. As a taser officer I detained domestic offenders, burglars, violent people.

Sometimes the sheer threat of taser or dog was all that was needed, and no injury caused to offender.

However, when I did have to use taser, in 95 percent of my deployments the injury was nothing more than a couple of pinpricks and maybe a bruise. In one deployment he banged his head and needed gluing.

The dog, when used, puts people in hospital. It's a much larger use of force.

And yet, taser officers don't have a social media platform advertising all their arrests. And if they did, I'd put good money on the bet that instead of #bittenoffmorethantheycanchew you'd be seeing #policebrutality.

The media should be held to account for some of the things that they create.

That can be the only logical explanation - I have no idea why else she'd have tasered him based on what we've seen / read.

So, after refusing to give his name, try to leave, stuggle with the police, it was right to taser him to prevent injury?

Absolutely not. I didn't say I agreed with that thinking or indeed that they were at risk - just that's what she must have thought.

//edit: Another quote from the same guy about the media's representation of taser deployments:

If they did arrest him (and the video doesn't show this but there's a large edit in the middle) and he continued to resist then I'd accept the force used as reasonable apart from the firing a taser in his face. Neither cops appears to be holding a pair of cuffs though.

So, if she thinks that there is a risk of injury to her colleague and her, she should do nothing?

No, I think she - or her colleague - should actually attempt to detain him if they genuinely believes that he is [wanted man] instead of standing there pointing a taser at the man from the beginning of the interaction. Or any sort of action that isn't merely throwing him away from his property.

Hang on, nope, male cop clearly has a pair of cuffs out. You can see them in his right hand on the blokes back in the struggle.

They did. There was a struggle. There was a Risk of further struggle and injury, so blokey was incapacitated.

At all times during the "struggle" he keeps his arms on the gate or by his side, except to free his arm. I'm not seeing a violent man struggling to assault a police officer?

I... didn't say otherwise?

taser time

And, probably, thinking there was a risk of a repeat and injuries occuring, taser time to prevent this.

Whatever man.

Like I said, she had the taser pointed at him from the beginning - from way before arrest was threatened, let alone instigated (if we're assuming that was done during the edit based on the handcuffs). She didn't pull out it because of the "struggle". She wasn't "in fear of her life" or "protecting her colleague" or whatever bullshit. She had it on him from the start.