UK Student Protests: Wheelchair-bound student dragged across the road by police officer, BBC defend

[jebussaves88]

I heard this was staged. It apparently isn't him, but a lookalike in the chair. That's just what I heard.

 

[AcrylicHero]

The worst part is that this happened to him twice. This was way out of line from the police officers, they should have dealt with the situation properly, there was no need for what they did, with the only reason being to induce violence.

I already referred to the afternoon incident earlier in the thread. An amateur photographer had been observing McIntyre. He acted like a complete tit to the police officers who took great care to remove him and his chair from the path of a planned horse charge.

Yeah, I was leaning towards Mcintyre but now I'm back on the fence about the whole thing.
Very commendable of the police officers to make a very good effort of moving him from harm's way in the afternoon, despite him trying to force his way back in. It seemed that in this incident they were trying to look out for him, and once you lash out against an officer who actually was trying to help you out you've got no case.
This also certainly raises certain questions about the event that took later. The officers could've decided to go down hard on him, just as you'd expect an officer to do against a protester who has been misbehaving throughout the day and showed no real signs of stopping.
Still it doesn't quite justify the method which the officer used and especially doing it in front of an already angry crowd wasn't the best move.

 

[NeedAUserName]

snip

But what could he have possibly done, you can see he is just sitting there, what possible threat could this hadicaped person have done to warrant being draggeda across the road.

He could have been trying to incite a riot/violence or anything like that.

A CRIPPLE really?

Right, people need to understand that just because hes disabled doesn't mean he couldn't still be at least slightly guilty. I'm not standing up for the police I'm just saying its not necessarily as brutal as it seems. And, I'd argue this guy did seem to be on his own, as if people had been told they wasn't allowed in the area he was in.

Also just as a last point, theres always a chance hes exploiting his disability. I mean even if he was in the wrong he presumably knows it would be a PR nightmare for the police to do anything about him, due to all the videos/pictures taking their actions out of context and branding them evil.

 

[Defective_Detective]

if the cops tell you to do something, do it, or else you'll have it done for you and you won't like it.

And is that morally right?

Doesn't matter whether it is morally right or wrong. It's the law.

So we should all bend over, accept, never question or do anything about it?

Why should we choose laws over morality?

Indeed. Sounds like a painfully spineless attitude to me. Still, if somebody wants to go through their life without a backbone then leave them to it. Just as long as they don't try to foist their yellow-bellied stylngs on the rest of us.

There's a difference between being spineless, and having respect for authority and the rules of the game.

 

[MarsProbe]

There's a difference between being spineless, and having respect for authority and the rules of the game.

Respect will be given, just as long as it is warranted, and reciprocated.

 

[Mcface]

He was where he wasn't supposed to be and refused to move. Just because hes in a wheel chair doesn't give him immunity to things like this. if he was a normal guy no one would say anything.
He should have moved, he didn't, so he got his ass moved for him. Get over it.

he said it himself it happened on two occasions. if it happened the first time, he knows he's in the wrong place. yet he stayed. this shit happens all the time. dumb kids think they are all tough and righteous, and then when the police knock them off the streets, they play victim.

 

[Normalgamer]

Please... Look up Cerebral Palsy. HOW can he do anything from a wheelchair and loss of motor skills?

You do realize he still has the ability to talk and push buttons right. This could allow him to incite a riot through his words, not all that hard, or possibly to activate a bomb. I doubt he had a bomb or the probably would have just shot him or it would be on the new or something, but you should get the idea. Just cuz he has cerebral palsy, doesn't mean he cant be a threat. I mean, there's a reason tyrannical governments control what thier citizens are allowed to say. words can often be the most powerful weapons of all.

The man can barely speak, I highly doubt he would be able to incite anything in the condition he's in. The police are clearly in the wrong if they have to grab a permanently crippled man and pull him across the street after he begs them to stop.

 

[Delusibeta]

And he's the link that Defective_Detective was referring to again: http://www.mitchell-images.com/#/jody-mcintyre/4546538655

Ultimately, there's insufficient evidence for either side. We got zero in the way of context.

 

[Mcface]

Please... Look up Cerebral Palsy. HOW can he do anything from a wheelchair and loss of motor skills?

You do realize he still has the ability to talk and push buttons right. This could allow him to incite a riot through his words, not all that hard, or possibly to activate a bomb. I doubt he had a bomb or the probably would have just shot him or it would be on the new or something, but you should get the idea. Just cuz he has cerebral palsy, doesn't mean he cant be a threat. I mean, there's a reason tyrannical governments control what thier citizens are allowed to say. words can often be the most powerful weapons of all.

The man can barely speak, I highly doubt he would be able to incite anything in the condition he's in. The police are clearly in the wrong if they have to grab a permanently crippled man and pull him across the street after he begs them to stop.

I've had a teacher in highschool who had Cerebral Palsy. She could be down right nasty just like any other. The simple fact is, if you are breaking the law, or stick around defiantly when the police tell you to move, you will get in trouble. this this case, he was moved because he refused to. chances are he put the breaks on his chair and refused to disperse after the police told the crowd to.

 

[Defective_Detective]

This man is a fucking god. He pwned that reporter he pwned the police. A-men to him and A-men to the student cause. Even though I disagree with all the long haired, dirty, alchoholic, scabies infested students I agree that education should be free to all and these rises in fees are ridiculous.

Why should education be free?

Surely if anything should be free, it should be bread and water?

Ok I mis-said that. I meant affordable not free. My bad there brohemasphere.

Hey, it's no problem.

 

[Normalgamer]

Please... Look up Cerebral Palsy. HOW can he do anything from a wheelchair and loss of motor skills?

You do realize he still has the ability to talk and push buttons right. This could allow him to incite a riot through his words, not all that hard, or possibly to activate a bomb. I doubt he had a bomb or the probably would have just shot him or it would be on the new or something, but you should get the idea. Just cuz he has cerebral palsy, doesn't mean he cant be a threat. I mean, there's a reason tyrannical governments control what thier citizens are allowed to say. words can often be the most powerful weapons of all.

The man can barely speak, I highly doubt he would be able to incite anything in the condition he's in. The police are clearly in the wrong if they have to grab a permanently crippled man and pull him across the street after he begs them to stop.

I've had a teacher in highschool who had Cerebral Palsy. She could be down right nasty just like any other. The simple fact is, if you are breaking the law, or stick around defiantly when the police tell you to move, you will get in trouble. this this case, he was moved because he refused to. chances are he put the breaks on his chair and refused to disperse after the police told the crowd to.

But if you watched the video, you'd learn he couldn't actually operate his wheelchair.

 

[Treblaine]

Who knows what actually happened, I welcome an independent investigation but I have little confidence in him as a reliable witness (nor a short and terrible quality video).

But I can't stand the logic seen in this interview:

>start a riot
>demand media take notice of injuries from riots
>complain the media are "distracting" from the "real issue" of the new tuition fees

Disabled people are people too, equally fallible to foolish logic. I am a student and instead of going to one of these stupid demonstrations as I was invited to I got on with my work on clinical placement, and I'm damn grateful for any support the government give me at all.

I have lived in counties where children can't even be guaranteed childhood education, I can only imagine what they would think when they realise what this minority are complaining about.

I see these "demonstrations" as nothing but tyranny of the mob.

A lynch mob bears little distinction from a demonstration, just different ratios of sociopaths to passive-aggressive enablers.

 

[Normalgamer]

Snip

The police say he gave them reason to think he was a threat. Do you always believe everything cops and the government say? I don't know how many cops you've met but a lot of them are just assholes with a superiority complex. All I'm saying is that it's just as naive to assume the cop had a legitimate reason to do that as it is to just assume the cop was completely in the wrong.

My personal belief, however, is that whatever cop it was should face some kind of repercussions. You don't drag a crippled person out of their wheelchair unless they're literally about to kill you or something like that. On top of that the cop was just a fucking moron for doing that in front of so many people; of course something like that is going to make a whole lot of people angry. If anything he should face charges of inciting violence.

I tend to believe most of what the police say, cuz otherwise our entire system of law and justice is not only priciply flawed, but crippleingly retarded. Let me say it one more time. There is not enough evidence in this video to support any conclusion. based on lack of evidence, my BENIFIT OF THE DOUBT goes to the cop. do any of you actually know what that means? it means that without any evidence, I trust a cop more than some random kid who's only provable cause for being more trustworthy is that he has cerebral palsy. Do we automatically assume that every speeding tickit was given by a cop who lied about how fast you were going? No. So why does this kid having cerebral palsy entitle him to being automatically the victim. That's discrimination, just so you know.

How should the cop face charges of inciting violence, you do realize that his actions not only didn't cause any kind of violent reaction in the video, but quite possibly, NOTE: POSSIBLY, could have averted violence.
So let me sum this up with two simple words:
PROVE IT. Until you can do that, any reaction against either party is baseless and more indicative of the person making it, than of the facts of what happened.

Why do you trust police more then your average man? They're just your average man in a certain occupation. Believing a man is truthful or not on his proffession is incredibly typecast and naive.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

I think I'll take a neutral stance on this whole situation. There really isn't a lot of information given to from the video of the event to really do anything. It seemed as if the camera man either edited it or started the camera solely to show the officer dragging the kid out.

I just don't feel comfortable jumping onto either bandwagon until I know a bit more about the situation.

 

[Choppaduel]

I've been reading on this and I'd like to share an exert from a blog entry by Danniel Hannan MEP.

The policing of mass demonstrations is the kind of issue on which everyone has an opinion. It was the main topic of conversation both in Parliament Square and in the House of Commons itself (whither I repaired, once I managed to convince a young policewoman to let me through). Whether to allow marches in the first place, whether to "kettle" the demonstrators, when to intervene: these are precisely the kind of issues which ought to be publicly debated. I'd like to see the decisions being made by an elected sheriff who knows that he will have to seek re-election on the basis of his record. And that's the real story of the moment.

source: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100067782/student-rioters-inadvertently-make-the-case-for-elected-sheriffs/

 

[spartan231490]

Snip

The police say he gave them reason to think he was a threat. Do you always believe everything cops and the government say? I don't know how many cops you've met but a lot of them are just assholes with a superiority complex. All I'm saying is that it's just as naive to assume the cop had a legitimate reason to do that as it is to just assume the cop was completely in the wrong.

My personal belief, however, is that whatever cop it was should face some kind of repercussions. You don't drag a crippled person out of their wheelchair unless they're literally about to kill you or something like that. On top of that the cop was just a fucking moron for doing that in front of so many people; of course something like that is going to make a whole lot of people angry. If anything he should face charges of inciting violence.

I tend to believe most of what the police say, cuz otherwise our entire system of law and justice is not only priciply flawed, but crippleingly retarded. Let me say it one more time. There is not enough evidence in this video to support any conclusion. based on lack of evidence, my BENIFIT OF THE DOUBT goes to the cop. do any of you actually know what that means? it means that without any evidence, I trust a cop more than some random kid who's only provable cause for being more trustworthy is that he has cerebral palsy. Do we automatically assume that every speeding tickit was given by a cop who lied about how fast you were going? No. So why does this kid having cerebral palsy entitle him to being automatically the victim. That's discrimination, just so you know.

How should the cop face charges of inciting violence, you do realize that his actions not only didn't cause any kind of violent reaction in the video, but quite possibly, NOTE: POSSIBLY, could have averted violence.
So let me sum this up with two simple words:
PROVE IT. Until you can do that, any reaction against either party is baseless and more indicative of the person making it, than of the facts of what happened.

Why do you trust police more then your average man? They're just your average man in a certain occupation. Believing a man is truthful or not on his proffession is incredibly typecast and naive.

Yeah, it's totally niave to assume that people who undergo background checks and a certain level(no matter how minimal) of review are statistically better than the average man, many of whom are unable of meeting the standards of that profession.
Don't be such a twit. and unless you can show any evidence that shows the kid didn't do anything wrong, i don't care.

 

[Kukakkau]

Prove it. It's a one minute video, you have no proof as to what happened that caused the cop to act this way. For all we know, the cripple deserved it. He is a cop, if you can't trust him not to abuse cripples, how can you trust him to uphold justice and the law? Interesting philisophical question right there. Why do we allways assume the cop is at fault when one of these show's up, and not the other way around? My bet is on projection. We identify more with the non-cop, therefore we project ourselves onto the non-cop and think "I wouldn't have done anything wrong so it must be the cop's fault" sub-consciously at least. That's my two cents, not that I have any reasonable credentials for that to be taken as fact, but it IS my opinion.

Sorry but there is NO reason to drag a person with a severe disability across the street - unless it is to save their life. And he's in a chair... with wheels - he can very easily be moved away, and with his condition he can't stop the officer from wheeling him away. Simple solution and causes no harm to him or the officer.

Yes, there isn't enough shown about what the guy did but it is evidently clear that he did not pose a physical threat - officers are only allowed to act with force if there is a deemed physical threat involved. And if said threat is present then they can act by any means necessary.

The kid is a strong speaker despite his disability, however do you really expect someone with a speech impediment like that to be able to speak loudly and clearly enough to incite riotous acts in an environment like that?

While I know the officers are just doing their job it is frequently obvious that officers controlling protests get increasingly impatient and stressed and the smallest offenses leads to them bringing people down. I recently saw a TV show from the riot police's perspective and he was cuffing and wheeling people off for swearing. They then justified it by saying it had been a long day and they'd had enough of dealing with people. Fair enough I can understand why - but that is still inexcusible.

Every occassion where officers get sent to deal with protests etc it is guaranteed that several officers will be charged with misconduct

 

[Defective_Detective]

I've been reading on this and I'd like to share an exert from a blog entry by Danniel Hannan MEP.

The policing of mass demonstrations is the kind of issue on which everyone has an opinion. It was the main topic of conversation both in Parliament Square and in the House of Commons itself (whither I repaired, once I managed to convince a young policewoman to let me through). Whether to allow marches in the first place, whether to "kettle" the demonstrators, when to intervene: these are precisely the kind of issues which ought to be publicly debated. I'd like to see the decisions being made by an elected sheriff who knows that he will have to seek re-election on the basis of his record. And that's the real story of the moment.

source: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100067782/student-rioters-inadvertently-make-the-case-for-elected-sheriffs/

Bad idea, in my opinion.

 

[Normalgamer]

Snip

The police say he gave them reason to think he was a threat. Do you always believe everything cops and the government say? I don't know how many cops you've met but a lot of them are just assholes with a superiority complex. All I'm saying is that it's just as naive to assume the cop had a legitimate reason to do that as it is to just assume the cop was completely in the wrong.

My personal belief, however, is that whatever cop it was should face some kind of repercussions. You don't drag a crippled person out of their wheelchair unless they're literally about to kill you or something like that. On top of that the cop was just a fucking moron for doing that in front of so many people; of course something like that is going to make a whole lot of people angry. If anything he should face charges of inciting violence.

I tend to believe most of what the police say, cuz otherwise our entire system of law and justice is not only priciply flawed, but crippleingly retarded. Let me say it one more time. There is not enough evidence in this video to support any conclusion. based on lack of evidence, my BENIFIT OF THE DOUBT goes to the cop. do any of you actually know what that means? it means that without any evidence, I trust a cop more than some random kid who's only provable cause for being more trustworthy is that he has cerebral palsy. Do we automatically assume that every speeding tickit was given by a cop who lied about how fast you were going? No. So why does this kid having cerebral palsy entitle him to being automatically the victim. That's discrimination, just so you know.

How should the cop face charges of inciting violence, you do realize that his actions not only didn't cause any kind of violent reaction in the video, but quite possibly, NOTE: POSSIBLY, could have averted violence.
So let me sum this up with two simple words:
PROVE IT. Until you can do that, any reaction against either party is baseless and more indicative of the person making it, than of the facts of what happened.

Why do you trust police more then your average man? They're just your average man in a certain occupation. Believing a man is truthful or not on his proffession is incredibly typecast and naive.

Yeah, it's totally niave to assume that people who undergo background checks and a certain level(no matter how minimal) of review are statistically better than the average man, many of whom are unable of meeting the standards of that profession.
Don't be such a twit. and unless you can show any evidence that shows the kid didn't do anything wrong, i don't care.

Your true colors are showing, just because someone does not agree with your opinions does not give you the right to immediately attack them because of it. "Statistically better then the average man." No, they are not statistically better then the average man, I want to see these "Statistics".