A bit rude?

[mudsticks]

[/QUOTE]

I'm sure she's intelligent enough to work out that there might be possible consequences to any of her actions.

I'm talking about afterwards, if she had been mistreated like this by the police.

You'd just tell her to stay quiet, and suck it up.?

That she'd 'asked for it' and the police (bears?!?) acted correctly.

Or would you be justifiably incensed on her behalf, given they were completely out of order..

I don't quite know what you mean by 'the type' but one question at a time I guess.

 

[newfhouse]

I don't quite know what you mean by 'the type'

I think we all know what is meant by that.

 

[mudsticks]

I think we all know what is meant by that.

Now now .

We all know what happens when we 'assume'

 

[newfhouse]

Now now .

We all know what happens when we 'assume'

I’m always happy to have my assumptions challenged. I look forward to a full explanation from the horse’s dog’s mouth.

 

[mudsticks]

I’m always happy to have my assumptions challenged. I look forward to a full explanation from the horse’s dog’s mouth.

In my experience you'll be waiting a while.

Or the 'explanation' won't actually relate to the question.

But let's wait and see right?

 

[PK99]

Exactly - i've no idea if the German police are any better or worse in terms of upholding decent and professional behaviour - p

This aticle may go some way to answering that:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/23/world/europe/germany-police.html

 

[mudsticks]

Is it any wonder that there are calls for 'defunding the police' among people who have researched all this very carefully .

Oh yes - it's all just 'bants' right ?? - What you'll get if you 'poke the bear'

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ers-joked-raping-women-police-watchdog-racist

Sickening - there is no excuse .

 

[mudsticks]

This aticle may go some way to answering that:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/23/world/europe/germany-police.html

behind a paywall - any chance you could cut and paste an extract ??

 

[PK99]

behind a paywall - any chance you could cut and paste an extract ??

Ha! I saw it from a Google search and got straight in, now using the link it tells me I've exceeded my free articles....

I've just tried the search again "german police reputation" and got stright in...

In Germany, Confronting Shameful Legacy Is Essential Part of Police Training​

In the postwar era, Germany fundamentally redesigned law enforcement to prevent past atrocities from ever repeating. Its approach may hold lessons for police reform everywhere.
...
Germans have applied the lessons of their unique and horrid history to every aspect of their postwar democracy, not least to how they police their country. Those changes were partly imposed on Germany after the war and took decades to work their way through attitudes and institutions. But over time they have become pillars of German identity
...
Even the more elaborate training courses fall far short of Germany’s minimum standards in terms of entry requirements, length and intensity.

“Before they even start, applicants have to pass personality and intelligence tests,” said Margarete Koppers, Berlin’s attorney general, who previously ran the Berlin police force.

Once accepted, training in Germany takes at least two-and-a-half years at an academy. Cadets are not just taught how to handle a gun but obliged to take classes in law, ethics and police history. When they graduate they are rewarded with high trust levels in society and civil servant status that guarantees decent pay and job security.

In another postwar innovation, German police officers do not handle minor infractions like parking tickets and noise ordinances, which are handled by uniformed but unarmed city employees.

“This was an idea of the Allies, they wanted to demilitarize and civilize police matters,” said Ralf Poscher, director for the department of public law at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security and Law.

 

[mudsticks]

Ha! I saw it from a Google search and got straight in, now using the link it tells me I've exceeded my free articles....

I've just tried the search again "german police reputation" and got stright in...

In Germany, Confronting Shameful Legacy Is Essential Part of Police Training​

In the postwar era, Germany fundamentally redesigned law enforcement to prevent past atrocities from ever repeating. Its approach may hold lessons for police reform everywhere.
...
Germans have applied the lessons of their unique and horrid history to every aspect of their postwar democracy, not least to how they police their country. Those changes were partly imposed on Germany after the war and took decades to work their way through attitudes and institutions. But over time they have become pillars of German identity
...
Even the more elaborate training courses fall far short of Germany’s minimum standards in terms of entry requirements, length and intensity.

“Before they even start, applicants have to pass personality and intelligence tests,” said Margarete Koppers, Berlin’s attorney general, who previously ran the Berlin police force.

Once accepted, training in Germany takes at least two-and-a-half years at an academy. Cadets are not just taught how to handle a gun but obliged to take classes in law, ethics and police history. When they graduate they are rewarded with high trust levels in society and civil servant status that guarantees decent pay and job security.

In another postwar innovation, German police officers do not handle minor infractions like parking tickets and noise ordinances, which are handled by uniformed but unarmed city employees.

“This was an idea of the Allies, they wanted to demilitarize and civilize police matters,” said Ralf Poscher, director for the department of public law at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security and Law.

This is what we need - its an acknowledgement that with power ( to control, arrest, or confine or whatever ) comes great responsibility to act ethically and professionally - regardless of personal likes or dislike, political view or whatever.

Of course that's going to cost to train and fund and retain good people - but the alternative is imo far more costly to everyone.

If we don't turn this around soon then many currently serving officers - with any self respect are going to be leaving policing - understandably not wishing to be associated with such horrible behaviour - and we risk being left with a bunch of oafs that no one trusts or consents to being 'policed' by.

 

[Unkraut]

Where did this [sullen and uncooperative] description come from?

I read through the Guardian article and links on this. It contained the following:

CCTV played to the hearing showed how police carried Duff from a van to the cage behind the station, while she refused to cooperate or speak with them, other than to ask to see a doctor.
Her response to the police in detention was “classic civil rights movement limp passive resistance”

Silent and uncooperative and resistant. I think my description of her is pretty accurate in the light of this - and not made up! To what extent this matters is the area of disagreement, but to me it doesn't show her in a particularly good light either.

To continue with the report of the disciplinary tribunal:

The decision to throw out the case came after Nicholas Yeo, representing Howard, had argued that the search was justified by Duff’s refusal to cooperate with officers while in detention, meaning they could not carry out a proper risk assessment.

He [the sergeant] must consider the demeanour of a detainee, their vulnerability and whether they pose a risk to themselves or others and he was unable to ascertain from Dr Duff whether she suffered from any mental illness, other vulnerability or whether she was on drugs ...

Now the panel might have been applying a generous two coats of whitewash on this occasion, but in any event it seems the strip search was justified. I don't think anyone would seek to justify the way it was carried out or what was said, and at least there is objective evidence about this in the form of the footage, so it is not 'she said they said'.

 

[Milkfloat]

I read through the Guardian article and links on this. It contained the following:

CCTV played to the hearing showed how police carried Duff from a van to the cage behind the station, while she refused to cooperate or speak with them, other than to ask to see a doctor.
Her response to the police in detention was “classic civil rights movement limp passive resistance”

Silent and uncooperative and resistant. I think my description of her is pretty accurate in the light of this - and not made up! To what extent this matters is the area of disagreement, but to me it doesn't show her in a particularly good light either.

To continue with the report of the disciplinary tribunal:

The decision to throw out the case came after Nicholas Yeo, representing Howard, had argued that the search was justified by Duff’s refusal to cooperate with officers while in detention, meaning they could not carry out a proper risk assessment.

He [the sergeant] must consider the demeanour of a detainee, their vulnerability and whether they pose a risk to themselves or others and he was unable to ascertain from Dr Duff whether she suffered from any mental illness, other vulnerability or whether she was on drugs ...

Now the panel might have been applying a generous two coats of whitewash on this occasion, but in any event it seems the strip search was justified. I don't think anyone would seek to justify the way it was carried out or what was said, and at least there is objective evidence about this in the form of the footage, so it is not 'she said they said'.

One of the many things you seem to miss is that she should not have been in the van in the first place. The Police abused their powers the moment they arrested her.
The sergeant was aware she was brought in because she was giving out literature explaining someone's rights when being arrested and was acting with classic civil rights passive resistance. It would be immediately clear that she would not be hiding something up her chuff ready to commit suicide and thus no strip search was required. Just in case you don't understand - the strip search was a punishment.

 

[mudsticks]

One of the many things you seem to miss is that she should not have been in the van in the first place. The Police abused their powers the moment they arrested her.
The sergeant was aware she was brought in because she was giving out literature explaining someone's rights when being arrested and was acting with classic civil rights passive resistance. It would be immediately clear that she would not be hiding something up her chuff ready to commit suicide and thus no strip search was required. Just in case you don't understand - the strip search was a punishment.

Oh I think everyone understands that very well, all round.

But you know, how it is if you act 'sullen and uncooperative'..

If you're not going to be a nice sweet compliant 'girl' then you'll get what's coming to you, right .??

 

[Ian H]

I read through the Guardian article and links on this. It contained the following:

CCTV played to the hearing showed how police carried Duff from a van to the cage behind the station, while she refused to cooperate or speak with them, other than to ask to see a doctor.
Her response to the police in detention was “classic civil rights movement limp passive resistance”

Silent and uncooperative and resistant. I think my description of her is pretty accurate in the light of this - and not made up! To what extent this matters is the area of disagreement, but to me it doesn't show her in a particularly good light either.

To continue with the report of the disciplinary tribunal:

The decision to throw out the case came after Nicholas Yeo, representing Howard, had argued that the search was justified by Duff’s refusal to cooperate with officers while in detention, meaning they could not carry out a proper risk assessment.

He [the sergeant] must consider the demeanour of a detainee, their vulnerability and whether they pose a risk to themselves or others and he was unable to ascertain from Dr Duff whether she suffered from any mental illness, other vulnerability or whether she was on drugs ...

Now the panel might have been applying a generous two coats of whitewash on this occasion, but in any event it seems the strip search was justified. I don't think anyone would seek to justify the way it was carried out or what was said, and at least there is objective evidence about this in the form of the footage, so it is not 'she said they said'.

You've explained the uncooperative bit, and others have expanded on the reasons for that. 'Sullen' seems to be your pejorative invention, a mere insult.

 

[qigong chimp]

I read through the Guardian article and links on this. It contained the following:

CCTV played to the hearing showed how police carried Duff from a van to the cage behind the station, while she refused to cooperate or speak with them, other than to ask to see a doctor.
Her response to the police in detention was “classic civil rights movement limp passive resistance”

Silent and uncooperative and resistant. I think my description of her is pretty accurate in the light of this - and not made up! To what extent this matters is the area of disagreement, but to me it doesn't show her in a particularly good light either.

To continue with the report of the disciplinary tribunal:

The decision to throw out the case came after Nicholas Yeo, representing Howard, had argued that the search was justified by Duff’s refusal to cooperate with officers while in detention, meaning they could not carry out a proper risk assessment.

He [the sergeant] must consider the demeanour of a detainee, their vulnerability and whether they pose a risk to themselves or others and he was unable to ascertain from Dr Duff whether she suffered from any mental illness, other vulnerability or whether she was on drugs ...

Now the panel might have been applying a generous two coats of whitewash on this occasion, but in any event it seems the strip search was justified. I don't think anyone would seek to justify the way it was carried out or what was said, and at least there is objective evidence about this in the form of the footage, so it is not 'she said they said'.

Risk assessment now is it?
Might the doctor she asked for have been able to throw some light on her mental state/sobriety/vulnerability? And might she have achieved it without forcibly stripping her?
I'll remember that next time I go full sexual humiliation thuggery on someone I've lifted from the street for no other reason than that I'm stronger than they are: "Consider yourself risk assessed, furry fish pants."
Sacked. The lot of them. Then charged individually risk assessed.
And when Dorries checks in to rehab Johnson may have a job for you, unkraut..