Justice or not?

[Deleted member 28]

I suspect not, given there's no allegation anyone assaulted him.

The reason it's come up is the inquest verdict was on the local News last night and apparently the only person being looked at is an off duty officer that was part of the 'restrainers'.

Not surprising really, can't win!

 

[Archie_tect]

He'll be safe providing he has witnesses who can verify he was attempting to restore order and doing his best to prevent harm.

 

[Rusty Nails]

"The jury's statement today reads: "Shane Bryant was detained following his involvement in an incident at the Co-op store in Ashby during the evening of Thursday, July 13 2017.

"Both his involvement in the incident itself and his resistance to being restrained contributed to his death.

"Whilst much of the force used to restrain and detain Shane Bryant was reasonable, there were aspects of it which were not reasonable and are more likely than not to have contributed to his death."

Seems like a reasonable judgement to me.

What does "being looked at" mean when referring to the off-duty police officer? I would have thought that his bosses would have to question him about his involvement, given the judgement, to see if there was anything he could have done to help avoid such an outcome. Is a police officer ever truly off-duty when involved in something like this?
I am not trying to apportion any blame to the officer concerned but his job gives him some obligations as in this note from the Wiltshire Police Federation:

"There are no Regulations or PNB Agreements covering this issue. It is generally accepted that 'off duty' officers place themselves 'on duty' when acting in purported performance of their duties as constables, all officers will be regarded as being 'on duty' and thus be afforded the protection that such a state entails. If in so doing, however, they commit any illegal act(s) the position becomes less clear and it could well be held that they are not acting in execution of their duty.

There is sometimes a discussion to be had about whether the officer did any more than a member of the public would have done in the same circumstances. Police officers are in an interesting position because we do not really have the option to walk on by and ignore a situation requiring an intervention. Managers being asked to authorise overtime for what an officer did off duty should consider how they would respond to a complaint that an off-duty officer did not act. Would the manager be considering misconduct for neglect of duty? We suggest that in most cases there will be a valid claim.

If this has happened to you or to an officer, you supervise, talk it through and exercise common sense and fairness on both sides."

 

[Deleted member 28]

What does "being looked at" mean when referring to the off-duty police officer?

Dunno?

A high ranking officer was on the News saying 'they are looking into the inquest's findings' regarding the off duty officer.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Dunno?

A high ranking officer was on the News saying 'they are looking into the inquest's findings' regarding the off duty officer.

As they have a duty to in this situation. They cannot just ignore the Inquest Jury's judgement that: "Whilst much of the force used to restrain and detain Shane Bryant was reasonable, there were aspects of it which were not reasonable and are more likely than not to have contributed to his death."

 

[steve292]

I won't shed any tears for the guy who died, but we can't have mob justice. OTOH you could say that if he hadn't done what he did he'd still be alive.

 

[Archie_tect]

I won't shed any tears for the guy who died, but we can't have mob justice. OTOH you could say that if he hadn't done what he did he'd still be alive.

If the person who caused his death thinks that then that is a problem, as they may believe they have a right to do it again.

 

[steve292]

If the person who caused his death thinks that then that is a problem, as they may believe they have a right to do it again.

but we can't have mob justice.
Is the bit that you need to read.

In all that I have read about this, from the link in the OP nowhere does it say that the people who restrained him assaulted him, indeed one fella got his face stamped for his trouble. Are you saying that no one should ever intervene?

 

[Archie_tect]

Sorry Steve, what I wrote was a bit ambiguous...
If the person who caused Shayne Bryant's death by using inappropriate restraint [and someone did because Shane Bryant died] thinks that it was justified, to use inappropriate force causing his death, solely because is reasonable to think Shane Bryant would still be alive if he hadn't tried to rob the shop and therefore put himself in the situation where someone deemed inappropriate force was required to restrain him, thereby it is a problem, if the restrainer then believes they have a right to use inappropriate force again in a similar situation.

That is what I meant...

 

[Deleted member 28]

......Shane Bryant would still be alive if he hadn't tried to rob the shop and therefore put himself in the situation where someone deemed inappropriate force was required to restrain him......

Agree with that bit, live by the sword etc.

 

[Deleted member 28]

I won't shed any tears for the guy who died, but we can't have mob justice. OTOH you could say that if he hadn't done what he did he'd still be alive.

Clearly you are correct and if they had beaten him to death I would wholeheartedly agree, in this instance however other issues were present, drugs and booze, which apparently also played a part in his death.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

The tricky thing here is that will any following prosecution put off others from doing the same (restraining, not killing the person running away)?

It was unfortunate he died, although he could have said 'fair enough' and not struggled. I have restrained struggling people, and it is oh so easy to get in to a position where harm could occur quite unwittingly. If someone doesn't struggle though, it's easier and more comfortable for everyone involved.

But back to the start though, what if someone is seen attacking a woman in the street, and 8-10 well built blokes think, 'let's detain him'. Should this case go further and action taken against the people who intervened because of the death, would people think twice about getting involved? Imagine if you were one of them, took the decision to not restrain them, and they raped someone the next day.

It is unfortunate he died how he did, but his fate was in his hands. So not justice in the strictest sense, but an outcome which one person could have avoided if he had realised the game was up. After all, it wasn't like they beat him to death and hung him from a tree.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Clearly you are correct and if they had beaten him to death I would wholeheartedly agree, in this instance however other issues were present, drugs and booze, which apparently also played a part in his death.

The coroner was quite clear that the deceased's ingestion of cocaine/alcohol AND the restraint contributed to the outcome of his death.

If push comes to shove and the person/persons who used the excessive restraint are charged and tried then a jury will decide the relative effect of drugs/booze or heavy handed restraint.

 

[Deleted member 28]

The coroner was quite clear that the deceased's ingestion of cocaine/alcohol AND the restraint contributed to the outcome of his death.

If push comes to shove and the person/persons who used the excessive restraint are charged and tried then a jury will decide the relative effect of drugs/booze or heavy handed restraint.

They aren't though.

 

[Moodyman]

Is there any suggestion the concerned citizens tried to harm him?

The report reads to me they were trying to restrain him, albeit I don't suppose they were too concerned about his welfare one way or the other.

Reminds me of when I was involved in restraining a street robber.

A fitter man than me caught the lad, but only because he vaulted a gate, clipped the top, and was left sprawling on the ground on the other side.

By the time I caught up, there were two or three others, one of whom was sitting on our suspect.

He was talking, trying to persuade us not to call the cops.

"Just give us a good hiding,' he said. "I'll say nowt."

Did you? I won't say owt either.