Incident at Manchester Airport

Curryman said:
What this proves to me is that too many people, including those who should know better like Andy Burnham, should keep their big traps shut until all the facts are out. Also the press are to blame for the misinformation by not investigating the incident properly, and for the following bun fight that occurred between various sections of the community.

There now seems to be an awful lot of back tracking from all and sundry.

I just hope for the policeman's sake that he is given a decent hearing and that the two thugs who attacked the Police are also given a fair trial with a fair outcome. We don't need things like this blowing up in society and causing more and more division.
Click to expand...
To be fair Andy Burnham stated early on the video shown was not the full story
 
Lala said:
The lads hadnt been on the plane. Only the mother.
The altercation or ‘words’ on the plane were between the mother and a n other.
When she got off the plane she pointed out the person she’d argued with to her sons. That’s when they then kicked off in Starbucks terminal 2, assaulting this other person, in what is being described as a violent incident.
That is why they were then being arrested a few minutes later.
Click to expand...
Ah okay but there was still no risk of a suicide vest if they were there to pick their mum up 😂
 
We haven't seen the original altercation between the sons and the person from their mother's flight.
If this was a violent incident, the lads were probably still high on adrenaline.
Maybe the police misjudged the situation when going to arrest them with one male and two female officers?
Once the fight started the male PO was on his own.
 
EdgeleyTangerine said:
Ah okay but there was still no risk of a suicide vest if they were there to pick their mum up 😂
Click to expand...
No, I dont think a suicide vest will have been the main concern. Diffusing the violent situation and allaying any further risk to others will have been.
But I wanted to keep you in the loop re who was on the plane as it helps to know the facts 😉
 
Lala said:
The kick was an attempt to keep him on the ground so they could then cuff him. Though if he hadn’t violently resisted arrest and assaulted emergency workers he would have been cuffed without any of the ensuing fracas.
Click to expand...
Absolutely and as bobbies we have done virtually anything to incapacitate dangerous offenders. In the heat of the moment its incredibly hard to make a rational decision, and until you actually do the job, its easy to have opinions and be critical.

This was no drunk coming out of a pub, unsteady on his feet, he was an individual who thought absolutely nothing about maiming a female and attacking law enforcers in the lawful execution of their duty.

As mentioned before by myself and a few others, he's lucky it was Manchester as there are many places in the world who not only would have shot him, but quite possibly killed the little shit.

A kick in the head in those places would have been a blessing.
 
EdgeleyTangerine said:
You seriously think that kick to the head was justified?
Click to expand...
I think if I’d been pummelled numerous times on the back and the side of the head, and was still standing enough to contain a dangerous citizen, then I may view it as the only safe option until he was cuffed yes. Definately.

You would obviously be the best copper ever, even after a serious tanking to the head. No room for grey areas eh, even though you have no idea how he was feeling physically and mentally after he’d been heavily assaulted whilst on public duty.
 
Bend it like Suddick said:
Did it result in the offender being incapacitated, and did it virtually nullify the situation?

If the answer is yes to both, then there is an argument for it being justified. That doesn't mean to say its right.
Click to expand...
We live in a very strange world where we think a kick to the face and stamp on the head from a police officer on a guy already on the ground is justified.

Like I said earlier, if this was a football fan then all of those excusing and defending this police officer would be up in arms crying about police brutality.
 
Lala said:
I think if I’d been pummelled numerous times on the back and the side of the head, and was still standing enough to contain a dangerous citizen, then I may view it as the only safe option until he was cuffed yes. Definately.

You would obviously be the best copper ever, even after a serious tanking to the head. No room for grey areas eh, even though you have no idea how he was feeling physically and mentally after he’d been heavily assaulted whilst on public duty.
Click to expand...
Might as well have just put a couple of rounds in him and finished the job eh?
 
EdgeleyTangerine said:
We live in a very strange world where we think a kick to the face and stamp on the head from a police officer on a guy already on the ground is justified.

Like I said earlier, if this was a football fan then all of those excusing and defending this police officer would be up in arms crying about police brutality.
Click to expand...
I would have exactly the same opinion if the offender was black, white, pink all over, gay, straight, female, animal or Tommy Robinson. So yes, definitely even a football fan, taking into account ALL of the circumstances.
 
Lala said:
No. Why would you say that. That has been totally avoided here.
Click to expand...
Well people seem to think it’s acceptable to kick and stamp on someone’s head which could result in death so what’s the difference?

I agree that the circumstances those officers faced were abhorrent and the violence from these guys towards the police, including female officers, was astonishing but the guy was on the ground. This officer took the law into his own hands. None of the other officers who were attacked retaliated in the same manner. Why did this officer feel the need to also kick the other guy to the ground when he was already going on to his knees?

You can seek to justify it however you want but the actions of this police officer are not acceptable and he should be rightly held to account.
 
EdgeleyTangerine said:
We live in a very strange world where we think a kick to the face and stamp on the head from a police officer on a guy already on the ground is justified.

Like I said earlier, if this was a football fan then all of those excusing and defending this police officer would be up in arms crying about police brutality.
Click to expand...
It wasn't a football fan was it, it was an idiot in an airport (an enclosed public area) who had broken the nose of a female officer already and then attacked (cowardly) the officers back with multiple punches.

See my other posts on the subject to get a balanced opinion on my views. I aint going to keep posting, its started to get boring reiterating stuff.
 
Bend it like Suddick said:
It wasn't a football fan was it, it was an idiot in an airport (an enclosed public area) who had broken the nose of a female officer already and then attacked (cowardly) the officers back with multiple punches.

See my other posts on the subject to get a balanced opinion on my views. I aint going to keep posting, its started to get boring reiterating stuff.
Click to expand...
Missed the point entirely.
 
EdgeleyTangerine said:
Well people seem to think it’s acceptable to kick and stamp on someone’s head which could result in death so what’s the difference?

I agree that the circumstances those officers faced were abhorrent and the violence from these guys towards the police, including female officers, was astonishing but the guy was on the ground. This officer took the law into his own hands. None of the other officers who were attacked retaliated in the same manner. Why did this officer feel the need to also kick the other guy to the ground when he was already going on to his knees?

You can seek to justify it however you want but the actions of this police officer are not acceptable and he should be rightly held to account.
Click to expand...
What would you say if we found out today that the copper concerned had died of brain injuries related to this assault.
Would you still say it’s ok for a copper to take a fatal blow but he still shouldn’t have restrained the assailant with his foot. Because lets face it, the fact that the kick could be rendered damaging here seems to be the issue, but the punches could have been as fatal as the kick. In fact they definitely were delivered with more force.
And would you not take into account the effect those punches could have had on the coppers reactions going forward. Not temperament type reactions, but physiological ones, effects that no training in the world could dictate ?
 
Lala said:
What would you say if we found out today that the copper concerned had died of brain injuries related to this assault.
Would you still say it’s ok for a copper to take a fatal blow but he still shouldn’t have restrained the assailant with his foot. Because lets face it, the fact that the kick could be rendered damaging here seems to be the issue, but the punches could have been as fatal as the kick. In fact they definitely were delivered with more force.
And would you not take into account the effect those punches could have had on the coppers reactions going forward. Not temperament type reactions, but physiological ones, effects that no training in the world could dictate ?
Click to expand...
Well then the offender would be punished in accordance with the law.
 
1722185597984.png

I'm really pleased that someone (it certainly won't be the police officers or the CCTV operators, it's more than their liberty is worth under the DPA), has released the other side of the story - to that presented by the family member who recorded a short, clip that distorts the facts & only shows what he wanted the public to see.
It's also fair, for the purpose balance, that the TV news are showing it (although the GMP & IOPC won't be happy). There will still be more that the IOPC will be forensically examining.
I'm also glad some posters on AVFT (but not all) have changed their views from finding the officer guilty without investigation.
Some posters continue to persist with a biased view, without knowing the detail of the evidence or the level of force that officers are entitled & trained to use. That is just naive at the very least & certainly showing a clear biased.
I'm not associated with anyone or any organisation in involved in this incident. But I can say with some confidence, that those sitting in judgement, who have already convicted the officer, will never have been in a extremely violent situation similar to which the officers found themselves. I have on a number of occasions (thankfully not in recent years!) and when you're fighting for your life, or to save your colleague or civilians, things don't always go to the text book.
In addition, there's nothing to even suggest that this is a racist incident. It just so happens that the instigators are of Asian origin. It's the trouble makers and mischief makers who are saying anything differently (as shown by Curryman's post).
I don't know what the evidence is against the officer(s) conduct, that is a matter for the IOPC. However, I do thank the officers for doing their duty & risking their own safety to keep us, the public, safe. I also hope they come out of this well & that the injured officers, who are still receiving treatment, fully recover. I understand the badly injured officer is to get married very soon, so I do hope she recovers in time for her wedding.
Justice will be done and be seen to be done. The lynch mobs must not be allowed to influence due process & hopefully they will conform with the wishes of the family with regards to peace on the streets.
No one has yet provided an answer as to why a poster from the protest group has circulated (now gone national) all the names of the GMP officers who work at Manchester airport. Is that intended to intimidate them and their families? Or to stir up a hate mob. I do know that the officers named are community based officers, not response officers, and none of them had any dealings with this incident - they weren't even on duty!
I'm bowing out of this discussion now, as I've nothing further to add.
 
585 = never give up said:
View attachment 20464

I'm really pleased that someone (it certainly won't be the police officers or the CCTV operators, it's more than their liberty is worth under the DPA), has released the other side of the story - to that presented by the family member who recorded a short, clip that distorts the facts & only shows what he wanted the public to see.
It's also fair, for the purpose balance, that the TV news are showing it (although the GMP & IOPC won't be happy). There will still be more that the IOPC will be forensically examining.
I'm also glad some posters on AVFT (but not all) have changed their views from finding the officer guilty without investigation.
Some posters continue to persist with a biased view, without knowing the detail of the evidence or the level of force that officers are entitled & trained to use. That is just naive at the very least & certainly showing a clear biased.
I'm not associated with anyone or any organisation in involved in this incident. But I can say with some confidence, that those sitting in judgement, who have already convicted the officer, will never have been in a extremely violent situation similar to which the officers found themselves. I have on a number of occasions (thankfully not in recent years!) and when you're fighting for your life, or to save your colleague or civilians, things don't always go to the text book.
In addition, there's nothing to even suggest that this is a racist incident. It just so happens that the instigators are of Asian origin. It's the trouble makers and mischief makers who are saying anything differently (as shown by Curryman's post).
I don't know what the evidence is against the officer(s) conduct, that is a matter for the IOPC. However, I do thank the officers for doing their duty & risking their own safety to keep us, the public, safe. I also hope they come out of this well & that the injured officers, who are still receiving treatment, fully recover. I understand the badly injured officer is to get married very soon, so I do hope she recovers in time for her wedding.
Justice will be done and be seen to be done. The lynch mobs must not be allowed to influence due process & hopefully they will conform with the wishes of the family with regards to peace on the streets.
No one has yet provided an answer as to why a poster from the protest group has circulated (now gone national) all the names of the GMP officers who work at Manchester airport. Is that intended to intimidate them and their families? Or to stir up a hate mob. I do know that the officers named are community based officers, not response officers, and none of them had any dealings with this incident - they weren't even on duty!
I'm bowing out of this discussion now, as I've nothing further to add.
Click to expand...
As am I, enough is enough. Excellent post
 
EdgeleyTangerine said:
Well people seem to think it’s acceptable to kick and stamp on someone’s head which could result in death so what’s the difference?

I agree that the circumstances those officers faced were abhorrent and the violence from these guys towards the police, including female officers, was astonishing but the guy was on the ground. This officer took the law into his own hands. None of the other officers who were attacked retaliated in the same manner. Why did this officer feel the need to also kick the other guy to the ground when he was already going on to his knees?

You can seek to justify it however you want but the actions of this police officer are not acceptable and he should be rightly held to account.
Click to expand...
No disrespect to you, but you probably know nothing about police training, the criminal law, what level & when force can be used or any of the evidence outside of the short video.
You've drawn conclusions based on very little but persist in arguing the point - you're flogging a dead horse.
Why not let the investigation take its course and wait for the outcome rather than persist with your biase?
I'm definitely out of this now, as there's nothing else to read or be said from me.
 
Lala said:
I hear ya, but all police officers are human. Some situations won’t be textbook, just like life.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. That's why I said 'should'. I also think similar to you that the first kick looks like it's something to get total control over the guy and get him cuffed. Of course, only the two of them know what they were doing and thinking.
 
I hope and expect that the IOPC, with the support of Burnham and the Rochdale community leaders, sanctioned the GMP to leak the car park zone CCTV to the press. For the main purpose of showing Rochdale the truth in order to calm the situation and prevent any more police station protests or riots (which could have developed).

I think they have all learned from the BLM situation which escalated across the USA because the police and authorities did not communicate enough.
 
Looks like the family have dismissed Yakoob the original lawyer, I think this is good news for all of those involved. It looked like Yakoob, like some other parasitical parties from both sides with a political axe to grind, wanted to use the situation to further his goals.
More impartial information from the excellent BBC.

www.bbc.com

Family of kicked Manchester Airport man concerned for police

The family say anyone who broke the law during the melee at an airport should face due process.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

One point - I don't think that the two assailants could not have been involved in an altercation in the baggage claim area if they were not on the flight as some on here have speculated. It's flight side isn't it?

IMO - Generally we should lay off with analysis and speculation - let the justice system do it's work.
Ugly situation and as I said before, it's possible for both sides in this to be in the wrong.
 
Bend it like Suddick said:
possible?

EBSN, both sides are DEFINITELY in the wrong
Click to expand...
100%, what’s pi….d people off is the first video, until the second one was released no one really knew why the response was as it was. Now Everyone can see why it’s kicked off like it did.
Pretty sure there may be more to come.
Will he loose his job who knows.( I hope not)
Will the guys face a court for assault and ABH who knows. ( I hope so)
 
Having just watched the release of the initial video prior to the kicking incident the bloke got what he deserved he was a violent thug who seriously assaulted 2 police officers one being a WPC.

The level of the violence used against the Police officers was just shocking to watch I’ve convinced myself had he a weapon he would have used it.

Absolutely to room for this scale of violence in our society this thug needs putting away for a long time with that level of aggression.

And for the record yes the officer went over the top but I can fully understand it now having seen the latest video the thug got what he deserved a right good kicking.
 
Jaffa_The_Hut said:
Having just watched the release of the initial video prior to the kicking incident the bloke got what he deserved he was a violent thug who seriously assaulted 2 police officers one being a WPC.

The level of the violence used against the Police officers was just shocking to watch I’ve convinced myself had he a weapon he would have used it.

Absolutely to room for this scale of violence in our society this thug needs putting away for a long time with that level of aggression.

And for the record yes the officer went over the top but I can fully understand it now having seen the latest video the thug got what he deserved a right good kicking.
Click to expand...
Correction Jaffa...

He assaulted all three officers and for that he should be facing a long custodial sentence, as should the other scrote.
 
Lala said:
What would you say if we found out today that the copper concerned had died of brain injuries related to this assault.
Would you still say it’s ok for a copper to take a fatal blow but he still shouldn’t have restrained the assailant with his foot. Because lets face it, the fact that the kick could be rendered damaging here seems to be the issue, but the punches could have been as fatal as the kick. In fact they definitely were delivered with more force.
And would you not take into account the effect those punches could have had on the coppers reactions going forward. Not temperament type reactions, but physiological ones, effects that no training in the world could dictate ?
Click to expand...
But that hasn't happened.

I don't think it's right that policd officers consider it part of their job to kick people in the face then stamp on their head regardless of the provocation.

This comes back to what I said yesterday. Two wrongs don't make a right. The initial assaults should be charged on that basis, and the police conduct should also be investigated according to law.

1. The man punching the person who had insulted his mother should be done for assault

2. The man piling in in support and hitting the coppers should also be done.

3. The policeman who overreacts should also be charged.

They are all separate issues, although bound together in one incident.
 
The policeman did not overact, given the severity of the attacks by the two men to all three armed officers. As I mentioned in another post

there were multiple other young men around the incident. It would be impossible for the policeman to determine who was involved in the

attacks as he received multiple blows from both men and also had his back turned to the policewomen who tasered the man and dragged him

to floor. A Taser strike only lasts for 5 seconds, and then the person starts to recover, given the threat I think he used reasonable force and

should be commended for managing to contain the incident without any loss of life.
 
Foolweary said:
The end of that video seems to coincide with the start of the original video that misled so many people.

The copper in question has been repeatedly punched in the head by the first assailant, (shown only to be sat down in the original clip) then jumped from behind by the 2nd maniac again repeatedly punched and grabbed from behind, the 2nd maniac is then thankfully tasered.

Is it 1 or 2 seconds later where the original film starts?

His actions in the original film seem wholly appropriate in that context.
Click to expand...
It follows on exactly, as was shown in this video and others.


But one thing that kid of rules out that he lost control to me is he didn't just boot this guy once he hit the deck like someone who lost control might, it's when he turned his head and potentially might have tried to get back up.

I've seen videos of people getting back up ans going again and even some who don't go down from a tazer.

The officer was hurt and in the heat of the moment, he chose to end the threat.

The 2 guys are lucky they chose restraint IMO.
 
Wizaard said:
But that hasn't happened.

I don't think it's right that policd officers consider it part of their job to kick people in the face then stamp on their head regardless of the provocation.

This comes back to what I said yesterday. Two wrongs don't make a right. The initial assaults should be charged on that basis, and the police conduct should also be investigated according to law.

1. The man punching the person who had insulted his mother should be done for assault

2. The man piling in in support and hitting the coppers should also be done.

3. The policeman who overreacts should also be charged.

They are all separate issues, although bound together in one incident.
Click to expand...
And the lad hasnt died either so do none of the actions count then if neither has died, is that how it works.

I disagree, and I will keep disagreeing. I don’t think you can compartmentalise all of the actions into little itemised boxes.
I think the police officer will have repercussions, I don’t think he would have until that footage came out, because he hadn’t been suspended until then.
I don’t want him to lose his job and I don’t want him to face charges, but he probably will.
I think we should be less pedant about how he secured the arrest, and more aware of the whole picture, circumstances and outcome.
 
Foolweary said:
The end of that video seems to coincide with the start of the original video that misled so many people.

The copper in question has been repeatedly punched in the head by the first assailant, (shown only to be sat down in the original clip) then jumped from behind by the 2nd maniac again repeatedly punched and grabbed from behind, the 2nd maniac is then thankfully tasered.

Is it 1 or 2 seconds later where the original film starts?

His actions in the original film seem wholly appropriate in that context.
Click to expand...

Yes Fool, I don't know for sure that the original video was a continuation of the video revealed later on but IF it was then it's easy to see why the copper - tbh I originally thought his actions were OTT - reacted like he did.

I'm not now saying that his response was acceptable - or unacceptable - but I think it's easier to understand why he reacted like he did.

I am a lover and not a fighter but if you have already been attacked by somebody then I would imagine you are more likely to think that you need to make sure your defence is very strong.
 
It was no volley or 2 footed stamp so on balance fair... Hopefully he ill get a cheeky 6months to go with the bit of retribution.
 
Thought this deserved a bump after the CCTV was shown yesterday of one of the two brothers headbutting and punching some fellar in Starbucks his mum had pointed out from her flight.

That’s why the police went to detain him.

A great read looking back for a few…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top