Sponsored Ad

Dismiss Notice
'Users of this forum are reminded they should not discuss performance of individual attendees at PRMC or in Recruit Training for PERsonal SECurity and in observance of Diversity & Inclusion legislation'.

Police Assault Fork Thread

Discussion in 'Jollies Bar' started by ThreadpigeonsAlpha, Aug 26, 2019.

  1. rkec

    rkec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Posts:
    247
    I strongly dispute that mate, as far as I know no powers given by any Parliament can trump Common law in this country and in Common law you can't assault someone unless

    "Self-defence (to the charge of common law assault) is available when reasonable force is used to prevent harm to self or another. Prevention of a greater crime or with the purpose of aiding a lawful arrest is also known as The Public Defence. The Private Defence or defence of property also may be used as an argument. These arguments are not strictly defences but justifications for a certain level of force."

    None of those apply to the Chief's Inspectors actions. He doesn't have any extra powers in this because no Parliament has the power to give him them.

    He's bang to rights here. He won't get charged because things don't work like that, but the Met will pay out on this one. Just like the Bible preacher a few months ago.
     
  2. boogey96

    boogey96 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2016
    Posts:
    80
    App Stage:
    Passed PRMC
    Prevention of crime mate you said it yourself. Very easily justifiable. A police constable can use force (assault) to assist in the prevention of crime. This has that written all over it and a well written statement accompanied with the footage above will negate any sort of complaint or claim for compensation.

    It’s very easy to judge this situation and his actions having never been in the officers position, hence why I’m sticking up for him although It may not be the way I’d have handled it.
     
  3. JWJ

    JWJ Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2016
    Posts:
    662
    App Stage:
    Passed PRMC
    The CI can say he used force in order to prevent a public order offence from being committed. AKA prevention of a greater crime.

    To say that common law is not trumped by statutes is a vast oversimplification of the interaction between common law and statutes. In essence, common law provides interpretation whilst statutes provide rules and guidelines.

    Unfortunately if this issue was actually seriously reviewed (which it won't be as its so trivial), then he would have to justify his use of force to the 3 questions I laid out earlier, and he would have a very tough time to give a response to 2 of the 3 questions, and only be able to provide a weak response to the firsts.

    Its the equivalent of a guy making the defense of "it was just a joke"
     
  4. ThreadpigeonsAlpha

    ThreadpigeonsAlpha Royal Marines Commando

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2015
    Posts:
    4,227
    App Stage:
    Not Applied Yet
    I have been in similar situations and you start with verbal commands and warnings unless doing so endangers life.

    It was an imediate escalation of force, without just cause.

    I would normally back up any copper however, it’s been handled poorly. And is now being used to fuel propaganda.

    I would like to get some of the opinions of the coppers/ex coppers we have in here though.
     
  5. rkec

    rkec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Posts:
    247
    I doubt that will hold up here mate. That footage is very clear, the guy does nothing more than express an opinion before the Police officer puts a hand on him.

    I have never found a single example of such in the UK. I'm open to learning examples though.

    The problem is that the debate is often confused by people on Youtube with their vidoes. They seem to believe that the Police can only uphold Common Law, this is false. They can uphold statute - so long as statutes do not conflict with common law.
     
    • Seen Seen x 1
  6. JWJ

    JWJ Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2016
    Posts:
    662
    App Stage:
    Passed PRMC
    I'm curious to hear what you believe common law is
     
  7. rkec

    rkec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Posts:
    247
    Very basically common law are laws that are founded by precedents and not be Parliaments.
     
  8. boogey96

    boogey96 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2016
    Posts:
    80
    App Stage:
    Passed PRMC
    I wasn’t referring to you with that comment dude but the law doesn’t change if you don’t use verbals first.
     
  9. sharpe

    sharpe Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2019
    Posts:
    84
    App Stage:
    Parent
    Really we have 1 major common law statute surviving and that is murder. Breach of the peace is the biggest cop out arrest going and 99% of the time never follows the letter of the definition
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. rkec

    rkec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Posts:
    247
    At what time in the video does the hands on start, and at what time in the video does the verbal start?
     
  11. JWJ

    JWJ Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2016
    Posts:
    662
    App Stage:
    Passed PRMC
    Statues are legislation, and are not meant to cover every scenario, they're the baseline rules and regulations, whilst common law is as you alluded, a collective of decisions made by courts in the interpretation of statutory law.

    You say that there's never been a case of the common law being superseded, but all common law is, is the collective judgement by courts on the interpretation of statues onto cases, which are of course binding to similar cases to come.

    If a statue is introduced, that previously common law has exclusively covered, then the statute would literally be superseding common law.
     
  12. sharpe

    sharpe Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2019
    Posts:
    84
    App Stage:
    Parent
    To put things into the context of this forum what you trained ranks went/go through on operations dwarfs a few gobby chubby Scots and antifa. Policing is 99% communication and occasionally getting hands on and depriving people of liberty
     
    • Gen Dit Gen Dit x 1
    • Seen Seen x 1
  13. rkec

    rkec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Posts:
    247
    I would disagree with that. For example, Parliament can't legalise assault by passing a vote, because common law trumps statue. In criminal law, where there is no ruling by common law, statute can be followed. But if Common law precedents have been set, that tends to be that unless a new precedent is set by the High Court, Court of appeals or the Supreme Court.

    In this context, the discussion was that the Chief Inspector had special powers given to him to allow him to put his hands on someone.

    I'm saying that no Parliament has the power to do that. That's something I stand by.
     
  14. JWJ

    JWJ Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2016
    Posts:
    662
    App Stage:
    Passed PRMC
    Common law is not statutory. The only real cases of laws existing exclusively or mainly within common law are areas like contract law, tort law and property law.
     
  15. boogey96

    boogey96 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2016
    Posts:
    80
    App Stage:
    Passed PRMC
    Go try it with any cop out on the street and see how you get on. All constables do have “special powers” given to them to allow them to put hands on someone when required.
     
  16. sharpe

    sharpe Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2019
    Posts:
    84
    App Stage:
    Parent
    Haha this is why our society has gone to pot, everyone’s a barrister:)
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. rkec

    rkec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Posts:
    247
    Yep I seen a clip of it, the guy later got paid out by the Met.



    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-49143822
     
  18. JWJ

    JWJ Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2016
    Posts:
    662
    App Stage:
    Passed PRMC
    Thats just simply not true. Lets create an example so we can talk about this a little easier, as I'm sure you agree its quite difficult to talk about this kind of thing in generalising statements.

    Lets imagine someone did an action that in previous court rulings, has been judged as being criminal and the only judicial decision making on this action has come from common law, and then parliament introduces a statue that specifically covers this action and imposes it as a criminal offence, then the statue would trump the previous common law judgments on that action. Of course new common law would be made by future courts interpreting the new statue.
     
  19. rkec

    rkec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Posts:
    247
    Then it must have happened and there must be an example you can give.
     
  20. JWJ

    JWJ Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2016
    Posts:
    662
    App Stage:
    Passed PRMC
    I mean its a simple case of its not a statute. A statute is a written law passed by a legislative body i.e parliament. Common law is literally the collective judgement of courts that is binding on future cases.

    And as I just alluded, most criminal law is covered by specific statues, i.e the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, which took a lot of pre-existing common law, into statutory law.

    However most of contract, tort and property law does not exist within statutory law, and is enforced mainly in common law.