david dissadent
New Member
.
I know, it's plain to see. But I will try and explain it, nice and slowly for you.
Because he's feebly trying to justify why it's ok for a 6foot+ copper (or any copper for that matter) to
a- give the young girl in the video a back handed slap, with nice big thick gloves on, because she stood up for someone else getting pushed around. And then
b- to whack her in the leg with a baton (which can easily break bones) because she had the gaul to complain about it.
Read the words here, try and put them together. See if any of the things you learnt at school come flooding back
Looks like a pretty straight forward assault case - he clearly strikes her, she does not appear to represent any threat to him.
Come on, there were some there trying to get a reaction from the police, hence the scores of people carrying video cameras, hoping to get something juicy.
The woman and others, jumped on a minor incident where the black bloke was pushed, and deliberately inflamed it, then screamed police brutality when they got a reaction from the police, what they were looking for.
Again,selective blindness.She clearly punched him in the back
Again,selective blindness.She clearly punched him in the back
I can't see any evidence of that at all. Even if she did, that does not give the copper the right to slap a small woman across the face and then strike her with a weapon. The correct procedure would be to arrest her. Without violence.Again,selective blindness.She clearly punched him in the back
Again,selective blindness.She clearly punched him in the back
There is no point on the tape where the woman is shown punching the police officer. She has her arm stretched out at the beginning of the footage
Which frame? I can't see it.
At 3:40 it's obvious,though off camera,she pushes him then on camera pushes him and he catches her arm.She then goes onto for a third time push/punch him and,imo,he attempts to bat her off at the same time as fending off somebody off camera.
Or maybe it's my eyesight
naah,I can't see it either. She comes close to him, but there's no arm movement to suggest that she's hit him or is about to hit him in anyway.
The BBC said:The footage shows the woman swearing at a police officer who then appears to hit her in the face on 1 April.
The officer also apparently strikes the woman on the leg with his baton.
naah,I can't see it either
'It's obvious, though off camera'
IE
'I'm going to invent shit to support my view'
lol I'll just fantasize about what happened cause that way I don't look like a mug
....Some would say she deserved a good slap
No,you see the copper get jolted forward then this little woman appears directly behind him shouting the odds....Some would say she deserved a good slap
Again,selective blindness.She clearly punched him in the back
I suspect more would say it's time a misogynistic twat like you was kicked off the boards for good.No,you see the copper get jolted forward then this little woman appears directly behind him shouting the odds....Some would say she deserved a good slap
No,you see the copper get jolted forward then this little woman appears directly behind him shouting the odds....Some would say she deserved a good slap
Some would say it's time a misogynist twat like you was kicked off the boards for good.
At 3:40 it's obvious,though off camera,she pushes him then on camera pushes him and he catches her arm.She then goes onto for a third time push/punch him and,imo,he attempts to bat her off at the same time as fending off somebody off camera.
Or maybe it's my eyesight
No,you see the copper get jolted forward then this little woman appears directly behind him shouting the odds....Some would say she deserved a good slap
Hang on. I want to see where in the video she punches the police officer in the back.