Weds 1st April: G20 protests - discussion, reaction and chat

[Jeff Robinson]

that hurt my eyeballs.

I like the way that the one out of the four who could otherwise pass off as a normal human being is wearing a t shirt that makes him look like a nazi.

 

[free spirit]

The logic is evidently working backwards. It's not possible to provide food, water, shelter and toilets for several hundred people for several hours so they don't bother; how about if they can't look after the people in their ad-hoc custody then they shouldn't imprison them in the first place.

er, that's the point I'm making.

if it get's defined that they have to supply these things in order to kettle people, then that also means that they can't kettle people if they can't supply these things... or at worst they could only kettle people without supplying this stuff for a couple of hours or so.

I'm using the same logic the police use when they don't want an event to happen - ie put so many conditions on the organisers that they end up deciding that they won't do it because it's too much hastle.

 

[Corax]

I'm using the same logic the police use when they don't want an event to happen - ie put so many conditions on the organisers that they end up deciding that they won't do it because it's too much hastle.

OOI, At what point did we start having to fill out forms in triplicate in order to lawfully protest? Has this *always* been the case, or did it come in as part of CJB?

 

[Azrael]

How hard do you think it is for the police to bring in 50-100 portaloos, drinking water bowser, water proofs and food for several thousand people?

it's doable, but very difficult at short notice, so IMO it would effectively lead to the use of a kettle becoming at worst a very short lived thing - ie not more than a couple of hours, which IMO has to be a major improvement on the current 8-10 hours.

Hard to be sure, but not only could the police be ready the day before, they could provide the minimum required, ie., a lot less that 50-100 portaloos, boxes of food etc.

As I said, I'm not against campaigs for humane treatment. Good luck to them. But I can see it being used to normalise the tactic if not done carefully. Law of unintended consequences and all that.

what I'm talking about has nothing whatsoever to do with any human rights act (unless I'm missing something major).

No, but the previous lawsuit invoked Article 5, and it's a fair bet that Liberty et al will be singing its praises and invoking it again if another lawsuit be launched.

There's no reference to the "kettle" on the front page of their website at the moment, so we'll have to wait and see.

 

[editor]

Excellent piece in The Londonist (excuse the length, but it includes a heap of useful links to reports):

We've been talking a lot about the G20 protests this week and been mulling over a number of points. Namely, police tactics and what the point of it all was?

Former Met assistant commissioner Andy Hayman defended police use of the 'kettle' last week in the Times. The kettle is basically a cordon of police - 'normal' or in riot gear - who surround groups of demonstrators, or any other 'troublesome' group, keeping them in one place for hours at a time. The idea is that eventually the people within the kettle get tired or bored and just want to go home. But its effect is to tar thousands of people - including people who just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time - with the same brush as a tiny handful of idiots hellbent on violence and destruction.

Commander Simon O'Brien said: "those who wanted to leave could, and those who wanted to stay and make their point, we facilitated that" and that by the end, those who remained wanted to be there. Not actually true. The Guardian reported reported parents wanting to go pick up their children, others in tears, refused permission to leave. Some escaped when police lines broke, but others were gradually released only if they gave their names, addresses and had their photograph taken. Nobody is legally obliged to do this, but anyone who refused was sent back into the cordon for daring to exercise their legal right to protest and privacy.

Tom Whipple in The Times said, "if I were to design a system to provoke and alienate, I could not do better". All a kettle does is create the very violence it's supposed to stop. It immediately sets up an 'us versus them' situation and tips the balance in favour of a backlash. After all, if you're already being treated like a criminal, why not behave like one?

In his article Andy Hayman talks about 'snatch squads', a quick smash and grab into a crowd to pluck out someone identified as a troublemaker. Why detain thousands when between 40 and 200 have been singled out as violent? Why not arrest the people they're after and let everyone else go? I suspect they don't because there wouldn't be anything to charge them with; is one side-effect of a kettle that it superheats the atmosphere to such a degree that it brings out any latent violence, providing a reason for arrest? It certainly doesn't stop it full stop: witness the mini riot at London Bridge on Wednesday night and the destruction that occured after the kettle was lifted at Oxford Circus in 2001. But again, it's worth stopping to wonder if that violence would always have happened, or was it partly created by police tactics?

But even if we were to accept, just for a moment, that kettles stop violence, what possible justification is there for its use on the Climate Camp? No eyewitnesses spotted anything other than fluffy loveliness down at Bishopsgate. In fact, during my wander through the camp I saw a small group of friends who'd clearly come down after work and were just opening up a bottle of red wine to enjoy in the remaining afternoon sunshine. It made me wish I'd been as organised. Though since a cordon was thrown up an hour later and the riot police sent in, it's probably just as well I wasn't. And as Bishopsgate had been open to pedestrians the entire afternoon, how many onlookers were caught up?

Yes, the camp blocked off a major City thoroughfare. But Climate Camp organisers say they'd been trying to talk to the Met for weeks. The Met denied all knowledge. Clearly somebody's lying here. Were the police ever interested in engaging with the demonstrators? Or was the intention to intimidate and justify the media frenzy that happened in the lead-up to the protests?

And the final problem with kettles: people get hurt. We still have to see whether the police did play a role in Ian Tomlinson's death, but how can they expect to wade into crowds (of mainly peaceful protesters and bystanders, let's not forget) with batons, or dogs, and not cause injury? Another little discussed tactic of a kettle is to squeeze protesters into an increasingly small space, until there's no room to move or - sometimes - breathe. It's a miracle nobody's ever got seriously hurt at one of these things.

And ultimately, what did any of it achieve? Did the protesters get their message across or was it drowned out by panic over anarchists and pictures of smashed windows? There was certainly little impact on the G20 leaders themselves, particularly on climate change. I would suggest all the police achieved was to destroy their relationship with thousands of members of the public.

However, it might be nice to end on a positive note. Yes, there is one. On my wander through the Climate Camp I overheard conversations by lots of non-protesting Londoners who were there, I suspect, to laugh at the hippies. But they were stunned - in a good way - at the organisation and genial atmosphere. At the music and the dancing. At the ingenuity and decoration.

If Climate Camp managed to change these people's minds about the nature of protest, if it planted a seed of doubt that might germinate the next time they see TV pictures of 'violent' protests, then it might be worth it. The more people see for themselves the true nature of these events, in time we might be able to stop discussing disproportionate police tactics because they wouldn't have the tacit backing of the general public.
So go on: spread the word.

 

[Azrael]

Commander O'Brien's statement that "Those who wanted to leave could" directly contradicts the protestors' account. All I can say here is that the Commander appears very poorly briefed.

That Cmdr. O'Brien feels the need to deny mass-detention indicates that the police aren't confident of public support for "kettling". A positive sign.

 

[editor]

Commander O'Brien's statement that "Those who wanted to leave could" directly contradicts the protestors' account.

He's a liar. I asked several times if I could leave and was told - in no uncertain terms - that I could not.

 

[Bakunin]

He's a liar. I asked several times if I could leave and was told - in no uncertain terms - that I could not.

The police are also lying about not having been in touch with the Climate Camp, as at least one of the liaison meetings was held in the office of a Lib Dem MP at the House of Commons!

 

[winjer]

at least one of the liaison meetings was held in the office of a Lib Dem MP at the House of Commons!

Not 'at least one', but the only meeting. Which was also not agreed by the camp process, just the media team...

 

[cesare]

Not 'at least one', but the only meeting. Which was also not agreed by the camp process, just the media team...

According to who?

 

[Kaka Tim]

First time Ive had time to post my account of the g20 thing since weds.

Myself and gf got to city about midday and we walked down to the bank of england. There was a thin line of about a dozen transport police but at first they were not stopping anyone going past.

After about 20 mins the police started to form a thicker line and it was obvious that they were going to block the route. I had no desire to be caught in a police kettle for the rest of the day so stayed the other side of the line whilst shouting to people what the police were doing - to no avail.

I noticed that the cops were not in riot gear and that crowd of several hundred people were building up on our side of the line. I pointed this out to the cops but they didn't take my advice to pull out.

Within another 20 muinutes pressure was building on both sides of the police line and then the samba band drew the more millitant sections of the crowd towards the poilce line. The cops were looking quite panicy now. Pushing and shoving started, batons were drawn. The first violence I saw was a city of london copper grabbing someone by the throat - a tactic he repeated on two other people.

Their then followed the sequnce which has been well covered by the media - the bare chested bloke at the front covered in blood, the copper getting hit with the wooden pole and the police line finally breaking and them being forced back down the road. ) whiich is always heartening to see)

I dont understand the police tactics - blocking the road was obviously going to casue a confonrtation with the crowd - so why have cop in soft hats and tit helmets? Why so few? Ant why did they not fuck off a lot earlier?
I'm inclined to favour overstretch and cock-up rather then conspiracy on this one - certainly the cops in the front line looked pretty panniced.

We then wandered round to the climate camp, chilled for a bit, though maybe we'd camp there, wondered weather the cops would close it down before night fall.

Walked back towards the bank - tried all sorts of alleys and backroads but couldn't find a way through the police lines.

Met some mates at climate camp about 6pm - all very chilled and fluffy. Decided to go for a pint in nearby pub. We were there for about an hour when we heard that the climate camp was kettled in - and all our stuff was there.

Started to leave the pub and saw live footage on sky news from out side the bank of england of the police proper beating the crap out of people sitting on the ground. What made it worse was there were city workers in there cheering the cops on. I saw two women with faces full of hate screaming 'go on - fucking kill em!' at the screen. I got into a - pointless - argument with them. Ive since learned that this was the police action where the man died. I doubt the hate filled harridens would be bothered - this was proper naked class hatred - the mask was off.

Went back to the outside the climate camp. We joined some other musicians in playing music and singing (guns of brixton, We aint gonner be treated this way, Vicious, Gangsters, I fought the law. get up stand up) all with suitably ammended lyrics.

Spent the next the few hours wandereing around the kettle, playing music and arguing with cops.

As it got dark the cops got more and more cuntish - shouting, threatneing, pushing, punching and batoning anyone who didn't move fast enough or gave them any lip - after a few hours of narrowly avoiding arrest, assult and/or being trapped we decided to get away, get some food and find a crash space.

Next day we went down to the Bank for the protest over Ian Tomlinsons death. A few hundred people were calmly and quitely sitting outside the bank. Pretty much as soon as we got there the met arrived and enforced a kettle - instantly making the crowd angry and noisy. Got let out after an hour or so.

A few hours later I was at liverpool street station and found a (very quiet and subdued) group of about 20 people (young student types by the looks of it) being contatined by about 50 fully tooled up riot squad. I thanked them for protecting me from the dangerous mob.

We were then standing about 20 yards away chatting to a cyclist who'd stopped to see what was going on. Straight away three riot cops came over and started filming us. I blocked the view with a newspaper and was threatened with arrest, the paper ripped out of my hand and told to 'move!'.

Three people, having a convsations out side a busy railway station - 'move!' -what is this? north korea? a gob smacked commuter came over to ask what was going on and was also filmed.

Wasn't suprised that the goon squad acted like the goon squad - but was pretty amazed that they attacked the climate camp. That was a pretty clear 'send a message' act of unprovoked violence - or maybe the hippies, kids and pacifists were just too easy a target - after all the class war types lot might fight back.

Reflections -

Good that the police violence has been exposed in such detail - many many poeple will have been shocked by how they behaved. Also its clear that any chaos, vilence and mayhem was overwhelmingly down to the police tactics.

The death of Ian Tomlinson may result in less or modified use of the kettle - more likely they'll get a slap on the wrist and introduce some mealy mouthed policy of 'ensuring our safety' which exists only on paper.

I though the turn out was pretty good - considering the media scaremongering and police threats of violence.

I dont think the trashing the RBS thing matters all that - millions of people are furious at the banks and aren;t going to be too bothered (remember the poll tax riots had considereable public sympathy).

We're not at the stage of full blown riots - but i think people are only going to get angrier and that the crowds will grow.

We cannot allow this ugly intimidation to work - we need to keep on demonstrating, demanding, blocading, refusing to move, refusing to comply, refusing to be silent.

(You can crush us - you can bruise us - you can even shoot us but oh oh .....)

 

[Xanadu]

A quick question:

At these events, are the police express roughly the same levels of violence, and has the press reporting of their violence changed over the past few years at all?

 

[Garcia Lorca]

we need our right of protest freely.

we need to keep it peaceful.. for now... (imho)

I also believe that the amount of video, photographic evidence is now crutial.. it spreads so easily and freely through the internet. . and is an important place to show the truth.. an example for the truth of what happened to the sadly passed away, ian tomlinson.

ive had lumps in my throats at some of the eye witness accounts ive read. I believe more people are starting to and will want to ask questions about issues that are effecting them.

 

[Garcia Lorca]

A quick question:

At these events, are the police express roughly the same levels of violence, and has the press reporting of their violence changed over the past few years at all?

a quick answer..(im shattered)..

it was certainly intense in the weeks leading upto the G20 april 1st demo. Using many key scare words, like "riot", "terror". "anarchist". etc etc through the stories. I think they hoped for a largely violent reaction from the crowd to try and dismiss the protesters as the unwashed, hippys and tree hugging anarchists through the main stream media. They didnt get the reaction they wanted in a large scale and indeed, they have shown their true colours and across the board people want their right of freedom of protest or expression, its very George orwell getting. .

its the most ive noticed, im not sure with the g8 that it was quite as provocative.. altho it was still there between the lines at times.

maybe yes, they really pushed for something that that no one wanted to participate in.


and now an innocent man is dead.

 

[SpookyFrank]

A quick question:

At these events, are the police express roughly the same levels of violence, and has the press reporting of their violence changed over the past few years at all?

Kettling has been around for a while. I was put in my first kettle back in 2004 I think; it was put in place pretty much the second our protest started so naturally there hadn't been anything to indicate we were a violent crowd, which we weren't anyway. We were given the usual 'we're letting you out in ten minutes' line over and over again, until at one point we decided to take the head copper's word as bond and leave exactly when he'd told us we could. When nine of the ten minutes were up everyone started counting down, not doing anything else just counting out loud, with the implication that when we got to zero we would be leaving the kettle no matter what. Some minor pushing and shoving ensued in which we were able to shunt the whole police kettle some fifty yards down the road, and in the end they gave up and broke their line. This was a very fluffy protest and it was only the hours of imprisonment that motivated a portion of the protestors present to confront the police in any way at all.

As for more overt forms of violence (imprisonment, especially outside in the cold without food or water, is a violent act IMO) it's hard to say. Random swinging of batons is certainly nothing new, and baton charges against peaceful crowds have happened several times in recent years without the press batting an eyelid. I don't think general police strategies have changed much over the years, although they've got better at getting them right (having seen kettles being put in place the total shambles that was the first cordon on Wednesday looks all the more suspicious, the plod are very good at this stuff when they want to be). Reporting-wise, I suspect the only reason this recent stuff has made the papers is because of the location and the high profile of the event. I doubt it was the worst instance of unprovoked police violence in recent years, but the g20 stuff has the press asking questions because there were so many witnesses (real people witnesses, not just protestors who don't count for anything and deserve what they get because they undoubtedly started it). The g20 certainly didn't catch the police on a bad day, they were behaving as they always do; ie like cowardly, bullying, violent shits who know they can do whatever the fuck they like and get away with it.

 

[_pH_]

A quick question:

At these events, are the police express roughly the same levels of violence, and has the press reporting of their violence changed over the past few years at all?

IME: Police violence was less severe at G20 than at e.g., Poll Tax, or Dicey. Not that that excuses them obv. Kettling is a relatively recent tactic

 

[winjer]

According to who?

Friend of mine who has been involved in the camps since day one, ex-RTS

 

[paolo]

No first hand experience, but the poll tax certainly looked very different on both sides, from the media coverage (yes, I know )

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

Friend of mine who has been involved in the camps since day one, ex-RTS

yes but the whole damned thing didn't happen because of a lucky bunch of coincidences either. iyswim?

 

[winjer]

No idea what you mean.

 

[ohmyliver]

direct link to the Londonist article is here: http://londonist.com/2009/04/opinionist_g20_in_london.php#more

It would be nice if people clicked on the recommend button, as then it's more likely to remain in the Londonist 'Londonist Popular' section after it goes off the front page.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

the poll tax riot was a series of unfortunate and unforeseen coincidences that could probably have been managed better from the cops pov.

whereas last week's chicanery was pretty much training ground exercises for the plod with some extra levels of brutality reserved for a bunch of fluffy fuckers.

easier?

 

[rollinder]

account from The Economist

Having captured all this, we decide it is time to head home, and here our troubles begin. Every road that leads away from the Bank of England is blocked by thick lines of police officers, letting no one in or out. When we ask why, their responses—from “maybe someone’s been hurt. Or maybe someone’s been silly” to “you’re not allowed to go through because we’ve taken control of the streets today”—are uniformly unsatisfactory.

The crowd behind us begins to swell, as does its frustration. One man pleads to be let through because he is diabetic and has no food or insulin with him. The officers are unyielding. It is an “absolute cordon” and no one is going anywhere. Scrabbling around in our bags and appealing to the crowd, we manage to scrounge together a banana and a chocolate bar but he is shaky.

Then the mood shifts. People start shoving. Suddenly there are shouts and the protesters behind us begin to surge forward in an attempt to storm the cordon. Propelled forward, we end up crushed first against the policemen, then against a van, pinned between riot police and demonstrators. The woman next to me begins to hyperventilate.

Then, just as suddenly as it started, it stops.

 

[Azrael]

Three people, having a convsations out side a busy railway station - 'move!' -what is this? north korea? a gob smacked commuter came over to ask what was going on and was also filmed.

Not North Korea -- where something a darn sight worse than being filmed or spending a night in the cells would befall you -- but not a free England either.

This is a direct consequence of 40 years of withdrawing the police from the streets and transforming constables into gendarmes who serve our ruling elite. Officers are simultaneously granted excessive powers and burdened with bureaucracy that makes it impossible to bring criminals to book.

The result is a "service" that's at once impotent and antagonistic.

Look at the police that's been created: they jangle as they walk, waddling under the weight of the stab-vests, gas cans, handcuffs, billy-clubs, radios -- and soon Tasers -- they feel the need to festoon themselves with. But they pose no threat to criminals, who know the Byzantine PACE as well as any lawyer, and have been told to expect endless second chances by the courts. Morality has long ceased to play a part in the force's day-to-day actions, governed by a bureaucratic code. So they release their pent-up frustration on protestors.

And the worst part is, given all they've had to endure, I sort of see where they're coming from.

 

[SpookyFrank]

And the worst part is, given all they've had to endure, I sort of see where they're coming from.

Oh the poor wee lambs having to carry things and do paperwork to show that they're hassling people for a reason not just because they 'know' they're guilty. Lots of people have crummy jobs you know, would you support a gang of council street sweepers if they decided to form up in a line and charge down the high street flailing their broom handles before them? How about steelworkers, are they to be permitted the occasional rampage with their mig welders? Soldiers have a pretty lousy job (and have to carry rather more stuff than coppers as a rule) but do we occasionally turn them loose on the public, with an assurance of 'no comebacks', just for the sake of their blood pressure?

 

[Kaka Tim]

This is a direct consequence of 40 years of withdrawing the police from the streets and transforming constables into gendarmes who serve our ruling elite. Officers are simultaneously granted excessive powers and burdened with bureaucracy that makes it impossible to bring criminals to book.

.

Nah - its a direct reuslt of allowing the police to follow their naturally authouritarian instincts.

 

[yield]

account from The Economist

Sun and fun give way to Robocop
FT. April 1 2009

 

[cesare]

FT Robocop link http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/87ff1546-1efb-11de-a748-00144feabdc0.html

 

[Azrael]

Oh the poor wee lambs having to carry things and do paperwork to show that they're hassling people for a reason not just because they 'know' they're guilty.

What I get when I talk to long serving (or even moderately serving) coppers is the frustration they feel at the PACE merry-go-round that sees crooks routinely walk. Far from not having the evidence, even when they have more than enough evidence for a prima facie case, PACE and the CJA 1994 compels them to interview, which often involves waiting hours for a solicitor. That's just one example of bureaucracy, and it could all go to waste at the whim of the CPS.

And if you do get crooks to court, they get a string of "second chances".

After you've watched thieves and louts walk away for years on end, it's going to wear you down. I said I "sort of" understand them; not that they're justified.

Nah - its a direct reuslt of allowing the police to follow their naturally authouritarian instincts.

Some officers might have "naturally authoritarian instincts". Many don't, and just want criminals brought to book. The common law used to facilitate this. Any serious campaign to restore civil liberties has to get at least some of the police on side. The great thing is, by abolishing PACE, charging promptly on a prima facie standard, and gaoling first-time around, order could be achieved without compromising liberty. The two go hand-in-hand.

 

[editor]

Debate about the heavy handed policing is really hitting the mainstream media now. This is from Yahoo:

The police have new tactics and they're not afraid to use them

Those attending the G20 protests this weekend have come back with complaints about the tactical manoeuvre employed by the police, known as 'kettling'. The protestors had not been around the Bank of England very long - perhaps just an hour - before police sealed off all exits and prevented anyone else from joining them. More frustratingly for those within the cordon - including parents with their children - they were not allowed to leave.

politics.co.uk was at the protest and reported back similar concerns. It is, however, very difficult to get any information from the police about when and why the strategy is implemented.

Neither Acpo, nor the Met, nor Scotland Yard itself were willing to discuss the scenarios in which they activate the power.

But some information can be garnered from a legal case brought against the police by two people - one of them a protestor, one of them a member of the public - who were caught up in a similar operation during the May Day riots in 2001 around Oxford Circus.

One challenge asked whether the power was permissible at common law. This challenge failed at the Court of Appeal on the basis that it was permissible in order to prevent a breach of the peace.

The second asked whether it contravened article five of the European Convention of Human Rights, which guarantees the liberty of the person. The case went to the High Court before reaching the House of Lords. They ruled in January this year that the practise could not be described as detention because it was conducted in the interest of public safety.

Last Wednesday was the first real opportunity for the police to use the powers without legal concerns. Legal experts do, however, expect the case to be taken to Strasbourg, to the European Court of Human Rights.

The House of Lords judgement, which was contingent on public safety, opens up a wide array of situations in which the police can legitimately use the powers. After all, almost any demonstrations can potentially turn into a situation which threatens public safety. In this case, the police had a stronger case than usual - there had been rumours running up to the event that a small group of demonstrators would use the event as an excuse to provoke trouble.

But the growing consensus from those on the march - including parliamentary observers, journalists, and demonstrators themselves - is that the strategy carries overtones of criminalisation. Several people attending the protest said they felt as if they were being punished for being there....

...If the IPCC find [Tomlinson's] death was related to violence from police, the surrounding coverage will be such that the entire police operation that day will be brought in for public scrutiny. Some politicians, such as Liberal Democrat MP David Howarth, are already calling for a full inquest with a jury. If they find otherwise, it's very likely the tactic will not face sustained questioning until that potential case in Strasbourg.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/blog/talking_politics/article/11432/