Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

Mr Broadhurst told an MPs' Home Affairs Select Committee the information was "true to the best of my knowledge at the time".
I'm not at all surprised by the suggestion that the commander of the uniformed cops might not have been told everything the Branch were up to at the protest, I'm actually surprised by all the commentators who are saying Broadhurst must have known everything just because he was ostensibly in charge.
 
I'm not at all surprised by the suggestion that the commander of the uniformed cops might not have been told everything the Branch were up to at the protest, I'm actually surprised by all the commentators who are saying Broadhurst must have known everything just because he was ostensibly in charge.

this is true. The point though is if he didn't genuinely know in his own mind, why go public saying a definite no?

I'd say a knowing arrogance, absolute contempt for the public and a complete lack of accountability allowed him the privilege of saying what ever the fuck he wanted - without checking and without actually caring.
 
it's pathetic, to see them floundering so patently.

He [Broadhurst] told the latest hearing: "I first of all apologise. When I appeared before you I gave you information that appears to be inaccurate. At the time it was true to the best of my knowledge."

ummmm... but your colleague Acting Commissioner Godwin adds: "that the use of covert officers on large operations was "not an exception at all".

So even though the use of covert officers is not exceptional at all and even though you admit you didn't know the whole truth, you were previously prepared to go on the record as stating an unequivocal opinion on the deployment of covert officers not having taken place? And you're the "gold commander"...:facepalm:
 
The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police broke the law in the way they "kettled" protesters at the G20 demonstrations in 2009.

In a landmark judgment released on Thursday, high court judges found for protesters who had claimed police treated them unfairly. The court heard that officers used punches to the face, slaps and shields against demonstrators whom police chiefs accept had nothing to do with violence.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/14/kettling-g20-protesters-police-illegal
 
Thousands of people found by the high court to have been illegally detained for hours by police at a central London protest may sue Scotland Yard for false imprisonment.

The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police had broken the law in the way it kettled up to 5,000 demonstrators at the G20 protests in April 2009.

The judges heard police used the tactic of mass detention against protesters that they accepted were peaceful, with officers meting out punches to the face, slaps and shield strikes as they tried to move a demonstration against climate change.

Judges found that the force used by police was "unjustified", criticised "imprecise" instructions given by senior officers about releasing innocent people, and said the mass detentions for five hours were an unlawful deprivation of liberty under article 5 of the European convention on human rights.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/14/sue-police-kettling-g20-protests
 
Back
Top Bottom