- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
That CCTV image is awful. Early January, those two wrapped up to the eyeballs but the baby in nothing but a sleepsuit, in a buggy unsuitable for a newborn, being held like a ragdoll.
They don't seem to realise babies and children are actual living, feeling, incredibly vulnerable human beings. They're only arsed about themselves.
My guess is one of them said something specific about this incident that meant the prosecution could now introduce this as evidence. I’ve seen this in other cases. We aren’t getting detailed/live reporting so it’s hard to say what they could have said to trigger it.
If it was just to discredit him then I would have thought they would have been allowed to introduce it all along but they clearly weren’t. So I don’t think it’s necessarily that prosecution think it’s directly relevant to the manslaughter charge, just that they need to disprove something that’s been said.
It would be the same if he made some wild claim about his grape conviction. They wouldn’t be allowed to introduce it as could be seen as prejudicial, but if HE raised it, they would probably want to share evidence against it even though it’s not directly relevant.
Maybe it will become more clear with closing statements.
If it was just to discredit him then I would have thought they would have been allowed to introduce it all along but they clearly weren’t. So I don’t think it’s necessarily that prosecution think it’s directly relevant to the manslaughter charge, just that they need to disprove something that’s been said.
It would be the same if he made some wild claim about his grape conviction. They wouldn’t be allowed to introduce it as could be seen as prejudicial, but if HE raised it, they would probably want to share evidence against it even though it’s not directly relevant.
Maybe it will become more clear with closing statements.
I don’t think he’ll find a new career as a barrister…
The police are only allowed to use techniques which have been approved, and must only use reasonable force for the perceived threat.
A member of the public can just grab him round the neck, him, push him onto the floor, or whatever they like, and not really have to worry too much about repercussions.
At no point did he do anything which would've warranted them using much force, their hands were essentially tied by the prospect of being disciplined/sued/sacked.
I wonder how long his summing up will take
They used pepper spray twice and he still kept on.
"Det Sgt Jones said her colleague then deployed her Pava incapacitant spray at least twice.
She added: “He was trying to escape while we were still holding onto him. We were asking him to calm down, stop resisting, but this had no effect whatsoever.”
She told jurors that she and her colleague were hit during the struggle before a new father stepped in to help."
Is there a new thread?
Not yet one needs doing - I don’t know how to do it. Hope someone does one soon.
- Status