Brighton G20 protester's criminal record for demo disorder (From The Argus)

A professional pain in the a***, scrounges on the State
Surely "working voluntarily" stops HER getting a job - perhaps that needs to be investigated?

I think this poor girl needs to see a doctor - my bruises certainly don't last that long...

Great security word, cash-idea. Think that says it all - £50K from dear old Max and wants more from the police despite her behaviour clearly being provocative on the tape - but the poor, defenceless woman denies swearing - despite the evidence.

it still isnt right for the police to attack people who have a democratic right to protest, this is simler to the veal exports at shoreham where old age pensioners were attacked by the police its about time some of you got off the fence and saw what is happening

If she already has a criminal record she won't be allowed to work with children and vulnerable adults.

Perhaps, as the Criminal Records Bureau spreads its tentacles, she won't be allowed to work with animals.

Then what?

Stop given her the column inches she so badly wants! I don't know ONE person who is on her side (then again, everyone I know has a JOB that they're hoping keep).

miasc wrote:
it still isnt right for the police to attack people who have a democratic right to protest, this is simler to the veal exports at shoreham where old age pensioners were attacked by the police its about time some of you got off the fence and saw what is happening

ummm... No, because when youre abusive to the police, threaten violence, spit in their faces and don't move along when you're asked to.............

I would like to know why we have a social security system in place that allows an able bodied woman to decide to take path doing voluntary work - and still be funded (presumably) by the government.
I have no problem with her doing her voluntary work as long as she is not scrounging off the social security system to do it.
You are normally expected to do volunteer work in your spare time, after work - not instead of work.
It's my guess that she has never done a proper job in her life.

PB wrote:
If she already has a criminal record she won't be allowed to work with children and vulnerable adults.

Perhaps, as the Criminal Records Bureau spreads its tentacles, she won't be allowed to work with animals.

Then what?

Wrong. You can still work with Children and Vulnerable Adults if you have a Criminal Record. It just depends on what you did. For example, if you were convicted of vandalism (graffiti), that's fine. If you were convicted of rape, that's not fine.

You get into bed with Max Clifford and suddenly you don't seem quite so credible.

The police are always up for a bit of action

"Ms Fisher showed the long black and red bruise on her thigh where she was hit by the policeman's baton."

£50,000 for one bruise.

"Nice work if you can get it"

Oh dear she got a slap before she could break a window or stick a knife into a police Horse. What a great shame.
Iam not over keen on the Police, BUT we must have them.

Get a job u lazy mare,no wonder shes got so much time on her hands going to these protests paid 4 by us.
Still sounds like shes gonna get the biggest Giro of her life.

Waiting for one of you to get a criminal record for one of the minor offenses(putting your rubbish out the wrong day), and then it'll be OK to abused you for life.??

I suppose now Max Clifford's biggest cash cow has popped her clogs he needs another sucker.

"...although she has continued to attend protests, she now stays away from the "front line"...."

Er, I don't think so! If the front line is where the protesters stop and the police line starts – she looks pretty "in the thick of it" in the footage.
___________

"...There's a wider problem with the whole police force, their training, their tactics..."

Osama Bin there I hear what you're saying but it seems we may have been wrong. It appears she is also a part-time consultant - advising the police on their Training Curriculum as well as being a resident expert on riot and protest tactics. Maybe this is her paid work.

She is definitely an ex-smackhead she cant even put a sentence together without slurring! Get a job Loser!

She has made a lifestyle choice which is not to work and live on benefits paid for by people who do work pay tax and probably don't have time protesting every trendy issue that she does.Lets face it if you are going 2 gob off at riot police then more than likely you are going to get a slap and for her and her mates its all part of a fun day out,waste of space.

This woman looks like a pretentious brightonian attention seeker..all credibility lost when the name Max Clifford pops up but I guess now Jade Goody is dead he has to pay the bills somehow!

Not much of a bruise either. You can hardly see it on the video. I thought it was going to be a whopper.
What a fuss about nothing.
I wonder who dug up her previous conviction. If it was the Argus - well done.
Social security scrounger of the worst kind.

Is anyone really suprised? What was she doing in the Policeman's face anyway - what was she screaming? A trouble making whinger who needs to grow up

Criminal record as long as my arm, is/was a drug addict, lazy benefit scrounger, police harrasser - clearly self-respect isn't important to her.

Made In Sussex wrote:
This woman looks like a pretentious brightonian attention seeker..all credibility lost when the name Max Clifford pops up but I guess now Jade Goody is dead he has to pay the bills somehow!

Its a good point - a lot of "protestors" come from Brighton

Is the "dole" office full of gullible idiots who will hand over our money to media savvy scum?

reminder - the green custard/mandelson case being a recent story

Osama bin there - her criminal record was all over the nationals at the weekend, there's a lot more than one conviction!!

Even if she did 'provoke' the police officer, does that justify him bashing her in the face and hitting her with a truncheon?

If provocation is ok then next time some old biddy pushes in front of me and gives me a dirty look at the supermarket, I can punch her in the mouth can I Argus?

It was police brutality and extreme. The giant officer who battered this small femail should be sacked. Lets not forget the murder of Ian Thomson either.

This woman is a f---ing idiot. It would seem she's never done a days work in her life.

tinkywinky wrote:
Even if she did 'provoke' the police officer, does that justify him bashing her in the face and hitting her with a truncheon? If provocation is ok then next time some old biddy pushes in front of me and gives me a dirty look at the supermarket, I can punch her in the mouth can I Argus? It was police brutality and extreme. The giant officer who battered this small femail should be sacked. Lets not forget the murder of Ian Thomson either.

Are you a clairvoyant? Can you see into the future?
The case has not gone to trial, and no one has been charged with murder, never mind convicted of it.
Have you ever heard of libel?

I'd quite happily take one across the back of the legs for 50k

jo w wrote:
Osama bin there - her criminal record was all over the nationals at the weekend, there's a lot more than one conviction!!

Just had a look...
She apparently has ...'a string of drug and shoplifting convictions'.. The Telegraph.

Look at the state of it. Chancer.
No one should really receive a slap from the law but I would not be surprised in the slightest if she had gone up there looking for a ruck and one of her crusty mates was the one filming it on his phone and then sold it to the papers. Double kerr-ching

Her previous record of misdoings were fully reported in the Mail as well. If she is fit enough to do voluntary work then she is fit enough to earn a living and stop being another drain on the state, probably like the majority of the other protesters

It doesn't matter if she provoked the polieceman or not, the fact is he shouldn't have reacted violently towards her slapping her in the face first and then using his baton to hit her legs.

The police should be trained to ignore provocation. Their duty is to uphold the law, not to hit people.
Also, why, at the g20 demos, did a number of these police remove or obscure their police number? Makes one think they didn't want to be identified... I wonder why?

tinkywinky wrote:
Even if she did 'provoke' the police officer, does that justify him bashing her in the face and hitting her with a truncheon? If provocation is ok then next time some old biddy pushes in front of me and gives me a dirty look at the supermarket, I can punch her in the mouth can I Argus? It was police brutality and extreme. The giant officer who battered this small femail should be sacked. Lets not forget the murder of Ian Thomson either.

Ian who?

tinkywinky wrote:
Even if she did 'provoke' the police officer, does that justify him bashing her in the face and hitting her with a truncheon? If provocation is ok then next time some old biddy pushes in front of me and gives me a dirty look at the supermarket, I can punch her in the mouth can I Argus? It was police brutality and extreme. The giant officer who battered this small femail should be sacked. Lets not forget the murder of Ian Thomson either.

Oh and 'femail' is spelled wrong.

It should read:'Jobless smelly layabout'.

phaser wrote:
Look at the state of it. Chancer. No one should really receive a slap from the law but I would not be surprised in the slightest if she had gone up there looking for a ruck and one of her crusty mates was the one filming it on his phone and then sold it to the papers. Double kerr-ching

Spot on,could'nt hav put it better myself phaser,the copper should get a promotion and pay rise and she needs 2 get her sorry arse down the job centre.

You can just tell by looking at her she is/was a junkie and a crusty, just putting on a nice dress does not hide the fact. Protesting about wasted money and capitalism, lets take away the benefits then and save some cash...see how she deals with that.
Security word, away-gold...ho ho.

Popular girl it appears. I wonder where she'll spend her cash - I might see if I can pop down and bum a pint and a couple of roll ups off her

I would suggest that a number of the contributers to this 'debate' need to go away and learn the meaning and application of 'ad hominem' before continuing to make **** of themselves!

RickH wrote:
I would suggest that a number of the contributers to this 'debate' need to go away and learn the meaning and application of 'ad hominem' before continuing to make **** of themselves!

One of the most widely misused terms on the Net is "ad hominem". It is most often introduced into a discussion by certain delicate types, delicate of personality and mind, whenever their opponents resort to a bit of sarcasm. As soon as the suspicion of an insult appears, they summon the angels of ad hominem to smite down their foes, before ascending to argument heaven in a blaze of sanctimonious glory. They may not have much up top, but by God, they don't need it when they've got ad hominem on their side. It's the secret weapon that delivers them from any argument unscathed.

In reality, ad hominem is unrelated to sarcasm or personal abuse. Argumentum ad hominem is the logical fallacy of attempting to undermine a speaker's argument by attacking the speaker instead of addressing the argument. The mere presence of a personal attack does not indicate ad hominem: the attack must be used for the purpose of undermining the argument, or otherwise the logical fallacy isn't there. It is not a logical fallacy to attack someone; the fallacy comes from assuming that a personal attack is also necessarily an attack on that person's arguments.

Therefore, if you can't demonstrate that your opponent is trying to counter your argument by attacking you, you can't demonstrate that he is resorting to ad hominem. If your opponent's sarcasm is not an attempt to counter your argument, but merely an attempt to insult you (or amuse the bystanders), then it is not part of an ad hominem argument.

Actual instances of argumentum ad hominem are relatively rare. Ironically, the fallacy is most often committed by those who accuse their opponents of ad hominem, since they try to dismiss the opposition not by engaging with their arguments, but by claiming that they resort to personal attacks. Those who are quick to squeal "ad hominem" are often guilty of several other logical fallacies, including one of the worst of all: the fallacious belief that introducing an impressive-sounding Latin term somehow gives one the decisive edge in an argument.

Brighton is unfortunately absolutely loaded with scum of the earth people like this and it appears to be getting worse as well.

rick h- i would suggest that you learn to spell 'contributor' before you make a **** of yourself (ooops...too late). and pray please explain what term of abuse has four letters in its plural form...

i hope that sopmeone from the jobcetre's read this and that the money this workshy professional troublemaker (sorry, 'grassroots activist') has earned from selling her story is docked from her dole.

anticowley wrote:
rick h- i would suggest that you learn to spell 'contributor' before you make a **** of yourself (ooops...too late). and pray please explain what term of abuse has four letters in its plural form... i hope that sopmeone from the jobcetre's read this and that the money this workshy professional troublemaker (sorry, 'grassroots activist') has earned from selling her story is docked from her dole.

Well, if she earns more than £7000 out of she doesn't qualify for any sort of state handout until the amount she has reaches £7000 again.
If she continues to draw benefits whilst having more than £7000 in her possession it's illegal.
But I'm sure Max Clifford will have found a way around that little hurdle for her.
And it won't be finding her a job!

So it is ok for a policeman to slap a woman in the face who swears at him and then hit here with his truncheon?

I hope the UK media, including the Argus, are ashamed of themselves after playing up 'violence' from protesters before the G20 marches.

These videos confirm what many of us who attend protests already knew. That many of the police in attendance are bullying thugs desperate for a chance to steam in.

str8outtadc- yes...please explain though why it would be so tough on the organisers of the protests to police themselves and ensure that their cause is not undermined by idiots like this provoking the police?

having attended plenty of demos myself, i know that there is always a core of idiots intent on winding up the old bill and then crying 'brutality' if they get hit. you only have to look at the masked idiots who marched in favour of closing edo to have evidence of that.

bet you a penny to a pinch of pig***t that she'll be at the 'smash edo' tea party

Granny wrote:
Her previous record of misdoings were fully reported in the Mail as well. If she is fit enough to do voluntary work then she is fit enough to earn a living and stop being another drain on the state, probably like the majority of the other protesters

In the days immediately after the G20 protests, The Daily Mail insisted that the protesters obstructed paramedics on their way to assist Ian Tomlinson. The Mail doesn't always get it right.

"Brighton is unfortunately absolutely loaded with scum of the earth people like this and it appears to be getting worse as well."

Funny that because most people posting on here that come from Brighton jump to its defense whenever the suggestion is made and instead point out that all chavs, scum etc live anywhere but Brighton..seems they were wrong!

Nice legs and a dirty looking bird (sexually) i'd give it one.

Being unemployed, You are supposed to be available to work. I hardly think demonstrating is classed as available for work. Wonder what she put in her job diary for that day? I am all for lawful protests and living in a free country long may that go on.

I bet she is loving all this attention,and until someone finds out how she can afford to keep going to all these protest and doing so called charity work she will never find a job,Stop her benifits strait away. I worked all my life and paid for a pension and what benifits can I get now, NONE

I propose an idea, for those who are so unhappy in their work places and paying taxes. The govt. should consider a swapping places scheme with the unemployed.

PETE OF QUEENS PARK I agree with you wholeheartedly. I too have paid my dues all my working life and get s*d all! I often wonder if it was worth it.

Txa wrote:
I propose an idea, for those who are so unhappy in their work places and paying taxes. The govt. should consider a swapping places scheme with the unemployed.

Aaah! but having a job is not right anymore, it's a privilege!?

She has made a lot of money being beat up. Hopefully she will get beaten up again soon ;)

Osama bin there wrote:

tinkywinky wrote: Even if she did 'provoke' the police officer, does that justify him bashing her in the face and hitting her with a truncheon? If provocation is ok then next time some old biddy pushes in front of me and gives me a dirty look at the supermarket, I can punch her in the mouth can I Argus? It was police brutality and extreme. The giant officer who battered this small femail should be sacked. Lets not forget the murder of Ian Thomson either.

Are you a clairvoyant? Can you see into the future? The case has not gone to trial, and no one has been charged with murder, never mind convicted of it. Have you ever heard of libel?

Whatever. Get a life.

I think too many people have moved away from the important issues with this journalistic piece. The main issue here quite clearly is;

What has she done to her hair!!

Capitalism in crisis, the world heading toward environmental meltdown, the rich and powerful doing nothing about it.

But the good people of Brighton are seemingly more concerned whether the victims of police violence at a protest against the above are "on benefits".

Thats obviously the most important thing...and bring back national service!

Good for Nicky. She cares passionately and stands in the front line. Let's not listen to all these fuddy duddies about 'she's chosen a lifestyle' blah blah. If I'd been at that demo at the vivisectionists conference I would like to throw more than water over them. What they do to defenceless animals is abominable. It wold be different if their work actually had any significance but...years and years down the line they still haven;t found a cure for cancer because they are following the rong track.
The policeman was totally out of order....if he had followed his training he wouldn;t have reacted thus.He was behaving like a civilian reacting to a bit of aggro. Well done, Nicky. If you get the dosh help the animals.

Shebcat wrote: She cares passionately and stands in the front line


yet in the article the Scrounging Violent Cow states... "and although she has continued to attend protests, she now stays away from the "front line".


So. Can I voluteer to smash the stupid bint's face in at the EDO protest she'll almost certainly attend.

str8outtaDC wrote:
Capitalism in crisis, the world heading toward environmental meltdown, the rich and powerful doing nothing about it.

But the good people of Brighton are seemingly more concerned whether the victims of police violence at a protest against the above are "on benefits".

Thats obviously the most important thing...and bring back national service!

Will you please cheer up.

My word, as I sit here on the balcony of my penthouse suite overlooking the sea having done nothing all day because I am so rich I am just glad that you are not sitting next to me at a dinner party.

Regardless of what you think of me or my comments (as displayed by the usual range of sub-assinine comments from those barely able to hold an argument, let alone a crayon) there is a principle here that is at stake: the police are there to upheld and enforce the law, NOT be above it; I just hope that you're never on the recieving end of some of the highly questonable behaviour exhibited that day by the 'boys in blue', whether you put yourself in such a position or otherwise.

anticowley wrote:
rick h- i would suggest that you learn to spell 'contributor' before you make a **** of yourself (ooops...too late). and pray please explain what term of abuse has four letters in its plural form... i hope that sopmeone from the jobcetre's read this and that the money this workshy professional troublemaker (sorry, 'grassroots activist') has earned from selling her story is docked from her dole.

The term of asbuse is related to the member of the equine family - bit like a donkey but there we go. And spelling or not, the principle is that the police are NOT above the law, regardless of what you, they and many others here seem to believe.

Redbeard wrote:

RickH wrote: I would suggest that a number of the contributers to this 'debate' need to go away and learn the meaning and application of 'ad hominem' before continuing to make **** of themselves!

One of the most widely misused terms on the Net is "ad hominem". It is most often introduced into a discussion by certain delicate types, delicate of personality and mind, whenever their opponents resort to a bit of sarcasm. As soon as the suspicion of an insult appears, they summon the angels of ad hominem to smite down their foes, before ascending to argument heaven in a blaze of sanctimonious glory. They may not have much up top, but by God, they don't need it when they've got ad hominem on their side. It's the secret weapon that delivers them from any argument unscathed. In reality, ad hominem is unrelated to sarcasm or personal abuse. Argumentum ad hominem is the logical fallacy of attempting to undermine a speaker's argument by attacking the speaker instead of addressing the argument. The mere presence of a personal attack does not indicate ad hominem: the attack must be used for the purpose of undermining the argument, or otherwise the logical fallacy isn't there. It is not a logical fallacy to attack someone; the fallacy comes from assuming that a personal attack is also necessarily an attack on that person's arguments. Therefore, if you can't demonstrate that your opponent is trying to counter your argument by attacking you, you can't demonstrate that he is resorting to ad hominem. If your opponent's sarcasm is not an attempt to counter your argument, but merely an attempt to insult you (or amuse the bystanders), then it is not part of an ad hominem argument. Actual instances of argumentum ad hominem are relatively rare. Ironically, the fallacy is most often committed by those who accuse their opponents of ad hominem, since they try to dismiss the opposition not by engaging with their arguments, but by claiming that they resort to personal attacks. Those who are quick to squeal "ad hominem" are often guilty of several other logical fallacies, including one of the worst of all: the fallacious belief that introducing an impressive-sounding Latin term somehow gives one the decisive edge in an argument.

Despite your well constructed and, arguably, loquacious point (which, may I add, is grossly let down by the rather poor attempt at sarcasm at the end) if you'd spent more time actually thinking about the situation I'm sure that you'd realise that the real principle at stake is here that the police are NOT above the law. Whilst it has yet to be proved that this is the case in this and the various other complaints arising from the G20 protest, but somehow I doubt you'll be a verbose if it is proved that the police acted illegally in this and the other instances currently being examined.

tinkywinky wrote:

Osama bin there wrote:

tinkywinky wrote: Even if she did 'provoke' the police officer, does that justify him bashing her in the face and hitting her with a truncheon? If provocation is ok then next time some old biddy pushes in front of me and gives me a dirty look at the supermarket, I can punch her in the mouth can I Argus? It was police brutality and extreme. The giant officer who battered this small femail should be sacked. Lets not forget the murder of Ian Thomson either.

Are you a clairvoyant? Can you see into the future? The case has not gone to trial, and no one has been charged with murder, never mind convicted of it. Have you ever heard of libel?

Whatever. Get a life.

If you are going to post here get your facts right, t0sser.

Redbeard wrote:

RickH wrote: I would suggest that a number of the contributers to this 'debate' need to go away and learn the meaning and application of 'ad hominem' before continuing to make **** of themselves!

One of the most widely misused terms on the Net is "ad hominem". It is most often introduced into a discussion by certain delicate types, delicate of personality and mind, whenever their opponents resort to a bit of sarcasm. As soon as the suspicion of an insult appears, they summon the angels of ad hominem to smite down their foes, before ascending to argument heaven in a blaze of sanctimonious glory. They may not have much up top, but by God, they don't need it when they've got ad hominem on their side. It's the secret weapon that delivers them from any argument unscathed. In reality, ad hominem is unrelated to sarcasm or personal abuse. Argumentum ad hominem is the logical fallacy of attempting to undermine a speaker's argument by attacking the speaker instead of addressing the argument. The mere presence of a personal attack does not indicate ad hominem: the attack must be used for the purpose of undermining the argument, or otherwise the logical fallacy isn't there. It is not a logical fallacy to attack someone; the fallacy comes from assuming that a personal attack is also necessarily an attack on that person's arguments. Therefore, if you can't demonstrate that your opponent is trying to counter your argument by attacking you, you can't demonstrate that he is resorting to ad hominem. If your opponent's sarcasm is not an attempt to counter your argument, but merely an attempt to insult you (or amuse the bystanders), then it is not part of an ad hominem argument. Actual instances of argumentum ad hominem are relatively rare. Ironically, the fallacy is most often committed by those who accuse their opponents of ad hominem, since they try to dismiss the opposition not by engaging with their arguments, but by claiming that they resort to personal attacks. Those who are quick to squeal "ad hominem" are often guilty of several other logical fallacies, including one of the worst of all: the fallacious belief that introducing an impressive-sounding Latin term somehow gives one the decisive edge in an argument.

Excellent post Redbeard ...probably the best on here...I do like to learn something new every day! Thank you.

(Your post was a darn sight more interesting than the original story!)

If I was unable as a six feet two fourteen stone male,with many years of police training, in posession of a truncheon,pepper spray and possibly a tazer to be able to deal with a five foot seven stone unarmed woman without bashing her up I would seriously worry about myself.
Is ther something terribly old fashioned(I'm 48) about not hitting women??????

Guerrero wrote:
If I was unable as a six feet two fourteen stone male,with many years of police training, in posession of a truncheon,pepper spray and possibly a tazer to be able to deal with a five foot seven stone unarmed woman without bashing her up I would seriously worry about myself. Is ther something terribly old fashioned(I'm 48) about not hitting women??????

Your right mate using the truncheon was out of order he should have used a good zap of the tazer followed by a hit of pepper spray,maybe we can send her out to Iran to start up a protest movement over there although i'm not sure where she could cash her giro.

Osama bin there wrote:

tinkywinky wrote:

Osama bin there wrote:

tinkywinky wrote: Even if she did 'provoke' the police officer, does that justify him bashing her in the face and hitting her with a truncheon? If provocation is ok then next time some old biddy pushes in front of me and gives me a dirty look at the supermarket, I can punch her in the mouth can I Argus? It was police brutality and extreme. The giant officer who battered this small femail should be sacked. Lets not forget the murder of Ian Thomson either.

Are you a clairvoyant? Can you see into the future? The case has not gone to trial, and no one has been charged with murder, never mind convicted of it. Have you ever heard of libel?

Whatever. Get a life.

If you are going to post here get your facts right, t0sser.

I will post here wheather my facts are right or wrong.
pratt.

tinkywinky wrote:

Osama bin there wrote:

tinkywinky wrote:

Osama bin there wrote:

tinkywinky wrote: Even if she did 'provoke' the police officer, does that justify him bashing her in the face and hitting her with a truncheon? If provocation is ok then next time some old biddy pushes in front of me and gives me a dirty look at the supermarket, I can punch her in the mouth can I Argus? It was police brutality and extreme. The giant officer who battered this small femail should be sacked. Lets not forget the murder of Ian Thomson either.

Are you a clairvoyant? Can you see into the future? The case has not gone to trial, and no one has been charged with murder, never mind convicted of it. Have you ever heard of libel?

Whatever. Get a life.

If you are going to post here get your facts right, t0sser.

I will post here wheather my facts are right or wrong. pratt.

Post whether the facts are right or wrong?

Do you not realise what a fool that makes you sound like - no-one who posts here regularly will ever believe anything you say again

PS Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story - areyou a reporter for the Daily Star or maybe the Sport?

Have we not missed the point, It is utterly irrelevant that she is on benefits,has a record of being arrested for demonstrating or allegedly being and I stress verbally provocative. The fact is that she posed no physical threat to this officer or his colleagues,Over ninety allegations of police violence have been presented to the IPCC for investigation and other complaints no ID NO and various other complaints regarding violations of the police code of conduct. The commissioner has been forced to disavow officers with no shoulder ID numbers:translation(
in my opinion)we've been rumbled boys and girls and I'm afraid any of you that get caught out will have to carry the can I'm busy saving my well paid job and pension and a cushy number with ACPO when I retire. I have to say it is not surprising that the media is on an all out attempt to smirch and belittle any who are involved in the complaints process. Do I detect Nu-Labour spin with assistance from that pernicious cabal at ACPO plc? Hard luck to the boys and girls of the metropolitan police your masters are going to throw you to the wolves.

QUIS CUSTODIET IPSO CUSTODES

Tye wrote:

tinkywinky wrote:

Osama bin there wrote:

tinkywinky wrote:

Osama bin there wrote:

tinkywinky wrote: Even if she did 'provoke' the police officer, does that justify him bashing her in the face and hitting her with a truncheon? If provocation is ok then next time some old biddy pushes in front of me and gives me a dirty look at the supermarket, I can punch her in the mouth can I Argus? It was police brutality and extreme. The giant officer who battered this small femail should be sacked. Lets not forget the murder of Ian Thomson either.

Are you a clairvoyant? Can you see into the future? The case has not gone to trial, and no one has been charged with murder, never mind convicted of it. Have you ever heard of libel?

Whatever. Get a life.

If you are going to post here get your facts right, t0sser.

I will post here wheather my facts are right or wrong. pratt.

Post whether the facts are right or wrong? Do you not realise what a fool that makes you sound like - no-one who posts here regularly will ever believe anything you say again PS Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story - areyou a reporter for the Daily Star or maybe the Sport?

Am I bothered. Most posters on here are Beano readers anyway. Stick to the story and mind your own business. Nosey pig.

tinkywinky wrote:

Tye wrote:

tinkywinky wrote:

Osama bin there wrote:

tinkywinky wrote:

Osama bin there wrote:

tinkywinky wrote: Even if she did 'provoke' the police officer, does that justify him bashing her in the face and hitting her with a truncheon? If provocation is ok then next time some old biddy pushes in front of me and gives me a dirty look at the supermarket, I can punch her in the mouth can I Argus? It was police brutality and extreme. The giant officer who battered this small femail should be sacked. Lets not forget the murder of Ian Thomson either.

Are you a clairvoyant? Can you see into the future? The case has not gone to trial, and no one has been charged with murder, never mind convicted of it. Have you ever heard of libel?

Whatever. Get a life.

If you are going to post here get your facts right, t0sser.

I will post here wheather my facts are right or wrong. pratt.

Post whether the facts are right or wrong? Do you not realise what a fool that makes you sound like - no-one who posts here regularly will ever believe anything you say again PS Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story - areyou a reporter for the Daily Star or maybe the Sport?

Am I bothered. Most posters on here are Beano readers anyway. Stick to the story and mind your own business. Nosey pig.

It's self evident that you don't have the intelligence to understand the Beano.

I bet her boyfriend will be moving out pretty soon when the Social Security come calling.They will have noticed the £50,000 she has been paid.

Guerrero wrote:
If I was unable as a six feet two fourteen stone male,with many years of police training, in posession of a truncheon,pepper spray and possibly a tazer to be able to deal with a five foot seven stone unarmed woman without bashing her up I would seriously worry about myself. Is ther something terribly old fashioned(I'm 48) about not hitting women??????

Isn't that sexist? Nicola the soap dodger would surely disapprove!

Security word: wife-type.

I think not!!

Guerrero wrote:
If I was unable as a six feet two fourteen stone male,with many years of police training, in posession of a truncheon,pepper spray and possibly a tazer to be able to deal with a five foot seven stone unarmed woman without bashing her up I would seriously worry about myself. Is ther something terribly old fashioned(I'm 48) about not hitting women??????

Isn't that sexist? Nicola the soap dodger would surely disapprove!

Security word: wife-type.

I think not!!

what a coincidence all those photogrophers were clustered round her when she got struck! you can imagine the conversation going something like -"hey mr press man! want a good photo and story for the morning papers? hang around and see what happens when i wind up this copper!"

£50k. Her dealer must be well chuffed. Look at her!!Lazy, soap dodging scum.

John Rambo. wrote:

Txa wrote:

John Rambo. wrote: As a doorman I wish we could just hit trash that behave like her! good on the copper, what was he supposed to do? let me say that I am no great fan of the old bill but in this particular case he was 100% right in what he did! he was challenged in a physical manner, and he answered the challenge in a way she did not like, tough! do not challenge (assault) people if you can't handle the consequences!!!!!!.

That's way you're not a policeman, you couldn't deal with it in first place. Police are trained to deal with difficult situations.

I would love you to do my job for a month and see if you still have the same views, it's easy to be an armchair critic when you are well out of the way of any danger, I treat everyone as an equal male or female it's totally irrelevant to me the gender, only only how people behave!.

Hitting women is easier though???
They tend to be smaller,lighter and less likely to hit back.
I've done your job and would never consider hitting a woman an option.
Progress I suppose.

It just gets better and better. Denis O'Connor the chief inspector of constabulary, has told MP's of the Commons home affairs select committee that he was and I quote "very uncomfortable" with footage of Ms Fisher being struck by a police officer, he also told the committee with regard to this same incident and I again quote that "it does not impress me that this was the British way of policing"
Mr O'Connor is also a former assistant commissioner of the metropolitan police.

QUIS CUSTODIET IPSO CUSTODES

Guerrero wrote:

John Rambo. wrote:

Txa wrote:

John Rambo. wrote: As a doorman I wish we could just hit trash that behave like her! good on the copper, what was he supposed to do? let me say that I am no great fan of the old bill but in this particular case he was 100% right in what he did! he was challenged in a physical manner, and he answered the challenge in a way she did not like, tough! do not challenge (assault) people if you can't handle the consequences!!!!!!.

That's way you're not a policeman, you couldn't deal with it in first place. Police are trained to deal with difficult situations.

I would love you to do my job for a month and see if you still have the same views, it's easy to be an armchair critic when you are well out of the way of any danger, I treat everyone as an equal male or female it's totally irrelevant to me the gender, only only how people behave!.

Hitting women is easier though??? They tend to be smaller,lighter and less likely to hit back. I've done your job and would never consider hitting a woman an option. Progress I suppose.

Agree Guerrero, even hitting a man wouldn't be correct. Again, if you can't deal with the pressures of being a policeman don't be one.

Could the nature of some jobs make some people to act more aggresive?.