British police used a Taser on a black man they thought was a robber. He was their race-relations adviser

[webfact]

British police used a Taser on a black man they thought was a robber. He was their race-relations adviser

By Cleve R. Wootson Jr.

The Washington Post

 

BRISTOL: -- Judah Adunbi has spent the greater part of a decade trying to improve relations between police in southwestern England and the members of his Afro-Caribbean community.

 

Still, all the advocacy and the meetings with police were ineffective in getting the 63-year-old dreadlocked man out of the predicament he was in earlier this month — staring at the business end of a police officer's Taser.

 

Adunbi had been out walking his dog in Bristol, about 120 miles west of London, when officers mistook him for a robbery suspect, according to the Guardian. They didn't know him — or that he was a founding member of the police department's Independent Advisory Group, an organization formed to improve police-community relations.

 

Full story: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/01/22/british-cops-used-a-taser-on-a-black-man-they-thought-was-a-robber-he-was-their-race-relations-adviser/

 

-- The Washington Post 2017-01-23

 

 

[Ulysses G.]

Whoops!

[NCC1701A]

 

[Pdaz]

Reports mention that he refused to give the cops his name when asked. Became abusive and then resisted arrest. So he got tazered. Big deal.  Police doing their job. Idiot with bad attitude got what he deserved. Had he answered their questions politely and informed them off his position as a relations officer I doubt he would have be tazered. 

[canuckamuck]

Resist arrest and reap the whirlwind. It should be an obvious thing. 

[Briggsy]

Typical BS. The guy was completely unco-operative with the police, hostile and aggressive. He was given many warnings and was up for an escalated confrontation. Cannot be compared to the USA where excessive force is not uncommon and the police often unaccountable.

[onthesoi]

1 hour ago, Pdaz said:

Reports mention that he refused to give the cops his name when asked. Became abusive and then resisted arrest. So he got tazered. Big deal.  Police doing their job. Idiot with bad attitude got what he deserved. Had he answered their questions politely and informed them off his position as a relations officer I doubt he would have be tazered. 

 

22 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Resist arrest and reap the whirlwind. It should be an obvious thing. 

 

He wasn't "resisting arrest" because he wasn't being arrested.

 

In the UK you don't have to give your name to the cops.

 

What should I do if I am stopped or/and searched?

It's up to you whether you provide your name and address.

http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Frequently-Asked-Questions/1400009364853/1400009364853

 

He asked the cops to tell him what he had done wrong, by law the police have to tell you why they are stopping you, the police wouldn't answer him so he opted to walk into his house whereupon he was then assaulted & tazered by the police for no reason.

 

What is a stop and search?

You may be stopped as the officer may have grounds to suspect that you are carrying:

Drugs, weapons, stolen property or fireworks;
Items that could be used:

• to commit crime.
• to cause criminal damage.

The grounds the police officer must have should be based on facts, information or intelligence or could be because of the way you are behaving. There are times, however, when police officers can search anyone within a certain area, for example:-

Where there is evidence that serious violence has or may take place. (Section 60 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994).

The police officer should explain this to you and must be searching for items that could be used in connection with violence.

http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Frequently-Asked-Questions/1400009364853/1400009364853

 

Even his neighbour came out to vouch for him, but the cops weren't listening.

 

Shockingly bad policing! 

Although, he should think himself lucky he is not in the US as he would probably be dead by now!

Edited January 23, 2017 by onthesoi

[Mickmouse1]

Police in Bath has arrested a friend who answered all questions asked but had no proof of ID. The arresting sergeant's asked ; what is your job?"I am a JP in HK  Sarge .." Well then , I am KING ARTHUR" replied back the Cop n locked him up over night?????

[hansnl]

1 hour ago, onthesoi said:

 

 

He wasn't "resisting arrest" because he wasn't being arrested.

 

In the UK you don't have to give your name to the cops.

 

What should I do if I am stopped or/and searched?

It's up to you whether you provide your name and address.

http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Frequently-Asked-Questions/1400009364853/1400009364853

 

He asked the cops to tell him what he had done wrong, by law the police have to tell you why they are stopping you, the police wouldn't answer him so he opted to walk into his house whereupon he was then assaulted & tazered by the police for no reason.

 

What is a stop and search?

You may be stopped as the officer may have grounds to suspect that you are carrying:

Drugs, weapons, stolen property or fireworks;
Items that could be used:

• to commit crime.
• to cause criminal damage.

The grounds the police officer must have should be based on facts, information or intelligence or could be because of the way you are behaving. There are times, however, when police officers can search anyone within a certain area, for example:-

Where there is evidence that serious violence has or may take place. (Section 60 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994).

The police officer should explain this to you and must be searching for items that could be used in connection with violence.

http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Frequently-Asked-Questions/1400009364853/1400009364853

 

Even his neighbour came out to vouch for him, but the cops weren't listening.

 

Shockingly bad policing! 

Although, he should think himself lucky he is not in the US as he would probably be dead by now!

As a member of the force, more or less that is, he should have just mentioned this fact to the policemen.

He did not do so but decided to play the difficult play.

Whatever went wrong after that is not really blameable on the policemen, but wholly on himself.

The mentioning of police methods in the US, where sometimes, and absolutely not always, things can go wrong, is not really fair.

Millions of times things go without any trouble over there, but sometimes things go wrong.

Maybe, just maybe, there is a reason why things go wrong, and maybe those reasons can be found in behaviour?

[stevenl]

As a member of the force, more or less that is, he should have just mentioned this fact to the policemen.
He did not do so but decided to play the difficult play.
Whatever went wrong after that is not really blameable on the policemen, but wholly on himself.
The mentioning of police methods in the US, where sometimes, and absolutely not always, things can go wrong, is not really fair.
Millions of times things go without any trouble over there, but sometimes things go wrong.
Maybe, just maybe, there is a reason why things go wrong, and maybe those reasons can be found in behaviour?

So the policeman did not do as protocol requires, but that is the victim's fault.

Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[helloagain]

3 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

Whoops!

555555555 good one. As jim davidson the comedian says. Is he black then nick him 555555

[arrowsdawdle]

And there you have the little country that could, or so they'd have you believe. Is it any wonder their bobbies are not allowed to carry guns?

[humqdpf]

8 hours ago, Pdaz said:

Reports mention that he refused to give the cops his name when asked. Became abusive and then resisted arrest. So he got tazered. Big deal.  Police doing their job. Idiot with bad attitude got what he deserved. Had he answered their questions politely and informed them off his position as a relations officer I doubt he would have be tazered. 

Actually that is not what happened. He was prevented from going into his own property with his dog. He does not have to give his name (in the UK) and he had done nothing wrong. The local plod had assumed that a black man entering a property by the front door must be a burglar (although why a burglar would bring a dog with him on a job beats me!). They then tasered him without checking anything, which is against the law in the UK.

[Baerboxer]

5 hours ago, Pdaz said:

Reports mention that he refused to give the cops his name when asked. Became abusive and then resisted arrest. So he got tazered. Big deal.  Police doing their job. Idiot with bad attitude got what he deserved. Had he answered their questions politely and informed them off his position as a relations officer I doubt he would have be tazered. 

 

Watch the video. Research the law of England and Wales regarding citizens rights. 

 

The police here, Avon and Somerset Constabulary, are not exactly one of the top forces. The neighbor, who was telling them this man was his neighbor and a "lovely man" was being ignored. 

 

Police in England & Wales have very specific powers. The whole concept of how they police is based around policing with consent. Both officers appeared poorly trained and unable to act out of rehearsed scenario. Had they used some intelligence they wouldn't be in the trouble they likely are now in. Note that all charges have been dropped. 

 

Highly embarrassing for a force that has had considerable issues with community policing in the past .

[Baerboxer]

4 hours ago, Briggsy said:

Typical BS. The guy was completely unco-operative with the police, hostile and aggressive. He was given many warnings and was up for an escalated confrontation. Cannot be compared to the USA where excessive force is not uncommon and the police often unaccountable.

 

That's not what I saw. I saw two police officers who apparently don't know the law they are supposed to enforce. Nor were they bothered about doing anything other than what they'd already decided to do. 

Neither officer comes out of that video with any credit. All charges against the gentleman have been dropped. Seemed like the police were trying to go for an assault charge if nothing else. 

There was absolutely no reason to taser him other than the female officers bad judgement.

 

Had Mr. Cherry, the neighbor not filmed this, had the victim not been a member of the independent police advisory board then the outcome might be different. Both officers could face charges and will almost certainly face disciplinary actions.

[uptheos]

He can use this to show how tolerant his community can be to mistakes.

[RuamRudy]

3 hours ago, hansnl said:

As a member of the force, more or less that is, he should have just mentioned this fact to the policemen.

He did not do so but decided to play the difficult play.

Whatever went wrong after that is not really blameable on the policemen, but wholly on himself.

 

Fantastic - two police officers do not understand the basic tenets of the law that they are supposed to uphold, and somehow you think that it is the innocent member of the public whom they assault who is to blame?

 

[uptheos]

I can't remember was the woman taserer black as well?

[ilostmypassword]

3 hours ago, hansnl said:

As a member of the force, more or less that is, he should have just mentioned this fact to the policemen.

He did not do so but decided to play the difficult play.

Whatever went wrong after that is not really blameable on the policemen, but wholly on himself.

The mentioning of police methods in the US, where sometimes, and absolutely not always, things can go wrong, is not really fair.

Millions of times things go without any trouble over there, but sometimes things go wrong.

Maybe, just maybe, there is a reason why things go wrong, and maybe those reasons can be found in behaviour?

And if he hadn't been a "member of the force, more or less" should have lied that he was?  You shouldn't have to be a "member of the force, more or less" to avoid tasering.  

And for what it's worth, he wasn't a "member of the force, more or less." Just a founder of an independent advisory group. Not on the police payroll, and without a formal role in the police department."

[pegman]

I would think it was part of his job to monitor situations such as this. Obviously this was an assault and that cop needs to be criminally charged with that offence.

[bluebluewater]

I look at this and it strike me as how different this would be back in the States - not even considering how screwed up whole thing is!

 

 In the States there would have been 10 officers there with that fellow face down and cuffed and a couple of boots or knees on his back and neck, the dog would have been shot dead, and the bystanders been whupped up on as well.

[Pdaz]

5 hours ago, onthesoi said:

 

 

He wasn't "resisting arrest" because he wasn't being arrested.

 

In the UK you don't have to give your name to the cops.

 

What should I do if I am stopped or/and searched?

It's up to you whether you provide your name and address.

http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Frequently-Asked-Questions/1400009364853/1400009364853

 

He asked the cops to tell him what he had done wrong, by law the police have to tell you why they are stopping you, the police wouldn't answer him so he opted to walk into his house whereupon he was then assaulted & tazered by the police for no reason.

 

What is a stop and search?

You may be stopped as the officer may have grounds to suspect that you are carrying:

Drugs, weapons, stolen property or fireworks;
Items that could be used:

• to commit crime.
• to cause criminal damage.

The grounds the police officer must have should be based on facts, information or intelligence or could be because of the way you are behaving. There are times, however, when police officers can search anyone within a certain area, for example:-

Where there is evidence that serious violence has or may take place. (Section 60 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994).

The police officer should explain this to you and must be searching for items that could be used in connection with violence.

http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Frequently-Asked-Questions/1400009364853/1400009364853

 

Even his neighbour came out to vouch for him, but the cops weren't listening.

 

Shockingly bad policing! 

Although, he should think himself lucky he is not in the US as he would probably be dead by now!

 

The question is WHY would you not want to give your name to the Police ?

If you have done nothing wrong why not make their job easier and cooperate?

If you are uncooperative and evasive that causes suspicion. 

Then the Police are almost bound to question you further.. After all if you were guilty of something and they failed to question you.. They'd be seen a negligent.

All the barrack room lawyer/human rights types always bemoan their lack of freedom are usuallybthe first to complain when there isn't any policing.

No different to the *ankers who object to a UK national ID card. Only criminals fear being identified.

 

Basically if you are a law obiding citizen the police are on your side and there to help.

If you are abusive, evasive or physically violent... Expect to get tazered,arrested and convicted.

[harrry]

Police who act outside the law bring disrespect to themselves their organisation and their country.

I wonder why so many despotic counties consider themselves the bastions of freedom.

[SaintLouisBlues]

9 minutes ago, Pdaz said:

The question is WHY would you not want to give your name to the Police ?

If you have done nothing wrong why not make their job easier and cooperate?

You're simply using the "if you've nothing to hide argument", rather than the "presumption of innocence" argument. All well and good if you're a white man, I suppose, but the phrase "driving while black" is used time and again to exemplify the "guilty until proven innocent" attitude of many police towards non-white people. Only a white heterosexual male could possibly use the phrase " the police are on your side and there to help " while keeping a straight face

[Pdaz]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Watch the video. Research the law of England and Wales regarding citizens rights. 

 

The police here, Avon and Somerset Constabulary, are not exactly one of the top forces. The neighbor, who was telling them this man was his neighbor and a "lovely man" was being ignored. 

 

Police in England & Wales have very specific powers. The whole concept of how they police is based around policing with consent. Both officers appeared poorly trained and unable to act out of rehearsed scenario. Had they used some intelligence they wouldn't be in the trouble they likely are now in. Note that all charges have been dropped. 

 

Highly embarrassing for a force that has had considerable issues with community policing in the past .

 

Another "citizens rights" mouthpiece..

 

Research the law for what ? 51 yrs old and English by birth. Stopped many a time as a youth or young driver by local cops. Polite, respectful and helpful, never had any issues. Had to produce my docs at the station a few time too.. Still no issues as all in order. Wonder why I wasn't assulted or arrested ?  Must have been because I was white, well spoken and had a good attitude..  There is no smoke without fire.. Cops ( British ones ) just don't tazer or beat people for no reason. 

[SaintLouisBlues]

9 hours ago, Pdaz said:

 Must have been because I was white ...

Yes indeed

[RuamRudy]

7 minutes ago, Pdaz said:

The question is WHY would you not want to give your name to the Police ?

 

In the UK we are allowed to go about our lawful business without fear of harrassment from officials. We are not obliged to carry ID at any time, and we are not obliged to prove who we are to any person, no matter the capacity in which they are asking, if we are not committing an offence. In the same way that many of our American cousins hold dear the right to bear arms, many in the UK hold dear the right to disregard unwarranted invasions of our privacy.

[Pdaz]

3 minutes ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

You're simply using the "if you've nothing to hide argument", rather than the "presumption of innocence" argument. All well and good if you're a white man, I suppose, but the phrase "driving while black" is used time and again to exemplify the "guilty until proven innocent" attitude of many police towards non-white people. Only a white heterosexual male could possibly use the phrase " the police are on your side and there to help " while keeping a straight face

 

Gimme a break..  I forgot, they picked on him cos he was black.. 

Funny, last time I worked in Nigeria I witnessed a black guy sass two black cops at a roadblock.. They pulled him out through the drivers window and gave it to him with a long bamboo baton. Now, was he being beaten cos he was abusive or because he was driving while black ?

[SaintLouisBlues]

11 minutes ago, Pdaz said:

Gimme a break..  I forgot, they picked on him cos he was black.. 

Funny, last time I worked in Nigeria I witnessed a black guy sass two black cops at a roadblock.. They pulled him out through the drivers window and gave it to him with a long bamboo baton. Now, was he being beaten cos he was abusive or because he was driving while black ?

We're not talking about a predominantly black country but a majority white one. Police brutality is common across the world, which is why many of us simply don't trust the police at all

[Pdaz]

3 minutes ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

Yes indeed

 

Nope. It's cos I was polite. Something that some people just can't understand. 

I've been stopped by cops in China, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, Congo Brazaville, Nigeria, Australia and Indonesia at various roadblocks or while walking down the street.. Never had a problem. But guess that was just cos of my big ole white privilege...