Czuch: That's illegal Czuch, to use force such as used against a non-violent person.... And as said he was not arrested, the police were hardly busy at the point of the incident.

Regardless of being charged for manslaughter, he still committed a criminal offence and will probably be given the boot. The police have had enough press over bad apples and stupid police doing stupid things.

They are supposed to uphold the law, not break it!!

Czuch: For someone who says he is for less government control, you sure do seem to want to give the police the power to be thugs.

(V): He was non compliant to a request from a police officer.... that is illegal, but they had more important things to worry about than to waste resources arresting him for non compliance, so they tried to impress upon him with a bit of force that they were serious about him moving it along a bit faster....

Wait and see the results, but my bet is that this officer does not get charged with manslaughter

Czuch: I just replied to this.

Czuch: No.. he wasn't.. If you'd watch the video you'd know that.

There is no reason to shove to the ground someone is doing nothing violent. IT IS AGAINST THE LAW, if a policeman did that to me, I would have the right to make a citizens arrest against that police officer.

You've got it wrong. As Art said, if he had done something wrong .. like verbally abusive.. then he is arrested. As he wasn't and went on and died somewhere else just a few minutes later... then he can't have done anything AS HE WOULD HAVE BEEN ARRESTED by the police at the time of their interaction with them.

HE WASN'T ARRESTED.

(V): A bad apple is a bad apple.


How do you know he wasnt purposefully trying to slow his walk home just to be in the way and piss the police off a bit? How do you know he isnt a bad apple himself?

Artful Dodger: He was not a threat. He was just moving slowly. Eventually, even a turtle makes it across the street.


Like you said before, the whole area was tense with potential violence.... this guy was just one more thing to worry about, they had more important things to worry about this day, and he was an unnecessary distraction that they needed to get rid of... the longer he was in the way, the longer their attention was diverted from their main focus... now you take time and resources to arrest him for non compliance? That doesnt make sense either....


My guess is that they will find that this shove by police was not the cause of his death, it is more likely like V said, he has previous health issues that were more a contributing factor to his death, that along with his defiant non compliance with a police order to move quicker

Artful Dodger: What actions? Having his hands in his pockets and walking off home?

He did nothing wrong, but be in the line of a bad tempered police officer.. A bad apple is a bad apple.

(V): And the police are not above the law. PERIOD.

i dont know your laws, but over here, it is against the law to not comply with any demand or request from a police officer.... they tell him to move along, to pick up the pace, then he decides to be defiant and slow down the pace.... he was being a dick and he knew it and the police knew it and I know it, and so do you, just that you wont admit it, and you feel for him because you would have done the exact same thing... "who are they to tell me how fast to walk, those A holes...."

Like I said, he would still be alive had he just complied with them, right or wrong...

(V):  Id say the guy was provoking the police by his actions.  And in a tense situation like G20, that was a stupid thing to do.  But police are supposed to show restraint.  Shoving a man to the ground was way out of line IMO.  Arrest him yes, but physically assault him?  The police officer lost his cool.   If in fact that action caused the man's death, then by definition of the law, that could be manslaughter. 

OTOH, why couldn't the police officer simply have ignore the man.  He was not a threat.  He was just moving slowly.   Eventually, even a turtle makes it across the street. 

Artful Dodger: He wasn't in the best of health, and the current cause is abdominal bleeding. They are now doing more tests to be precise over the exact reason why of the bleeding. But the policeman involved ... as I've said ... is being interviewed under caution of suspected manslaughter. He is suspended until further notice, ie the results from the tests.

It looks to me like the guy just got shoved to the ground.  Perhaps a bit too agressively but that caused the death?

Czuch: A BIT OF A NUDGE!!!!!!!! He was shoved with BOTH HANDS from BEHIND.

NO BOMBS, NO IMMEDIATE THREATS.

The guy was just going home.

Czuch: Well the Independent Police complaints commission are handling the case. His walk home was through the area of the G20 protests, his crime.. none.

They are also looking into that he might have been assaulted by the police before hand and why did he need to be git with a baton and shoved from the back to the ground.

He did nothing wrong Czuch, he just wanted to get home to watch the football.

You've got it wrong Czuch.... completely wrong. And the police are not above the law. PERIOD.

(V): The police have many things going on all the time.... it may seem like nothing to you or to this guy, but maybe they had to have this area cleared for some unknown reason to me or to you or to this guy? Maybe there was a bomb or other immediate threat that they had been warned about, and they were trying to save this guys life by getting him to move out quicker?

You really dont know, nor do you need to know, all you need to know is that it is the police telling you to move it quickly, and when you dont do it, you get a bit of a nudge... thats what I see here

(V): The guy was on his way home from work, he was harmless.

You are the one who doesnt know what he is talking about.... this guy is just walking home from work you say??? He is surrounded by police just by some random accident?

It looks quite obvious to me that he is being told to move along by the police, and he is trying to be defiant, by dilly dallying along, he is far from being some plain guy just minding his own business and the police just come at him from nowhere and decide to just push him for absolutely no reason.... he is being told to pick up the pace and move along, and he would be alive today if he was compliant

Czuch: Don't talk about something when you have not watched the video. The guy was on his way home from work, he was harmless.

And our police can carry guns, especially at airports.

The bloke had done nothing.

Bottom line is, you are talking about something you obviously don't know anything about.

(V): But the point still arises... why make a physically aggressive attack on a man with his hand in his pockets?


What a bleeder you are

The police are out there day after day, placing themselves in all kinds of dangerous situations, yours dont even carry guns do they?

Do you really think it is okay for someone to disobey a police command, and then simply turn with his hands in his pockets, and that makes him all of a sudden harmless?

People need to accept that if they willingly put themselves in a situation where they are confronted by the police, for whatever reason, then they have to accept some chance of injury, or other mishap!

To me it is the same sympathy for one of the Guantanamo inmates.... who would have never ended up there in the first place if they hadnt intentionally inserted themselves where they had no business to be

Bottom line.... you dont hear of anyone getting roughed up by the police for staying at home tending to their families

And the guy who died who the police blamed the crowds.. but then video appeared of the guy with his hand in his pockets being shoved from behind by a policeman, resulting in him falling on his stomach.

... He didn't die off a heart attack, he died of abdominal bleeding.

The policeman is now being interviewed under caution on suspicion of manslaughter

More tests need to be made to be sure, to work out why the bleeding happened

But the point still arises... why make a physically aggressive attack on a man with his hand in his pockets?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8004222.stm

But then The "Territorial Support Group" is just a renamed "Special Patrol Group"..... and their record was ..... less then perfect to say the least.

Snoopy: Yep. The 'management' got caught out.. time to face the music and not hide behind some political spin.

Bernice: The crew was already safe. Only the captain was taken hostage.

Artful Dodger: Well.... If I go by "Wikipedia".....

It started in the 1990's but warnings have been said by many international organisations.

Actually.. I've learnt that a 'anti pirate force' called Combined Task Force 151 has been in place..

..... But the size was only 2 ships.. everyone wants to send more.. but the usual red tape... ....

what about the poor crew?

who cares about them?

they aren't american so they have been left to their own devices.

whether this is true or not but on our news they say this is the first time americans have been pirated in 205 years?

(V):Yeah.  I've been trying to find some history on it but haven't found a great source yet. 

Artful Dodger: Nope. I'm actually surprised that no real action has been taken by various naval powers before hand.

It's not exactly a new problem.

(V):That all works for me!  One thing for sure, if I were a US ship, I'd be sure to have an armed unit with me even if I had to hired them out!  And I'd take every precaution that is recommended by those that know.  That area of the world is not a cake walk. 

Artful Dodger: Marines, etc on every ship. Some nice 20mm cannons and a few guided surface to surface missiles. eheheheheh.

Use the old ruse of hiding the heavy weaponry like they did in WWII to catch the U-boats out.

(V):Yep, it's gotta be a show of force.  And a few traps would be nice.  Run those waters later at night and why not fully arm part of the crew? 

Artful Dodger: International force of warships running escort just like in WWII... only way.

Well, the captain is free, and the Navy Seals with sniper guns shot and killed 3 of the pirates.  The Captain escaped unharmed.  The 4th pirate is in US custody.  According to a report:  "Acting on a standing order from President Obama to move in when Phillips was in "imminent danger" snipers were ordered to fire."   Way to go Obama.  That will certainly be to his credit.  The pirates had an AK47 to the back of the head of the Captain.  That and previous shots fired were enough and the Seals took their shots.

Here's a follow up story  Not a surprise.  The Pirates vow to avenge the death of their co-pirates.  hmmmm, how dare the US fight back against terrorists who threaten innocent people.  Now those terrorists are mad and will retaliate. 

So what.  Now is the time to bring it to those cowards.  A far more noble task than Iraq.  Many nations are suffering at the hands of these pirates.  I hope the international community takes this opportunity to band together for the good of humanity and defeat these pirates.  No more $$ should be given to these crooks.  That only guarentees more of the same. 

Make no mistake, the pirates will want revenge.  Stay away, and keep the gun loaded.  Head snots only.  No warning shots to approaching vessels.  Sink em.  BAM!  If every time they sink an approaching vessel, or shoot the pirates as they try to board, how long before they try their luck somewhere else?

Here's the deal.  It's not smart to threaten a moderator with stupid threats.  I'm so NOT concerned.  So give it a rest.



If you want to be taken off hide, just delete your offending post and
simply don't misbehave again.   If you don't remove the post, you don't
come off hide.



It's up to you.

Artful Dodger: Unfortunately in matter like this, such action has a high friendly death toll probability. If you wanted to really stop the pirates, you'd have to show that having a hostage is not a shield.

.... As for Reagan..... Sure he was tough. He traded weapons for people... A great stance against terrorists.

Artful Dodger: With the exception of the last sentence, I totally agree.

(V):Oh yeah.   That was with that wimpy ineffective moron Jimmy Carter.  He was one of the worst presidents in US history.  Iran knew that Reagan wouldn't put up with anymore of their nonsense and they released them.  You have to take a hard stand against terrorists.  No soft approach will do.  No "understanding their motives."  Take it to them.   And use lots of ammo and head aims.  Dead terrorists can't whine about international law or rights or whatever. 

Artful Dodger: Instances where USA citizens have been taken hostage. Then there are those taken in Iraq..

(V):One of them what?

Artful Dodger: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Iran is one of them.. aka Iran-gate.

Pedro Martínez:Well, if they surrendered, I'd have no choice but to take them prisoner.  But while they are still armed and aggressive, I'd take a shoot to kill approach.  If they survive, then they are captured.  But my goal would be to make them dead first, captured second. 

well maybe not millions, but a lot!

Artful Dodger: There's millions of poor desperate young men always willing to fill any open ranks with the Pirates!

Artful Dodger: There is a comando group of sorts. It's called Combined Task Force 150. However, the take-no-prisoners approach is not feasible. International law, you know... :) But now when we have a US hostage, I can imagine a change in this respect - as the US has proven not to worry much about the international law in the past few years.

(V):When and where and what was done?

Pedro Martínez:But don't you think they could do more?  Like have a commando group on a few ships and set the pirates up?  With a take no prisoners approach.  A dead pirate can't reoffend.

Artful Dodger: Us hostages have been taken before. Maybe not in this area, but certainly in other areas of the world.

Artful Dodger: Yes, they have. And I actually think the international forces (including the US) have been doing a good job fighting against them. There were victims, there were ransoms paid, but the number of successful pirate acts has a decreasing tendency. I especially welcomed the recent incident involving FGS Spessart.

Pedro Martínez:
  Well, to my knowledge this is the first time a US hostage has been taken.  But you're right that these pirates have been at this sort of crap a long time.

Czuch: Well, they won't rescue the captain without talking to the pirates, I can tell you that.

Vikings: How about USS Cape St. George, USS Gonzalez, MV Seabourn Spirit (not a US-registered vessel, but owned by an American corporation) or MS Nautica (again, not registered in the US, but owned by a US-based corporation)?

For further information on the Somali piracy problem, read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somali_piracy

Pedro Martínez: It will be a good litmus test for the new liberal appeasement/talk with our enemies, get to know and understand them better, have sympathy for them, and they will play nice too, mentality.....

If these pirates let this captain go un harmed with tears in their eyes, heads hanging in shame and sorrow, and a new outlook for peaceful prosperity, then we will know that we finally have the solution to all of our problems!