Do you blame him or not, MP manhandles woman protester

Faugheen

BattleCorp wrote: »

There's a place called Specsavers. They sell glasses. If you think that's what the guy did, then I suggest you invest in a pair of glasses.

Either that or we have very different ideas of what the word 'slammed' and 'throat' means.

Actually he did grab her by the throat before he turned her back to him.

‘Go to SpecSavers’ and watch the video again.

Timberrrrrrrr

Faugheen wrote: »

I asked you to quote me where I said they should be strip searched please.

People in this thread peddled the nonsense that this woman could have been armed with a knife or whatever as a means to excuse Field’s behaviour. Where’s his attempt to disarm her? There is none, because there was no threat.

At the time he percieved a threat and took action. What would you have done?

Faugheen

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

At the time he percieved a threat and took action. What would you have done?

Stepped in front of her, and if she’s tried to force her way past THEN have her removed.

It’s very simple really. I thought you would have understood.

Still waiting for the quote where I said she should have been strip searched. You can hold your hands up and admit you just peddled nonsense to try and dismiss the point I’m making. It’s really not that difficult.

Timberrrrrrrr

Faugheen wrote: »

Stepped in front of her, and if she’s tried to force her way past THEN have her removed.

It’s very simple really. I thought you would have understood.

He puts his hand out, she attempts to get past thats when he restrains her. So he pretty much did what you would have done in that same situation.

malinheader

Tell me how wrote: »

Bystander effect is more applicable when the bystanders do not feel threatened themselves.
If some in the audience appeared panicked by what was happening, Mr Field could claim he felt a threat was possible.

No one did, he can't.
The protestors clearly announced their purpose.

You don't have to scream and cry to show panic.
You should of said in your view no one seems to panic, but then that is your view.
My view is I have seen people being mugged and attacked and people calmly walking by, not showing signs of panic.
Alot of people think aw well I'm alright Jack, nothing to do with me.
If you try and rush past security for any reason be prepared to suffer the consequences. She got away lightly in my eyes. Could of been a whole lot worse.

osarusan

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

He puts his hand out, she attempts to get past thats when he restrains her. So he pretty much did what you would have done in that same situation.

If I had genuinely felt there was a threat, the first thing I'd be doing is knocking whatever they had out of their hands and then out of their handbag, or at least limiting their ability to get at their bag.

He didn't do that. She was still carrying all her stuff as she was being taken out.

To me, that's far more indicative of him seeing her as a disruptive nuisance rather than a threat.

Faugheen

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

He puts his hand out, she attempts to get past thats when he restrains her. So he pretty much did what you would have done in that same situation.

No he pushed her against the wall because she was walking past him while he sat on his arse. That's not blocking her path. He put his hands on her.

That's not what I suggested doing at all. I suggested standing up and blocking her path before she's had a chance to get past me, which Field didn't do.

One more time. Quote me where I said she should have been strip-searched or else admit it was all fantasy land exaggerations.

Timberrrrrrrr

osarusan wrote: »

If I had genuinely felt there was a threat, the first thing I'd be doing is knocking whatever they had out of their hands and then out of their handbag, or at least limiting their ability to get at their bag.

He didn't do that. She was still carrying all her stuff as she was being taken out.

To me, that's far more indicative of him seeing her as a disruptive nuisance rather than a threat.

That's your personal opinion which you are fully entitled to have.

Timberrrrrrrr

Faugheen wrote: »

No he pushed her against the wall because she was walking past him while he sat on his arse. That's not blocking her path. He put his hands on her.

Well duhhhh, should he have used his Jedi powers instead?

That's not what I suggested doing at all. I suggested standing up and blocking her path before she's had a chance to get past me, which Field didn't do.

One more time. Quote me where I said she should have been strip-searched or else admit it was all fantasy land exaggerations.

Well if you're ever in the position that he was in you do that and let us know how it goes. In the meantime I'm happy to believe that he did the right thing as the situation evolved.

sReq | uTeK

I bet the narrative if she got to the top table and stabbed someone in the neck would be why no one took the initiative to stop her.

The man reacted accordingly. She shouldn't have been there.

Tell me how

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

I bet the narrative if she got to the top table and stabbed someone in the neck would be why no one took the initiative to stop her.

The man reacted accordingly. She shouldn't have been there.

Let's talk about what happened instead of the hypothetical What Ifs.

Everyone could see what was happening.
No one reacted with any element of panic.
Mr Field used excessive force.

Faugheen

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

I bet the narrative if she got to the top table and stabbed someone in the neck would be why no one took the initiative to stop her.

The man reacted accordingly. She shouldn't have been there.

Stab him with what? Her phone? Her purse?

There was no fear of her being armed, such as the lack of any effort to disarm her when she was stopped.

Another conspiracy theory with absolutely no basis for anything.

Faugheen

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Well duhhhh, should he have used his Jedi powers instead?



Well if you're ever in the position that he was in you do that and let us know how it goes. In the meantime I'm happy to believe that he did the right thing as the situation evolved.

He saw her coming from a good bit away. You can see him watching her the entire time. Stand up. Block her path, if she tries to force her way past, then stop her. It's very, very simple.

Instead he pushed her against a wall and put his hand around her throat. He used excessive force and didn't even try to disarm her because he knew she posed no actual threat.

Bass Reeves

Tell me how wrote: »

Let's talk about what happened instead of the hypothetical What Ifs.

Everyone could see what was happening.
No one reacted with any element of panic.
Mr Field used excessive force.

Ya she had to be carried away on a strecher

Faugheen

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Ya she had to be carried away on a strecher

Why is it that people have to post sh*t like this that clearly isn't true to dismiss what another person is saying?

That post is absolute sh*te.

gctest50

Faugheen wrote: »

Why is it that people have to post sh*t like this that clearly isn't true to dismiss what another person is saying?

That post is absolute sh*te.

Was she carried away on a stretcher ?

[....] YES

[....] NO

Faugheen

gctest50 wrote: »

Was she carried away on a stretcher ?

[....] YES

[....] NO

So is the only result of excessive force to be carried away on a stretcher?

You're chatting absolute nonsense now.

Bass Reeves

Faugheen wrote: »

Why is it that people have to post sh*t like this that clearly isn't true to dismiss what another person is saying?

That post is absolute sh*te.

No it is not we have a load of drama queens here that are trying to make out that just because Fields took action that he is guilty of assault.

Lets look at the facts The protester was an uninvited guest, she had got further in than any other protester. Other guests may have held back expecting security to handle it. Fields saw that she was beyond secirity and he too action to protect the top table.

We have people here expressing an opinion of him using excessive force. Excessive force is where some one at least injured where they have to be be seriously helped or carried away and even then that force may be appropiate. Excessive force is not grabbing or grappling with a person, spinning them around and frog marching them out of the room.

We have people trying to make out that because he carried out action one way way that he is guilty. If he knocked her to the floor and pinned here there they be say he could have carried out the action he did carry out to have controlled the situation. Could he have used less force to get control of the situation with 20/20 hindsight vision maybe he could. Then again the protester could have got past him if he was slightly less forceful. Pulled an egg out of her bag and threw it at someone at the top table

But Fields use appropiate force to control the situation. Nobody is in hospital. Nobody had hands or legs broken and neither the Chancellor or the head of the Bank of England have egg on there faces.

So grow up and live in the real world. If you protest, gate crash a private function and leave with a few bruises it is the least you can expect.

gctest50

Faugheen wrote: »

So is the only result of excessive force to be carried away on a stretcher?

You're chatting absolute nonsense now.

Was she carried away on a stretcher ?

Yes or No ?

Faugheen

gctest50 wrote: »

Was she carried away on a stretcher ?

Yes or No ?

What does that have to do with anything?

gctest50

Faugheen wrote: »

What does that have to do with anything?

Was she carried away on a stretcher ?

Faugheen

Bass Reeves wrote: »

No it is not we have a load of drama queens here that are trying to make out that just because Fields took action that he is guilty of assault.

He used excessive force on someone he knew wasn't of any threat.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Lets look at the facts The protester was an uninvited guest, she had got further in than any other protester. Other guests may have held back expecting security to handle it. Fields saw that she was beyond secirity and he too action to protect the top table.

Why didn't he just stand and block her way, wait for her to be the one forcing his hand. Instead he went straight on the offence. There's ways to deal with it and there's ways not to deal with it. How were security able to get the rest of them out without using the force Field did?

Bass Reeves wrote: »

We have people here expressing an opinion of him using excessive force. Excessive force is where some one at least injured where they have to be be seriously helped or carried away and even then that force may be appropiate. Excessive force is not grabbing or grappling with a person, spinning them around and frog marching them out of the room.

There is actually no legal definition for what constitutes excessive force, so your claim that someone must be injured is absolute bollocks.

Excessive force is grabbing someone by the throat. Before anyone tries to dispute this, watch the video again.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

We have people trying to make out that because he carried out action one way way that he is guilty. If he knocked her to the floor and pinned here there they be say he could have carried out the action he did carry out to have controlled the situation. Could he have used less force to get control of the situation with 20/20 hindsight vision maybe he could. Then again the protester could have got past him if he was slightly less forceful. Pulled an egg out of her bag and threw it at someone at the top table

Pulled an egg out of her bag how? By putting everything else down first? She had her phone in one hand and her bag in the other.

Why didn't Field disarm because nothing was going to stop her throwing imaginary eggs around the room anyway.

Stop making up ****.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

But Fields use appropiate force to control the situation.

In your opinion. In my opinion he used excessive force.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Nobody is in hospital. Nobody had hands or legs broken and neither the Chancellor or the head of the Bank of England have egg on there faces.

Proof she had eggs please.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

So grow up and live in the real world. If you protest, gate crash a private function and leave with a few bruises it is the least you can expect.

Grow up? You're literally making up imaginary eggs and making up what defines excessive force. You have posted a load of absolute bollocks of hypotheticals and conspiracies yet I'm the one that needs to 'live in the real world'?

Absolute spoofer.

Bass Reeves

Faugheen wrote: »

What does that have to do with anything?

It has a huge bearing on whether Fields used excessive force and I posted earler force of that magnitute may have been appropiate in a similar situation.

Faugheen

Bass Reeves wrote: »

It has a huge bearing on whether Fields used excessive force and I posted earler force of that magnitute may have been appropiate in a similar situation.

I also told you that the idea someone has to be injured for it to constitute 'excessive force' is absolute bull****.

gctest50

Faugheen wrote: »

......

Absolute spoofer.

Was she carried away on a stretcher ?

malinheader

I'm sure the compensation package she receives will soon help to heal her life threatening bruises and scratches.
She should of got a kick in the hole as well before he let her go.

Tokyo

gctest50 wrote: »

Was she carried away on a stretcher ? (x3)

Mod:

gctest50 - up your standard of posting, or don't post here again.

Bass Reeves

Faugheen wrote: »

He used excessive force on someone he knew wasn't of any threat.

She was a threat, She was an uninvited guest that got past security who were tied up with 39 other univited guests all dressed the same. The question to ask was the force he used reasonable before we deem it excessive, this is a legal definitation of reasonable force.

A person is generally justified in using force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm if the person reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. The person is also generally justified in using such extreme force to prevent or terminate another's unlawful entry into or attack upon a dwelling, if: (1) the entry is made or attempted in a violent manner and he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent personal violence to himself or another then in the dwelling, or (2) he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a felony in the dwelling.

So we can see the defination of reasonable force. It carries a long way. Fields action were reasonable in the sitautaion

Tell me how

I missed the part where Mr Farage climbed on to a stretcher to ensure the thrower of the milkshake would be charged with assault.

I wasn't aware it was a qualifying element.

(I also wasn't aware some people can't understand that there are varying degrees of excessive force.) Mr Fields was at the lower end, but, it was excessive. According to Mr Field anyway.

Danzy

The protester was guilty of criminal trespass, there have been numerous politicians attacked recently by those convinced of their moral righteousness and purity.

He has fair grounds to use reasonable force.

The protester will not press charges because she would be laughed out of court and the Mansion House could press charges against her which she has no defence against.

She should not be charged, nor should people pretend he assaulted her and gun for his job.