Do you blame him or not, MP manhandles woman protester

Sleeper12 · 22-06-2019 07:33PM

Deleted User wrote:

There are mitigating circumstances.

It is still assault.

22-06-2019 07:44PM

Faugheen wrote:

You can use words like 'made a beeline' for Hammond but it's simply not true. You can say 'she could have been armed' but fact is she wasn't. You talk about context? All you're peddling is conspiracies.

Thanks. But I never said either.

Faugheen wrote:

Also to add to some more context, Fields apologised. To add some more, Fields got suspended by Theresa May.

I've already stated that regardless of that, it doesn't change the fact that I agree with what he did.

Faugheen wrote:

'It's only because of the Twitter mob' is another conspiracy unless you have proof where either Mark Fields or Theresa May confirm this to be the case.

It's my opinion. Never stated it as fact.

Faugheen wrote:

Don't call me intellectually challenged when you are actually making sh*t up to suit your perspective on things.

I will if I feel you are.

Faugheen wrote:

Context? A woman peacefully protesting followed by a man slamming her against the wall. There's your context.

A protester getting forcibly removed from somewhere she shouldn't have been.

There's your context.

22-06-2019 07:48PM

Why do politicians fear for their lives? Well..

Faugheen · 22-06-2019 07:49PM

Deleted User wrote: »

A protester getting forcibly removed from somewhere she shouldn't have been.

There's your context.

So nobody’s allowed to showcase their democratic right to a peaceful protest?

You big ol’ fascist you.

Junkyard Tom · 22-06-2019 07:54PM

He saw that it was a woman in a dress with her phone in her hand and found his balls - if the protester had been wearing combat gear and had a mask on he'd have been under the table crying in a puddle of his own piss.

22-06-2019 07:54PM

Faugheen wrote:

So nobodyâ€™s allowed to showcase their democratic right to a peaceful protest?

They are. But nobody is allowed to just storm into a place they aren't invited without being forcibly ejected.

Faugheen wrote:

You big olâ€™ fascist you.

Yeah... I'm such a fascist. Just need you to call me privileged and and a Nazi to fill in your sjw bingo card.

22-06-2019 07:56PM

Junkyard Tom wrote:

He saw that it was a woman in a dress with her phone in her hand and found his balls - if the protester had been wearing combat gear and had a mask on he'd have been under the table crying in a puddle of his own piss.

Yeah. Good stuff.

Plumbthedepths · 22-06-2019 07:58PM

YFlyer wrote:

Two jabs Prescott got away with punching a protester

The protestor attacked Prescott, self defence is acceptable. Personally I think this lad acted in defence of others maybe a little heavy handed but justified in my opinion.

Tell me how · 22-06-2019 08:01PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why do politicians fear for their lives? Well..

People have been attacked and killed by randomers in the street but you still don't see how out and see everyone as a likely attacker.

The motive of the lady in question was clear because;
She was a member of a group who announced their purpose on entering the room.
She was wearing a sash that said they were protestors.
She was clearly unarmed.
She made no aggressive motion towards anyone.
All other 100+ attendees acted differently to Mr Field.

There are exceptions, but, given all of the above, his reaction was excessive, or are you saying every protestors should be seen as an attacker?

Plumbthedepths · 22-06-2019 08:02PM

end of the road wrote:

whether that is or isn't the case, there is nothing from what i can see to show that she caused anyone to believe they were going to be assalted.

The above is your opinion only. Hindsight is great isn't it?

22-06-2019 08:02PM

Plumbthedepths wrote:

The protestor attacked Prescott, self defence is acceptable. Personally I think this lad acted in defence of others maybe a little heavy handed but justified in my opinion.

That's it in a nutshell really. Prescott acted after the fact. This lad ensured there was nothing to react to. could have been a little more gentle but by no means brutalised her.

I would have done the same.

lawred2 · 22-06-2019 08:03PM

Tell me how wrote: »

People have been attacked and killed by randomers in the street but you still don't see how out and see everyone as a likely attacker.

The motive of the lady in question was clear because;
She was a member of a group who announced their purpose on entering the room.
She was wearing a sash that said they were protestors.
She was clearly unarmed.
She made no aggressive motion towards anyone.
All other 100+ attendees acted differently to Mr Field.

There are exceptions, but, given all of the above, his reaction was excessive, or are you saying every protestors should be seen as an attacker?

Well definitely the uppity women ones anyway

22-06-2019 08:03PM

I think he was dead right. Layeth the SmackethDown! on her candy ass, as the Rock would say.

Pity there's not a poll attached to this thread. You wander in somewhere uninvited, you get booted out again. Seems fair and reasonable.

22-06-2019 08:07PM

Tell me how wrote:

The motive of the lady in question was clear because; She was a member of a group who announced their purpose on entering the room. She was wearing a sash that said they were protestors. She was clearly unarmed. She made no aggressive motion towards anyone. All other 100+ attendees acted differently to Mr Field.

Bull.

Her group had no right to be in the room.

She split from her group and was quickly approaching the too table.

I could be wearing a repeal t-shirt. Doesn't mean I would be for abortion. What does a sash matter?

No she was not "clearly" unarmed.

She did make an aggressive motion. She was not meant to be there and she was heading towards the highest ranking officials on her own.

Yes. Mr Field was the only one to apprehend her. The rest of the security seemed to be on the other side of the room, attending to the other protesters. Seeing this, I'd have stepped in too.

runawaybishop · 22-06-2019 08:07PM

Sleeper12 wrote: »

The police are investigating his actions. The victim has said she wont file a complaint. This makes it more difficult but not impossible to charge him

Just in case you don't know the meaning of the word that I keep using:

assault

/

That's a dictionary definition. Legally assault does not mean what you posted. The important bit you left out is the bit about believing an assault was going to happen and being allowed to take action to stop it.

Timberrrrrrrr · 22-06-2019 08:07PM

Sleeper12 wrote: »

The police are investigating his actions. The victim has said she wont file a complaint. This makes it more difficult but not impossible to charge him

Just in case you don't know the meaning of the word that I keep using:

assault

/əˈsɔːlt,əˈsɒlt/Learn to pronounce

verb
[COLOR=#878787 !important]

1.
make a physical attack on.
[COLOR=#878787 !important]"he pleaded guilty to assaulting a police officer"[/COLOR]
synonyms:hit, strike, physically attack, aim blows at, slap, smack, beat, thrash, spank, thump, thwack, punch, cuff, swat, knock, rap; More

noun
[COLOR=#878787 !important][/COLOR]

1.
a physical attack.
[COLOR=#878787 !important]"his imprisonment for an assault on the film director"[/COLOR]
synonyms:(physical) violence, battery, mugging, actual bodily harm, ABH; More

2.
a concerted attempt to do something demanding.

[/COLOR]

None of which happened! If the police haven't arrested him (they also have the footage) then they also believe no "assault" took place.

Faugheen · 22-06-2019 08:07PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

They are. But nobody is allowed to just storm into a place they aren't invited without being forcibly ejected.

By being slammed against a wall and grabbed by the neck?

Nobody else felt the need to do that. Look at other videos and security got the rest out without needing much force.

She posed no threat to anybody. She wasn't violent. She was walking around a room.

If you're at an event in an official government capacity you're going to get protests. There are ways to deal with them. Slamming non-violent protestors against the wall isn't one of them believe it or not.

Could he not have stood up to block her path? If she tried to force her way past THEN he would have had some justification to restrain her. He made an absolute **** up here.

But being the big manly man that he his, he went straight on the attack.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yeah... I'm such a fascist. Just need you to call me privileged and and a Nazi to fill in your sjw bingo card.

SJW. Something the fascists love to turn to when they're being little bitchy cry babies.

22-06-2019 08:08PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote:

None of which happened! If the police haven't arrested him (they also have the footage) then they also believe no "assault" took place.

I seem to be in a parallel universe at the moment where me and timber are in total agreement!!!!

Let's enjoy this moment buddy

Faugheen · 22-06-2019 08:09PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

None of which happened! If the police haven't arrested him (they also have the footage) then they also believe no "assault" took place.

This is just plain wrong.

If I shoot you dead but police don't arrest me while they investigate. Does that mean you were not shot dead?

Timberrrrrrrr · 22-06-2019 08:10PM

Faugheen wrote: »

This is just plain wrong.

If I shoot you dead but police don't arrest me while they investigate. Does that mean you were not shot dead?

If they had you on tape commiting this act You would be arrested and questioned.

_blaaz · 22-06-2019 08:12PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

None of which happened! If the police haven't arrested him (they also have the footage) then they also believe no "assault" took place.

Could also be because woman involved didnt want to make a complaint?

22-06-2019 08:15PM

Faugheen wrote:

She posed no threat to anybody. She wasn't violent. She was walking around a room.

Where she had no right to be.

Faugheen wrote:

SJW. Something the fascists love to turn to when they're being little bitchy cry babies.

Nope. An accurate summation of people who like to shout Nazi or fascist at anyone who disagrees with them, all the while being horrendously abusive to all and sundry. I haven't cried about anything. But again, that's just your attempt of being insulting. You knock yourself out.

Faugheen wrote:

But being the big manly man that he his, he went straight on the attack.

What has his gender got to do with anything? Bit sexist.

Faugheen wrote:

Could he not have stood up to block her path? If she tried to force her way past THEN he would have had some justification to restrain her. He made an absolute **** up here.

Maybe. I think in the spur of the moment though, your initial response should be to make sure she was removed as quickly as possible without injuring her. That's what he did.

Faugheen · 22-06-2019 08:19PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

If they had you on tape commiting this act You would be arrested and questioned.

So they have to make an arrest straight away?

That’s not how it works. Sometimes they’ll make an arrest straight away, other times they’ll investigate, take statements and then arrest later if they need to.

What you have said is absolute nonsense. Lack of arrest so far does not mean no crime.

The woman hasn’t filed a complaint either.

Sleeper12 · 22-06-2019 08:19PM

runawaybishop wrote:

That's a dictionary definition. Legally assault does not mean what you posted. The important bit you left out is the bit about believing an assault was going to happen and being allowed to take action to stop it.

I've been pulled up for saying that he assaulted her. He assaulted her that's a fact. Only a court of law can decide if he is guilty of assault or not. It is nothing more than opinion that he did or did not assault her yet plenty on here state that he did not as fact. Its not fact until a court of law decides

tritium · 22-06-2019 08:20PM

Faugheen wrote: »

By being slammed against a wall and grabbed by the neck?

Nobody else felt the need to do that. Look at other videos and security got the rest out without needing much force.

She posed no threat to anybody. She wasn't violent. She was walking around a room.

If you're at an event in an official government capacity you're going to get protests. There are ways to deal with them. Slamming non-violent protestors against the wall isn't one of them believe it or not.

Could he not have stood up to block her path? If she tried to force her way past THEN he would have had some justification to restrain her. He made an absolute **** up here.

But being the big manly man that he his, he went straight on the attack.

SJW. Something the fascists love to turn to when they're being little bitchy cry babies.

Yeah, not sure I’d advocate this when your trying to prevent a person who may possibly be armed from advancing. It tends to ensure you get stabbed for a start.

22-06-2019 08:22PM

tritium wrote: »

Yeah, not sure I’d advocate this when your trying to prevent a person who may possibly be armed from advancing. It tends to ensure you get stabbed for a start.

But we have hindsight to show us that that wasn't going to happen.

Sleeper12 · 22-06-2019 08:26PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote:

None of which happened! If the police haven't arrested him (they also have the footage) then they also believe no "assault" took place.

He hit her several times. Are watching the correct video?

If throwing liquid on someone is assault then slamming someone against a wall, hitting them & grabbing them by the neck is definitely assault. I'd love her to post photos of her neck. I'm betting she's black and blue today

Sleeper12 · 22-06-2019 08:30PM

Deleted User wrote:

But we have hindsight to show us that that wasn't going to happen.

You don't find it odd that there was a room full of people & he was the only one who assaulted someone? The main group were escorted out of the room peacefully without being assaulted.

runawaybishop · 22-06-2019 08:32PM

Sleeper12 wrote: »

He hit her several times. Are watching the correct video?

If throwing liquid on someone is assault then slamming someone against a wall, hitting them & grabbing them by the neck is definitely assault. I'd love her to post photos of her neck. I'm betting she's black and blue today

Assault is only assault if you do not have a lawful reason. If he believed he was stopping her committing assault then that is a lawful reason.

Assault has a specific legal definition, stop abusing it

runawaybishop · 22-06-2019 08:32PM

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You don't find it odd that there was a room full of people & he was the only one who assaulted someone? The main group were escorted out of the room peacefully without being assaulted.

No one else needed to stop her after he removed her. The fact that he acted first doesn't make him wrong

Do you blame him or not, MP manhandles woman protester

Comments