Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Do you blame him or not, MP manhandles woman protester

Options
1…3536373941

Comments

  • Options
    #1142
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,498 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    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.

    Maybe he is not trained like you, or he was reacting in the real world.


  • Options
    #1143
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,297 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Faugheen wrote: »
    He used excessive force on someone he knew wasn't of any threat.
    And how would he have known?


  • Options
    #1144
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    the_syco wrote: »
    And how would he have known?

    Because he didn't even try to disarm her.


  • Options
    #1145
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,498 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    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.

    He had reasonable grounds, the trespasser had already worked to evade security, marked herself out as a different level.

    Why the police or security were not there to apprehend her is as big a story. Leaving it up to someone at a dinner table, the next time someone does this it might not be a bourgeois twat on a mission.


  • Options
    #1146
    gctest50
    Registered Users Posts: 9,605 ✭✭✭gctest50


    Faugheen wrote: »
    ....

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

    ....



    He probably saw the glint of her phone in her right hand and thought she had a knife


    She is holding her shiny phone by the end of it :


    OPhGdQy.jpg





    Watch the video again and keep an eye on her phone, it's in her right hand, he is on her left


    He reacts just as she walks past the spotlight illuminating the wall

    Her phone is silvery/shiny

    You can see the spotlight down at floor level illuminating her arm

    a split second before that, it would have lit up her phone

    hrBnWt0.jpg









    Here you can see the light from floor level on one of the other pillars, right at elbow height



    C0OJF5d.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1147
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,027 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    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 didn't simply take action. he slammed the woman up against the wall and grabbed her by the neck.
    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.

    or alternatively, based on the fact he wrote a letter to the met in relation to their absolutely correct all be it slow methods of dealing with the extinction rebellion protesters.
    up on seeing the protester, having his dinner disrupted, still being annoyed that the police didn't deal with extinction rebellion in the way he had hoped, the mist descended and he decided he would deal with this protester as an "i will show m"
    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.

    actually no, excessive force is force beyond what is actually required to be used within a given situation. one doesn't need to injure someone to have used excessive force. pushing someone up against a wall and grabbing them by the neck is excessive force.



    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

    she could have put her phone in her pocket, grabbed her bag and pulled an egg out and threw it while fields was removing her. she had plenty of opportunity before and during to do it. therefore his actions prevented nothing and what she may or may not have potentially done is irrelevant in terms of mark field's actions.
    Bass Reeves wrote: »
    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.

    well no he didn't use appropriate force because as i said, you don't need to cause someone to end up in hospital to have used excessive force, and the force used by fields wouldn't have prevented people from having egg on their faces if the protester threw one, which she would have been able to do because fields didn't act in a manner that would have prevented such.
    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.

    it wasn't a private function. it was a government held function for invited guests. leaving with bruises is not the least such protesters should expect unless they are actually violent.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #1148
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,027 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


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


    and yet so far no charges brought against her. the police would be able to get such evidence rather quickly and the cps would likely be able to bring charges very quickly. yet nothing.


    Danzy wrote: »
    He has fair grounds to use reasonable force.


    reasonable force, sure. he could have stood up and blocked her path and called security. he didn't do that.


    Danzy wrote: »
    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.


    again, that is just speculation with no basis as the police could bring charges against her anyway, they have all of the evidence.
    her not pressing charges does not get her out of facing any potential charges. as for being laughed out of court, i wouldn't bank on that in any way.



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


    people are not pretending he assaulted her, they are satisfied that it is exactly what he did based on all of what we do know.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #1149
    lawred2
    Registered Users Posts: 24,300 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    And another viewer of law and order... Nobody gets to 'press charges' in the UK but the CPS.

    All that anyone can do is report an incident to the police.


  • Options
    #1150
    gctest50
    Registered Users Posts: 9,605 ✭✭✭gctest50


    You have this in the UK



    (7) In deciding the question mentioned in subsection (3) the following considerations are to be taken into account (so far as relevant in the circumstances of the case)—

    (a) that a person acting for a legitimate purpose may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action;

    and

    (b)that evidence of a person's having only done what the person honestly and instinctively thought was necessary for a legitimate purpose constitutes strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken by that person for that purpose.



    10)In this section—

    (a)“legitimate purpose” means—

    (i)the purpose of self-defence under the common law, or

    (ia)the purpose of defence of property under the common law, or

    (ii)the prevention of crime or effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of persons mentioned in the provisions referred to in subsection (2)(b);

    (b)references to self-defence include acting in defence of another person; and

    (c)references to the degree of force used are to the type and amount of force used.


  • Options
    #1151
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,437 ✭✭✭tritium


    end of the road wrote: »
    and yet so far no charges brought against her. the police would be able to get such evidence rather quickly and the cps would likely be able to bring charges very quickly. yet nothing.

    No charges against either of them actually

    reasonable force, sure. he could have stood up and blocked her path and called security. he didn't do that.

    And if she’s armed he gets stabbed....

    again, that is just speculation with no basis as the police could bring charges against her anyway, they have all of the evidence.
    her not pressing charges does not get her out of facing any potential charges. as for being laughed out of court, i wouldn't bank on that in any way.







    people are not pretending he assaulted her, they are satisfied that it is exactly what he did based on all of what we do know.
    No people are jumping on ideological bandwagons. The poster above just gave the UK perspective, do you really think a prosecution of Fields is likely against that standard?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1152
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,498 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    gctest50 wrote: »
    You have this in the UK



    (7) In deciding the question mentioned in subsection (3) the following considerations are to be taken into account (so far as relevant in the circumstances of the case)—

    (a) that a person acting for a legitimate purpose may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action;

    and

    (b)that evidence of a person's having only done what the person honestly and instinctively thought was necessary for a legitimate purpose constitutes strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken by that person for that purpose.



    10)In this section—

    (a)“legitimate purpose” means—

    (i)the purpose of self-defence under the common law, or

    (ia)the purpose of defence of property under the common law, or

    (ii)the prevention of crime or effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of persons mentioned in the provisions referred to in subsection (2)(b);

    (b)references to self-defence include acting in defence of another person; and

    (c)references to the degree of force used are to the type and amount of force used.

    That won't apply because while it may be the law there, it is inconvenient to their argument.

    So let's all keep pretending it was an assault.


  • Options
    #1153
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,498 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    The Mansion House is choosing to not press charges. That is all, the police will not act in a case like this unless they do so.

    You do not have to be a Lawyer to follow this but some understanding of the law and legal process is inevitable as one goes through life.


  • Options
    #1154
    Bass Reeves
    Registered Users Posts: 18,274 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    Danzy wrote: »
    That won't apply because while it may be the law there, it is inconvenient to their argument.

    So let's all keep pretending it was an assault.

    Correct if you browse through this thread a certain section started of that it was criminal assault and he should be hung drawn and quartered. Then it moved to that he had no legal right to get involved. From there it moved to just because nobody else moved he should not have reacted. Then it was he used excessive force and he should be charge with that.

    Now most are of the line is that in there opinion he used excessive force. They are trying to use 20/20 hindsight as a reason why he should have either not got involved or just say ''sorry dear you cannot go up there'' as she storms past him.

    There is absolutely no physical evidence that his actions were inappropiate or over the top. Neither is there legal evidence in the video that he used excessive force. At the end of the day if either were charge with an offence that they could be conviced of it would be the protestor

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Options
    #1155
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 21,524 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    Bass Reeves wrote: »
    Correct if you browse through this thread a certain section started of that it was criminal assault and he should be hung drawn and quartered. Then it moved to that he had no legal right to get involved. From there it moved to just because nobody else moved he should not have reacted. Then it was he used excessive force and he should be charge with that.

    Now most are of the line is that in there opinion he used excessive force. They are trying to use 20/20 hindsight as a reason why he should have either not got involved or just say ''sorry dear you cannot go up there'' as she storms past him.

    There is absolutely no physical evidence that his actions were inappropiate or over the top. Neither is there legal evidence in the video that he used excessive force. At the end of the day if either were charge with an offence that they could be conviced of it would be the protestor

    Well, apart from the video and his apology obviously.


  • Options
    #1156
    lawred2
    Registered Users Posts: 24,300 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Danzy wrote: »
    The Mansion House is choosing to not press charges. That is all, the police will not act in a case like this unless they do so.

    You do not have to be a Lawyer to follow this but some understanding of the law and legal process is inevitable as one goes through life.

    :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #1157
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Tell me how wrote: »
    Have you evidence that it is likely she would have been?

    An Iraqi managed to take his shoes off and throw them at Bush and no one even pulled a gun.



    Truth hurts doesn't it.

    That happened in Iraq


  • Options
    #1158
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 21,524 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    That happened in Iraq

    Well done. Good input. No Americans around were there? I suspect the secret service took the afternoon off and left the president to the care of the locals.


  • Options
    #1159
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,437 ✭✭✭tritium


    lawred2 wrote: »
    And another viewer of law and order... Nobody gets to 'press charges' in the UK but the CPS.

    All that anyone can do is report an incident to the police.

    Not technically correct, the UK is one of a number of countries where private prosecution is possible

    More generally, “pressing charges” is really just an Americanism that has crept in to language for the act of making a complaint to the police.


  • Options
    #1160
    lawred2
    Registered Users Posts: 24,300 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    tritium wrote: »
    Not technically correct, the UK is one of a number of countries where private prosecution is possible

    More generally, “pressing charges” is really just an Americanism that has crept in to language for the act of making a complaint to the police.

    at great cost...

    and private prosecution is definitely not what people are talking about here..

    This incident has become known to the police. It is their job to investigate. They may or may not forward their findings to the CPS.


  • Options
    #1161
    Bass Reeves
    Registered Users Posts: 18,274 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    Tell me how wrote: »
    Well, apart from the video and his apology obviously.

    The video supports that his actions were not excessive. At no stage did he strike or hit her and after he had the situation under control he just frog marched her out.

    He apologized because in this politically correct society he more than likely came under pressure. In hindsight he should not have neither would convict him in a court of law.

    It is interesting that the protester is unwilling to press charges but rather prefers the court of public opinion to try him. In the old West this would be the equivalent of a lynch mob

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1162
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 21,524 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    Bass Reeves wrote: »
    The video supports that his actions were not excessive. At no stage did he strike or hit her and after he had the situation under control he just frog marched her out.

    He apologized because in this politically correct society he more than likely came under pressure. In hindsight he should not have neither would convict him in a court of law.

    It is interesting that the protester is unwilling to press charges but rather prefers the court of public opinion to try him. In the old West this would be the equivalent of a lynch mob

    Most people realise that excessive behaviour can be carried out without striking or hitting someone. He forcibly pushed her against pillar, grabbed her by neck and then marched her out.

    It wasn't attempted murder, it was excessive force.


  • Options
    #1163
    lawred2
    Registered Users Posts: 24,300 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Tell me how wrote: »
    Most people realise that excessive behaviour can be carried out without striking or hitting someone. He forcibly pushed her against pillar, grabbed her by neck and then marched her out.

    It wasn't attempted murder, it was excessive force.

    ah now - a damn good throttling is the only language some women understand...


  • Options
    #1164
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,437 ✭✭✭tritium


    lawred2 wrote: »
    at great cost...

    and private prosecution is definitely not what people are talking about here..

    This incident has become known to the police. It is their job to investigate. They may or may not forward their findings to the CPS.

    Your point was no one but the police get to press charges in the UK. It’s incorrect, both in a technical sense and also in terms of the colloquial usage if the phrase


  • Options
    #1165
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,437 ✭✭✭tritium


    Tell me how wrote: »
    Most people realise that excessive behaviour can be carried out without striking or hitting someone. He forcibly pushed her against pillar, grabbed her by neck and then marched her out.

    It wasn't attempted murder, it was excessive force.

    He used a relatively low level of force to control a situation where there was significant potential threat. Any less force would have the potential to expose him to considerable danger.


  • Options
    #1166
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 21,524 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    tritium wrote: »
    He used a relatively low level of force to control a situation where there was significant potential threat. Any less force would have the potential to expose him to considerable danger.

    Really? How much danger were the other 300 people exposed to?


  • Options
    #1167
    lawred2
    Registered Users Posts: 24,300 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    tritium wrote: »
    Your point was no one but the police get to press charges in the UK. It’s incorrect, both in a technical sense and also in terms of the colloquial usage if the phrase

    That wasn't my point... It was this notion that not 'pressing charges' would dictate the flow of a matter reported to the police/CPS... This notion that not 'pressing charges' would result in something not being investigated when the incident is known to the police is toss.


  • Options
    #1168
    malinheader
    Registered Users Posts: 5,103 ✭✭✭malinheader


    Tell me how wrote: »
    Really? How much danger were the other 300 people exposed to?

    Danger that people like you always seem to think that the time to react or speak up against is after an attack or an atrocity has been committed instead of acting first.


  • Options
    #1169
    Spook_ie
    Registered Users Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭Spook_ie


    He should have known she was no threat just like Stephen Timms MP knew that Roshonara Choudhry was no threat.
    The MP told the court that when she came in she didn't sit down and continued walking towards him.

    He said: "She looked friendly. She was smiling, if I remember rightly" before she "lunged at me with her right hand".

    "I think I knew that I had been stabbed although I didn't feel anything and I can't recall actually seeing a knife but I think I said 'She has a knife' or words to that effect."
    Source


  • Options
    #1170
    Tell me how
    Registered Users Posts: 21,524 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    malinheader wrote: »
    Danger that people like you always seem to think that the time to react or speak up against is after an attack or an atrocity has been committed instead of acting first.

    Wrong. Again.

    I never said he had no right to intervene, I said he used disproportionate force.

    Do you look at everyone you meet in the street as a would be attacker given you can't wait until it's too late?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1171
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,437 ✭✭✭tritium


    Spook_ie wrote: »
    He should have known she was no threat just like Stephen Timms MP knew that Roshonara Choudhry was no threat.


    Source

    This is exactly the point. Anyone saying Mr Field should have just blocked her way really has no sense of what a knife can do to a human body in a split second. The video I posted earlier of the attack on a polish politician illustrates this also.


Advertisement