Here and elsewhere this video and various eyewitness accounts have sparked a debate that encompasses a wide range of opinions. Since this is, after all, a blog about judicial matters, may I suggest that we approach this as if we were considering evidence.
What are the agreed facts? Put those aside as they need not detain us.
What are the disputed facts? Was the police action necessary and proportionate? Were the members of the public involved breaking the law? If so how? Were they threatening or violent to police or anyone else?
What is the evidence? What we have are eyewitness accounts (let's take them all at face value) and some video. Look at the facts that we have before us, as we would in court (albeit without cross-examination). Discount absolutely all preconceptions and concentrate on the evidence alone. What did the video or the witness accounts show?
What do you make of it?
Post a Comment
Posts are pre-moderated. Please bear with us if this takes a little time, but the number of bores and obsessives was getting out of hand, as were the fake comments advertising rubbish.