Royfromaus - “You too seem to have omitted why you would have run from these people. Why would you have run?” If you're talking to me (it helps if you make this clear) then my answer would be – I wouldn't have. I would have stood my ground – unless I was specially ordered to gather info only and retreat if confronted. The day I kneel before a baying mob of fascist,...
Those two coppers are evidence gatherers. They have thousands of quidsworth of sophisticated gear in that backpack.
Although they are 'ordinary' cops, their duties that day would preclude them from getting involved in anything.
Overt evidence gatherers work in teams of two, they don't as a matter of course have a 'bodyguard, if they leave Police lines in order to follow someone of interest (for example) the whole Police line cannot follow them, they are on their own.
They have a roving commission, at the start of the clip they are obviously filming people of interest, gaining evidence which is what their function is.
I doubt any 'guvnor' said 'Follow that crowd' they would have decided to do that for themselves.
Having done the filming it is then up to them to get the evidence back to the nick.
I agree it was undignified to have to run away but you wouldn't expect an RAF photo reconnaissance plane to engage in a dogfight with enemy fighters would you?
If that was their assignment , Shoota, why wouldn't they be dressed up as reporters, or maybe just some shaggy hill-billies taking random shots of the ongoing situation? Why the police uniforms?
That's the way they work. They are 'Overt' not 'Covert'.
I've been out of it for 14 years now so I'm not up to date with the latest rules and regulations, but I've a feeling the civil rights people kicked up a fuss about covert evidence gatherers on the basis that if the culprit had been aware he was being filmed he wouldn't have done the deed.