Guilty yes . . .

[sir.prize]

but did he deserve this treatment?

http://www.guardian.c...nsioner-car?fb=native

[jno]

hard to have a leg to stand on when someone's just run over your foot. I wonder why they haven't posted the video of him driving off from them? Alternatively, I wonder why they did post this one?

[sunny-dave]

Trial by Youtube is always dodgy - you tend only to be allowed see the bits that help the case of the side posting the video ...

[exdc]

Hi Jno

"I wonder why they haven't posted the video of him driving off from them"

I think they could if the driver was convicted for the offence (failing to stop).

[China Doll]

I think if people genuinely thought that the police were to blame in this incident then they would have said so, a few have. Some of us disagree. I have no sympathy for him at all.

[sunny-dave]

Nope - my instinctive response to this sort of case is usually *not* to believe the police version - or at least to treat it with a healthy degree of scepticism. I grew up in an era when the police were (at best) 'flexible' and often worse.

But things just look 'wrong' here - would you drive off over a PC's foot when he was ticketing you? Would you not stop for 8 miles? Would you not exit the car pretty damn quickly once you had been brought to a halt?

The fact that the man was an OAP with a disabled badge is irrelevant - he behaved dangerously, suspiciously and stupidly. The police reaction was violent, yes I agree that, but how could they know what this idiot was going to do next?

[sunny-dave]

If you have ever had any dealings with compensation claims (which I have in another area of public life) you'll know that legal teams will always tend to take a purely monetary view of cases. Looking not just at the actual rights and wrongs of each case, but also the potential up/down sides of contesting or settling.

It could have cost many hundreds of thousands of pounds to defend this case - with (I suspect) no real chance of retrieving much of those costs even if they won the case.

So someone took a pragmatic decision to settle out of court - with no admission of liability.

As you so rightly say, we have precious little to base our arguments on (either for or against the police) so I suggest we just accept that we have to disagree on this one.

dave

[wolf63]

The guy is guilty of the driving/not stopping crimes.

The policemen had to do their job - but it was a little heavy handed.

There may be much more to the story - we will never know.

The police are faced with a difficult job and the aren't robots - things like this probably happen all the time.

[andy-hughes]

It does look pretty OTT, but the fact that the driver locked his door woiuld be sufficient grounds for the police to break in to prevent him driving away again - public safey being the reasoning behind this kind of activity.

It might have been better if the officer on the bonet had walked to one side, and the officer on the driver's side had tapped on the window a couple of times demanding that the door be opened, given that they knew the driver was an older person.

[jno]

exdc, yes, that makes sense, thanks.

[flip_flop]

People keep on referring to his age - why?

Why is his age relevant?

He is 70, not 107 - 70 these days is not particularly young.

Should 70 year olds (and above) be subject to different laws or should the punishment for transgression of the law be different to those under 70?

[Gromit]

Those tinted windows Really irritate me as well. Totally justified for driving at 30mph in a 40mph zone.

[flip_flop]

My post should, of course, read "...70 these days is not particularly old."

[anotheoldgit]

'Have I got 'old' news for you'?

/// Friday 6 August 2010 /// :0)