@1:12 BATTERY ,,, use of force was not necessary according to police code of practice CODE 3.2 :- A forcible search may be made if the person to be searched is un-willing to cooperate , even if verbally contests the search ((HRA art.10) proof that the person was compliant @2:24 therefore is a "BATTERY" Thee is nothing in PACE or the CODE of practice stating "I don't know you, prevent making off, your bigger than me ect that A PC can use force , whether by handcuffs or holding a person , this PC needs reflective practice , and person has the right to ask for name , rank of his "line manager". "reflective practice" came out February 2020 , Police (conduct) Regulations 2020,, part 6 ,, section 65 (2) but I would prefer watching this video part 5 , section 49 = referral of accelerated misconduct hearing AND CODE 4.3A person is not required to provide name ect or any information , and should NOT be asked to do so to complete the record 💥 If this is how constable act in office , it is not a good future of policing 😒
Thanks Bill. It is important that officers reduce the amount of "compliant and unnecessary handcuffing" There are far too many and as highlighted handcuffing in itself is a use of force. All force must be necessary and justified. Not many people highlight the Police Conduct regulations 2020, I assume you must either be an officer, work in PSD or work in law?
@@att10tivesocialenterprise32 good afternoon sir , all I can say is ,I am retired , another fact is the searching officer was breaching RIPA = Regulated Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and is a criminal offence .RIPA has to be applied for permission in "writing" by Superintendent to/from Home Office , maintained by the chief Constable Code 3.5.5 of BWV verbally stating of the OVERT recording is taking place with verbal date, time & location unless operating under RIPA for "COVERT" recording in a place at a time location the PC obviously was not operating under RIPA but theoretically operating under PACE , but not quoting CODE 3.5.5 verbally , therefore breaching RIPA (without permission) and is a criminal offence 💥 glad I found your platform site , all the best,, Will
@1:12 BATTERY ,,,
use of force was not necessary according to police code of practice
CODE 3.2 :- A forcible search may be made if the person to be searched is un-willing to cooperate , even if verbally contests the search ((HRA art.10)
proof that the person was compliant @2:24 therefore is a "BATTERY"
Thee is nothing in PACE or the CODE of practice stating "I don't know you, prevent making off, your bigger than me ect that A PC can use force , whether by handcuffs or holding a person , this PC needs reflective practice , and person has the right to ask for name , rank of his "line manager".
"reflective practice" came out February 2020 , Police (conduct) Regulations 2020,, part 6 ,, section 65 (2)
but I would prefer watching this video part 5 , section 49 = referral of accelerated misconduct hearing
AND
CODE 4.3A person is not required to provide name ect or any information , and should NOT be asked to do so to complete the record 💥
If this is how constable act in office , it is not a good future of policing 😒
Thanks Bill. It is important that officers reduce the amount of "compliant and unnecessary handcuffing" There are far too many and as highlighted handcuffing in itself is a use of force. All force must be necessary and justified. Not many people highlight the Police Conduct regulations 2020, I assume you must either be an officer, work in PSD or work in law?
@@att10tivesocialenterprise32 good afternoon sir , all I can say is ,I am retired , another fact is the searching officer was breaching RIPA = Regulated Investigatory Powers Act 2000
and is a criminal offence .RIPA has to be applied for permission in "writing" by Superintendent to/from Home Office , maintained by the chief Constable
Code 3.5.5 of BWV verbally stating of the OVERT recording is taking place with verbal date, time & location unless operating under RIPA for "COVERT" recording in a place at a time location
the PC obviously was not operating under RIPA but theoretically operating under PACE , but not quoting CODE 3.5.5 verbally , therefore breaching RIPA (without permission) and is a criminal offence 💥
glad I found your platform site , all the best,, Will
2000+ views and only 3 comments?????? Has someone been deleting hundreds of negative comments perhaps???
No the comments were disabled