Police Forward Intelligence Team's own video helps find anti-
surveillance protesters not guilty!

The second day of the trial of 2 protestors, arrested outside the
University of London Union in Malet Street, ended with both defendants
being found not guilty by a District Judge. The arrests of a woman and
a 14 year old youth followed their attempts to obstruct the civilian
cameraman, who was filming people as they arrived for a planning
meeting for protests against the DSEi Armsfair which took place at the
ExCeL centre in Docklands in September 2007.

Despite bringing in a senior prosecutor, the CPS were unable to secure
any convictions. Both protestors were charged with "obstructing a
police constable in the course of his duty", whilst the woman also
faced a charge of assult on a PC.

From the time that the Forward Intelligence Team arrived outside ULU
in April, the 2 protestors set out to obstruct the camerman who was
filming people going into the meeting. They followed him around, and
constantly put their banners, which read "No cameras" in front of his
lens. This led to a decision to move him onto a set of steps on a
building across the road from ULU. 4 officers then formed a cordon
across the steps, and the protestors continued to hold the placards up
in front of the camera.

This continued for some time, until people left to attend the meeting.
By the time they had crossed the road and entered ULU, both protestors
were seized and shortly after , were handcuffed and taken to a police
carrier.

A succession of police officers took the stand, and almost every one
claimed that the protestors were "BARGING" into the police officers,
in order to get at the camera. The officers also echoed the same line
about the arrests (neither of which actually took place until the
protestors were inside the carrier), claiming that they had grabbed
hold of the 14 year old as the 2 were escalating their tactics, and
that they feared a breach of the peace. In light of this, 2 officers
grabbed hold of the 14 year old, and restrained him using a fair
amount of force. When the woman tried to intervene, she too was
grabbed and restrained. PC Palfrey who grabbed hold of her claimed
that he was kicked whilst restraining the woman.

Ironically, it was FIT's own video which proved to be the undoing of
the cops. Whilst all the officers who took the stand presented a
unified account of what happened, not one of them was able to show
where the actions took place in the video. Furthermore, contrary to
the claims that the 2 had escalated their tactics after the others
went into the meeting, the video showed the 14 year old standing still
and calmly when he was suddenly seized by the 2 officers. The video
also showed that it was old favourite Steve Discombe (pictured), who
appeared to order the arrest. The video also cast doubt on PC
Palfrey's claim of assault.

The prosecution was unable to produce evidence that any police
constable was obstructed in the course of their duty, and both
defendants openly acknowledged that they had intended to obstruct the
civilian cameraman.

A further 2 trials are scheduled to take place at Uxbridge Magistrates
Court in the New Year. Both defendants face the "obstructing a PC"
charge, even though both defendants were clearly intent on obstructing
the civilian cameraman outside the Climate Camp earleir this year. One
of the defendants has managed to get the court to agree widespread
disclosure.

My guess is that FIT are less than happy this evening.

JW

Further details of FITwatch and how to get involved can be found at
http://fitwatch.blogspot.com/2007/11/first-fitwatch-trial-ends-in-not-guilty.html

See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_Intelligence_Team

A few years ago, when I was a Londoner, a photographer was arrested at
a demonstration. He was doing nothing, but a few minutes after he was
arrested, a scuffle broke out, and IIRC people were hurt. The police
claimed the photographer was involved in the scuffle, and he was duly
charged.

The log sheet of his arrest showed clearly he had been arrested
*before* the scuffle - the timing of which was attested to by several
officers.

Things looked bleak as the defendant called the arresting officer a
liar over the time. All was set for a bristling showdown.

Unfortunately for plod, they failed to realise the significance of one
of the photos they confiscated from the photographer. It showed the
arresting officer in the process of arresting the defendant. It also
showed his watch, clearly displaying the time 15 minutes *before* the
scuffle.

This was the watch the officer had sworn under oath was correct, and
used to time the arrest.

ISTR that after this case, quite a few cases involving this PC (who I
think was disciplined BICBW) were reviewed - he was a serial liar and
bully.

"Jethro"  wrote in message
news:b5c0fc78-a8e1-4776-89dc-243f8458b64d@w34g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> ISTR that after this case, quite a few cases involving this PC (who I
> think was disciplined BICBW) were reviewed - he was a serial liar and
> bully.

Unfortunately not really surprising :-(
--
Steve

Jethro  wrote in news:b5c0fc78-a8e1-4776-89dc-
243f8458b64d@w34g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

> 
> ISTR that after this case, quite a few cases involving this PC (who I
> think was disciplined BICBW) were reviewed - he was a serial liar and
> bully.

David Wyvill?

-- 
Regards or otherwise,

Periander

jocasta.woolfolk@googlemail.com wrote:
>
> A succession of police officers took the stand, and almost every one
> claimed that the protestors were "BARGING" into the police officers,
> in order to get at the camera. The officers also echoed the same line
> about the arrests (neither of which actually took place until the
> protestors were inside the carrier), claiming that they had grabbed
> hold of the 14 year old as the 2 were escalating their tactics, and
> that they feared a breach of the peace. In light of this, 2 officers
> grabbed hold of the 14 year old, and restrained him using a fair
> amount of force. When the woman tried to intervene, she too was
> grabbed and restrained. PC Palfrey who grabbed hold of her claimed
> that he was kicked whilst restraining the woman.
>
> Ironically, it was FIT's own video which proved to be the undoing of
> the cops. Whilst all the officers who took the stand presented a
> unified account of what happened, not one of them was able to show
> where the actions took place in the video. Furthermore, contrary to
> the claims that the 2 had escalated their tactics after the others
> went into the meeting, the video showed the 14 year old standing still
> and calmly when he was suddenly seized by the 2 officers.

Despicable tactics - nice to see it rebounded upon them...

On 5 Dec, 18:56, Periander  wrote:
> Jethro  wrote in news:b5c0fc78-a8e1-4776-89dc-
> 243f8458b...@w34g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > ISTR that after this case, quite a few cases involving this PC (who I
> > think was disciplined BICBW) were reviewed - he was a serial liar and
> > bully.
>
> David Wyvill?

I don't recall. But I *do* recall the damaging photo being printed in
the press. It showed the policeman with his arm upraised, and his
watch crystal clear.

I vaguely recall a comment by the defending barrister that he was
astounded the prosecution hadn't realised the significance of the
photo. But then they had assumed that in a public vs. police battle,
the police would automatically win.