Officer who tasered him charged with murder!

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/c ... 89306.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting

'But the CPS refused to provide the officers’ names, against the standard practice when people are charged with crimes.'

Always felt that people charged with serious crimes should be anonymous until found guilty. But its rare this happens. But this IS the police after all...

Surely it can only be manslaughter at worst?

I must admit I'm with you on this one CC. Why does an officer charged with murder remain anonymous when that option is not open to all? Although I also agree that the option should be open to all. I have long questioned why the alleged victim of rape, for instance, should remain anonymous (which I agree with) but the alleged rapist is not allowed that privilege. It is somewhat topsy turvy in my view because the victim is simply that, a victim, but the 'offender' has been charged with a terrible crime which, if he is found not guilty, many people just say 'he's got away with it'. The same is true of all serious crime really, when mud is thrown some of it always sticks. It would be easy to publish the name after the trial is finished (assuming guilt has been proved).

BurnleyFC wrote:Surely it can only be manslaughter at worst?

I thought this. You don't use a taser with the intent of killing someone because most of the time it won't. And isn't the differentiation between manslaughter and murder mainly 'intent'? I'm not certain on this but I'm pretty sure it is.

houseboy wrote:I thought this. You don't use a taser with the intent of killing someone because most of the time it won't. And isn't the differentiation between manslaughter and murder mainly 'intent'? I'm not certain on this but I'm pretty sure it is.

In most cases there will be some plea bargaining. So with him being charged with murder he may bargain at manslaughter. Whereas if charged with manslaughter the higher charge from which to bargain from has dropped significantly.

houseboy wrote:I must admit I'm with you on this one CC. Why does an officer charged with murder remain anonymous when that option is not open to all? Although I also agree that the option should be open to all. I have long questioned why the alleged victim of rape, for instance, should remain anonymous (which I agree with) but the alleged rapist is not allowed that privilege. It is somewhat topsy turvy in my view because the victim is simply that, a victim, but the 'offender' has been charged with a terrible crime which, if he is found not guilty, many people just say 'he's got away with it'. The same is true of all serious crime really, when mud is thrown some of it always sticks. It would be easy to publish the name after the trial is finished (assuming guilt has been proved).

Not agreeing or disagreeing but how do you enforce the practicality of this. How many people are charged with some sort of crime and go to court across the country each day that is reported in local news and online.

Who is gonna police this and if some petty thief or muggers charge is reported on are they gonna be entitled to sue for compensation. In serious cases like your example it makes complete sense but once you put rules and laws in place suddenly everything is potentially covered and you end up in a web of rules and exemptions to untangle and manage

Charged with murder for doing his job

Is it definitely the officer who tasered him who’s being charged?

Apparently Atkinson was ill with heart problems before this incident..the murder charge is so wrong.

Steve1956 wrote:Apparently Atkinson was ill with heart problems before this incident..the murder charge is so wrong.

On the surface yes, but presumably there are very strong grounds for a prosecution, so maybe it's not so simple (black and white) as we generally assume. Maybe use of the Taser is only part of the story- especially as apparently it's 2 officers charged with serious offences.
I always think it's best in these cases not to speculate.
It's a very sad case whatever the outcome.

They will never get a murder charge to stick.

How do you prove he set out to kill him?

If the charge is reduced to manslaughter and if the officer is found guilty, does this mark the end of the Taser? Cos if I was a police officer and was given a weapon to use that could kill someone and I was using it under the direction of a senior officer, knowing that if the worst happened I would be facing a charge of murder or manslaughter, I would be loathe to use that weapon.

I dont know the exact circumstances surrounding the tasering but would be very surprised if he wasnt warned prior to being tasered....if he knew he had heart issues then surely best not resist arrest if that is what he did ?

Steve1956 wrote:Apparently Atkinson was ill with heart problems before this incident..the murder charge is so wrong.

How do you know the charge is wrong? Are you privy to more information than the Crown Prosecution Service and Independent Office for Police Conduct?

I'm wondering weather the officer(s) didn't follow correct procedure in some way or used the tazer wrongly or inappropriately as I tend to agree that if all was done properly, no one could have foreseen the tragic outcome. Having said that it could well mark a serious re think on the use of these things.

Rileybobs wrote:How do you know the charge is wrong? Are you privy to more information than the Crown Prosecution Service and Independent Office for Police Conduct?

Ok the guy was doing his job,he didnt go out to murder the fella,I'm sorry I made a comment.

Steve1956 wrote:Ok the guy was doing his job,he didnt go out to murder the fella,I'm sorry I commented.

No need to be sorry you commented, were you not expecting anyone to reply to you though?

You can still murder someone whilst doing your job, and with all due respect nobody knows if he went out to murder the fella.

Like I say, the CPS and the IOPC will have a lot more information to hand than either you or I so I'm not sure how you can categorically say that the murder charge is wrong?

Dark Cloud wrote:I'm wondering weather the officer(s) didn't follow correct procedure in some way or used the tazer wrongly or inappropriately as I tend to agree that if all was done properly, no one could have foreseen the tragic outcome. Having said that it could well mark a serious re think on the use of these things.

I have commented a few times on the use of taser, and am very interested to see the outcome of this case.
There must have been more to the incident than the actual Taser part of it.

Nobody has ever died as a result of the actual Taser deployment, i.e the electrical side of things. Although it is up to 50,000 volts, the ampage, the thing that kills you if you start licking plug sockets is ridiculously low, something like 0.001 or something.

People that have died as a result of a taser incident have usually had a secondary injury, such as a fall, which is sometimes, and very very rarely, the unfortunate reaction of the muscles contracting between the probes, and associated loss of balance.

There are cases where people with pre existing heart conditions, as seems to be the case with Atkinson's, which have been affected by the current from the device. In these occasions, quite how an officer is expected to know this when being faced with extreme violence I'm not sure.

I feel people need to be educated about Taser to show that it is deemed a less lethal use of force than some hand to hand combat or the Police Baton, which is essentially a metal stick for hitting. There are no long lasting effects from Taser and apart from the uncomfortable pain from the actual deployment of it, and the removal of the tiny barbs from the skin when invariably in cuffs.
Compare that with a shiner, or broken nose from being punched, or bruising from being hit with a baton, and it is exactly why most Police forces are rolling them out to every officer who wants one within the next 3-5 years.

ClaretFelix wrote:I have commented a few times on the use of taser, and am very interested to see the outcome of this case.
There must have been more to the incident than the actual Taser part of it.

Nobody has ever died as a result of the actual Taser deployment, i.e the electrical side of things. Although it is up to 50,000 volts, the ampage, the thing that kills you if you start licking plug sockets is ridiculously low, something like 0.001 or something.

People that have died as a result of a taser incident have usually had a secondary injury, such as a fall, which is sometimes, and very very rarely, the unfortunate reaction of the muscles contracting between the probes, and associated loss of balance.

There are cases where people with pre existing heart conditions, as seems to be the case with Atkinson's, which have been affected by the current from the device. In these occasions, quite how an officer is expected to know this when being faced with extreme violence I'm not sure.

I feel people need to be educated about Taser to show that it is deemed a less lethal use of force than some hand to hand combat or the Police Baton, which is essentially a metal stick for hitting. There are no long lasting effects from Taser and apart from the uncomfortable pain from the actual deployment of it, and the removal of the tiny barbs from the skin when invariably in cuffs.
Compare that with a shiner, or broken nose from being punched, or bruising from being hit with a baton, and it is exactly why most Police forces are rolling them out to every officer who wants one within the next 3-5 years.

Yes, that's the point I was making i.e. unless someone attending this scene has done something daft, it appears ON THE SURFACE that it's simply a very unfortunate and tragic outcome and how any officer is expected to know in advance about a person's underlying medical conditions I don't know, but no doubt we'll see. My belief is that the original development and use of tasers transferred from the US where it has probably been a great "development" since restraining difficult/potentially dangerous people previously would either mean a baton beating (as you say) or perhaps more likely "if in doubt, draw your gun and fire". Restraining a seriously uncooperative customer without endangering yourself, the public and the customer himself is probably pretty nigh impossible tbh, but whether tasers are the answer may well be called into question at this trial.

You don't have to intend to kill, you need to have intent to cause serious harm or injury and the result of the actions is the unlawful death. If a police officer used excessive force with intent to cause serious harm and he died as a result of that force it would be murder because the force would be unlawful. If the police officer was reasonable in the amount of force used for the circumstances it wouldn't be an offence of any kind. Given the inquiry and now laying of charges it sounds like the officer probably went beyond what could be classed as reasonable so it would then be up to a jury to decide if the actions warrant the murder charge or a manslaughter charge if he is also charged with that (which is usual).

If the officer arrived and he had a genuine concern that DA could cause an immediate threat to others or himself, then using a taser would likely be reasonable (I don't know the guidelines). If DA was just distressed and incoherent / unresponsive and not threatening, and in particular if the officer was made aware of any health issues then using the taser wouldn't be reasonable, and if he then died then murder would be an appropriate charge for a jury to consider. Until the full facts are known its impossible to say what charge is appropriate but I think the CPS would be far more cautious in charging a police officer during the discharge of his duties than it would a member of the public.

Devils_Advocate wrote:Not agreeing or disagreeing but how do you enforce the practicality of this. How many people are charged with some sort of crime and go to court across the country each day that is reported in local news and online.

Who is gonna police this and if some petty thief or muggers charge is reported on are they gonna be entitled to sue for compensation. In serious cases like your example it makes complete sense but once you put rules and laws in place suddenly everything is potentially covered and you end up in a web of rules and exemptions to untangle and manage

Totally agree mate. Even when I was writing that I was thinking about how it would be policed. In the perfect world (which we don't have) it would be more for 'serious' crime but then what is serious? Murder,rape, major robbery, terrorism etc. of course but then would we dismiss the robbing of someone's house and the invasion of property not serious? To victims of that is IS serious. We would be left then with ALL accused being anonymous (which would possibly be easier to police than being selective), again a possible option. But then we would be left with the press screaming that they have been silenced and in a way they would be right, although they could still report on a trial without giving names. That leaves the policing of foreign media and the internet. Of course they wouldn't bother with 'petty criminals' but then the major crimes, the ones they would deal with, are the ones that wind up staining people's lives after they are proven innocent.

An absolute minefield I agree.

In the current climate there’s no way the CPS would let a black mans death via a police officer go without the full mechanics of the law. Perhaps it was murder ? time ( and a jury )will tell, though surely this ends up as manslaughter ? . It’s ironic that we have arguably the softest physically weakest most touchy feely police force the world over armed with only little useless batons and a minority with tasers , yet some think the police are “ brutal “ I’m no police apologist but they should all have tasers

AlargeClaret wrote:In the current climate there’s no way the CPS would let a black mans death via a police officer go without the full mechanics of the law. Perhaps it was murder ? time ( and a jury )will tell, though surely this ends up as manslaughter ? . It’s ironic that we have arguably the softest physically weakest most touchy feely police force the world over armed with only little useless batons and a minority with tasers , yet some think the police are “ brutal “ I’m no police apologist but they should all have tasers

Haven't they all got them bud? Genuine question because I thought they had.

I seem to remember at the time there were reports of inappropriate use of force in restraining him so I'm not sure whether this is just in relation to being shot with a taser or more beyond that.

Herts Clarets wrote:If the charge is reduced to manslaughter and if the officer is found guilty, does this mark the end of the Taser? Cos if I was a police officer and was given a weapon to use that could kill someone and I was using it under the direction of a senior officer, knowing that if the worst happened I would be facing a charge of murder or manslaughter, I would be loathe to use that weapon.

He may have been using it unlawfuly. By many reports atkinson was unarmed and posing no threat.

houseboy wrote:Haven't they all got them bud? Genuine question because I thought they had.

No, it requires extra training as well because even though several seem to be talking them down they can injury and the use of them has to appropriate.

Also, there's nothing useless about a police baton. Those things could easily kill. I know I have no intention of getting hit with one.

houseboy wrote:Haven't they all got them bud? Genuine question because I thought they had.

You need specific taser training to carry one.
I hope it’s not like the pepper spray training where the police recruits all have to experience what it’s like to have pepper spray in your eyes.
As someone said they do all carry the batons and receive training for these. These are heavy duty weapons and would definitely cause some damage if you got hit with one of them.

Aren't all police supposed to wear body cams now when dealing with incidents like that?

Quickenthetempo wrote:They will never get a murder charge to stick.

How do you prove he set out to kill him?

That's why he'll go free...

A friend quit the armed police because he said they could see this coming, however he did think it would be a firearm.

I will be interested if he is now going to hand in his taser, he kept that license live.

ClaretFelix wrote:I have commented a few times on the use of taser, and am very interested to see the outcome of this case.
There must have been more to the incident than the actual Taser part of it.

Nobody has ever died as a result of the actual Taser deployment, i.e the electrical side of things. Although it is up to 50,000 volts, the ampage, the thing that kills you if you start licking plug sockets is ridiculously low, something like 0.001 or something.

People that have died as a result of a taser incident have usually had a secondary injury, such as a fall, which is sometimes, and very very rarely, the unfortunate reaction of the muscles contracting between the probes, and associated loss of balance.

There are cases where people with pre existing heart conditions, as seems to be the case with Atkinson's, which have been affected by the current from the device. In these occasions, quite how an officer is expected to know this when being faced with extreme violence I'm not sure.

I feel people need to be educated about Taser to show that it is deemed a less lethal use of force than some hand to hand combat or the Police Baton, which is essentially a metal stick for hitting. There are no long lasting effects from Taser and apart from the uncomfortable pain from the actual deployment of it, and the removal of the tiny barbs from the skin when invariably in cuffs.
Compare that with a shiner, or broken nose from being punched, or bruising from being hit with a baton, and it is exactly why most Police forces are rolling them out to every officer who wants one within the next 3-5 years.

Bang on the money.

Taser doesn’t kill, it’s a pre-existing condition, or secondary fall that does the damage.

I carry taser, and I have absolute confidence in it. I’d much rather, as an officer, use my taser than have to get my baton out, which I avoid at all costs (if I can).

Any use of force used by police officers has to be reasonable and proportionate. I’m not going to comment on this individual case, but to be charged with murder, and I can only guess at this, then the use of force has been called into question.

I’ve had a few run ins with the IOPC in my time, and I don’t have a good word to say about them. I’ll be very interested to see what the outcome is at court.

Whatever the circumstances of the case, I think we all know what the outcome will be.

AlargeClaret wrote:In the current climate there’s no way the CPS would let a black mans death via a police officer go without the full mechanics of the law. Perhaps it was murder ? time ( and a jury )will tell, though surely this ends up as manslaughter ? . It’s ironic that we have arguably the softest physically weakest most touchy feely police force the world over armed with only little useless batons and a minority with tasers , yet some think the police are “ brutal “ I’m no police apologist but they should all have tasers

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/sites/ ... 201718.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Look at the facts, and judge for yourself. Our police don't carry guns, but there are a lot of cases of deaths in custody, and that should be alarming.

Death or incidents after Police contact is up to 72hrs following this contact.
That's 3 days. A long time given the lifestyle choice of a lot of the Police's regular customers

ClaretFelix wrote:Death or incidents after Police contact is up to 72hrs following this contact.
That's 3 days. A long time given the lifestyle choice of a lot of the Police's regular customers

People - especially the most vulnerable of people - shouldn't die in police custody. I'm not blaming the police, but our government for not providing the funding for mental health, and not providing the police with the resource to deal with all of it.

Rileybobs wrote:How do you know the charge is wrong? Are you privy to more information than the Crown Prosecution Service and Independent Office for Police Conduct?

This...

TVC15 wrote:You need specific taser training to carry one.
I hope it’s not like the pepper spray training where the police recruits all have to experience what it’s like to have pepper spray in your eyes.
As someone said they do all carry the batons and receive training for these. These are heavy duty weapons and would definitely cause some damage if you got hit with one of them.

I was talking to a policeman once and he said he had been tasered as part of the training but I don't know if they all do. I asked him what it was like and he said it's pretty much like having extreme cramp all over your body. Sounds bloody awful.

This is not sounding good...

Ex-Aston Villa star Dalian Atkinson died after being tasered three times and kicked at least twice to the head by an "angry" police officer, a murder trial jury has heard.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... w7ftZHUsuc

It will be interesting to see on what grounds he'll be absolved from all blame.

AC12 are all over this.

Reported the Police Officer over-rode the standard 5 second taser limit and applied the taser for 33 seconds; further the officer is reported to have kicked DA twice in the head with sufficient force to leave the imprints of the boot laces there.

If those are facts it's not hard to understand the charges, perhaps a little less easy to understand why it'd taken almost 5 years to come to trial.

Hopefully we follow Americas Example and the Kicking Copper gets Life.

tim_noone wrote: ↑

Tue May 04, 2021 4:06 pm

Hopefully we follow Americas Example and the Kicking Copper gets Life.

Hopefully we follow the British example and let the trial take place first

Bordeauxclaret wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 07, 2019 1:03 pm

Is it definitely the officer who tasered him who’s being charged?

Yes, the same one who thereafter allegedly kicked his head in; we must await the evidence and the jury's decision, but on face value at least those actions combined sound to warrant a charge of a murder.

Sounds horrific.
No excuse for booting someone in the head.

claptrappers_union wrote: ↑

Tue May 04, 2021 2:28 pm

This is not sounding good...

Ex-Aston Villa star Dalian Atkinson died after being tasered three times and kicked at least twice to the head by an "angry" police officer, a murder trial jury has heard.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... w7ftZHUsuc

It's "not sounding good" because that's the case for the prosecution. It's job of the prosecution to make it "not sound good".

It will be the job of the defence to make it sound like an unhappy accident or some other cause.

That's how it works.

Bordeauxclaret wrote: ↑

Tue May 04, 2021 4:52 pm

Sounds horrific.
No excuse for ALLEGEDLY booting someone in the head.

At this point in time.

True, there could be multiple ways his laces left an imprint on his head.
I for one look forward to hearing them.

evensteadiereddie wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 07, 2019 10:11 pm

Whatever the circumstances of the case, I think we all know what the outcome will be.

I'm not sure we do tbh.

That's the point of the trial.

We've heard all this before.

"They won't allow us to vote Brexit. And even if we do, they won't allow us to leave."

"They won't allow Barak Obama to win the election. They'll never allow a black man to be president of the USA."

If you don't like the verdict, you could at least wait until it's been delivered to decide the fact.