Complaints against officers

[Fedster + 1,307]

'They charged me so I'm charging them'.

 

Date - 1st October 2018
By - JJ Hutber- Police Oracle

1 Comment

 

Four Metropolitan Police Service officers were summoned to a misconduct hearing this morning to answer allegations they followed a man into a tube station then hit him with a baton and used CS spray in 2014.

MPS PCs PC Louise Coleman, based at Roads and Transport Policing Command, PC Jade Lubin based at Trident and Area Crime, PC Jack Douglass based at West Area Command, PC Gulbadan Aulakh based at West Area Command were sent to help late at night on March 11, 2014 when Victor William refused to get off a route 140 bus.

He had topped up his Oyster card earlier that day but the card reader “beeped” when he got on his bus home. Mr William offered to pay his fare with a £20 note but the bus driver did not have any change to give him.

At this point, Mr William, 53, growing frustrated, sat down and refused to move - so the bus driver called the police.

The officers and Mr William differ over why they went into Northolt Underground Station with him but agree PC Aulakh spoke with the station supervisor on his behalf before the altercation happened.

“I was very frustrated at the situation because the bus driver and the police driver would not listen to reason. I felt with my receipts I was in the right," Mr William told the hearing.

“I felt that for no reason, I said to them on the bus I didn’t commit no crime, and they followed me like I committed a crime.”

He admits PC Aulakh was “trying to help me” when he spoke to the station supervisor but said PC Lubin was “blatantly antagonising me…constantly saying you had to walk, you’re not going to do this, you’re not going to do that".

“She was angry in her face, repeating the same thing over and over again. The voice was slightly raised with assertiveness within the voice.

“Obviously I felt there must have been some kind of crime I committed somewhere, else they shouldn’t have been there.

“I was frustrated about how I’d had to walk home and so forth and I don’t know why she [PC Lubin] was bantering with me and so forth.

"I just suddenly felt myself going backwards, obviously I felt pushing. I sprang from going straight backwards onto my feet. Then I got angry.”

He told the hearing after being almost pushed off his feet he was only trying to defend himself.

During evidence he became so emotional proceedings had to be paused while he gave evidence.

“I swung a couple of times to make sure everybody gets away from me. I punched out to make sure everybody that was around me moved back," he said.

“I didn’t know who I connected with and so forth, I just swang out. I didn’t really care. Anger, rage, frustrations, numerous feelings all at the same time.  

“I just wanted everyone away from me.

“Initially it worked for a little while. These things happen in microseconds. Everybody went back and then everyone attacked me.

“I remember three of them coming towards me, the same three.  

“They were just hitting me and I was fighting back.”

Mr William was convicted in May 2014 of assaulting the police officers but in April 2015 he won a crown court appeal against the judgement and made a formal complaint against the officers.

In July 2015 the MPS decided not to uphold the complaint, but after Mr William went to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (now the Independent Office for Police Conduct), the force was directed to hold a misconduct hearing.

The officers all deny the allegations against them and PC Coleman says she never laid a hand on Mr William - she said she went to handcuff him but was punched in the head over her handcuffs so hard she fell over.

The officers argue they went inside the underground station with Mr William at his request, to help negotiate with Transport for London staff.

PC Aulakh and PC Douglass first made physical contact with Mr William when they saw him “moving aggressively” towards PC Lubin, using “very gentle force” to push him away from their colleague.

PC Aulakh said in evidence given at court and in a statement taken after Mr William’s complaint that he was “scared for my safety and colleague’s safety.

“I saw him walking toward Jade very angry, I stepped forward and grabbed his left hand. PC Douglass had his right hand. I moved him back I thought he was going to harm Jade. Next minute he kicked and punched PC Douglass.”

PC Douglass said in previous evidence he saw Mr William walk up to PC Lubin “right in her personal space, wagging his finger in her face and said he was going to carry out his earlier threat and hurt her. My hand was flat on his stomach - it was like a flat hand shove.

“I placed my right hand on the stomach area, the use of force was incredibly low and was used to stop him advancing rather than push him back. It was quite a commotion.

“I place my right hand on his stomach area to try and create space between the two of them. I thought he was very aggressive in the way he approached her.

“He turned to me and kicked me on the left shin. Hit me, bursting my lip." 

PC Lubin said in a previous statement she tried explaining to Mr William he could make a complaint to TfL and asked if there was anything else they could do.

“He said 'no, you’re not leaving'. He came up to me, squared up to me and said something like 'you’re annoying me - now I’m going to hit you'.

“His face was scrunched up, he had anger in his eyes. I genuinely thought he was about to headbutt me.

“I don’t know why Mr William was acting this way, why his behaviour had changed. I felt quite scared."

She said she hit him several times with her baton as he fought with her fellow PCs and “tried to hit whatever area was available, I was trying to avoid my colleagues".

PC Aulakh used CS spray to disable Mr William and eventually detained him with the help of other police officers who were called to their aid.

A statement given by the bus driver described how Mr William was “aggressive, his voice was raised and I was frightened about what this male might be capable of doing”.

A separate statement given by the station supervisor said he was “shocked” when Mr William “punched and kicked” the officers while when he first came into the station he was calm.

View On Police Oracle

[Radman + 2,163]

All of this could have been avoided had they ejected him lawfully under the TFL byelaws and then just arrested him for Obstruct Police when he kicked off and refused to leave escalating the situation.

Met cops have their own set of very powerful byelaws at their disposal much like we routinely utilise on the railway when on TFL Buses... The difference being our byelaws are enforced (or atleast were enforced until regularly before NICHE complicated file building.)

I had a job where a bloke refused to get out of a taxi in the rank because he had no money to pay, blocking the entire station front, we were called over and repeatedly asked the man to leave along with the station manager because of the disruption he was causing, continued refusal so we went hands on and tried to eject him from rail property only for him to massively kick off, arrested for the byelaw offences (6&13) but also crucially obstruct police... When a constable enforces a byelaw and they're specifically written into the legislation as authorised person's to enforce it, it becomes part of their duties, any obstruction or resistance from that point on is obstructing a constable in the execution of their duty. 

Cops laugh at byelaws and their utilisation but the reality is as a cop who police's a specialised industry or area where byelaws are in effect they literally are an insurance policy against these sorts of complaints... Learn them, know them, use them and when necessary arrest for them when all other options have been exhausted.

[ParochialYokal 1,119]

I’m slightly puzzled and may have skimmed over the article but he is 54 years old man that you would expect to have some wisdom and not done 14 year old boy whom doesn’t act rationally.

 

You can’t throw a tantrum when your Oyster Card doesn’t top up and then expect the world to bend over backwards for you.

 

 

 

 

[Radman + 2,163]

56 minutes ago, ParochialYokal said:

I’m slightly puzzled and may have skimmed over the article but he is 54 years old man that you would expect to have some wisdom and not done 14 year old boy whom doesn’t act rationally.

 

You can’t throw a tantrum when your Oyster Card doesn’t top up and then expect the world to bend over backwards for you.

 

 

 

 

In this case however the world did bend and he did win in the end.

Some of the strangest, obstructive individuals I've met on duty have been folk over the age 40 who think for whatever reason the world revolves around them.

[bensonby + 3,503]

There is so much to say around this case. I might say a little once the hearing is over. 

[DB11 + 224]

Why was the conviction overturned? I can't find anything on the Internet about the appeal

[Fedster + 1,307]

If this bus moves I'll mash you up' alleged victim of officer assault said

Man was planning an all-night sit-in protest on a bus over Oyster card mishap.

 

Date - 2nd October 2018
By - JJ Hutber- Police Oracle

 

A youth worker who accuses four Met Police officers of attacking him ‘for no reason’ told a misconduct hearing he threatened to beat them up beforehand.

Victor William, 53, alleges PC Louise Coleman, based at Roads and Transport Policing Command, PC Jade Lubin based at Trident and Area Crime, PC Jack Douglas based at West Area Command, PC Gulbadan Aulakh based at West Area Command followed him into Northolt Underground Station on March 11, 2014 and assaulted him without cause.

Mr William was convicted for assaulting the officers in 2014 but won a crown court appeal the following year.

He was trying to board a route 140 bus when his Oyster card beeped as it had insufficient credit. 

Mr William was insistent his card should have enough money for the journey and refused to get off the bus. He sat on the bus for so long it was taken out of service and police were called.

Despite his initial evidence he had no idea why the officers went with him into the station, Mr William said at a Met Police misconduct hearing yesterday at the Empress State Building in west London.

He conceded his bus home pulled up at the stop every eight minutes and it would have taken him just over 15 minutes to walk home, even with the heavy bag he was carrying that night.

Mr William also said he was willing to make the bus driver stay at the bus stop all night as he felt he had already paid his fare and was being unfairly treated.

Lawyer for the officers Kevin Baumber put it to Mr William he only agreed to leave the bus “when they agreed to accompany you”.

“Maybe in more fancy language, that’s right”, he responded.

“You said the bus better be here when I get back or I’ll mash you up,” Mr Baumber said.

 “You meant the beat you up version.”

“I did,” he confirmed.  

He said he made the comment in “pure frustration” and included it in a letter of complaint to the MPS in April 2015 in the “jubilation” of winning his appeal and “being able to justify myself and put something on paper and do my best to get the officers arrested”.

A statement he made in October 2017 did not use those words and said he got off the bus because he felt “intimidated by the officers” and hit them to protect himself.

“Isn’t what you’re doing between these accounts changing to remove things that sound as if you’re aggressive and adding things that do not?” Mr Baumber asked him.

He said Mr William’s April 2015 account of when he became “extremely angry” was while being pushed by PC Douglass and PC Aulakh but this changes to after.

“Was this a drafting error or do you accept the time you were extremely angry was when you were pushed back?”

“I remember being pushed back by three people at the same time,” he responded.  

Mr Baumber also suggested Mr William was asked a leading question by the Isleworth Crown Court Recorder.

“This idea of protecting or defending yourself was only something you start to describe at the crown court appeal. At the magistrates court you just said the police were in your way.

“In the crown court transcript you are asked: Mr William I’d just like you to answer one question. What is the nature of your defence and you say I was provoked.  Are you saying self defence?

“You say yes. You are asked do you accept it was your action that caused the injuries, might it be your case the four of them in very close proximity to you thought the four of them were going to do something to you? You acted in self defence?

“That is where it comes from. That is where the four of them being close, that’s where all of that comes from. It’s the judge and not your experience on the night.”

Mr William said: “That’s my experience. Provoked is on a scale. It could mean someone saying you’ve got a big nose, someone tapping you on the back of your head. Provoked.”

“I cannot say I was not frustrated. There was frustration on the bus. I wasn’t angry, I wasn’t mad. It was frustration. I wasn’t thinking about who I’m hitting. I just make sure that everyone that was in my vicinity [inaudible].  

“If your people are around you they make you feel they have the authority to make you do things. Yes it’s intimidating, it’s frightening and so forth.

“Most people, animals, insects maybe even some sort of bacteria would defend themselves if someone comes towards them in an aggresive manner.

“Even if they’re persuading me it’s still wrong. I’m sitting here. If four people surrounded me and tried to persuade me gently would you think it’s not intimatding and so forth. With four people does it not become gang related?”  

He said he had no memory of the officers warning him they were going to use a baton and CS Spray against him.

Neither did he have any memory of hitting PC Coleman in the head as she went to handcuff him.

The police officers’ case is PC Aulakh and PC Douglass gently pushed Mr William back when he approached PC Lubin with a clenched first and he then rounded on them and violently resisted arrest.

View On Oracle

 

 

 

[Zulu 22 + 4,569]

The report seems to make clear that someone is committing perjury having changed their story several times. Once even prompted by the Judge at the appeal. It seems that it is an act of bravery for a Youth Worker to hit a female officer. Someone here should feel ashamed and it is not the officers.

[Radman + 2,163]

The way the situation came about is through what can only be described as utter stupidity. A regular bus route or a 15minute walk home and this man caused utter chaos over his Oyster card failing to work properly?

I can understand peoples frustrations when they are about to miss their last train at night or it's an infrequent service with long waits between, this is something I encounter daily with passengers who have incorrect tickets or maybe have in someway upset a sensitive conductor but having a fit over a bus journey and then inconveniencing everyone else around them for no reason at all is simply silly and selfish.

Reading between the lines this seems like one of those occasions where body worn would have been very useful as Mr William seems to have been totally unreasonable from the very beginning. 

Edited October 2, 2018 by Radman

[Fedster + 1,307]

Man who accuses officers of assault didn't 'understand Oyster card', hearing told

Victor William wanted to do 'everything he could to get the officers arrested'.

The hearing is being held at the Empress State Building

Date - 2nd October 2018
By - JJ Hutber- Police Oracle

 

The Metropolitan Police Service has “no evidence” four officers followed a man into a tube station and attacked him, their lawyer told a misconduct hearing this morning.

At about 10.30pm on March 11, 2014 PC Louise Coleman, based at Roads and Transport Policing Command, PC Jade Lubin based at Trident and Area Crime, PC Jack Douglass based at West Area Command, PC Gulbadan Aulakh based at West Area Command were called to help a bus driver with a passenger who was refusing to leave over a dispute about his Oyster card.

Victor William alleges the four officers followed him into Northolt Underground Station for no apparent reason, PC Lubin deliberately goaded him and then all four rounded on him in a violent attack.

He was convicted of assaulting the officers in spring 2014 but won a crown court appeal in April 2015 and made a formal complaint about the officers a few days later.

Kevin Baumber, counsel for the officers, submitted an application of no case to answer this morning which the misconduct panel is currently considering.

“The evidence taken at its highest leaves you short of any possible finding of proof in terms in terms of whether there was misconduct on the bus,” he said.

“The police were called to an aggressive person that caused the driver to be frightened.

“There are pehaps two elements to the way in which Mr William says he was spoken to by PC Lubin.

“The evidence we heard distilled is that the height of that allegation is a reference to PC Lubin to Mr William having to walk home. That was correct advice.

“We learned [Mr William] still doesn’t understand an Oyster card is somewhere to put credit and we learned it’s impossible to explain that to him.

“Mr Williams admits there was no shouting or swearing or threatening. There was nothing on the CCTV to support a finding of antagonistic or intimidating wards so there’s no case to answer. “

PC Coleman “never touched” Mr William, he said.

“She’s not alleged to be a party to the first pushback, she never engaged with Mr William while others touching and only withdrew her handcuffs after Mr William had been violent to multiple colleagues.

“The evidence of the CCTV is she approached him gradually and receives a debilitating punch to the face which takes her out of action.

“Unless the panel is of the view it is excessive force to approach someone with handcuffs after one has kicked and punched another.”

The officers argue PC Douglass and PC Aulakh gently pushed back Mr William when he “squared up” to PC Lubin with a clenched fist and that he responded violently.

Yesterday the hearing, held at the Empress State Building in west London, heard Mr Baumber question Mr William on his understanding of his Oyster card.

Mr William’s card “beeped” insufficient funds on March 11, 2014 but he was insistent he had paid for his bus journey and refused to move because he had topped up the card earlier that day.

“Do you carry the understanding to this day you had already paid for this bus journey?” Mr Baumber asked.  

“Yes I knew I wasn’t getting off [the bus]. I already paid," he replied.

“I didn’t think I paid for it I know I paid for it. The Oyster was topped up.

“I felt that it was completely wrong. I’ve got the receipt to show you. I sat down and said do what you’ve got to do.”

Counsel for the MPS Stephen Morley resisted the application on behalf of the force.

He said: “There is clear evidence from Mr William about what happened. Taking the evidence at its highest Mr William has described being assaulted by these officers.

“The starting point is of a generally intimidating approach that they took toward Mr William.

“He couldn’t understand why they were following him the four of them standing around him in that little dead end corner.

“He had done nothing wrong. There was no need for four police officers to be standing around him in the way that they were.

“This man was just going home. It’s half past ten at night. Within a few minutes of coming off the bus he has been hit by a metal baton, a serious use of force.”

He said while there is no evidence to show PC Coleman ever directly laid hands on Mr William she “doesn’t dispute she was going to put hands on him”.

“She took out her handcuffs as part of what’s going on, she is one of the four officers that have behaved in an intimidating manner and had intention of using force.

“The only reason she wasn’t able to do that is Mr William defending himself and moves her out of the way.”  

The MPS was directed to hold the hearing by the Independent Office for Police Conduct after initially refusing to uphold Mr William's complaint

View On Police Oracle

[HazRat 762]

3 hours ago, Fedster said:

Even if they’re persuading me it’s still wrong. I’m sitting here. If four people surrounded me and tried to persuade me gently would you think it’s not intimatding and so forth. With four people does it not become gang related?

Er no, it doesn’t become gang related.

 

3 hours ago, Fedster said:

He said he had no memory of the officers warning him they were going to use a baton and CS Spray against him.

 Neither did he have any memory of hitting PC Coleman in the head as she went to handcuff him.

How convenient. He remembers them (apparently) assaulting him, but not him assaulting them.

[Zulu 22 + 4,569]

So the IOPC directed that the hearing be held, typical. As one who has been subject of the same, they overstep the mark and ignore evidence. In my case it had a happy ending and I was commended on my actions. I came out of it smelling of roses but cannot describe the uncertainty and worry that it brings for months and months. The IOPC  and the CPS have completely different standards of proof for prosecuting. A waste of time and money.

I await the decision on the sum is sion with interest.

[Private * 0]

On 01/10/2018 at 17:07, Radman said:

All of this could have been avoided had they ejected him lawfully under the TFL byelaws and then just arrested him for Obstruct Police when he kicked off and refused to leave escalating the situation.

Met cops have their own set of very powerful byelaws at their disposal much like we routinely utilise on the railway when on TFL Buses... The difference being our byelaws are enforced (or atleast were enforced until regularly before NICHE complicated file building.)

I had a job where a bloke refused to get out of a taxi in the rank because he had no money to pay, blocking the entire station front, we were called over and repeatedly asked the man to leave along with the station manager because of the disruption he was causing, continued refusal so we went hands on and tried to eject him from rail property only for him to massively kick off, arrested for the byelaw offences (6&13) but also crucially obstruct police... When a constable enforces a byelaw and they're specifically written into the legislation as authorised person's to enforce it, it becomes part of their duties, any obstruction or resistance from that point on is obstructing a constable in the execution of their duty. 

Cops laugh at byelaws and their utilisation but the reality is as a cop who police's a specialised industry or area where byelaws are in effect they literally are an insurance policy against these sorts of complaints... Learn them, know them, use them and when necessary arrest for them when all other options have been exhausted.

I thought TfL byelaws only covered trains, taxis and trams? 

[bensonby + 3,503]

There are byelaws covering bus stations: I'm not sure whether the bus stop(s) outside that tube station would be covered. The Public Service Vehicles (Conduct of Drivers, Inspectors, Conductors and Passengers) Regulations 1990 would cover the circumstances though.

[Radman + 2,163]

52 minutes ago, Private said:

I thought TfL byelaws only covered trains, taxis and trams? 

There are byelaws that cover bus stations and specialist pieces of legislation that cover then aswell.

Which is strange considering I don't believe there are any such "bus byelaws" outside of London.