London Police use new technique for moto crime

They won't shoot your ass but they'll sure as heck run it over! Like it, don't do the crime if ya...

Pat

Works for me.

Had a buddy in middle school that tried to run from the Warren, MI Police on his dirt bike.

They caught him.

Came to school on Monday with a severely messed up looking face and a major adjustment in his previously macho attitude. lol!

You never, NEVER run from the cops.

Interesting video clips but, in the event of bodily injury or death to the rider/passenger or pedestrians/onlookers, would likely result in significant liability to police departments and governments if they did that in this country. Not much different than why high speed chases for minor crimes don't happen much anymore. Also, too similar to shooting a fleeing suspect. Maybe in the old west, but not today.

Good points Randy but, I think when crime has no punishment it usually breeds more crime. JMO.

Pat

Agree that crime needs appropriate punishment, but not before a trial and proof of guilt.

I think that in the US most municipalities would face too many big $$$ settlements if it couldn't be shown immanent danger to the public was the justification for running the two wheeler over..

A motorcyclist speeding through the neighborhood isn't enough. Maybe if the lawman was able to get well in front of the rider and block his path and said scofflaw failed to manage a safe stop and hit the squad, but running the bike over is a grey area that begs for a lawsuit. Even if a liability injury settlement didn't happen, public relations would suffer. Since you can't out run a Motorola defense attorneys would point this out as the safest way to reprehend a scofflaw and the bad guy gets a pay day from a sympathetic jury..

Yeah but you to catch them first. Sometimes a rough period is necessary to change societal behaviors. In the USA criminals are more blatant than ever. People need to be fearful of committing crime. It is amazing how many habitual criminals, many violent ones, running around free. A detective showed me the criminal record of a guy suspected of breaking into my office. There were at least 30 crimes listed. He kept getting slapped on the wrist and committing more crimes. Not sure what the answer is, but what we are doing isn't working.

When I was active duty, "apprehension and escape" were a justification for the use of deadly force when the "suspect" was "believed" to have committed a serious offense.......mugging is in my mind, a serious offense. I don't see an issue with they way they are "knocking" down the suspects. I've gone under two axles and survived, even had a BFG mud terrain tire mark bruising on my back, certainly these low speed hits will leave a few bumps and bruises but they'll be able to sit at a trial.

Yeah but you to catch them first. Sometimes a rough period is necessary to change societal behaviors. In the USA criminals are more blatant than ever. People need to be fearful of committing crime. It is amazing how many habitual criminals, many violent ones, running around free. A detective showed me the criminal record of a guy suspected of breaking into my office. There were at least 30 crimes listed. He kept getting slapped on the wrist and committing more crimes. Not sure what the answer is, but what we are doing isn't working.

You get a really Big BINGO for that thought! Everybody deserves a break in life but not 30 of them.

Pat

I'd be for this sort of punishment if it was going to be used equally across racial and economic lines.

It turns out banning lead in gasoline may have had a much bigger effect on crime than any police or sentencing guidelines have had.

Agree that crime needs appropriate punishment, but not before a trial and proof of guilt.

The "hard stop" is not a punishment. It's too bring to an end a pursuit. If the rider had stopped in the first place, no pursuit would have occured.

And as to suing the police; yep, that happens here too.........

I think that in the US most municipalities would face too many big $$$ settlements if it couldn't be shown immanent danger to the public was the justification for running the two wheeler over..

 

A motorcyclist speeding through the neighborhood isn't enough. Maybe if the lawman was able to get well in front of the rider and block his path and said scofflaw failed to manage a safe stop and hit the squad, but running the bike over is a grey area that begs for a lawsuit. Even if a liability injury settlement didn't happen, public relations would suffer. Since you can't out run a Motorola defense attorneys would point this out as the safest way to reprehend a scofflaw and the bad guy gets a pay day from a sympathetic jury..

Police - public relations have never been better on this particular topic. People were fed up to the back teeth with these feral youths, & most are just loving every such arrest.

I'd be for this sort of punishment if it was going to be used equally across racial and economic lines.

 

It turns out banning lead in gasoline may have had a much bigger effect on crime than any police or sentencing guidelines have had.

I have quite a few LEO friends. Statistics show where and who does most of the crime. Politicians and news papers have their facts. The ones who enforce the laws have theirs.

I'd be for this sort of punishment if it was going to be used equally across racial and economic lines.

 

It turns out banning lead in gasoline may have had a much bigger effect on crime than any police or sentencing guidelines have had.

I have quite a few LEO friends. Statistics show where and who does most of the crime. Politicians and news papers have their facts. The ones who enforce the laws have theirs.

Sorry, I don't buy that argument. If we can't agree on what is real and what isn't, everything comes down to force. Using rigorous analysis and separate oversight has made airline travel safer, given us vaccines and cell phones, and generally made the world a better place. Letting people do what they feel is right leads us to some very dark places, as people will always come up with justifications for their use (and retention) of power.

I'd be for this sort of punishment if it was going to be used equally across racial and economic lines.

 

It turns out banning lead in gasoline may have had a much bigger effect on crime than any police or sentencing guidelines have had.

I have quite a few LEO friends. Statistics show where and who does most of the crime. Politicians and news papers have their facts. The ones who enforce the laws have theirs.

With all due respect to LEOs, in the USA the 4th and 5th Amendment don't cite "statistics." Crashing into/running over fleeing unarmed motorcyclist suspects can reasonably (statistically?) be expected to kill/maim them before due process.

You can only use the least amount of force to bring someone into custody. Without knowing the offense the person is suspected of committing, I'd be very reluctant in encouraging the use of deadly force to arrest someone. My opinion may not be the most popular, but it is based on 30 yrs as a LEO. And yes, ramming someone driving a vehicle can easily be viewed as the application of deadly force, especially a two-wheeled vehicle. The agencies that utilize such procedures typically have very restrictive policies regarding them. Additionally, following such a use of force, an administrative review will follow. Just another joyful example of what an officer must keep in mind when deciding what force level to use when his/her a$$ is puckered tight. I'm glad I'm retired...

Good points guys, it is London and not the U.S. though, seriously doubt it would fly here. The article did say the police were 'specially trained', here's the entire article..

"Breathtaking footage shows police knocking moped muggers off their bikes in new tactics to stamp out the scooter crime-wave that has plagued London.

Dashcam video released today shows a squad of specially trained drivers carrying out so called 'tactical contacts', which involve tipping crooks off their scooters or dumping them on the bonnets of police cars.

One incredulous rider raises his hands in indignation after he is sent clattering to the ground, and another told police: 'I took my helmet off so I thought you'd stop chasing me.'

The Met says it only uses the tactic as a last resort to stop muggers who are a risk to pedestrians or putting police in danger.

Police say they are now carrying out 'tactical contacts' every day and have used the method 63 times so far.

Sergeant Tony McGovern, who is one of the specially-trained 'Scorpion' drivers using the tactic, said: 'They think that if they remove their helmets we'll stop the pursuit, sometimes we may but, as you can see, we have used tactical contact against riders without helmets.'

He said police drivers have to quickly weigh up the risk to the public and the rider before carrying out the manoeuvres, as fleeing criminals often ride along busy pavements or behind railings to evade capture.

The method has been rolled out around the country after a seemingly-unstoppable crime wave gripped the capital this year, with scooter yobs grabbing people's phones, watches and bags, smashing their way into jewellery shops and stabbing anyone who got in their way.

Some moped robbers have hit 30 victims in one hour alone, with those coming out of tube stations seen as an easy target. Police officers have also been injured by thieves riding directly into them.

Scotland Yard was previously frustrated in catching the criminals, who often discarded their helmets to make officers think twice before chasing them.

Victims of the spate of incidents included ex chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne and comedian Michael McIntyre, who was robbed of his Rolex by two men on a moped while parked outside his children's school.

But Scotland Yard chiefs have now vowed to get tough with the gangs as they attempt to take back control of the streets.

Met Commander Amanda Pearson said: 'There is a perception that if you remove your helmet or fail to stop for police when requested to do so we will not take any further course of action. This is untrue.

'The public quite rightly expects us to intervene to keep London safe. Our highly trained police drivers weigh up the risks and decide upon the most appropriate tactics in those circumstances.

'Offenders on mopeds and motorcycles who attempt to evade the police are making a choice that puts themselves and others at risk.

'So our message is clear: we can, we will and we do target those involved in moped and motorcycle crime at every opportunity.'

#metropolitanpolice #newtactics #mopedmuggers"

The Met says it only uses the tactic as a last resort to stop muggers who are a risk to pedestrians or putting police in danger.

This is similar to the justification used in the US for the PIT maneuver, i.e. when the pursuing LEO deliberately spins out the vehicle he's pursuing. The fleeing suspect/vehicle is then at risk for a violent crash that may injure occupants of that vehicle or bystanders. So LEOs usually don't do it unless the chase is getting dangerous, and then when they do it they try to choose their moment so as to minimize risk: pick a moment when the suspect's speed is lower (e.g. they've just rounded a tight corner), and/or when other vehicles aren't in the area. Looking at the video you linked to at the start of the thread, for the most part, the London interventions are done at fairly low speeds and low speed differentials, which reduces the risk of injuries; it's not like they're going head-to-head on the A25 motorway.

In Oklahoma. BIG problem with pick up truck theft , mostly Ford F150's for some reason, and the resulting high speed chase and or PIT maneuver.

Most of the idiots crash and run then the K9's get to go chew on them. Everyday occurrence.

In Oklahoma. BIG problem with pick up truck theft , mostly Ford F150's for some reason

High class thieves you've got out there...

Pat

Yup, the 4 door ones I'm guessin the owners leave the keys in them cause the thieves ain't smart enough

to by pass the security systems in the new trucks.

Just like the business here that left a new enclosed trailer out behind the store with no hitch lock or Denver boot and

was surprised that it was stolen. Video shows a newer pickup that backs up to the trailer and suspect hooks and goes.

Proply a stolen truck too.

The Met says it only uses the tactic as a last resort to stop muggers who are a risk to pedestrians or putting police in danger.

 

This is similar to the justification used in the US for the PIT maneuver, i.e. when the pursuing LEO deliberately spins out the vehicle he's pursuing. The fleeing suspect/vehicle is then at risk for a violent crash that may injure occupants of that vehicle or bystanders. So LEOs usually don't do it unless the chase is getting dangerous, and then when they do it they try to choose their moment so as to minimize risk: pick a moment when the suspect's speed is lower (e.g. they've just rounded a tight corner), and/or when other vehicles aren't in the area. Looking at the video you linked to at the start of the thread, for the most part, the London interventions are done at fairly low speeds and low speed differentials, which reduces the risk of injuries; it's not like they're going head-to-head on the A25 motorway.

Then there's this:

Gaisar shooting death

Multiple choice:

1. Perfect scenario for the PIT maneuver, could've saved a life.

2. Momma don't let your babies grow up to be cowboys!

3. According to the video on the third stop his vehicle was still moving and trying to pull away, again.

4. In the first paragraph, the 'editorial board' used the words "unaccountably, probably, and assumed".

5. The FBI? Really : )

6. The Washington Post? and an opinion piece at that.

7. All of the above..

Multiple choice:

 

3. According to the video on the third stop his vehicle was still moving and trying to pull away, again.

 

The key phrase is "trying to pull away" -- rolling at crawling speed away from the officers who were in no danger but became so personally pissed off that they decided summary execution was warranted.

Yes, FBI, really, since this killing was committed by federal officers who were pursuing (at low speed) a vehicle on federal park property. Thank goodness a Fairfax County officer caught the act on camera -- AND that the county police released it to the public -- or we'd know nothing of what happened and perhaps would never know.

Yes, this link was an editorial by the Post but all the related news articles are linked below it, unless you believe the editorial board writes all news stories?

Yes, unaccountable. To this day, the district congressman and both VA senators have been refused any meeting with the director of the FBI about this case or any information whatsoever.

Multiple choice:

 

3. According to the video on the third stop his vehicle was still moving and trying to pull away, again.

 

 

The key phrase is "trying to pull away" -- rolling at crawling speed away from the officers who were in no danger but became so personally pissed off that they decided summary execution was warranted.

 

.

Right, his hands weren't off the steering wheel and in the air signaling he gave up, and his car was still moving one would presume to evade capture. No, the key phrase is "the third stop". Google 'Police shot at traffic stop' on Youtube. I stopped counting at 30 in 3 pages. Yes there's plenty of adrenalin after an extended chase with Police who know all too well the possibilities, it's no time for games or testing their patience. The rest you either misunderstood or took out of context.

.

Multiple choice:

 

3. According to the video on the third stop his vehicle was still moving and trying to pull away, again.

 

 

The key phrase is "trying to pull away" -- rolling at crawling speed away from the officers who were in no danger but became so personally pissed off that they decided summary execution was warranted.

 

.

The rest you either misunderstood or took out of context.

 

Multiple choice:

 

3. According to the video on the third stop his vehicle was still moving and trying to pull away, again.

 

 

The key phrase is "trying to pull away" -- rolling at crawling speed away from the officers who were in no danger but became so personally pissed off that they decided summary execution was warranted.

 

.

 

Right, his hands weren't off the steering wheel and in the air signaling he gave up, and his car was still moving one would presume to evade capture. No, the key phrase is "the third stop". Google 'Police shot at traffic stop' on Youtube. I stopped counting at 30 in 3 pages. Yes there's plenty of adrenalin after an extended chase with Police who know all too well the possibilities, it's no time for games or testing their patience. The rest you either misunderstood or took out of context.

 

I disagree with your conclusion that the officers had cause and the authority to shoot to kill into a car (with innocent passengers?) that was rolling slowly away from them. "Adrenaline" doesn't give anybody a freebie to kill, including LEOs. The news story noted that drawing their weapons violated USPP procedure.

What of the rest in your numbered list did I misunderstand or take out of context? Not trying to be snarky - I'd just like to know so I can understand.

Also, I'm curious if you have any thoughts on what could possibly be the justification for authorities to completely stonewall any information -- even just the names of the officers who killed a citizen -- for a year? To me, nothing short of a serious and imminent national security issue could possibly warrant such a bureaucratic/political coverup.

Wait, now we have innocent passengers? Put yourself in their shoes, the Police don't have the benefit of radar vision or that of 20/20 hindsight like us. And I didn't say they had just cause but that 'in the moment' things can go awry very quickly, it's a poor choice not to obey them precisely, and in this case was fatal.

#5 was a joke, the FBI haven't been conducting themselves in a stellar manner of recent, at least on the surface. Your use of 'unaccountable' was 180* of that in the article.

Better idea.

Instead of chasing criminals. why not dispatch the fairy grandmother?

You know, a kindly women on a Segway who provides care, comfort, and restitution to victims of crime.

A mullet net would stop a moped.

Line the streets with dispensers of nets, bolos, and tridents.

See a crime, break the glass and use the handy crime stopping tools.

Multiple choice:

 

3. According to the video on the third stop his vehicle was still moving and trying to pull away, again.

 

 

The key phrase is "trying to pull away" -- rolling at crawling speed away from the officers who were in no danger but became so personally pissed off that they decided summary execution was warranted.

 

Yes, FBI, really, since this killing was committed by federal officers who were pursuing (at low speed) a vehicle on federal park property. Thank goodness a Fairfax County officer caught the act on camera -- AND that the county police released it to the public -- or we'd know nothing of what happened and perhaps would never know.

 

Yes, this link was an editorial by the Post but all the related news articles are linked below it, unless you believe the editorial board writes all news stories?

 

Yes, unaccountable. To this day, the district congressman and both VA senators have been refused any meeting with the director of the FBI about this case or any information whatsoever.

Video is a godsend to the BS that happens with cops, good and bad. It's unfortunate the FBI is above the law or even review. No one should be.

Sorry, but if you decide to run from any police on a motorcycle they have and should have the right to run you off the road. What are they supposed to do, call a time out and go round up a bike for the chase?? If you want to be a dumb ass then man up.

Given that there appears to be a void of information emanating from law enforcement, it's nice to know that conjecture and conspiracies are there to fill the void. At first blush, it does seem a bit long for an investigation into a shooting to take a year to come to a conclusion, but really, don't let a lack of factual information be a reason to suspect nefarious actions by law enforcement. I can say with a moderate level of confidence: two people can keep a conspiracy from the public eye, as long as one is dead. Unless you're related to the "guest of honor at the shooting," relax and let the authorities conduct a professional investigation.

Just read a report from over there.

Incidents of moped mugging fell precipitiously comparing November 2017 to November 2018.

Below is a portion of the article found here: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/met-police-mopeds-video-tactical-contact-cars-injuries-head-criminal-teenager-a8666476.html

A police officer is under criminal investigation after ramming into a moped rider who was left with serious head injuries and broken bones.

It is one of two incidents being investigated involving Scotland Yard's “tactical contact” strategy, which has been publicly supported by Theresa May and Sajid Javid.

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) said the 17-year-old suspect had been chased through Kent and followed by a police officer before crossing into London on 7 November last year.