BBC3
The title
of this documentary may seem controversial and the fact that independent film
maker and rapper Adam Deacon directed and fronted it gave the impression
that it would be a hard hitting exposé of what goes on in the modern police
force. Let us remember, however, that it is on the BBC, who are not
exactly unbiased and ground breaking any more: not since they started receiving
money from the EU. So as I sat down to watch the video I was wondering which
will it be – safe or controversial?
It begins
with Deacon attending firearms training. He relates to the camera that recent
polls in the Hackney area show that one in three think that the police
are corrupt and one in five think the police cannot be trusted. Deacon
interviewed some of the armed police. One marksman told him that
although he hopes to go through his career without having to draw his weapon he
did not feel safe without a gun. Mr. Deacon then asked the trainer if marksmen
were told to shoot for the arms or other non vital areas first but the trainer
confirmed that they are taught to aim at the largest body mass (the torso).
Another said that the officer at an incident that involves weapons may have
only a split second within which to decide whether to fire on an assailant.
Next we are
told of a case of mistaken identity. A man called “David” was accused of kidnap
and rushed and pinned down with no warning. The video footage taken by the police
was shown, and it was quite scary. They gave no warning as they approached
their suspect who was looking in the boot of his car. He was forced to the
ground and had a police officer standing on his head. It took twelve hours for
them to realise that they had the wrong man. The officers involved were not
identified and to this day David has not had an apology.
Deacon then
travels to Derbyshire to bring us a tale of police neglect. He speaks to a
mother of a 21 year old girl that was shot by her ex-boyfriend. For months the
girl and her family told the police of attacks he had carried out, that he had
a criminal record for assaulting his ex-wife and that he had a gun and had
threatened to kill the girl. This he did and her poor mother found out when she
went to look for her daughter who had been expected home earlier and was
stopped at a police road block which turned out to be the crime scene of her
daughters murder. Police blamed “systemic failures and overwork” for the
tragedy.
About half
way through the documentary Mr Deacon poses the usual question – is it a few
rotten apples, etc. He visits his barber shop where customers are saying that
youngsters don’t help themselves, that they are aggressive and disrespectful to
the police.
He visits Scotland
to look at rural police and discovers that people are much friendlier towards
their local PC’s and see them as a valuable part of the community. The best
part of this section, however was watching Adam Deacon walking across a very
muddy farm yard in his ever so expensive bright white trainers. I got quite a
chuckle out of that, so did the farm workers! He asked the rural officer what
he thought when he heard stories of police brutality. He replied that it was
disappointing when someone let the side down.
From
Scotland it was back to the capital and a Tottenham vs. Chelsea football match.
The policing of the match was shown as being hands off. The police
maintain a presence at a low profile but watch for trouble starting. However a
father and son who are Chelsea fans tell of an event away from the ground. When
trouble flared at a pub the police blocked the area off. The duo and the son of
a friend were not allowed to leave until the situation was dealt with. The two
boys were 13 at the time and one of them was accused by an officer of “giving
him the eyeball” then hit him with his baton and pinned him to the ground. The
father tried to intervene and was treated in a similar manner. This also was
filmed but despite this no officers could be identified and no charges were
brought against any of them.
The
documentary finishes with a visit to Northampton to see cadets training. The
cadets give a lot of feedback to superiors and the hope is that this will
improve policing. One cadet tells how he passed on that an officer training him
was homophobic. The officer was dismissed.
My first
thought at the conclusion was: is this the BBC being pro-establishment, pushing
authoritarian values? By commissioning a film made by a Black film maker that is
popular with youth they look like they are providing an alternative view but
what we get is the same old thing: the police are ok really, they are only
human, etc. It is refreshing in a way to see that they are human, because
perhaps the unsuitable officers can be identified and removed from the force.
It also shows that our police force as a whole is not brainwashed in to being
exactly the same. They need the personal touch to prevent them from becoming
unthinking automatons of the state. Obviously the rural PC and the urban armed
officers do not face the same problems, so why should they behave in the same way?
No comments:
Post a Comment