The Shotgun Blog
Tuesday, December 07, 2010
Steven Paikin on Police Brutality at G20
From testimony before a parliamentary committee:
“They took his accreditation because they wanted to check out whether he was who he said he was. Two police officers held him, He was chippy, he didn’t swear but he was talking a lot. He was saying ‘Why are you holding me. There is no need to hold me. I am who I say I am’,” he said.
“One officer held one arm, The other officer held the other arm and a third officer came up to him and basically told him to shut up three times, punched him in the stomach. He doubled over. The same officer brought his elbow down on the small of his back and flattened him. It seemed to me that that was a massive overreaction to try and check to see whether somebody was who he said he was.”
Paikin is among the most level headed and scrupulous journalists in Canada today. His testimony cannot be easily dismissed.
Posted by Richard Anderson on December 7, 2010 | Permalink
Abuse of power is nothing new. On the other hand, everyone the cops grabbed probably made the same statements. If he had just shut up I doubt if there would have been a problem. If a cop told him to shut up 3 times perhaps he should have listened. Having said that, the officer that assaulted him should be prosecuted. That was abuse of power.
Posted by: peterj | 2010-12-07 10:59:06 AM
Other than what is stated here I have no information about this situation but do have a few questions. Why was he obligated to identify himself, and even more so prove he was whom he said he was. Was he in, or trying to enter a restricted or forbidden area?
Whatever the answers if he was not attempting to assault or resist the cop, there is no justification for the cop to use force of any kind, much less brutality. Secondly I would like to know why one non threatening individual, mouthy does not count, how can anyone justify the need for three cops to deal with the situation?
Posted by: Alain | 2010-12-07 3:10:34 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.