RTE cameraman attacked by Gardai

pgj2015

In a victim impact statement read to the court last month, Mr Hand said what happened that day shattered his confidence and he had never really recovered from it.

He said he now worried about everything, which made it hard to concentrate. And it had been difficult to work in the same way since. He also found it hard to sleep.



Hes looking for handy money, I wouldn't believe a word of the above in bold.

pgj2015

pgj2015 wrote: »

In a victim impact statement read to the court last month, Mr Hand said what happened that day shattered his confidence and he had never really recovered from it.

He said he now worried about everything, which made it hard to concentrate. And it had been difficult to work in the same way since. He also found it hard to sleep.



Hes looking for handy money, I wouldn't believe a word of the above in bold.

Doesn't really matter what you or anyone else believes other than those involved in the case and the actual verdict.

10000maniacs

It's assault. The cameraman was a passive observer. People have a right to protest. Both groups had thugs within their ranks. So did the Gardai. Extreme right and extreme left are as bad as each other.
Ronald Reagan got it right when he said "If Fascism ever comes to America, it will come in the name of Liberalism." The same applies in Ireland.

Wanderer2010

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Anyone else? You know this as a fact then? Can you tell me the last Guard jailed in this country for assault? Of course it happens but very few and far between.

Surely that's a good thing?
Because you seem to think it's not?
Our police force not assaulting people can only be good, surely?

Potential-Monke

Having being involved in a few of these 'peaceful protests' over my time, lines get very blurry very quick in some situations. The front line get the order to charge and disperse the crowd. The way that is done is via verbal warning, and if that doesn't work, physical enforcement. That's what happened here, albeit a bit too far. The 'tap' the cameraman got (from that clip, maybe there was more?) was not needed and a bit silly tbh. But I'll tell you something, being in that uniform trying to disperse a 'peaceful' crowd is scary and exhilarating at the same time.

The main part of that is to disperse, and it seems to only be Ireland where the police direct you and people think it's ok to not scarper. The front line doesn't move at your speed, it moves at the speed of the public order unit. If you're not moving fast enough, you'll get a belt to help you along. And as pointed out many times, a lot of the 'protesters' there had no idea what they were protesting, but were there to make trouble. Shur that's why the Gardai were called in the first place, scum attacking scum and it entered a store.

Anyway, his reaction was wrong towards the cameraman. But I don't think it warranted the sentence tbh. I also don't agree that cameramen should be able to walk through the line, which is kinda what it looked like to me. A line is a line, only police will get through it. If the media want access, they all know who to ring. Still unwarranted, but a total over reaction from that rag anyway. And, as mentioned above, he has the hand out now for a few pound. I've injured myself more by turning into the wall during my sleep...

Rufeo

Honestly, if you get up close to a Garda, they can be pretty thick headed (not all, but many). I went into a south dublin Garda station looking for a police certificate once. He had no idea what i was looking for. Few minutes later another officer comes out and tells me how to sort it out. The other guy must have been straight out of the garda college. Seriously man.

I also went into a city centre Garda station to process said police cert. I was waiting for 20 minutes for someone to come out. God forbid I was in there for anything serious.

I'm not surprised that RTE got hammered!

Yeah, love the Gardai!

pgj2015

Rufeo wrote: »

Honestly, if you get up close to a Garda, they can be pretty thick headed (not all, but many). I went into a south dublin Garda station looking for a police certificate once. He had no idea what i was looking for. Few minutes later another officer comes out and tells me how to sort it out. The other guy must have been straight out of the garda college. Seriously man.

I also went into a city centre Garda station to process said police cert. I was waiting for 20 minutes for someone to come out. God forbid I was in there for anything serious.

I'm not surprised that RTE got hammered!

Yeah, love the Gardai!

you usually just ring 999 in case of emergency, you dont stroll into a garda station.

Rufeo

pgj2015 wrote: »

you usually just ring 999 in case of emergency, you dont stroll into a garda station.

Ok i suppose it wouldn't matter if i had no phone

Potential-Monke

Rufeo wrote: »

Ok i suppose it wouldn't matter if i had no phone

Not really no. It's expected that most emergencies come via the phone. If you're able to walk into a station, you're not in a rush. If you are in a rush, roar and shout and someone will come out. Because if it's a rush, that's what you'd do anyway.

Muahahaha

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Does he automatically get fired for having a conviction against him? Or do they legally have to keep him employed until the outcome of an appeal?

Not a surprise though, a Garda doesnt get jailed. If it were anyone else..

Its his first offence, no way was he getting jailed and nor would a member of the public for something similar. He also had a clean disciplinary record in the Guards so its not like he was doing this all the time.

I actually think it is pretty harsh on him, it was one moment of madness in his whole career and it happened at a time when he was under stress from a protesting crowd. Its not like he got the cameraman to the ground and continued on hitting him, that would be a different case entirely but all that happened was a single strike.

He will lose his job now so is paying a very high price for that single split second where he lost control in a volatile situation. He made a mistake like we all do but will suffer a pretty harsh punishment for it

riffmongous

In fairness, you don't expect the cream of the crop in these units anyway, don't normally agree with acab but these guys..

mynamejeff

riffmongous wrote: »

In fairness, you don't expect the cream of the crop in these units anyway, don't normally agree with acab but these guys..

how do you figure that ? , do you know what the requirements of such a unit is ?

Guy:Incognito

Was the "unjustified act of aggression" the poke with the baton right at the end of the video in the op from the irish times article?

**** me, hope that poor photographer never ends up working in a war zone, the poor lamb.

Potential-Monke

I'd say he'll appeal for a softer sentence. Might as well at this stage. As for being fired, I don't think he will. It's not an automatic thing, but the liklihood is high. Transferred at the very least anyway. Possibly even an office job for the rest of his career.

washman3

He WILL NOT lose his job.
He will be assigned to 'desk duties'

He will lose some wages and benefits though. Overtime for example.
A custodial sentence would mean he would lose his job.
My problem is that he has refused to apologise to the cameraman or even acknowledge that he made an 'error of judgement' in a sticky and volatile situation.
That to me, makes him a d***head.

Darc19

pgj2015 wrote: »

In a victim impact statement read to the court last month, Mr Hand said what happened that day shattered his confidence and he had never really recovered from it.

He said he now worried about everything, which made it hard to concentrate. And it had been difficult to work in the same way since. He also found it hard to sleep.



Hes looking for handy money, I wouldn't believe a word of the above in bold.

I'd disagree.

When a garda abuses their position it has a far greater detrimental affect on someone due to the power they have

You become a marked person. You are treated differently because the blue stick together like glue and anyone questioning them or calling them out can suddenly find that they get stopped more often, or if they want something signed it becomes an ordeal or if they report a crime, nothing is done.

washman3

washman3 wrote: »

He WILL NOT lose his job.
He will be assigned to 'desk duties'

He will lose some wages and benefits though. Overtime for example.
A custodial sentence would mean he would lose his job.
My problem is that he has refused to apologise to the cameraman or even acknowledge that he made an 'error of judgement' in a sticky and volatile situation.
That to me, makes him a d***head.

You have no idea what will happen to him.
You have just made all that up in your head.

If imagine he will lose his job, he may get a chance to resign first.
No harm in him appealing now...

Potential-Monke

Darc19 wrote: »

You become a marked person. You are treated differently because the blue stick together like glue and anyone questioning them or calling them out can suddenly find that they get stopped more often, or if they want something signed it becomes an ordeal or if they report a crime, nothing is done.

You've proof of that I suppose? Or just hearsay?

This line gets me:

'Judge Greally said public interest issues were at play here and a transgression of this kind must be seen to have serious consequences. '

Same Judge gave probation to a 15 year old who had a loaded gun under his bed and only gave an unaccompanied leaner driver, who was speeding and killed a 16 year old 9 months for it. Basically saying that tapping a cameraman on the camera (and allegedly in the groin, no recording of that though) is just slightly below speeding and killing someone. If she didn't suspend the sentence, he would have served more than someone who killed someone.

Proportional be bollix. Judge's away in their own world again. I agree as a Garda he has more responsibility, but the sentence far outweighs the crime here.

Plumbthedepths

washman3 wrote: »

He WILL NOT lose his job.
He will be assigned to 'desk duties'

He will lose some wages and benefits though. Overtime for example.
A custodial sentence would mean he would lose his job.
My problem is that he has refused to apologise to the cameraman or even acknowledge that he made an 'error of judgement' in a sticky and volatile situation.
That to me, makes him a d***head.

Pretty sure a conviction of assault is a criminal conviction. Not sure how someone can continue to be a Garda with a criminal conviction.

jetsonx

washman3 wrote: »

He WILL NOT lose his job.
He will be assigned to 'desk duties'

He will lose some wages and benefits though. Overtime for example.
A custodial sentence would mean he would lose his job.
My problem is that he has refused to apologise to the cameraman or even acknowledge that he made an 'error of judgement' in a sticky and volatile situation.
That to me, makes him a d***head.

Well said.

He did not walk out of the court house yesterday, he strutted.

Arrogant pr!ck.

Darc19

Potential-Monke wrote: »

You've proof of that I suppose? Or just hearsay?

.

I can absolutely say it is not hearsay.

Darc19

washman3 wrote: »

He WILL NOT lose his job.
He will be assigned to 'desk duties'

He will lose some wages and benefits though. Overtime for example.
A custodial sentence would mean he would lose his job.
My problem is that he has refused to apologise to the cameraman or even acknowledge that he made an 'error of judgement' in a sticky and volatile situation.
That to me, makes him a d***head.

A garda will never ever ever ever apologize no matter how guilty he/she is of wrongdoing.

A report a few years ago stated that this was a major problem and led to far more claims of damages against the state due to garda wrongdoing than there would be if a fullsome apology was made at an early stage.

But you will never get a garda to apologize.

Better Than Christ

Potential-Monke wrote: »

The main part of that is to disperse, and it seems to only be Ireland where the police direct you and people think it's ok to not scarper. The front line doesn't move at your speed, it moves at the speed of the public order unit. If you're not moving fast enough, you'll get a belt to help you along.

Do you not think there's something seriously wrong with the police service of a democratic country using violence against people whom they decide are moving too slowly?

I was on the receiving end of this before, as a commuter, not a protester. It would have been around the time of the bailout, when there were protests outside the Dáil every evening at fucking rush hour. There was a big one happening on Molesworth St. I could hear Joe Higgins giving a muffled speech over a loudspeaker. The guards were trying to stop people from gathering and blocking the pavement on Kildare St (as I say, it was fucking rush hour). I had no interest in stopping for a gawp because it was a freezing cold evening and I just wanted to get home. Anyway, some absolute prick of a guard decided I was walking too slowly on the icy pavement, so he gave me a shove (with his fist or baton, I don't know) to 'help me along'. It was hard enough to leave a small bruise on my back, and it was pure luck there wasn't a 46A passing at the time because I stumbled right out onto the road.

It all happened so quickly, it was a bit of a blur. It was only when I got on the bus that I thought "what the hell just happened there?" With the benefit of hindsight, it's a shame I didn't have the presence of mind to immediately turn around and get his ID number. Although I suspect I would've got more than a bruise for my troubles.

Potential-Monke

Darc19 wrote: »

I can absolutely say it is not hearsay.

So you have proof?

Darc19 wrote: »

But you will never get a garda to apologize.

An apology is an admission of guilt, it's advised against unless completely warranted. And what good would it be? Pointless imo.

Better Than Christ wrote: »

Do you not think there's something seriously wrong with the police service of a democratic country using violence against people whom they decide are moving too slowly?.

Do you not think there's something seriously wrong in a democratic country where 2 crowds of racists start fighting in broad daylight over their opinions, so much that it goes into a privately owned shop and the Gardai are required to prevent this?

No, there's nothing wrong with it. You see a hape of guards with helmets and batons running at you directing you to leave the area, you think it's ok to just meander off? No, you run, or at the very least move fast. They're not rushing for the craic, it's required as a response to disperse.

Regarding this specific incident, no one had any excuse to be anywhere near that shop unless they were involved in the violence, so no, rushing people on with baton swings (directed, legal, practised) and shouting with some pushing (better than a slap of the baton?) is not wrong.

In your example, you knew there were protests happening quite often, but still went that same route. Would it have been too much of a bother to avoid that 1 street? If i'm not mistaken, lots of Dublin (and Irish cities in general) are in a square pattern, wouldn't have been much trouble to avoid the area imo (don't know the area so I could be mistaken).

I'm not saying you should, but prevention is better than the cure. If I saw a protest, I'd avoid it. To be honest, I try to avoid people in general these days. And you are right, if you had turned around it probably wouldn't have been taken the way you'd like and be seen as a refusal and possibly escalate.

Pedro K

Better Than Christ wrote: »

Do you not think there's something seriously wrong with the police service of a democratic country using violence against people whom they decide are moving too slowly?

I was on the receiving end of this before, as a commuter, not a protester. It would have been around the time of the bailout, when there were protests outside the Dáil every evening at fucking rush hour. There was a big one happening on Molesworth St. I could hear Joe Higgins giving a muffled speech over a loudspeaker. The guards were trying to stop people from gathering and blocking the pavement on Kildare St (as I say, it was fucking rush hour). I had no interest in stopping for a gawp because it was a freezing cold evening and I just wanted to get home. Anyway, some absolute prick of a guard decided I was walking too slowly on the icy pavement, so he gave me a shove (with his fist or baton, I don't know) to 'help me along'. It was hard enough to leave a small bruise on my back, and it was pure luck there wasn't a 46A passing at the time because I stumbled right out onto the road.

It all happened so quickly, it was a bit of a blur. It was only when I got on the bus that I thought "what the hell just happened there?" With the benefit of hindsight, it's a shame I didn't have the presence of mind to immediately turn around and get his ID number. Although I suspect I would've got more than a bruise for my troubles.

I've seen similar happen after football matches. Some of the public order unit are absolute gowls who are dying for it to kick off.

Darc19

Potential-Monke wrote: »

So you have proof?

.

It's currently part of a case.

Funny, I changed my car, registered it at an alternative address I have and haven't been stopped since.

Probably purely a coincidence - yeah right.

It's very few that bring the force into disrupute, but there are enough of them.

pgj2015

Pedro K wrote: »

I've seen similar happen after football matches. Some of the public order unit are absolute gowls who are dying for it to kick off.

really? the ones i have met have all being really friendly to be honest. what do you think they would rather do, stand there after a match without trouble and get paid or have to be running after people and hitting them with the risk they themselves could end up injured?

Potential-Monke

Darc19 wrote: »

It's currently part of a case.

Funny, I changed my car, registered it at an alternative address I have and haven't been stopped since.

Probably purely a coincidence - yeah right.

It's very few that bring the force into disrupute, but there are enough of them.

Sorry, I don't know all the details, nor do I want to tbh if it's an ongoing case, best to leave it be until it's all dealt with. But usually a car with a lot of previous searches can be stopped more than a car without. I've seen it happen a few people who bought a second hand car and keep wondering why they keep getting pulled over (previous owner was a dealer, etc). Not implying anything, but with a different car it would make sense that you'd be stopped less as there's no 'history' on the car.

Could be a coincidence too :pac:

I also think your view on how many of them bring the force into disrepute is slightly wrong. It's very few, but no one remembers the other 10000+ members who perform their duties on a daily basis without issue. It's a small number, but easily remembered.

Darc19

Darc19 wrote: »

It's currently part of a case.

Funny, I changed my car, registered it at an alternative address I have and haven't been stopped since.

Probably purely a coincidence - yeah right.

It's very few that bring the force into disrupute, but there are enough of them.

Without going into details, it seems to me that it was your car being stopped, not your?
You didn't get stooped walking down the street, for example?
Only when driving?
If that's the case, then there was obviously something flagged on the system about that car. Maybe something to do with a previous owner? Or maybe even you yourself?
I don't know, but if you have changed your car & the problems have stopped, seems likely the car was the issue.

Larbre34

washman3 wrote: »

My problem is that he has refused to apologise to the cameraman or even acknowledge that he made an 'error of judgement' in a sticky and volatile situation.
That to me, makes him a d***head.

He was found guilty as charged, so nothing I say can un-guilty him, but I don't think he should have seen the inside of a courtroom.

It was absolutely a sticky situation, very volatile and the Guards were trying to restore order on several fronts. If you look at the first person footage from the injured party on the day, he has placed himself in the front line of protestors being pushed back, arguably the most dangerous spot at that time. Yes he yells "you can't hit cameras" but with the surrounding din I doubt that was either heard by anyone or acknowledged. Also the Guards are well used to cameras from the groups themselves shooting their own footage for their own aims so they probably don't particularly care when they see one.

The public order unit isn't a full time gig for most. Ordinary Guards receive training to operate in the unit and are tasked to be on standby at events or to respond in an emergency and show up in their kit. A friend of mine did that until he moved to a national unit. He tells me that since this verdict was handed down, many Guards are simply handing back their public order gear and withdrawing from the volunteer list for POU duty, because they feel they have no support for reasonable force in dangerous situations so they and members of the public are now endangered themselves.

I blame the victim here entirely, he was reckless in the performance of his own duty for whatever reason (bit of canteen glory perhaps?) and I know if my wife and kids got caught up in a situation like that on street or i was a store owner on the day, I'd want the guards to be fully biased against those perpetrating the violence and disorder.

All this case has done is further weaken protection of the general public by the Police and given oxygen to those who contrive anarchic acts on the streets and against people and property.

I further consider the cameraman's statement about loss of confidence and development of anxiety since the incident to be spurious and designed to maximise the severity of sentence against the Garda. He got one belt of a baton near his jewels which probably left him no worse off physically than any dirty Sunday league match in the local Park. I know a lot about anxiety, and while I can accept mental health problems do arise out of single incidents (sex assault, robbery, burglary, intimidation, unprovoked attacks) what he describes is more consistent with persistent mental strain like bullying or harassment and so I call bullsh1t.

To address the point at hand, if I felt I hadn't done anything wrong, regardless of a judgement, I wouldn't be apologising either and its obvious that thats whats in the Garda's mind even now.

mynamejeff

assuming the upcoming euros take place as panned I wonder if the expected groups of hooligans will be allowed to roam the streets causing carnage because the gardai aren't allowed to engage them for fear of offending some one who hadn't the scene to get out of the wat of a line of riot police


and what the response of the idiots here will be

Larbre34

Larbre34 wrote: »

since this verdict was handed down, many Guards are simply handing back their public order gear and withdrawing from the volunteer list for POU duty, because they feel they have no support for reasonable force in dangerous situations so they and members of the public are now endangered themselves.
.

Well exactly this, as is typical of the response by Garda management.
Same when a young guard was prosecuted in court for driving with blue lights & sirens on, actually within speed limits, he hit a pedestrian & was prosecuted.
He got no backing from his management.
Guards are on their own, even if they are just doing their job.

However, guards being guards, they will continue to do their job, even when they have good cause to say no.

Better Than Christ

Potential-Monke wrote: »

In your example, you knew there were protests happening quite often, but still went that same route. Would it have been too much of a bother to avoid that 1 street? If i'm not mistaken, lots of Dublin (and Irish cities in general) are in a square pattern, wouldn't have been much trouble to avoid the area imo (don't know the area so I could be mistaken).

Because of the crowds, I deliberately avoided walking down the street where the (completely safe and peaceful) protest was actually happening. I was shoved by the guard on the adjoining Kildare St, which was fully open to traffic and pedestrians at the time. I couldn't avoid it because I had to catch a bus from there. It was clear to me at the time that the guards were trying to contain the protest on Molesworth St in order to prevent Kildare St from grinding to a halt too, which was completely understandable. Assaulting random people was, to put it mildly, not understandable at all.

Potential-Monke wrote:

And you are right, if you had turned around it probably wouldn't have been taken the way you'd like and be seen as a refusal and possibly escalate.

I find that troubling. That their response to something so passive as stopping and turning around would be to use further violence. I find it impossible to have any respect for an organisation that behaves like that.

Muahahaha

Pedro K wrote: »

I've seen similar happen after football matches. Some of the public order unit are absolute gowls who are dying for it to kick off.

I think part of the problem with public order units in any police force is that when they recruit them they are obviously looking for lads who dont mind being in a scrap and indeed many of them might enjoy it. Theres a balance to be found, they need people who can handle severe aggression but their own aggression has to be controlled and within the laws set down.

The UK Met had a big overhaul of how their officers deal with necessary force during protests after the case of Ian Tomlinson, a newspaper seller who died after an officer struck him from behind his back with a baton. That case was a watershed in the UK for police behaviour as it came out that the Met had immediately set in motion the beginnings of a cover up after he died. Initially they denied engaging with Tomlinson at all that day but then several different videos of the incident emerged revealing this to be lies. In the videos before he died he was shown walking away from police officers with his hands in his pockets when he was attacked from behind and pushed to the ground.

In the subsequent enquiry it came out that the officer who assaulted Tomlinson involved had been the subject of 10 complaints from members of the public in 12 years. Complaints involved multiple assaults and a road rage incident when he was off duty. It also emerged that he had removed his identity numbers off his shoulder and had failed to record any notes of the assault in his notebook as required by law. On top of that earlier in the day he had assaulted a BBC cameraman and put him to the ground. In the end the officer was charged with manslaughter but was aquitted but the Met sacked him for gross misconduct and using excessive and illegal force.

LaFuton

durty bastid

pgj2015

LaFuton wrote: »

durty bastid

great contribution.

Potential-Monke

Muahahaha wrote: »

had been the subject of 10 complaints from members of the public in 12 years

Just on that, and not defending this lad in the slightest, but that's not a lot of complaints in 12 years. Scumbags lodge complaints just because they feel hard done by, so I'd take some of them with a pinch of salt. While it does appear to paint a better picture of this scum cop (who hits someone from behind, pure scum behavior), I just wanted to point out that nearly every cop gets a few complaints, simply just for doing their job. Complaints board will entertain anyone.

So I'm curious.. what makes the videographer any different from anyone else in that video that got a belt of a baton?

Surely, if the Garda is done for hitting the RTE lad, then they can be done for hitting anyone else, too? There's a chap at the start of the video that has "legal viewer" or something like that scribbled on his hi-vis, and he's belted by a baton as he walks away form the Garda (ie; with his back to the Garda).

Surely he's just as entitled (if not more so!) to go and get a few Euro in compensation for the sleepless nights he had.


Also, kind of irrelevant, but I love that RTE cut the video the minute the camera is tapped, as if that broke the camera or something. :rolleyes: I'm surprised they didn't add some static special effects to make it look like the camera was knackered altogether.


(As an aside, I've experience as a pro photojournalist - I've never gotten hit with a baton, but just out of curiosity, did RTE man get any compensation? Just so I know where to stand if there's a protest on again anytime soon.. :P )

Potential-Monke

Something about journalists being special people who deserve special treatment so they can be in the thick of it and record it all for the masses to lap up in shock journalism. As far as I'm concerned, if there's a public order line and it's moving towards you, fast, shouting get back, you get back, regardless of who you are.

And yes, convenient timing for the camera to 'break'. :rolleyes:

The Tetrarch

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Something about journalists being special people who deserve special treatment so they can be in the thick of it and record it all for the masses to lap up in shock journalism. As far as I'm concerned, if there's a public order line and it's moving towards you, fast, shouting get back, you get back, regardless of who you are.

And yes, convenient timing for the camera to 'break'. :rolleyes:

A few of the population might not like your police state.
The law applies to everyone. A jury of his peers found him guilty.

Plumbthedepths

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Something about journalists being special people who deserve special treatment so they can be in the thick of it and record it all for the masses to lap up in shock journalism. As far as I'm concerned, if there's a public order line and it's moving towards you, fast, shouting get back, you get back, regardless of who you are.

And yes, convenient timing for the camera to 'break'. :rolleyes:

Wasn't the problem for the guard in question that he stepped out of the line to strike the camera man? I've served in the military I never found someone operating a camera as a threat, the person with two free hands is a different story.

Larbre34

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Wasn't the problem for the guard in question that he stepped out of the line to strike the camera man? I've served in the military I never found someone operating a camera as a threat, the person with two free hands is a different story.

In the footage he steps out of the line and strikes a few people in the protesting group as they try to push them back up the street. I guess being able to discern relative threats in a mob of people is proportional to how scared or adrenalined you are yourself at that moment.

Potential-Monke

The Tetrarch wrote: »

A few of the population might not like your police state.
The law applies to everyone. A jury of his peers found him guilty.

I'm not disputing it, but a Jury of peers will not know what it's like to police a public order line. Not excusing it, but a jury of peers are not peers to a Garda, imo. Different worlds.

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Wasn't the problem for the guard in question that he stepped out of the line to strike the camera man? I've served in the military I never found someone operating a camera as a threat, the person with two free hands is a different story.

Yeah, he does that. But that happens with nearly every line over here. It's not as military as other countries, which leads to less of a line and more of an area most times. As someone mentioned, if he was the public order unit, it means he's a normal Garda and gets called to these situations when needed. Lack of constant use usually results in this happening.

Also, having being on the frontline, the people with the cameras can be just as dangerous. Everyone is a camerman these days, especially with the cost of professional smaller cameras (like what that cameraman was using - portable). I wouldn't dismiss someone just because they're holding a camera. I wouldn't dismiss anyone in front of me tbh, as everyone is capable of doing things you wouldn't expect. Another difference, imo, between the mentality of a civvie and that of a Garda/police.

Larbre34 wrote: »

In the footage he steps out of the line and strikes a few people in the protesting group as they try to push them back up the street. I guess being able to discern relative threats in a mob of people is proportional to how scared or adrenalined you are yourself at that moment.

Exactly. Directions being shouted from behind, far more people shouting at you in the front, a lot of which wouldn't think twice about belting you or throwing stuff at you. Then you have the civvie cameramen stuck in the middle of it. Cameras have zoom, stand back, get a good angle and zoom. No need to be in the thick of it imo. Again, not excusing this particular Garda, but it's not black and white on that line.

Still think the cameraman is blowing it out of proportion with his lack of trust, blah blah give me money statements. He shouldn't have been hit, but he's acting like he got battered over and over by multiple Gardai. That's what galls me.

Stovepipe

Anybody remember "robocop" of a few years ago, twatting the college kids like a mad drummer? All the Southsiders whinging,exactly like the camera jockey.