Show us the video
Like a scene from Road Wars, we see another pursuit come to its end in glorious technocolor in the leafy lanes of Wales.
As if on cue one officer leaps from the pursuing squad car, runs to the drivers window  & proceeds to batter it with gusto, hitting it at least 15 times. Another officer leaps onto the bonnet & kicks at the windscreen.
The driver is led away in handcuffs, another successful pursuit brought safely to an end by officers of Gwent Police.
Except Robert Whatley wasnt your average drugged up joyrider.
In an effort clearly designed to garner maximum impact, papers have described the 70-year-old as a pensioner, retired businessman, someone who had suffered a stroke &  a man who took tablets for a heart condition. As if any one of these were reason enough for our initial sympathy, put together they must be proof absolute of the man’s inability to be aggressive, violent or belligerent.
What is clear is that police had stopped Mr Whatley for traffic offences & were in the process of issuing a ticket for no seat belt, when he drove off.
Whatley stated when he appeared at court recently that he thought the officers had finished despite not being hold anything to that effect. He said he thought the reason they were then following him with blue lights &  two-tones was because they were escorting him home.
True, this was not your normal high-speed, reckless pursuit. It was brought to a halt when another officer used a Stinger to puncture Mr Whatley’s Range Rover tyres.
So what prompted the officers to attack his windows?
Anyone who has watched Road Wars or Traffic Cops or any of the seemingly hundreds of derivative shows will have seen this technique used in almost every show. It is a well-practised distraction & disorientation technique. It is designed to distract the driver from either trying to escape or preparing to attack the officers trying to arrest him, shock  & awe. It’s usually used on people who have clearly demonstrated , by their actions in the previous pursuit, their keenness to avoid capture & willingness to put others’ lives at risk.
Mr Whatley says that, ten months on, his life has been ruined & he suffers flashbacks. It seems only the payment of £100,000 will lessen the effects of his experience.
Gwent Police say they are investigating take the matter extremely seriously.
Don’t get me wrong, it may be that the officers were over the top – they jave been suspended. But perhaps if they showed the footage of the actual stop check it might go some way to explaining the actions of the officers when they eventually forced Mr Whately to pull over or it might show he was perfectly amenable & just misunderstood the situation. I suspect they never will since senior officers are more concerned with showing how sympathetic they are to the IPCC & comlainants than they are to their own officers. They never stamp on false information at the earliest opportunity because it is always “inappropriate to comment”.
Oi says:
Argus from 6 years back. Anyone notice the strange similarity in the names – Dejavu?
Seems evidence of similar fact or bad character could be given boyo!
A MAN who had accused a Gwent police officer of assaulting him after a query over an expired tax disc was yesterday convicted by magistrates of four charges.
Robert Clive Whatley, 64, of Four Ash Street, Usk, was found guilty of using a motor vehicle without insurance and no MoT, using insulting words and behaviour and failing to give his name and address to a constable when asked.
Whatley had pleaded not guilty to each of the offences but after appearing in the morning, he failed to attend Abergavenny magistrates court yesterday afternoon and the case was heard in his absence.
http://archive.southwalesargus.co.uk/2004/7/30/58738.html
August 9th, 2010 at 01:12
Civ_In_The_City says:
One reason the Chiefs love the IPCC, as in this case and the recent goings on in Cumbria, is that the whole crappy situation is immediately taken off their hands. They can then completely reliably and honestly say that they have played their part and official procedure is being followed, with the added advantage of having a watertight excuse for not answering any difficult questions.
Chiefs LOVE being told what to do and say, and how to behave in any given situation. They LOVE predictability.
They DON`T love those criminal types, messing up their carefully devised plans for hitting bonus targets and getting promotions.
I agree with 200 that the actual footage should be shown at the earliest opportunity. And IF the Chief is satisfied with how his officers acted, whether or not the IPCC agrees, he or she MUST come out and say so publicly.
Because worrying about if the public have confidence in the police isn`t the major problem (and here`s the elephant in the room), the real problem is that officers on the ground have zero confidence in those who ‘lead’ them.
August 9th, 2010 at 07:43
Shijuro says:
I think it’s even simplier why they love the IPCC…
They don’t have to make a decision they may be held accountable for…
Simples…
August 9th, 2010 at 08:28
Arkham Inmate says:
Don’t forget that Whatley had tried to run over one of the Gwent officers, has form for this kind of thing and the senior officer quoted in the case is Carmel Napier, possibly Essex Police’s least popular officer of all time after Roger Baker (if you are to believe the commentators over at Police Oracle). Either way it all adds up to a big shit sandwich.
August 9th, 2010 at 08:28
Dr Melvin 'Banned from most police blogs' Gray says:
Criminals behind bars are accorded more respect and we must assume that ‘misplacement’ of Mr Whatley’s title is accidental or arises from a customary contempt for victims of illicit police actions.
“Don’t get me wrong, it may be that the officers were over the top” No reasonable person could fail to conclude that events captured on video constituted thuggery.
Jumping on Mr Whatley’s car bonnet and failure to give him time to open his door before striking the driver’s window, were equally unjustifiable. These actions were calculated to cause alarm and distress to Mr Whatley and saddle him with extensive repair bills. UK citizens will always resist oppressive or criminal police methods whilst the latter perpetrate the same and subsequently seek refuge in denial.
August 9th, 2010 at 10:23
Shijuro says:
Lol just try this when you are on holiday in the USA, Mr Whatley…
Imagine your surprise when the Police draw their pistols and shoot you for attacking a cop with a deadly weapon (a car…).
Then watch your family complain to the SMT over there only to be told, “sorry but we take threats to the lives of our officers very seriously, unlike you dopy limeys…”
August 9th, 2010 at 10:24
Shijuro says:
So to sum up: a fail to stop (injuring an officer in the process); a male refusing to leave his vehicle; etc..
Now the officers used batons lawfully to break the windshield (to prevent escape) and smashed the drivers window to get him out…
What happened to the officers involved?
Baring in mind they went through a court process and the defendant was found guilty on all counts?
Suspended!!!!!
See what I mean?
Why anyone would do my job I just don’t know…
Reply
August 9th, 2010 at 11:55
benno says:
200. tommorow bbc1 1035 documentry re that mad swedish bint off the m6 who then stabbed a bloke to death in stoke. Might be worth a view.
August 9th, 2010 at 12:46
Legal Eagle says:
Sounds like a crap situation if you ask me.
As an MOP my view is this – you fail to stop (or even worse, drive off when already stopped) for the police, then getting your windows smashed and being dragged out of your car is a bit of an accepted hazard.
He should think of it as a learning experience and not do it again the prat.
Also to the IPCC/SMT chucking officers on suspension – GET REAL – the public pay taxes to have officers on the street not on suspension!
August 9th, 2010 at 14:05
Shijuro says:
It’s even funnier than that ..,
any officer that is being investigated by PSD can’t be in the ‘chain of evidence’…
This means that for the duration of the enquiry (often months or occasionally years) you are not really doing the work of a police officer. They put you in the call centre, or in an admin role…
Not really fair on the officer or taxpayer…
August 9th, 2010 at 16:06
Ted says:
Any reason why when the officers first stopped him they didn’t get him out his vehicle before doing the ticket thus not letting him be in the position to drive off?
August 9th, 2010 at 16:55
shijuro says:
Yes. That WOULD have been an abuse of power…
After the stop they put him under arrest and that gives us powers to force entry to effect arrest.
Those powers were not abused-dont listen to MTG, he has it wrong on this occasion…
Without arrest, we have a few powers of detention, for search etc…
August 9th, 2010 at 18:24
200 says:
Whatley doesn’t appear to be the paragon of virtue that Melv likes to think.
Having made off & almost running the officer over in the process & failing to stop – rather than merely being ‘escorted’ home, I wonder what Melv’s reaction would have been if they had merely knocked on his window & politely asked him to step out only for him to roar off round the corner & run over Melvin’s cat (given that he probably doesn’t have a wife, or friends).
August 9th, 2010 at 21:45
Dr Melvin 'Banned from most police blogs' Gray says:
Gwent’s Chief Constable appears to have missed his opportunity of early consultations with you, 200.
I do hope that Mr Giannasi, who just happens to be Britain’s leading traffic police officer, has not acted prematurely against these uniformed rogues by foregoing consideration to your wildest speculations.
August 9th, 2010 at 23:19
boy on a bike says:
If the bloke was so addle-brained that he thought he was being “escorted” home, and didn’t realise that he nearly ran an officer down, then he has no place being on the road behind the wheel. Whatley has essentially made the case that he is incompetent to drive, and he should be banned for life.
August 10th, 2010 at 09:41
simon says:
Too many MOP’s me included, that bit of video shows policemen going over the top. It does not matter what the truth is or who is right or wrong because it’s the perception gained from that single bit of video that counts and it does not show the policemen in a good light (in my opinion).
The police point of view on blogs like this is that the policemen didn’t over react.
The MOP’s point of view on blogs like this is that the policemen did over react.
The worrying thing is that this gulf between the police and MOP’s seems to be getting wider.
(BTW I’m a supporter of the police)
August 10th, 2010 at 10:37
shijuro says:
Simon…
In other countries- he would have like as not been shot. They take assaults on Police with a deadly weapon quite seriously over there… they don’t here, Police are immediately at fault no matter what the circs – I remind you it took him 10-months to make a complaint too? I wonder why?
I notice that the ‘leaked video’ didn’t show his behaviour before the pursuit?
or him hitting the officer?
I wonder why?
It’s not a determined campaign by Whatley and his brief to smear the Police is it?
I wish, just for one week, the MOPS of this country would have the Polish Police.
I suspect you would be screaming for us to come back.
Anyway…
Soon you will see what the country is like without Police…
August 10th, 2010 at 14:17
shijuro says:
I show you how serious they take assaults against Police…
Offences against the person act sections go on the lower the number the more serious the offence:
sec 18- GBH with intent;
sec 20- GBH without intent;
Sec 47- ABH;
Sec 39-Common assault…
and Police Assault?
Sec 51…
August 10th, 2010 at 14:19
simon says:
shijuro,
What I’m trying to say is that the PERCEPTION you get from the video clip is of 2 policemen going over the top. The perception may or may not be the truth.
I agree with your comments in the above posts. I’m on your side.
I spent 16yrs in the Army, nearly 3 of those years in Northern Ireland and I’ve seen the police from a fair few countries at work.
August 10th, 2010 at 16:47
shijuro says:
Tell you what Simon- watch this instructional video from the USA…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0mtxXEGE8&feature=related
August 11th, 2010 at 15:43