DSLRUsers.com

This is the photographer who was shoved so violently by a policeman that she fell backwards and almost cracked her skull on the road. She could have been killed by the fall. The incident was shown on National TV. It was a shocking act of violence by a padded up and armed officer and I hope he is severely repremanded for it. She should persue the matter in the courts.

I for one have been pissed off with all the heavy handed crap.......this is life under Howard i am afraid.....and i am NO hippy/greeny far from it.........its complete BS.....

I know it is pointless but I sent an email to the commissioner of police. This was after he had been interviewed for the news re the Chaser incident. He stated that he was disgusted with what they had done and I pointed out that I was disgusted with him for trying to blame others for his ”cock-up”.

Your photo depicts the difference between someone actually doing their job and a solid wall of gangster power controlled by a state out of control.

I havent seen the footage, and I have an outsiders view, but I detest morons that think, in modern civilised large cities, that freedom (speech, press, etc) should reign over law and order. Is that the case with her actions, was she trying to break through a police line?

far from a case of "doing her job" and gangsters.

anyway, I'm too removed for my comments to be a reasonable statement of fact I guess...

I would like to see the complete footage of this event if possible,but what i did see was pretty shocking, the police must have observed she was a (press) photographer ,Interestingly i think she was in a largish group of other (male) press people,anyway it was extremely lucky she was not badly injured by the fall,

I have worked as a press photographer and a number of things come to mind here, women don't always get prime position in the workplace or the ''scrum'' at a shoot (where things are hard enough anyway) and i think as she may have been trying to get an advantage by being out front she was first in line to be pushed,

Whilst i too would like to put the blame on some government official i think this event points to some much deeper issues that have grown within our society.

Great reportage Matt. You are brave to have been out there yourself, if that's what happened to the other phot.

Judging just by that incident alone, it was horrific. Don't think there is an excuse for that in anyway.

Also reminds me one of the report that said "...when the police DECIDED that the protest was over..."

The footage that I saw was disgusting. I have sympathy with the police and the thankless task that they have, however it seems that the mob mentality takes over on both sides.

My question is, what as a society are we going to do to ensure this doesn't happen again??

The police are unrepentant and have the support of the government. So where do we turn without sounding like some extreamist..

MATT

MATT wrote:So where do we turn without sounding like some extreamist..

If you want the Police to be reined in, you are an extremist. I mean, you have Miranda Devine on your side. What more do you need to know?

(sorry, I can't find her column from Sunday, but she's upset that the Police attacked that nice accountant from the North Shore)

From the photograph, it doesn't look like she is doing anything threatening to anyone and is merely reporting. Much better she be doing this than invading some poor celebrity's privacy.

For those that haven't seen the footage...

There's a link to the video here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007 ... 027864.htm

Seeing the footage puts it into perspective. The push was a little heavy handed. Glad she wasn't using my gear. She did seem to fall backward and if was facing forward it would not have been a problem.

I can understand the police frustration... and can also see how this could get way out of hand. The look on the policeman's face he seems scared maybe worked up under the moment.

Thanks for the link to the footage.

Cheers
MATT

Is the footage anywhere I just searched youtube, but no luck.

Craig: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEZ29NepDtg

MATT wrote:The look on the policeman's face he seems scared

The look of someone who just cocked up big time I think. Disgusting!

Great photos as usual Matt!

Thanks Trent, the footage is sickening

Unfortunately, that is the price to pay for being on the front line. She had put herself in a situation where the police were trying to contain/push back a crowd on the footpath. With hindsight, that policeman probably wouldn't have pushed her like that. Those guys are human, they make mistakes just like everyone else. Fortunately, this time it wasn't serious for the photog.

Looking at the video, she actually came from behind the line of policemen, who knows what went through the policeman's mind when he pushed her back towards the crowd.

I'm not trying to make excuses for the police here because like a lot of others, I feel that the government were too heavy handed in a number of situations. It is the people at the top that need blaming. They are the ones that put these measures in place.

Great reportage Matt, very well captured photo.

(edit: I found that she is Paula Bronstein, a Getty staff photog. She has quite the credentials, she is well used to be in dangerous situations. It will be interesting to see her reportage on this event)

cheers,

André

What about the footage of the two cops holding some guy down while a third cop repeatedly punches the guy in the stomach? Is that justified under any circumstances? Is that necessary under any circumstances? Surely if the two cops can hold him down, they could put handcuffs on.

From the footage, it doesn't look like the cops had any ID, so it doesn't really matter, now, does it? Heaven forbid any accountability should follow?

interesting note from the former comissioner http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jchRHcTnXs4

radar wrote:Unfortunately, that is the price to pay for being on the front line. She had put herself in a situation where the police were trying to contain/push back a crowd on the footpath. With hindsight, that policeman probably wouldn't have pushed her like that. Those guys are human, they make mistakes just like everyone else. Fortunately, this time it wasn't serious for the photog.

Looking at the video, she actually came from behind the line of policemen, who knows what went through the policeman's mind when he pushed her back towards the crowd.

I'm not trying to make excuses for the police here because like a lot of others, I feel that the government were too heavy handed in a number of situations. It is the people at the top that need blaming. They are the ones that put these measures in place.

Great reportage Matt, very well captured photo.

(edit: I found that she is Paula Bronstein, a Getty staff photog. She has quite the credentials, she is well used to be in dangerous situations. It will be interesting to see her reportage on this event)

cheers,

André

she certainly takes some powerful images http://gettyawards.mediaroom.com/index. ... &photo=598

That footage makes me sick.

There is no justification for two cops to be throwing anybody around.

None.

Matt, great reportage; thanx.

I wonder, if Paula made a list of all injuries she recieved thoughout her photography/journalist carreer. where is the most dangerous place she has worked? ... 3th world country? ... war zone? ... APEC in the middle of Sydney?

Matt great work as always. Good thing you weren't the one thrown around.

Regardless of whether or not she was in the police frontline, that sort of behaviour by the authorities is not required. With a press pass and obvious forms of identification showing that she was a press photographer, how much other proof does one need to justify that they could be there? What happened to innocence before proven guilty?

what ever happened to pepper spray. from what i have seen, when used on someone it makes them pretty useless

I have just viewed the footage and whilst it was a terrible sight to see someone shoved like that, it does appear that she was trying to either get up nose to nose or even through the police line. As a seasoned journo, she was just trying to get that great shot that she often does but as you can see by the other peole also reporting the incident that hey had kept their distance and none of them were attacked. These heat of the moment situations always take on a different perspective when you are actually there. Not saying the violent push is warranted but some sort of physical restraint was needed for those not following instructions. The issue is not wether people think the instructions given by the police are fair or not - you fail to follow it, you risk a bad decision being made against you. I have experienced these situations before, the protests at Woomera being a good example and one soon learnt that you kept out of arms reach if you wanted to be safe.. I repeat, I do not condone the action but can see why it happened if the footage showed all that led up to it.

I have just viewed the footage and whilst it was a terrible sight to see someone shoved like that, it does appear that she was trying to either get up nose to nose or even through the police line

I now what your saying, but in this case, therre was a gap between the police line and the protestors. she was standing in the open, and the police line moved in and either overtook her or was level with her. Police clashed with protestors and she got shoved.

Biggzie wrote:

I have just viewed the footage and whilst it was a terrible sight to see someone shoved like that, it does appear that she was trying to either get up nose to nose or even through the police line

I now what your saying, but in this case, therre was a gap between the police line and the protestors. she was standing in the open, and the police line moved in and either overtook her or was level with her. Police clashed with protestors and she got shoved.

I think you will find that at the very start of the footage, she is in the middle of the street where the line of cops is roughly on edge of the street facing away from it (ie. she was something like 10m with the guy in yellow jacket behind police). (I stand to be corrected)

From what I understood of a news report yesterday, she was following the protestor in yellow jacket who went beyond police lines and they (police) tried to get them in front of police lines.

At the end of the day, we see 6 secs of footage to come up with a conclusion.

Furthermore, we see situations like this polarising public opinion, in a similar way to dog bites boy: boy walks past fence on the other side of which is a german shepard. Each day, the boy runs a stick along the fence to purposefully annoy and taunt the dog. After days and days of this, the gate is left open and dog bites boy.

One group will say the boy got (to an extent) what he deserved and others, who just see the boy getting bitten will say the dog should be put down (I have seen this during my childhood as a vet's son).

I am not defending the coppers, but how much s#$t are they supposed to take? Does someone's right to protest not come with responsibilities, including not to be a complete pain in the a$$ (I don't know if guy in yellow was a PIA).

Anyway, before we start pissing on the cops, it would help to get the complete story (and, hey, perhaps the 6 sec footage is the complete picture and the cops were too heavy handed, and Matt K was there and can elaborate)

Reschsmooth wrote:I am not defending the coppers, but how much s#$t are they supposed to take?

All of it. They are in a position of authority and a violent response is not justified - especially when there are so many more police than protesters.

Does someone's right to protest not come with responsibilities, including not to be a complete pain in the a$$ (I don't know if guy in yellow was a PIA).

It shouldn't matter if the guy was a pain in the arse. The violence is not justified.

Cops are not above the law. They are the law. If a cop breaks the law he should be dealt with far more severely than someone who is not paid to uphold the law - in the same way that someone who kills (or is violent against) a cop is treated worse.

ATJ wrote:All of it. They are in a position of authority and a violent response is not justified - especially when there are so many more police than protesters.

Really? At what point is physical force appropriate to make people comply with your appointed authority? Never? What's the point of having a police presence then? Just hope that people will know where the restricted zone is and will comply under their own volition?

If you accept that some physical force maybe required, does the police officer have to take into account the weight and size of the person to determine the correct force to use, take into account the predospition of the person to fall if some or a lot of force is applied, the footwear of the person?

If you say yes to all these things and others, then I guess we have to disagree.

It shouldn't matter if the guy was a pain in the arse. The violence is not justified.

My use of the term "pain in the arse" was not as strong as I wanted to convey, and refer to my previous point.

But, I just don't believe that people should enforce their rights without understanding their responsibilities (and I don't know enough about this incident to comment about the actions of both the guy in yellow or the photog).

Cops are not above the law. They are the law. If a cop breaks the law he should be dealt with far more severely than someone who is not paid to uphold the law - in the same way that someone who kills (or is violent against) a cop is treated worse.

I don't disagree with the first part, but your comment about a person who is violent towards a cop - how do you define violence? Striking a cop, striking a cop with a weapon, or strongly and physically refusing to comply with orders?

doing riot control as any member of any force is quite a difficult task, you have to remember these guys don't know what anyone may do... they are running on adrenaline, they have to not only control the crowd but themselfs and not take anything personal, they have 2sec to make a choice, for which others debate and chew at them for hours afterwards... i know for one, and coming from my previous experience in a riot control situations, you are on edge, you don't know what is going to happen, you have to think quick and hope that the decision you have made in that split moment is the correct one. we all make mistakes.

im not taking anysides, im not saying that it was correct or that is wasn't, just trying to give you an insight, however this is my one and only rant.. i can not be bothered arguing on such topics. goodbye people. *exits thread*

Of course physical force may be required, but how can having two cops holding one guy down while a third cop repeatedly punches the guy in the stomach be anything but violence?

In the case of a photographer, she was a woman and she was basically holding a camera in each hand. That was excess and unnecessary force, in my opinion, whether you agree or not. If a cop can't judge how much force to use in that circumstance, perhaps he needs to find another profession.

I think you misunderstood my last post. I was not condoning violence against a cop. On the contrary, I was actually condemning it. But if violence against a cop is seen by our community as being a bad thing (and worse than violence against a civilian (which is also bad), then cops also have to show restraint.

foonji wrote:they are running on adrenaline, they have to not only control the crowd but themselfs and not take anything personal, they have 2sec to make a choice

That's the claim that I can't understand - people keep saying that, but the video does not show it. What it shows is groups of cops in control of the situation acting in a threatening way. There's a lot of open space, there's an awful lot of cops, and the cops have the protesters hemmed in and under control. At no stage did I see anything that would justify the attitude of the cops - they were acting as though every single member of the public was as heavily armed as they were, and as ready to be violent.

Eventually a few people started talking back... gosh.

You'd think that if there were so many threatening, violent people there the cops and media would have ample footage of them... but instead the only threats and violence we see comes from the blue gang.

Firstly, with regards to the shot (which is why we are here), it really does nothing for me. If she had been caught further into the fall, with gear going everywhere, it would have been more dramatic. To me, it looks like she is almost crouching down. Sorry Matt, don't mean to be negative about the shot. I do like the contrast and colours though. Can I ask where it was taken. The reason I do ask, is that the Police are Victorians.

With regards to some of the comments such as:

'if police can't judge the amount of force, they should find another profession'

Well, how much force DOES it take to make someone fall over? Do you push softly, to give them a warning? Do you push hard and let them know your not mucking about? Somewhere in between and hope for the best? Who do you do this to? Just some woman who gets in your face, or everyone. Maybe the guy with the crow bar in the newspaper deserves a second chance also?

Incidentally, if a Police officer FAILS to use a suitable level of force, and pushes a person twice, or three times and THEN injures them, they can be persued through the Courts because they didn't do their job PROPERLY the FiRST time. Sound like utter crap? It is, but thats a REAL case before the Courts just now.

If a cop breaks the law he should be dealt with far more severely than someone who is not paid to uphold the law

Really? Thats interesting. So we do away with the Law being the same for everyone, and prosecute cops more than normal people? That seems fair. Maybe, though, we could also sack everyone who gets a criminal conviction from their jobs? Maybe, they could also loose their pensions, livlihood and homes? Justice should apply to all equally. Would you advocate the law being harsher everyone or just the Police? Because Policing is already such an easy job.

- in the same way that someone who kills (or is violent against) a cop is treated worse

Really. Like the seven years a guy just got for killing Glenn McAnally? After being released from a stint inside for vilence only weeks before? Or, the guy who got a $200 for punching a female officer in the nose, but $500 for kicking her police dog? Maybe the guy who tried to stab me with a kitchen knife and got 6 months in gaol. Glad he missed really, I would have hated for him to have got a real sentence. I think you are confusing crimes against Police officers as people with crimes against the community. Police are enforcing the LAW. If you kill or assault a Police Officer, you are attacking the system of laws, and the State. Thats why it is meant to be viewed so dimmly.

what ever happened to pepper spray. from what i have seen, when used on someone it makes them pretty useless

Then we'd be having an argument over OC spray, and the fact that it also contaminated eveyone nearby. Pushing is the appropriate, and legally defensible, tactical option to use. I train people to push, very hard, into the chest, at the join with the shoulders, where a group of nerves run. I train them to do it hard enough to sit people on the asses. No point doing anything else.

What happened to innocence before proven guilty?

In a crowd control situation, you don't have time to either A) check credentials, or B) determine guilt. Someone comes up in your face, they get pushed back. It's simple enough for most people to understand that riot police aren't there to be 'Constable Care', they have a difficult job to do and getting under their feet isn't without risk. She would have known that. If she didn't, she was kidding herself.

From the footage, it doesn't look like the cops had any ID, so it doesn't really matter, now, does it? Heaven forbid any accountability should follow?

Just a heads up for this. A previous time Police and protestors met in the CBD, Police officers ended up getting stabbed with their stupid name badges (that have a rather large pin on the back). So, our overalls now have velcro to attach name badges. If you think the NSW Police supply embriodered name badges, you need to think again. Apparently it's to much of a hassle. Should Police wear ID, hell yes. I give people my card if they want to complain. I don't give a stuff because I know I'm right. I don't think there was anything malicious in no name badges though.

A few people have said it already, but until you are in that situation, you have no idea what it is like. Fortunately, or unfortunately, I have been. It scared the shit out of me. Try getting pelted with bricks and bottles at night and having a baseball cap to protect your skull. I can tell you, despite my training (and I am trained to train other officers in tactical options use), if I had caught the people throwing the missiles at me, I would have punched the crap out of them. I would challenge any of you to be different. The blue uniform doesn't make you impervious to getting angry. Your still a human under it.

I'm sure you all get angry at something.

I find it amusing that so many of you will cry foul when the Police push a photographer over, but the cries are a lot quiter when it comes to the protestors who throw darts, assault Police and break the law.

Maybe phone one of the protestors next time you see one of your mates getting the crap kicked out them by a group of drunken thugs outside a pub. See who comes and puts themselves in harms way for you and yours then.....

they were acting as though every single member of the public was as heavily armed as they were, and as ready to be violent.

Moz, thats exactly what you have to do.

There are a list of whats called the 'ten fatal errors'. Basically, they are a list of reasons police officers typically are killed in the line of duty.

One of them is 'relaxing to soon', another is 'apathy'.

It might just be the man with a rolled up newspaper who hits you with a crow bar.

[/quote]

Raskill wrote:

- in the same way that someone who kills (or is violent against) a cop is treated worse

Really. Like the seven years a guy just got for killing Glenn McAnally? After being released from a stint inside for vilence only weeks before? Or, the guy who got a $200 for punching a female officer in the nose, but $500 for kicking her police dog? Maybe the guy who tried to stab me with a kitchen knife and got 6 months in gaol. Glad he missed really, I would have hated for him to have got a real sentence. I think you are confusing crimes against Police officers as people with crimes against the community. Police are enforcing the LAW. If you kill or assault a Police Officer, you are attacking the system of laws, and the State. Thats why it is meant to be viewed so dimmly.

Maybe I shouldn't bother... I'm sure I will be taken out of context again.

My point here is that the law SHOULD take a more dim view of someone killing a policeman. Isn't that what the police force wants? I never said I agreed with the reviewed sentence in the McAnally case - and I don't. I think it was wrong. I think the guilty party should have been treated worse.

I'm also saying that if someone is violent to a cop he should be treated worse - and if that means that the law is not the same to everyone, then so be it.

Really? Thats interesting. So we do away with the Law being the same for everyone, and prosecute cops more than normal people?

The simple answer is yes. The police are employed to uphold the law and, if in the course of that employment, they break the law then the penalties should be extremely harsh. WE, the people, employ police to protect us and not to indulge in criminal activities.

Police are enforcing the LAW. If you kill or assault a Police Officer, you are attacking the system of laws, and the State. Thats why it is meant to be viewed so dimly.

So police are protected by the laws that they can themselves break - see the first para. It might be the time to indicate police procedure in the case of an assault or murder against a police officer. It may be a myth and it may not but the public are generally aware that if a police officer comes to harm the full weight of the ”police service” is used in pursuing the culprit.

I can tell you, despite my training (and I am trained to train other officers in tactical options use), if I had caught the people throwing the missiles at me, I would have punched the crap out of them. I would challenge any of you to be different. The blue uniform doesn't make you impervious to getting angry. Your still a human under it.

This is totally unacceptable - punch the crap out of them - are you in the police force or are you a mercenary. This is not the kind of statement that I would expect to hear from a police officer.

I would like to add one last comment. The police commissioner stated on TV that the Chaser Team were lucky not to be take out by a police snipers. What a load of crap - a sniper is a highly trained person (and I DO know this) who has the job of remaining concealed. The police ”snipers” were just marksmen placed for the benefit of the media and used more as a fear deterrent.

Raskill wrote:Just a heads up for this. A previous time Police and protestors met in the CBD, Police officers ended up getting stabbed with their stupid name badges (that have a rather large pin on the back). So, our overalls now have velcro to attach name badges. If you think the NSW Police supply embriodered name badges, you need to think again. Apparently it's to much of a hassle. Should Police wear ID, hell yes. I give people my card if they want to complain. I don't give a stuff because I know I'm right. I don't think there was anything malicious in no name badges though.

This will make me look like I am sitting on the fence, which I probably am, but I don't understand why they didn't keep their velcro name tags on? The real problem is, without the ability to identify a police officer, a complaint against the officer is less than useless. You can't complain against the "police that were on Elizabeth Street on Saturday".

On Hack (JJJ) this afternoon, the host asked the question to teh Commissioner how the person is to identify the police officer if they wanted to make a complaint, and he neatly avoided the question.

Regarding the question of applying the law more or less harshly towards certain sections of the community - my belief is that the law should be appropriately applied to all sections of the community.

Raskill wrote:

they were acting as though every single member of the public was as heavily armed as they were, and as ready to be violent.

Moz, thats exactly what you have to do.

[/quote]

Let me restate: I think the Police response to a situation where no violence was offered, and violence was threatened only by people on the Police side, was over the top. It is hard to escape the conclusion that the response was calculated to produce a violent response.

I am convinced that if the police had been less violent the protesters would have been less violent... and in fact an entirely peaceful protest was possible. As Raskill has said before, we pay our Police to put their bodies on the line - is it too much to ask that they at least allow the possibility of a non-violent protest by waiting for someone not being paid by the government to be there to initiate violence?

Raskill wrote:
I find it amusing that so many of you will cry foul when the Police push a photographer over, but the cries are a lot quiter when it comes to the protestors who throw darts, assault Police and break the law.

Sorry Raskill, this is a fallacious argument. I don't see anyone here arguing that violent protestors should get off scot-free. People just want the same standards to be applied to the police -- that is, if police are violent, that they also be held accountable.

Sure, the police can protect themselves from harm by pre-emptively disabling everyone within reach, yet I really doubt if most of the civilians were there to commit violence or to have it committed against them.

I respect the tough job that police have to do and the fair dealings I have had with them on the occasions when I've needed their help (disregarding one bad interaction with one officer in a country town), but it doesn't excuse the top-down lack of judgment that leads to the kinds of overreactions we have been seeing at APEC.

--Chuan

Just for the record I'd like to say that my image of the photographer was not taken at the same location that she was pushed. Further...the great majority of the police at the demonstration were very courteous and very professional. The incidents captured by the media were isolated and should not be seen as indicative of the behaviour of the majority of those present. The police presence was grossly over inflated but this was a political decision and a serious misjudgement....though the public were not privy to the intelligence that might have influenced the planning. No doubt the prime objective of the force was to protect the APEC conference members and to this end the police were grossly over represented in relation to the number of demonstrators. I have no doubt from my own observations that there was a number of extremely violent demonstrators present….but the overwhelming police force intimidated them and they kept a low profile. Some violence was averted because of this. However, this in no way excuses the sickening violence we saw that was perpetrated by a tiny minority of the police members present. There is no excuse for that. If you carry a gun on your hip and you are there to enforce the law then you don’t have to shove, punch and scream at members of the public who clearly are not threatening violence. This is where the police force needs to rethink its operational strategies. I saw a number of arrests where “Excuse me Sir! You are under arrest…please accompany me back to the footpath” would have been sufficient to affect an orderly arrest. But for some reason the current standard operational procedure is for at least 3 policemen to grab hold of the suspect, throw him to the ground whilst kneeling on his neck and twisting his arms behind his back whilst yelling “STOP RESISTING! STOP RESISTING!” which is for the benefit of all witnesses so that they might lay an extra charge of resisting arrest if they so please. And they often do. Most normal people would be outraged and humiliated if they were so treated. A very small number of the police present were clearly not able to conceal their unsuitability for the occupation they were currently employed in and they hopefully will be identified and given less stressful work to do. For the rest of the cops there all I can say is “Good job! Well done! And I’m so sorry to see you used for political purposes but you get no say in that.”

Some people are getting way too worked up with this.

Condenming police =/= hippy; wishes violence on police

Condenming protesters =/= pro police


From here, it seems like some of you guys are older or working in the law enforcement area, and the more severe conservative views really isn't justified since we are not in a military state like Indonesia or North Korea.

And more so, that was not a good example of a police officer at all, I can imagine kids or teenagers looking at that footage and wanting to be a police so they can do that to someone, like it's already happening in the armies around the world. The traditional image of a police as a heroic persona really doesn't belong in the present society.

I only really condemn those few violent protesters along with the supposedly neo nazi groups that arrived and left, they should be arrested instead.

The police ”snipers” were just marksmen placed for the benefit of the media and used more as a fear deterrent.

I can assure you that they were snipers, not 'marksmen'. A sniper has a role to play in both covert and overt operations. They are snipers in every sense of the word, with skills to rival any military sniper. In fact I know of a least one ex SAS operative who is now a NSW Police sniper.

The velcro name tags, sorry, I didn't make it clear enough, the Police don't actually have any to give the officers. It would have to be a corporate decision to award a contract for them to be embroidered (I'm not kidding ) and it has never been done.

This is totally unacceptable - punch the crap out of them - are you in the police force or are you a mercenary. This is not the kind of statement that I would expect to hear from a police officer.

Yep, I'm a police officer, and again, would challenge anyone on this forum to put up with being pelted with bottles and bricks (and onions also, go figure) for several hours and not get really really pissed off. I'm human also, and like every person only have so much patience, resilience and tolerance.

... and with that last word by Alan I'm locking the thread. I think this topic has been well and trully covered and we've wandered way off topic