I don’t see why the union couldn’t have just made an exception and let him stay tbh seeing as he has a disability and was early to the debate anyways (it hadn’t even begun). They did themselves no favours dragging him out by his ankles that’s a terrible thing to do.

He should have left when asked politely to do so, he made the fuss no one else

They still shouldn’t of dragged him out by his ankles though, that is an idiotic thing to do. He may have kicked up a fuss but if there was no valid reason as to why he was refused entry before the debate even begun, then I think he has every right to be upset.

An appeal hearing on Saturday heard evidence from fellow student Henry Hatwell, 21, who said: “Thirty seconds after he [Azamati] sat down, the security guard came in. Five seconds afterwards, he started touching Azamati, who was holding on to the bench. Thirty seconds later, they were dragging him by his ankles.”

On Saturday, the union and McGrath formally withdrew the charge of violent misconduct against Azamati and apologised “unreservedly” for the distress and damage caused.


...despicable...It’s so good that this was addressed with such speed and an unreserved apology given for something that should never have happened...how ironic that he’s studying international relations and that the specific debate was about ....whether it was right to feel confident in the UK government ...

Do you have any evidence for your assumption in the first place? Other than a bad faith that is?

why is him being blind relevant and included in the title?

please put link in with and quotes


and i am surprised that you have included lies in your post and then based your "anger" about the lies

The video posted on you tube is 1 minute 57 seconds long and at no time is anyone dragged off buy the ankles

your post states: "Thirty seconds after he [Azamati] sat down, the security guard came in. Five seconds afterwards, he started touching Azamati, who was holding on to the bench. Thirty seconds later, they were dragging him by his ankles"

well that video runs for 1 minute 57 seconds and he gently touches the mans arm at the start so....?

I wonder what else is incorrect about this incident??

....just read the OP and stop being so silly...otherwise I’ll assume you’re harassing me...

maybe just watch the video and do the math, no one is harassing you, just picking you up on misinformation that you are spreading.

..the appeal did the enquiry into the incident and their conclusion is reported...which is all in the OP...or you can do math if you’d rather, I prefer to comment on the official appeal and conclusion...

...LT stop your nastiness..you’re a grown man, not a silly little school boy who likes to bully...

yes i agree but as security it was their job to remove him as best they could, id imagine they were under a lot of stress as everyone was watching them. they have a job do do you know.

your information was wrong and the video and time there for all to see, sorry if that makes you feel bad but its the truth - anyone can watch and time it.

...it doesn’t make me feel bad, I watched the vid and read the conclusion of the appeal...but you interpreting it your own way, which is contra to the appeal conclusion...obviously means an awful lot to you...so knock yourself out, I’ll leave you to it as I neither have the time or the inclination etc, to dance with you...

It was a quote from a witness. So take it up with him about his perception of time. And stop picking on Ammi who is reporting the witness statement.
The investigation heard from the relevant parties. The reactions from the union says it all.
Your reaction also says it all.

Jesus ****ing wept!

Bc being blind makes you extra vulnerable as you cant judge fully your surroundings and neither you can judge what people are about to do to you or defend yourself.
It's in the title bc it is relevant and makes his removal especially aggressive and humiliating.

Your sneering is shocking

When did dragging a disabled person by the ankles become the way to deal with a situation? The fact that an apology etc has been given so quickly indicates fault on the Union's side, otherwise surely they would be offering wraths of evidence and witness statements to show that the level.of restraint and removal was warranted.

I think that is totally uncalled for? He is simply pointing out the discrepancies between what has been written and the timings on the video.

Maybe they hoisted him out by the ankles to stop him walking into a door?

The president of the Oxford Union has bowed to pressure to resign after a blind student was dragged by his ankles from a debate event by a security guard.

Ebenezer Azamati, a postgraduate student from Ghana, was forcibly removed from the event last month when he tried to return to his seat before a debate.

Brendan McGrath, the president of the union, who had alleged that Azamati had behaved violently, accepted he “manifestly failed” in his duty to ensure that every member felt welcome.

In a resignation statement posted on the union’s Facebook account, McGrath apologised and said he was wrong to seen to be trying to blame Azamati in the aftermath of incident.

McGrath’s resignation came after the Oxford University Africa Society (OUAS) launched a petition calling for him to to go and impeachment procedures against him were started by union members. The OUAS said Azamati’s treatment was “violent, unjust, inhumane and shameful”.

Several other senior post holders at the union have already resigned over the incident, according to Cherwell, the university’s student magazine.

McGrath said he was advised to bring a disciplinary case against Azamati on behalf of the security guard involved but had failed to recognised the wider “institutional problems” highlighted by the incident.

For all of my shortcomings, and all of my mistakes, I apologise profusely and unqualifiedly,” he added.

The president of the Oxford Union, a debating society that operates independently of the university, is one of the most sought-after positions at Oxford and frequently a springboard to high-profile political careers. Past presidents include Boris Johnson, Benazir Bhutto, Michael Foot, Tony Benn and Jeremy Thorpe.

The university said it shared widespread outrage at Azamati’s treatment.


Oxford University
✔
@UniofOxford
We share the widespread outrage regarding the unacceptable treatment of Ebenezer Azamati, a member of our University community, at the Oxford Union. Ebenezer’s college and the University are working to fully support him.


In his resignation statement, McGrath also called for an independent review into the union’s policies on disability and a professional review of its security system and staff training.

Azamati, an international relations scholar, said his treatment left him feeling “unwelcome in the union, Oxford and even the country”.

He successfully appealed on Saturday against what he said were claims of “false violent disorder” by the union. The union withdrew its charge of violent misconduct against him and apologised “unreservedly”.

The society has hosted speakers and debates since 1823.

https://www.theguardian.com/educatio...nd-student-row

[McGrath said he was advised to bring
a disciplinary case against Azamati
on behalf of the security
guard involved but had failed
to recognised the wider
“institutional problems” highlighted
by the incident.
For all of my shortcomings,
and all of my mistakes,
I apologise profusely and unqualifiedly,”
he added.
The president of the Oxford Union,
a debating society that
operates independently of the university,
is one of the most sought-after
positions at Oxford and frequently
a springboard to high-profile political careers.
Past presidents include Boris Johnson,
Benazir Bhutto, Michael Foot,
Tony Benn and Jeremy Thorpe.]

[The university said it shared widespread
outrage at Azamati’s treatment.]



Yes it can go onto TVnews
now

Tv news told me to thank you for allowing it, Arista :smug:

Excellent news, the guard will also have to be dealt with. With any physical intervention the response has to be proportional to the threat, therefore he failed in adequate safeguarding. The SIA have recognised holds for restraint, this was not one of those, if the guy was injured then he should imo be claiming for assault and personal injury.

The whole thing was just shocking.

Only HD channels though :nono:

This wouldn't be an appropriate way to remove anyone, let alone a blind person :think:. Really scraping the barrel trying to justify this one.