[Dogeatdog]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..I think it’s fine to have the rule, Big E...it’s just applying it equally to all platform eaters is obviously the thing...otherwise it would easily be perceived as harassment and singling out...which is exactly what’s happened in this incident...and also hence the eat in protests which are happening ...as it appears to be so commonplace on the platforms...(...except for Mr Foster, interestingly...hmmmm..)...

But that why I find this rule quite petty though because when you apply them to someone it’s going to come across as singling out especially if their are other people doing it and is just going to cause situations like this one.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Big Evil

I’m curious as to why eating food on a station platform is an offence? Seems pretty daft to me.

I'd say it would be to minimise the amount of lawsuits filed due to slip related injury on the platform.
The rule is not being enforced consistently though that's obvious, hence the protests on the platform fir attempting to make an example of one guy.

[Kizzy]

Glad you brought that up Girth meant to mention that.. why would you have to be mealy mouthed to the police for fear of arrest? No offence was committed so there was no grounds for arrest :/
Where is this homophobic comment? Surely if the guy was being so offensive the other platform eaters wouldn't have been so supportive.

[GiRTh]

I havent commented because we didnt see it. IF it happened then its appalling.

Twice in the video the officer says he's under arrest for 'eating' and one other time he says for 'resisting arrest'. He never mentions ID. So did he ask him for ID once only? Seems unlikely.

I will only comment on the video.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I havent commented because we didnt see it. IF it happened then its appalling.

Twice in the video the officer says he's under arrest for 'eating' and one other time he says for 'resisting arrest'. He never mentions ID. So did he ask him for ID once only? Seems unlikely.

I will only comment on the video.

It's not against the law to refuse to show ID in California.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I havent commented because we didnt see it. IF it happened then its appalling.

Twice in the video the officer says he's under arrest for 'eating' and one other time he says for 'resisting arrest'. He never mentions ID. So did he ask him for ID once only? Seems unlikely.

I will only comment on the video.

I guess the video was recorded just for that reason. I'd rather know what happened first, than assuming the man with the sandwich was being racially singled out, and that the cop was a racist. And if evidence comes to light that this man was racially singled out, I'll be the first to condemn it.

We're going round is circles now, G. Good to chat with you again though.... it's been ages.

[Kizzy]

It's helpful to comment on what was said. .. not what you think was said.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I havent commented because we didnt see it. IF it happened then its appalling.

Twice in the video the officer says he's under arrest for 'eating' and one other time he says for 'resisting arrest'. He never mentions ID. So did he ask him for ID once only? Seems unlikely.

I will only comment on the video.

...I think for me also, Girth...on several occasions we hear a police officer say..’stop resisting arrest’...and yet we don’t see any resistance at all to the handcuffing/detaining...all we see is a man questioning it and saying that he was feeling harassed ...so without knowing what the apparent ‘homophobic slur’ was, it’s only an interpretation of something from the police officers, surely..and their interpretations of ‘resisting arrest’ seem a bit skewed to me....unless the comment is on a witness’s vid or something...?..in which case it’ll be something that’s presented in the inquiry....?...

[Livia]

It isn't against the law not to show ID in California, although it is in some other states. I neve said he was detained only for now showing his ID, but it was mentioned in the article I read, and I'm thinking it was just one of the things the man did or said that led to him being detained.

But people really don't know for sure what happened, and the man was never arrested anyway. So I'm willing to bet that refusing to show his ID was just one of the things he did, along with a probable homophobic slur and ignoring a request from the officer.

[The Slim Reaper]

That's a roller coaster of not knowing versus what you think and you're willing to bet, when I always believed the law was about what could be proved? If refusal to show ID is not against the law, then by definition it can't be "just one of the things he did..."

There are no figures for 2019 that I can find but between 2016-18, California paid out around $450m for police misconduct.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

It isn't against the law not to show ID in California, although it is in some other states. I neve said he was detained only for now showing his ID, but it was mentioned in the article I read, and I'm thinking it was just one of the things the man did or said that led to him being detained.

But people really don't know for sure what happened, and the man was never arrested anyway. So I'm willing to bet that refusing to show his ID was just one of the things he did, along with a probable homophobic slur and ignoring a request from the officer.

Why probable?

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Glad you brought that up Girth meant to mention that.. why would you have to be mealy mouthed to the police for fear of arrest? No offence was committed so there was no grounds for arrest :/
Where is this homophobic comment? Surely if the guy was being so offensive the other platform eaters wouldn't have been so supportive.

YEah, its strange the public are expected to quickly comply to police officers and obey their instructions without any dissent. Belligerence toward the police is not a good idea but its also not a crime.

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

It's not against the law to refuse to show ID in California.

I didnt know that. Makes me now think he's definitely going to sue.

Originally Posted by Livia

I guess the video was recorded just for that reason. I'd rather know what happened first, than assuming the man with the sandwich was being racially singled out, and that the cop was a racist. And if evidence comes to light that this man was racially singled out, I'll be the first to condemn it.

We're going round is circles now, G. Good to chat with you again though.... it's been ages.

As the article we both read stated 'Context is key'. If he used homophobic slurs then we'll find out soon enough but based on the video this was huge waste of everyones time.

Good to chat with you too, its definitely been too long