Manchester Airport Incident: IOPC Demands News Gives up its source!

[@Ciphery1]

Officers very nearly got sacrificed, their careers in dust and sentenced to jail and branded as racists without the whistleblower. Leaker definitely saved three ppl.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

How did you work that out?

[@williamsmith7340]

@@adenwellsmith6908If you can’t work it out mate, maybe you should move to Pakistan.

[@harold6863]

@@williamsmith7340he clearly has learning to 😂😂😂

[@simonspider]

The vile and evil leftist overlords really are out to destroy us it seems...

[@Stig_of_Soton]

This leaker will also ensure the two men involved won’t get prosecuted

[@alexstewart9747]

When who leaked it is more important to who did it, you’ve got a serious problem. What a disgrace.

[@ohdearism]

At what point have the Police and CPS stated that the leaking of the video is more important than the violent offence captured on it?

[@boswellwhanau]

IF it was the leaked footage that lead to the riots because everyone thought that Muslim got the knee because you know, the poh poh is rwaaaacist, then absolutely the news should be FORCED to hand over names of who leaked the video to them!!!

[@boswellwhanau]

Hmmmm?? KZbin censoring posts? How suspicious 🤔 Anyway, the gist of my post was if it was the leaked footage of the guy getting kicked that lead to the rioting when the actual full footage of the incident showed it wasn’t because of the race of the guy in the ground that lead to the kick but the fact the guy on the ground attacked the police that sparked this all off. Then in that case absolutely the media should be FORCED to hand names over.

[@boswellwhanau]

On the other hand, if they are after the name of the people who leaked the entire incident to the media then absolutely no they shouldn’t hand over any names.

[@theolddog5129]

The two aspects are totally separate. The CPS is responsible for deciding whether to prosecute in relation to any crime committed by any of the parties. The IOPC is responsible for investigating police conduct. It has been widely reproted that the family has complained about the release of the CCTV - presumably because it puts the two young men in a less than positive light. It has apparently been questioned whether a police officer may have released the CCTV footage. This being so, the IOPC absolutely have to investigate the source of the leak and it would be highly irregular for them not to ask the publisher for details of the source. It is difficult to understand why BBB is choosing to miss out this vital piece of information as judging by the many comments here this is leading to many making the wrong assumptions about cover ups etc.

[@kez0o9]

"When exposing a crime is treated as committing a crime You are ruled by criminals"

[@revan.3994]

...Criminals in power that is.

[@camkai1998]

Snowden

[@kez0o9]

@@camkai1998 yes

[@camkai1998]

@@kez0o9 stay safe

[@BlairWamboldt]

Welcome to 2024.😂

[@tizerrazor1956]

If only the police put as much effort into finding and arresting actual criminals.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

I've a complaint, Lancs officer. Well two actually. First was rejected, as expected. Second is on going. Not recording the offence by the officer. Now they have admitted they are investigating him. All the interactions from DPS in Lancs were designed to get the officer off, not dealing with the officer in the same way they treat the public. ie. Pure Two Tier. Now because DPS told a porkie, and I've the tape, I'm going to take it to the PCC. I made it a Schedule 3 complaint under the 2002 police reform act. That means I need the resolution letter. They really really really don't want me to get that letter and refer it for review. I've got the voice recordings and they have tweaked I have them. The actual referal I'll be quite straight. When people see officers doing wrong on social media, then an officer needs to look at the video, and the officer needs to refer. That's the law. They then need to put up a statement to that effect on their website, followed up with any action. They need to stop using the rules to cover up. Otherwise people like me who know the rules, will use them to circumvent their game.

[@machineman-p5v]

The IOPC are not the police...

[@adenwellsmith6908]

@@machineman-p5v Most are ex coppers and in this case, doing the investigation, they will be. However, the IOPC are incompetent. For example, they have a website to submit complaints. Forwarded onto police forces. So I FOI'd them. For last year, what were the outcomes of complaints submitted via their website. We don't keep those statistics was the answer.

[@Weakeyedominant]

@@machineman-p5v they are ex police officers and senior civil servants that want to make sure the police toe the line. It's a disgrace they are trying to find the police officer that leaked it to the press. What worries me is these deep state tyrants will be all too keen to flex their muscle in support of sir Keir after doing their best to undermine the Tories while they were in power. I have no love for the Tories but the deep state is every bit as corrupt.

[@DudeSilad]

@@adenwellsmith6908 Good luck. Hope everything works out in your favour. We've all seen the lies and cover ups from the police. First time I came across it was when my best mate was arrested for drunk and disordely in the 80's. There had been a fight in a taxi place, my mate wasnt involved and was just waiting for a taxi outside. Police came, decided he was the man, put him in the back of the van and charged him. When we went to court as witnesses, the lies the police came up with was unbelievable. They said he'd been kicking and shouting at them in van. He's a bit of a wuss in reality and would more than likely have been crying. And the police who gave evidence in the magistrates weren't even the arresting officers. He pleaded not guilty and I ran rings around the prosecutor. Kept picking holes in his questions but alas, you're never going to win but I think the magistrate knew the coppers were making stuff up and gave him fine for drunk and disordely which was less than what the coppers and prosecution were after.

[@devonfuse]

Funny how disseminating knowledge is considered more dangerous than the criminal actions exposed.

[@ohdearism]

It's not though, is it. It's just one part of their investigation.

[@devonfuse]

@@ohdearism "Far-Right" instantly charged and sentenced based on CCTV evidence alone. Quite right. Beating up and breaking the nose of armed police by those who are, shall we say, "Far-Left" and there seems to be; a) no charges, b) painstaking and long-winded investigation, and c) a strong desire to control the information. 2-tier? Some may say so.

[@vickymc9695]

​@@ohdearismthey already have that. It was leaked from their information. This is just to go after the officer letting everyone else see what he did

[@crawford1083]

More effort seems to be put into the whistleblower than actually apprehending the Muz brothers who caused the ruckus.

[@Journey_to_who_knows]

Communists are more interested in arresting those who complain than actual criminals

[@SouthpawDavey]

The problem is honesty about whats going on in the country is not in the government interest.

[@FriendlyHomie]

@@SouthpawDavey They can't let the house of cards fall down, corruption is a big money game!

[@leevan2332]

Not in the PEOPLES interest ....The government are the ones allowing these crimes to happen by mass immigration

[@GeorgesDupont-do8pe]

Look up IOPC. It's supposed to be a body completely independent of the police. Completely independent of other sources is another thing, sure with a bit of rooting around, those managing it could be disclosed. It must be in the public domain.

[@Mr_Penguins_Pet_Human]

Well done ME News for standing up to this inappropriate request and pressure from the police.

[@LDI154]

​@@Mr_Penguins_Pet_Human The IOPC are not the Police. They are anti-Police! The inference I take from this is that the IOPC believe a police officer leaked the video and they want to prosecute them for that. I'm shocked at how brazen they are in demanding this information, it's journalistic material which is protected in law!!!

[@geordiewishart1683]

It's not the police. It's the IOPC!

[@Stig_of_Soton]

The GMP were the party that leaked it to them in the first place because they sought to interfere in the investigation by the IOPC

[@deb7834]

Altercation 😂 policewoman had her nose broken and they tried to get the one officers gun. It was terrorism.

[@adenwellsmith6908]

What does the IOPC expect to gain from this? It's bizarre. They have the full footage from the videos from the CCTV from the airport, from the BWV. What do they need for their investigation into the police's conduct? They have it all. What it looks like, is they want the source so they can prosecute the source. ie. Shoot the messenger, not the problem.

[@eliaspanayi3465]

I'm more interested in finding out who cut the footage to paint those police in a negative light. The full context was certainly available on the CCTV system.

[@jasonallen6081]

@eliaspanayi3465 Is that included in this or not. It was originally released in its truncated form because it made the police look bad. When the rest of it was released, it put it in a different context. Did the press also clip the footage to suit their narrative? If not, who did ?

[@rockfan3299]

the original was from a different camera... wasn't it a phone?

[@AlexRiganas]

that wasn't cctv, was a phone clip

[@johng.1703]

these were two completely different videos, one was from a cell phone, the other was from CCTV footage. the first can be released at will, the second, that, has legal implications.

[@not_glad]

If you've watched the George Floyd body cam footage (it's on yt) the whole thing is difficult. You could probably edit a Harry Potter film to make Hagrid look like the villan.

[@Akstergrind]

This country gets more like a police state with every day that passes. Why does everything to do with the authorities seem so bloody dodgy and underhanded at the moment? I really don't know who to trust anymore!

[@rolyvonotter2693]

Because of Cameras 😂

[@S.Trades]

Well you do know who you cannot trust. One of them seems to appear on the news every day, either being arrested or sacked!

[@walterxplinge3867]

Trust no-one.

[@madMARTYNmarsh1981]

I have asked the same question recently. When you consider all the MPs and celebrities who have been dodgy in the past, the efforts made to hide their crimes within the time frame of 'living memory' be it the criminals, the victim, or eithers family, the only rational decision I could come to is that they have always been dodgy and underhanded. The internet has ruined the old technique of making these crimes a local myth through threats and/or bribery, and cameras mean we get recorded evidence of many more crimes than was possible when I was a kid. Social media is the key to our intellectual freedom. Freedom of speech is our main weapon. Is it any surprise that both are under attack?

[@kimlee4010]

Because the ARE dodgy and underhanded…… to say the least!

[@tannersmith8205]

This is harassment of the press.

[@rnash999]

It should be public information freely available. People make fun of Florida but pretty much everything is required to be made public, excepting children and crime victims.

[@collier8931]

Get used to it, the Communist Labour government are in POWER now.

[@handsomejack5787]

If it were me or you who was on the footage nobody would give a toss.

[@primafacie5029]

The press are a joke these days but occasionally they'll deign to publish the truth... If nothing else, it confuses people.

[@JonDingle]

Why protect the press? They don't protect you, remember covid?

[@mikeharrison1714]

MEN to IOPC "What part of "No" do you not understand" - polite version

[@jaywalker1233]

Welcome to thePoliceState

[@jaywalker1233]

@TriTr-gk8bo legally they r,thats what matters

[@Rose.Of.Hizaki]

Men Going Their Own Way.

[@dacorum8053]

Th senior officer in the IOPC who sanctioned this demand that the newspaper should give up its source should be sacked with immediate effect. Their job is not to intimidate whistleblowers which is in any case against the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998. This particular whistleblower meant the that the public saw a much truer view of the events at Manchester airport that day and that is in the public interest.

[@PCDelorian]

Asking for information isn't worthy of saking an investigator. If he's made unjustified threats, maybe, but otherwise its his job to ask. Edit - to clarify there should be a defence available to the leaker but if there isn't its not the fair to sanction an officer investigating for a failure in the law.

[@sandrawhelan9159]

I wonder why the police did not wa nt the public to see this video. Having seen most of the video, there was more to it than what we saw in the beginning.The first puts the police in a very bad light, the second show what the police were dealing with. Animals.why didn't the police want us to see this.

[@PCDelorian]

@@sandrawhelan9159 Because its prejudiced any potential jury pool which is going to make prosecuting them harder. The police have to comply with law and its potentially unlawful that this was disclosed, and the police should not pick and choose which laws they enforce. I'm sure individuals within the police wanted this known and indeed somebody felt strong enough to release it anyway, but as a collective institution they must comply with all rules not just ones they agree with and releasing footage of suspected pre-trial without anything being gained for an investigation is generally bad practise.

[@AndrewFosterSheff69]

We are still waiting on the report to be released, re the child gr4pe / grooming gangs across the country. That was held back because it wasn't in the public interest... This world is completely DEMONIC!

[@AndrewFosterSheff69]

@@PCDelorian Unless you're a white working class person, then they will come at you with everything.

[@louisemarshall9301]

Big problem about it being leaked is that it highlights the fact that "violent thugs" come from all walks of life and political persuasion.

[@WhatyourAncestorsknew]

There was the nandos incident where police let another one walk after assaulting a waitress with a plate.

[@shugthehornyhaggis]

Both where Muslim​@@WhatyourAncestorsknew

[@shugthehornyhaggis]

It really doesn't if you take 5 mins to look at the perpetrators on 90% of the problems they all come from the same background

[@WhatyourAncestorsknew]

@@shugthehornyhaggis yeah that's what I meant by 'another one' my yt account is heavily censored.

[@jfla5700]

What it highlights is the fact that violent thugs from certain communities are pandered to and are not held up to the same standards as the rest of us

[@frankielov]

The video should been seen police did their duty to protect them selfs and the public.

[@S.Trades]

Is English your first language? Or are you a police officer?

[@HikaruKatayamma]

@@S.Trades Cop apologist.

[@S.Trades]

Maybe have another look at your grammar?

[@a.y.t.a.s.494]

@@S.Tradesa bit petty, which part of frankies comment could you not understand?

[@tomhollins5303]

The IOPC doesn't think the public knowing the broader context is a good thing? Think about that for a while.

[@ValTwineDeaner]

This is total insanity. That truthful video is 100% superb, giving us the proper reality of what happened. I've seriously had enough of this mental country - or rather the rotten to the core, people in charge. I want out, I can't take any more.

[@rosemarylelong6282]

So showing a crime is now a crime in the UK you couldnt make it up.

[@jmcc2275]

Seems to be…..think of what would have happened if MSM were our only source of news during the riots? Thank God for YT etc.

[@richardc3194]

Does 2TK hatred to 'right wing thugs' or anyone with a different political opinion now amount to a national security threat issue?

[@jaywalker1233]

Welcome to thePoliceState

[@rolyvonotter2693]

2TK is a Marxist with activist background, Marxists blame everything on the 'Right Wing' which is seen always as an existential threat to the Comrades, the opportunity to attack & label is Classic Marxism.

[@jmcc2275]

Misogyny seen as terrorism now? It makes you wonder what exactly is going on.

[@leswalker4282]

@richardc3194 we have all got understand this is about silence and to intimate the people.To try and stop whistle-blowers and anyone trying to be a citizen journalist from posting videos that officials don't like. This is extremely dangerous. To me the msm are conplict in this by the bias way they report the news the worst example when those little girls who where murdered 😢 and the msm put a photo of the murderer on tv when he was a little child this was just sickening. And before all that these to two horrible brothers.

[@idonotwantahandle2]

National security threat. Hate crime. Freedom and truth is fading right before our eyes.

[@me38443]

IMHO it looks more like IOPC and Manchester police wanting to find away to dismiss the case against the brothers but go full force against the police officers.

[@davidclegg3554]

"Well Your Honour", said the expensive barrister representing the airport thugs, "My clients cannot have a fair trial as millions of people have seen the cctv footage which shows my clients attack the police officers". "Oh" says the judge, "then we will dismiss the case, now bring in the heinous criminal who released the video so we can lock him up"

[@S.Trades]

Let's hope so... but I doubt it.

[@brycecombs2868]

Bbbuuuutttt... They're white.🤦

[@tannersmith8205]

@@me38443 You got it in one.

[@S.Trades]

*"find a way"

[@Gekite]

our institutions appear to be getting ahead of themselves and need winding back in

[@rolyvonotter2693]

Because given the chance they do, especially the Police, having a Police force that is regional is for a purpose & not issuing them with firearms is for the same reason.

[@ibrstellar1080]

There's worse coming as watch UK Column news.

[@jmcc2275]

Who gave then the green light?

[@stephenwilliams9950]

@@ibrstellar1080 can you be slightly more specific? There's a lot of material out there.

[@englishbottlecap]

I think that the independence of the Independent Office for Police Conduct must now be very questionable

[@bremnersghost948]

IOPC = Indebted Officers Protecting Corruption!

[@CaptainLaika]

They're doing this for the video leaker but have they even charged the two ungentlemanly suspects who assaulted the police officers yet?

[@gteaz]

The facebook poster will be charged and prosecuted to the max, the assaulters will get a slap on the wrist.

[@Stig_of_Soton]

The prosecution of these two could collapse if the Manchester Evening News does not give up who gave them the footage so I wouldn’t be too surprised if you see them walk

[@lalaholland5929]

Resisting Arrest Assault on 3 armed officers.

[@Stig_of_Soton]

@@lalaholland5929 Footage showed police officers slamming his head into the ticket machine and then proceeding to start punching and that’s when both parties started throwing punches. Try not to lie because the footage shows these things, despite the full footage being cut which shows the police hitting his mother with the taser and hitting the other brother as well

[@lalaholland5929]

​@@Stig_of_Sotonso you're saying there are 3 versions of the action then. The first 2 are misleading? And there's another which is 'not edited'?

[@3amael]

The british gestapo want your informants.

[@lonesheepdog6337]

These people aren't the state interior security police.

[@mikerayson-q2t]

Independent..( in IOPC)..my arse , someone in high places is putting pressure on .

[@boogboog8097]

@@mikerayson-q2t 2 tier kier

[@philmarston9078]

It's clearly in the public interest, after the officer was placed in a bad light. It is important to show both sides after all.

[@JamesCarmichael]

I wonder who leaked the original footage without any context? Are they going after them? Doubt it. Inconvient truth seems to be more hurtful than a lie these days.

[@jyyyb]

@@JamesCarmichael without context it was incitement

[@JamesCarmichael]

@@jyyyb Fully agree, but as you know it's one rule for some and another rule for the others.

[@justanerd1138]

I love how UK law has found a way to keep people from providing an opinion on current events. Great way to minimize the public's access to subject matter experts and help ease government's ability cover-up whatever they wish.

[@AndrewFosterSheff69]

We have been fast tracked to stage 7 of the 10 stages of genocide (look into it). Being able to silence dissent will pay dividends at stage 10, when they start denying anything even happened.

[@NICKBYN]

I sense that the establishment are frustrated that any cover up of the Manchester Airport incident has been botched......

[@canuck3169]

The cheque to the `victims’ was probably already being typed up

[@JohnWalker-rt6ue]

The Manchester newspaper could simply say that the video was sent to them anonymously.

[@blackbeltsecrets]

Journalists also need to verify it

[@S.Trades]

​it's a video? Why would it need verifying? We can clearly see this is the same incident? @@blackbeltsecrets

[@rogermellie8068]

What the hell has it got to do with the IOPC. They only exist to monitor police behavior.

[@geordiewishart1683]

They are concerned it might have been a cop who leaked it. Such a leak would be contrary to the police code of ethics.

[@S.Trades]

That's what they claim....not everyone believes that.

[@aries6776]

Could be a policeman obtained and then leaked the video.

[@daveharrison61]

@@aries6776 it could quite well be a copper that leaked it to the press. The fact that the IOPC is treating it that way suggests to me they are trying to hang the coppers from the footage out to dry.

[@jensun77wilson]

@@aries6776and?

[@ozandthemartianmonkeys173]

They are trying to justify letting them off

[@1aatlas]

Of course they're investigating the newspaper.... Still no word on charges for these people. SMH.

[@randommusic4567]

@@1aatlas i imagine that if the police hadn't appeared to assault the suspects (even though they appear to be displaying thuggish behaviour) that the case would have been much simpler and they probably would have already been charged

[@dreimann]

It's incredibly important to protect whistleblowers.

[@colinwinterman]

I don't call it leaking, I call it knowing, there's nothing wrong in knowing

[@SM-mz2hz]

What does it matter who releases the CCTV? Why do they want to know?

[@stevepi1]

Politicised subject matter.

[@tlangdon12]

It only matters if it was a service police officer who had been provided with evidence to investigate a crime. If it wasn't this, then the IOPC wouldn't have any jurisdiction to request that the source be identifed. However, Manchester Airport know who they gave their footage to, so it's not going to be the Police Officer that received the evidence, rather it will be someone else who had access to the evidence. Clearly Manchester Police don't have perfect control over who can access electronic evidence.

[@SM-mz2hz]

@@tlangdon12 So it would only matter if the evidence was handed to police in order to investigate. Aren’t people allowed to hand in evidence anonymously? Particularly electronic evidence. I mean, if it’s witness testimony then you’d need to know who the person is it be credible.. but videos too?

[@stevepi1]

@@tlangdon12 Looked to me like the leaked video wasn't a transfer of a file (requiring access) but more like somebody videoing a screen that was playing it.

[@kenricnarbrough8191]

@@SM-mz2hz M15 nudge unit would like to know your location...

[@billwinward9324]

So what criminal offence does the IOPC think the CCTV leaker has committed and why are they investigating rather than the ‘normal’ police?

[@geordiewishart1683]

If the person who leaked it was a police officer then he or she has breached the police code of ethics. And that falls under the IOPC remit.

[@yousoufkirkwood6289]

​@@geordiewishart1683good point!

[@Stig_of_Soton]

@@billwinward9324 Have you seen the press conference done by the lawyers of the two men involved in this altercation with the police? I would recommend watching it in full as I found it very interesting. Their lawyer has made a number of allegations, one of which was that they made an allegation to the IOPC that the police have sought to interfere in the investigation as they have accused the GMP of selectively leaking information to the press in order to try and influence public opinion by presenting a partial account to the public. The allegation they have made is that GMP is involved in unauthorised leaking of this material to Manchester Evening News. They claim it’s not the full footage as it has been cut. They have also made an allegation that they were taken into a part of the airport without CCTV after being arrested and were subjected to additional abuse. If the news agency does not give up who leaked this material, then what could potentially happen is that any prosecution for assault on police could collapse as any prosecution would be viewed as an abuse of process as information that relates to police criminality is being withheld from the defence. I don’t think BBB is showing everybody the whole story because he has right wing political opinions that is influencing how he is presenting this case.

[@leemitchell8501]

@@geordiewishart1683 I can only agree with you 100% when it comes to breaking the ethical code. However, only one side of the story was being shown publicly and nationally and it was beyond viral, as such, having not been defended by the police desperation, may have kicked in given the public outcry against said officers, which is also ethically wrong. My point being, why and who released the first CCTV video? Was that unethical, if so, they should be investigated. If, and it's obviously an if, a police officer leaked it, they may be wrong under the IOPC remit, but one could argue that they were let down demonstrably by the police force who did nothing publicly to defend them.

[@helenisherwood3325]

Broken the GDPR law, I would imagine

[@JBinthesticks]

Why does everything in the news seem so fishy these days? I'm not one for tin foil hats, but straightforward common sense, evenhandedness and transparency are right out of the window, in most cases

[@MRW515]

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” ― George Orwell, 1984

[@DerekEmerson]

A chief constable has been quoted as saying that ‘common sense is not an appropriate tool for a police officer’!!

[@jmcc2275]

It makes you wonder what’s going on that’s for sure. What final outcome do they have in mind?

[@LaurieKnight1969]

Because we might be 4 decades late but we got there in the end

[@paul8972]

@@JBinthesticks the so called tin foil hats have been right about mist things , it will probably take you another 12 months and you will understand the need to question most things in the news. Start by not watching bbc and sky that will help you.

[@YachtEventHorizon]

It very much sounds like they want to go after those who leaked the footage. If that footage had not been leaked then we would not have known the full story.

[@randommusic4567]

I imagine you would have known the full story when all the evidence is shown by both sides in the trial

[@codegreen5213]

@@randommusic4567 Yeah.. After the police officers were either arrested for their own protection or jumped in the street. Are you for real? The trial might not have been for 6-12 months. Stop making excuses for this you fool.

[@donnalloyd7195]

The government are responsible and accountable, no one else is responsible or accountable regarding the footage.

[@suefrowde9378]

Sharing a video proving the Police took the correct action, after the misleading short video intimating police brutality is a problem! What a crazy world we are living in

[@AlexRiganas]

correct? he booted the guy in the face while on the floor. that wasn't the correct action.

[@stevepi1]

@@AlexRiganas "Correct" is a subjective determination.

[@suefrowde9378]

@@AlexRiganas what did you want him to do "pop his gun down on the floor, while he freed his hands to help restrain the vicious thugs". It was a serious assault on armed police at an airport. The thug was extremely lucky he wasn't shot. It is easy to be righteous after the event but at that moment, 2 officers had already been taken down, the officer had no idea who else could be involved and his priority had to be to protect his firearm and the public

[@AlexRiganas]

@@suefrowde9378 i couldn't care less about the jack boot cop. they were just embarrassed they both got delt with by a kid. but you cant break the law and enforce it. kicking him while down isn't protocol to restrain.

[@GODOURSALVATION.]

@AlexRiganas how would you react, if you had weapons inuour hand, and you were punched, and so were your colleagues 🤔

[@madMARTYNmarsh1981]

This would have already been covered up if that video hadn't been leaked. Whoever released that footage, if you see this comment, you are a hero.

[@shaun67uk]

Why are they so concerned about who leaked it?

[@geordiewishart1683]

They are concerned it may have been leaked by a police officer.

[@Stig_of_Soton]

@@shaun67uk And if they don’t give up their source, it could collapse any prosecution against the two men accused of assaulting the police as information is being withheld from the defence, please watch the press conference conducted by their lawyer to understand why

[@NB-TB]

@@geordiewishart1683 So what? Why does it matter who leaked it? It shows the true timeline of the crime no matter if it was a policeman, a prostitute or the pope who leaked.

[@jensun77wilson]

@@Stig_of_Sotonsurely It cannot be withholding evidence to not show who the source is?!

[@donny121able]

The footage means they can't sweep it under the carpet and go easy on the thugs who did it.

[@vapingreaper2463]

Seems the authorities didn’t want us to see the second leaked footage, just the first part to suit a narrative

[@JaniceLamb-n1y]

The public have a right to know what happened.

[@andreaclarke4955]

I think your subscribers like you, I love reading their comments as they vent their frustrations safely on your channel, please continue to speak the truth to us, I'm disappointed to hear you have troubles, the officers in your story and your brilliant self deserve our support and respect big time, I pray God's blessings for you all, thank you Blackbeltbarrister for another informative video, with warmest thoughts and regards

[@fastbandit1250]

Those 2 brothers cannot get away from being charged, ther will be a big outcry if they get away without being charged, it will just reinforce the publics view that a two tier system exist

[@canuck3169]

It looks as if the police & the `justice’ system are trying to kick it into the long grass so the general public forgets about it

[@karlstone6011]

What seems as significant, if not more so - than who leaked the footage, is how it was subsequently edited for public consumption.

[@paulwary]

Thinking about a crime is a crime Reporting a crime is a crime Recording a crime is a crime Non-crime beliefs are a crime But committing a crime? Well it all depends…

[@garrycroft4215]

They always jail the Whistleblowers.

[@jamesbain6070]

Bullying tactics

[@paulfoster553]

I'd rather do prison time than help the police and government

[@paulyoung4422]

Thank God, for the brave Whistleblower.

[@piggypiggypig1746]

Never mind who leaked the footage in its entirety. I’d like to know who leaked the edited version and why.

[@jonathanlake6053]

They attempted to damage the reputation of the police & infer that it was a racist attack, by severe editing of the footage.

[@petermaddison6782]

They had a proppergander* at it before leaking it as proppaganda *To those who don't know, 'gander' means to have a good look at in the UK.

[@stevehand8063]

Truth hurts

[@duncansmith7562]

am guessing that IOPC stands for Indefensible Organization of Pakistani Criminals

[@dwgray9000]

Hey lads, i found the racist.

[@duncansmith7562]

@@dwgray9000 use of the word "lads" = we found the misogynist!

[@dadsstuff5562]

There didn't seem to be this much concern over the Matt Hancock fondling CCTV making the front pages, and that, I would have thought, would have been of greater concern given where it was taken.

[@reluctantheist5224]

Was police behaviour involved? If not, that's why.

[@greenendhouse]

Yes very good point. That was a matter of national security . This now is just politically motivated.

[@Paul_Holmes]

How can you not speak about the case? Has it already been made impossible to prosecute because the family held a press conference?

[@Some1outside5973]

I wondered that I hope he answers

[@davidsmart8594]

@@Paul_Holmes He (nor we), can’t comment in detail about the case because it’s “in court” now. The danger is that he (or we) are charged by the presiding judge with “contempt of court”. The law is that way to ensure a fair trial. If you were to be accused of something and end up in court, I’m sure you wouldn’t want a “trial by media” or “trial by public”, where not all the facts are known by the media or the public and talking about the matter (in detail) could endanger the fairness of the trial. I hope that helps. 👍

[@jmcc2275]

@@davidsmart8594there have already been trials by Government.

[@davidsmart8594]

@@jmcc2275 Ah, true that…

[@Paul_Holmes]

@@davidsmart8594 Oh, I did not know it was in court, there has been total silence from he Police

[@craigmorson]

Thank you another fantastic video keep them up 👏👍

[@facehugger3]

Who cares who leaked it. The main thing is the truth comes out.

[@ValeriaPugliesiWashington]

#TwoTierJustice is real.

[@chrisplant7273]

Why should they state criminal proceedings as to the leakage when it is surely police & adversaries they should be looking at?

[@jaywalker1233]

Welcome to thePoliceState

[@kaedesnex]

Crimes against the state (and it's narrative) are more important than crimes against the person.

[@kiwishitloard2568]

From what you have said I can only think that maybe the IOPC believes that a member of police leaked the information. Otherwise why would it be within their scope?

[@kc-qs8qg]

one issue re. workplace abuse and retaliation - in particular in the NHS - is that lawyers take payment in order to defend said workplace abusers...

[@BionicRusty]

IT DOESN’T MATTER.

[@heidiHiHo2391]

Generally the whole footage from situation/incident should of been requested by the courts. To obviously to watch actual evidence to gain full contextual evidence showing, before, leading up to, and after. Fair examination of evidence on both parties is our justice system.... isn't it? Seems more focussed on finding out who provided fair evidence for a fair judge ruling! It's quite worrying really! Thank you for covering this. 🙏

[@sharronreynolds]

Thanks so much for another educational vid, love your professional input. Keep them coming, I appreciate you 🙏

[@MiPointIs]

I don’t understand why IOPC thinks it is entitled to make this request as I thought it was to set up to investigate serious complaints against the police. Are they trying to establish that the video was leaked by a police officer? If this is the case surely this is a serious internal police matter?

[@jaywalker1233]

Welcome to thePoliceState

[@suefrowde9378]

@@MiPointIs that was my initial thought too

[@thoughtfulalbatros9683]

Request being the operative word - I don’t know if they can force it And yeah possibly, saw another comment saying something about it possibly being a copper that released it so it’d make sense for the IOPC to investigate - nout will happen but gotta do the paperwork to get paid lol

[@paul-t-geist4245]

Something SERIOUSLY not right here.

[@sbv-zs7wz]

Didn't see this call when the 'Matt Cock-hand' video appeared a few years back.

[@enigma7791]

The protected species of the uk

[@leahsturdevant7651]

Love your show

[@blackbeltsecrets]

Thank you 😊

[@tonymills4971]

So they want to arrest the person who leaked the footage of the 2 thugs attacking armed police officers yet the 2 thugs have still not been charged, what is going on here ?

[@jaywalker1233]

classic attck the messenger +ignore the message.More+more Orwellian by theday!! Soon they’ll comefor allof us

[@TheDaflad]

Is the establishment just buying time as to prolong the criminal charges that will follow??

[@derekking5386]

Correct, they are playing the long game, hoping we will forget about it. The powers that be know that if they charge and sentence these criminals, they will have a full scale muslim supporting riot on their hands. They didnt want us to see the later videos

[@Stig_of_Soton]

@@TheDaflad watch the press conference done by the lawyer of the two men involved to understand the significance of this request by the IOPC

[@Ollybus]

Why does the IOPC think that it’s necessary to know who leaked this video? Is it so they can have them arrested?

[@davidian7787]

If the CCTV showed an average day, with nothing happening would they look at who released it? Why are they so interested in an assault in a public area being released?

[@wedolly]

Really enjoy watching/istening to your videos, both channels, which I recently discovered. There is lots to learn - all the best😀

[@Rankbaajin]

When reporting a crime is more serious than commiting a crime you are being governed by criminals

[@rogerwilson6367]

A Totally Irrelevant distraction.

[@ep1929]

Imagine what the witchunt against the brave officers would have been like without the leak.

[@tektkite7255]

Full out fascism. enjoy

[@sahhull]

So ..the powers that be don't want the public knowing the full unedited story . Especially when the full version doesn't fit the narrative.

[@rockfan3299]

what if the video was posted? nobody would know where it came from. It seems that the police are upset because of the 2 tier system in place and they never acted on the attack......

[@robertharper6481]

The press in the UK has very little value left, good to see they can at least sometimes stand up for themselves.

[@ScottyJ1122]

I think this is time wasting because they do not want to prosecute the two men who committed the assaults.

[@jonathanlake6053]

I doubt they will be jailed,one law for the diverse & another law for the natives.

[@dreddykrugernew]

They wanted a narrative to paint and thats why the government themselves never released the footage. Why are all the police officers turning up to work when even they are attacked by the 'untouchables' the government will annihilate them and make them the scapegoats. What are the police doing, why arent they themselves not sticking together in their union its a seriously dangerous job being an officer now in this day in age but with the added fact that if you are attacked by an 'untouchable' the government wont even back you up and will hang you out to dry.

[@johnnyhock]

THE VERY FACT THAT THE GMP ARE MORE CONCERNED WITH, AND ANNOYED ABOUT WHO LEAKED THE CCTV FOOTAGE OF THEIR OFFICERS BEING BEATEN AT MANCHESTER AIRPORT, THAN THEY ARE ABOUT THEIR OFFICERS BEING BADLY BEATEN AT MANCHESTER AIRPORT.. SPEAKS VOLUMES !!

[@phil4893]

Why are the IOPC so concerned about where the leaked footage came from? It has exposed the truth.

[@googleuser8740]

Lets not worry about potentially abusive cops lets worry about who exposes them and allows for public scrutany. Society is doomed

[@GhostWriter_Music]

if the police put this much energy into crime, then there would be less crime.

[@brucegillies4798]

Why is the IOPC looking into a matter that is out with their remit unless i'm missing something i.e they think the material was released by a police officer

[@chamatsprayart2283]

The question that should be asked is"who tried to keep the truth from us? " these are the people we need to focus on.... Those that try to cover up the truth...

[@thetruthwillwinoneday]

Doesn’t fit the agenda……informing the public of the full facts.

[@richardhodds7812]

What diference does it make to the IOPC who leaked the videos surely they should only be interested in the actual video, which if it is CCTV in the airport the airport has?

[@justinmarkwilliams]

why does it matter who leaked it??? is it criminal to release videos?

[@stevenjackson3906]

Don't give them the footage. They'll get rid of it as part of a cover up to protect the Narrative. These are Starmer's goons at work.

[@S.Trades]

Hands up, anyone who trusts the iopc? Anyone?

[@geofftyerman9419]

Cctv doesn’t lie and should help with the prosecution against the thugs attacking the police.