Resisting the FIT Teams: A proposal for action

[lights.out.london]

Absolute rubbish. Cops are constantly asking people to move and have absolutely know idea what legislation they're using. Half the time they're making it up and expect people to do what they're told because they're wearing a uniform. I have rarely met a cop who has the slightest clue what the law is.

Whilst there are no Ociffers on my Xmas card list, perhaps I've been unlucky and have crossed the one or two who made it through Hendon without having to attend remedial reading and writing classes?

As a rule, I can emphasise with coppers on the frontline as other human beings; it must be intimidating at times, when faced with two groups trying to rip one another to bits. I'm not that surprised cops get short-tempered when faced with a 'fuck you' attitude. Doesn't mean I like it.

I remember back in '98 (cue - nostalga music) I and a Comrade had a run-in with a couple of fash skins in Blackfriars (close to the Cockpit pub/Carter Lane). When the cops arrived and pulled us off the scum, they weren't too gentle with me especially (I have a big mouth when the blood/adrenaline is pumping ). When they'd listened to who we were, who the skins were and what happened, Big Cop said they'd "fuck off out of it" (as I had asked) and gave us 5 minutes to get it sorted and sod off. I guess they were cops who would never join the BNP/NF etc, etc.

e2a ^ City of London police, not the Met.

I don't do sit down demos for whale hugging and tree saving. Fuck em - hippies. No problem with cops following or bashing a few middle class trustafarians around town.

I do care about the effect the FIT teams have had on our movement, the effect they have had on myself and my friends. My personal view is this isn't about saying "you can't do this" but making it as difficult as possible for them to do what they do.

I don't know what DA you're involved with (and it's none of my business) but a little organisation and some good spotters can help. And whilst it may be too late for you, the trick (if there is one) is not to become a 'face'.

 

[The Black Hand]

Why so surprised? Since when did we live in a democracy?

I agree, but pointing out the contradictions contained within is a way of building class consciousness. Policing in a democracy is supposed to be reactive, policing in a police state is proactive. I agree the tendency is towards more proactive policing but unless these things are resisted by all possible means things will get worse. We have to try to defend what few freedoms are supposed to exist - like free speech, the right to policitically organise without prejeudice from the police etc. There are alredy enough laws out there to deal with public order, and the police should be photographing the local mosque if we are to take their hierarchy of risks seriously.

 

[chymaera]

For anyone who doesn’t know, these are the cops who are paid to harass anarchists (and the Far Right, football fans and Islamic fundamentalists). They follow “known” people on protests and they stand outside public meetings taking photos and writing copious notes.

.

Shouldn't you be more worried by covert surveillence? If there is a team overtly filming and taking notes there is bound to be a covert one.

 

[LX365]

Shouldn't you be more worried by covert surveillence? If there is a team overtly filming and taking notes there is bound to be a covert one.

I think anyone who's involved in direct action should be worried about covert surveillence.

However it's not them knowing our plans and who we are that is necessarily the issue. It's the psychological effect of having them outside meetings, of being followed, wrongfully arrested, assaulted, etc. It's the constant grinding down of activists that they successfully engage in which I take issue with and want to respond to.

I agree it's better not to become a known face. When we've done affinity group trainings, we've always advised people that if they see us on a demo and we're being followed not to come up and say hello.

However it's not always that easy. Lots of people look for public events and public meetings as way to get involved with politics. This also still makes it important for people to organise public events for people to connect with and have an entry point into what can be a very closed world.

 

[lights.out.london]

I think anyone who's involved in direct action should be worried about covert surveillence.

I'm pretty certain my phone is tapped and they're also adding their phone bills to mine - seemed that way last month.

 

[The Black Hand]

I think anyone who's involved in direct action should be worried about covert surveillence.

However it's not them knowing our plans and who we are that is necessarily the issue. It's the psychological effect of having them outside meetings, of being followed, wrongfully arrested, assaulted, etc. It's the constant grinding down of activists that they successfully engage in which I take issue with and want to respond to.

I agree it's better not to become a known face. When we've done affinity group trainings, we've always advised people that if they see us on a demo and we're being followed not to come up and say hello.

However it's not always that easy. Lots of people look for public events and public meetings as way to get involved with politics. This also still makes it important for people to organise public events for people to connect with and have an entry point into what can be a very closed world.

I think anybody involved in DA already takes precautions. Certainly I decided, like Sinn Fein/IRA, after numerous direct actions and political apprenticeship that I had better step away from the violent stuff and concentrate on the political, and now I am out and proud. How many anarchists can say that? (I know, a lot). But the point is that many are not known and keep a deliberate low and/or invisisble profile, and this is sensible if you want to do anything political that is seriously illegal.

I agree they shouldn't be able to film people just like that it is very provocative as well as oppresive. It would be good to find police houses who are doing the photography, and wait outside their house with cameras etc Or - as a propaganda stunt, go outside top cop house, invite press, and say we will move when you stop photographing us - which should raise the profile of this issue...

 

[lights.out.london]

I think anybody involved in DA already takes precautions. Certainly I decided, like Sinn Fein/IRA, after numerous direct actions and political apprenticeship that I had better step away from the violent stuff and concentrate on the political, and now I am out and proud. How many anarchists can say that? (I know, a lot). But the point is that many are not known and keep a deliberate low and/or invisisble profile, and this is sensible if you want to do anything political that is seriously illegal...

Class War paranoia?

I doubt 'they' have retired your file if you were once an activist.

I agree they shouldn't be able to film people just like that it is very provocative as well as oppresive. It would be good to find police houses who are doing the photography, and wait outside their house with cameras etc Or - as a propaganda stunt, go outside top cop house, invite press, and say we will move when you stop photographing us - which should raise the profile of this issue...

That would be interesting. Whilst not knowing, I'd bet a pound that there is some law/by-law preventing assembly (peaceful or otherwise) outside all copshops?

 

[detective-boy]

Whilst not knowing, I'd bet a pound that there is some law/by-law preventing assembly (peaceful or otherwise) outside all copshops?

You'd lose.

 

[lights.out.london]

You'd lose.

That surprises me. **hands DB £1** Even stations like Paddington?

 

[Yossarian]

The bvast, vast majority of officers I ever worked on public order with had no problem at all with people who sat down in the road, etc. and were a nuisance but, once the game was up, came quietly and created no problems. The majority walked out of the station with nothing more than a caution (if that) a couple of hours later).

Individuals with in your face attitudes, for some reason, used to end up getting charged ...

 

[detective-boy]

And your point ...

... You do have a point, don't you?

 

[The Black Hand]

And your point ...

... You do have a point, don't you?

He was taking the piss out of self proclaimed 'demi gods' like you.

 

[detective-boy]

He was taking the piss out of self proclaimed 'demi gods' like you.

Oh, sorry. We "demi gods" are not so all-seeing as the full Gods like yourself ...

(And, to be honest, it looked like knee-jerk abuse, irrelevant to any of the points in hand, rather than anything which could broadly be described as wit ...)

 

[Andy the Don]

Do not know why you lot are screaming about this now. Us football supporters have had to put up with this since the mid 1990's. I can remember being in town on the day of England v Scotland 1996, I had a ticket & was stopped about three times on my way to wembley. Twice by the same team in the matter of minutes on my way to & from The Globe pub in Baker Street. Always the same routine, search & photographed which was then transmitted to police HQ for verification & then let go after being told not to be seen again. After the match we went to Leicester Square tube station & were basically told to sod back to south London or risk arrest.

 

[newbie]

You'd lose.

so standing outside Brixton police station and photographing all the guys and gals in jeans and trainers wouldn't get me arrested? Somehow I doubt that.

 

[The Black Hand]

Oh, sorry. We "demi gods" are not so all-seeing as the full Gods like yourself ...

(And, to be honest, it looked like knee-jerk abuse, irrelevant to any of the points in hand, rather than anything which could broadly be described as wit ...)

Of course I am glad you are now worshipping at my temple

Face it - he succesfully took the piss out out of the police farce, sorry that should read 'force'. You just do not like it

 

[lights.out.london]

so standing outside Brixton police station and photographing all the guys and gals in jeans and trainers wouldn't get me arrested? Somehow I doubt that.

That was the point I was driving at. Law or no law, I just can't see Plod letting a group of activist's hang out on their doorstep ...

 

[detective-boy]

so standing outside Brixton police station and photographing all the guys and gals in jeans and trainers wouldn't get me arrested? Somehow I doubt that.

You may get arrested ... but they would have to have reasonable grounds to suspect some offence for which they could arrest you.

They could NOT arrest you simply for simply peacefully assembling outside a police station, which was what the question was, because there is no specific offence committed by doing that. And the situation is exactly the same outside a police station as anywhere else - there is no specific law which applies there and nowhere else (even at Paddington Green).

They couldn't arrest you simply for taking photographs ... but that activity may well provide reasonable grounds to suspect something else (in the case of Paddington Green perhaps a terrorism related offence, particularly if suspects were being detained there at the time.)

 

[detective-boy]

Face it - he succesfully took the piss out out of the police farce, sorry that should read 'force'. You just do not like it

No they didn't.

They boringly posted the same thoughtless bollocks cartoon that has been posted dozens of times before and which has no specific relevance to the issues being discussed. It's simply tedious.

 

[detective-boy]

Law or no law, I just can't see Plod letting a group of activist's hang out on their doorstep ...

There have been demonstrations outside police stations on numerous occasions.

 

[lights.out.london]

They couldn't arrest you simply for taking photographs ... but that activity may well provide reasonable grounds to suspect something else (in the case of Paddington Green perhaps a terrorism related offence, particularly if suspects were being detained there at the time.)

Aye. And there's the rub. I can imagine 'reasonable grounds' being whatever the Inspektor on duty decides is reasonable.

btw - Paddington Green is very disappointing. I had the pleasure of hanging out there for a [short] while, until they had to let me go without charge (I could have saved them a lot of time and admin). I expected....more, somehow. The tea was awful and the food was inedible. My 'room' had no view and the bathroom was postively Dickensian. The nice lady with the keys to my 'room' was pretty fit though. For a class traitor.

 

[detective-boy]

Aye. And there's the rub. I can imagine 'reasonable grounds' being whatever the Inspektor on duty decides is reasonable.

btw - Paddington Green is very disappointing.

But those grounds can be challenged in Court - if you do not believe there are sufficient grounds for your arrest you can sue the police for unlawful arrest (as dozens of people do every year, many of them successfully).

(And I am afraid no-one will believe you about Paddington Green - they all know that it is chock full of torture devices, screaming inmates, solitary confinement cells and the like ... )

 

[nosos]

They couldn't arrest you simply for taking photographs ... but that activity may well provide reasonable grounds to suspect something else (in the case of Paddington Green perhaps a terrorism related offence, particularly if suspects were being detained there at the time.)

.... for which you could be arrested

 

[lights.out.london]

But those grounds can be challenged in Court - if you do not believe there are sufficient grounds for your arrest you can sue the police for unlawful arrest (as dozens of people do every year, many of them successfully).

(And I am afraid no-one will believe you about Paddington Green - they all know that it is chock full of torture devices, screaming inmates, solitary confinement cells and the like ... )

Ah. We may be getting somewhere, DB. The fact that you appear to be condoning wrongful arrest. Arrest as a tool to remove innocent people from a scene which the police feel threatened by.

Unless the police act in a wholly unlawful manner, I'd imagine it reasonably difficult for Joe Public to demonstrate that the police had no reasonable grounds for arrest or, to demonstrate that the police were acting unlawfully intentionally, or out of malice.

So, a convenient arrest or ten, get 'em off the street (for now) and we (the police) will take a chance the arrestee(s) (is there such a word?) have neither the guts nor the time/energy/money to pursue a claim through the courts.

 

[detective-boy]

.... for which you could be arrested

The point is that you can't be arrested "for taking photographs". You can be arrested on reasonable grounds to suspect terrorist activity.

Taking photographs MAY (not WILL, not DOES, not ALWAYS but MAY) amount to part (not ALL, part) of those reasonable grounds. But not necessarily so - if you are engaging in perfectly innocent activity you will be able to explain that to any officer asking questions of you and so you WON'T get arrested (or, if you do, you'll be able to sue for unlawful arrest).

Which bit of the distinction are you having difficulty with?

 

[detective-boy]

The fact that you appear to be condoning wrongful arrest.

No. I'm not. Where do I "appear" to be doing so?

If you're going to go down the road of putting words in my mouth you can join the other fuckwits on ignore. You're all fucking tedious.

Unless the police act in a wholly unlawful manner, I'd imagine it reasonably difficult for Joe Public to demonstrate that the police had no reasonable grounds for arrest or, to demonstrate that the police were acting unlawfully intentionally, or out of malice.

You imagine wrong. There is no need to demonstrate either intentional unlawfulness or maliciousness in relation to unlawful arrest. IF there are insufficient grounds (and no, that doesn't mean you are innocent - you can be perfectly lawfully arrested even if you are entirely innocent) then put the police to test.

Can't be arsed? Sorry, in that case you're part of the fucking problem, not part of the solution.

The principle check on the abuse of powers by the police is challenge by the public ... or do you want every constable followed around by a sergeant, every sergeant by an inspector, every inspector by a chief inspector ...

 

[lights.out.london]

I think you may suffer from anger issues, DB.

I'm suggesting that the police may use those kinds of arrests as a tactic of convenience. My first reading of what you wrote suggested that you might think it's okay for them to do that.

You imagine wrong. There is no need to demonstrate either intentional unlawfulness or maliciousness in relation to unlawful arrest. IF there are insufficient grounds (and no, that doesn't mean you are innocent - you can be perfectly lawfully arrested even if you are entirely innocent) then put the police to test.

Can't be arsed? Sorry, in that case you're part of the fucking problem, not part of the solution.

Ah. You inhabit a world so different to us non-cops. Perhaps all those years (?) as a boy in blue has distorted your world view? Do you have any idea at all, even an inkling of what it is like for Mr/Ms Average Joe Public to be nicked? Any earthly?

And then the thought of finding a brief, maybe Legal Aid and then going up against the Met/whomever and the Judicial system! It's trite and glib to come back with "Sorry, in that case you're part of the fucking problem".

I'll assume that as you were allowed to join the police, you joined with a clean record, or at most, teenage misdemeanours or a parking fine and hence you've never spent a night or two in a cell at the whim of a duty Inspector..

Try being on the receiving end of what some of your [former] colleagues think is okay and see how you like it.

You're either very disingeneous, or you're pretty naive. I know you're not stupid, so which is it?

You still think like a police officer, DB.

I can save you. Fuckwit or not.

Lol.

 

[detective-boy]

And then the thought of finding a brief, maybe Legal Aid and then going up against the Met/whomever and the Judicial system! It's trite and glib to come back with "Sorry, in that case you're part of the fucking problem".

I know that complaints are investigated.

I know that it is easily possible to find briefs who will sue the police for pretty much fuck all (at least in London).

I know that dozens and dozens of people do so. I would be very, very surprised if you had a reasonable case if you could not find a lawyer to pursue it for you.

And I know that if I believed I was treated wrongly I would pursue it as far as I could in any way I could - complaint, the law, publicity, whatever.

Even where it is dead easy to challenge improper official behaviour (e.g. parking tickets) people can't be arsed ... and when the officials (inlcuding police officers) realise that they will be encouraged to play on it.

I tried to manage my team properly. I simply couldn't do so without the public making complaints because as soon as the coppers walked out of the door I had little idea of what they were doing. I could do things to find out (and I did what I could) but I still only personally saw a tiny proportion of how they dealt with people.

 

[smokedout]

There have been demonstrations outside police stations on numerous occasions.

kentish town, after the police murdered kebbe jobe and the camden underclass rose up

a soundystem was set up outsides kentish town nick, the cops locked the front door and bottled it, and we held kebbes wake there listening to some fat dub

 

[The Black Hand]

Class War paranoia?

Its not paranoia if 'they are out to get you', and there have been filth and journo's 'waiting' for me several times.