Ridiculous road closure.

[Learning]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20466764
Closing Whitehall for 3 hours for one exhibitionist. As soon as the first fire appliance arrived, why wasn't this idiot just hosed down from his plinth?

[TheFatControlleR]

Herself read this out earlier and I said the same thing.

All it required was a Bobby to tell the eejit to get off or risk being pulled off by the Fuzz!

[P_Stoddart]

Police are not there to deal with the clearly mentally challenged person.

But the crowds that would gather to watch. That what causes the main H&S problems.

What is the betting there was 10,000 watching. Maybe even more.

You would need ambulance in case he slipped off. You need fire bridge to remove him safely or if he jumped they have the needed safety kit.

If he had been hosed down from the statue, he might have been killed, it's quite a drop.

Then said fire bridge would have been liable for causing manslaughter.

As there was no or I assum you was being serious.

Finally not a nice way to treat a person with mental health issues.

Might be time for the council to look at some kind of alteration that can be done within the listing limitation to prevent future issues.

[beejaybee]

Police are not there to deal with the clearly mentally challenged person.

But the crowds that would gather to watch. That what causes the main H&S problems.

True but the large crowd is not necessarily an issue in itself. Was it really necessary to cordon off the area?
Also I'm not convinced by the "clearly mentally challenged" tag. Maybe he was trying to make a legitimate protest. Maybe he was just drunk. There are lots of exhibitionists around who happen not to climb statues & there are reasonably well balanced people who will climb statues, monuments, buildings & trees simply "because they are there".

You would need ambulance in case he slipped off. You need fire bridge to remove him safely or if he jumped they have the needed safety kit.

If he had been hosed down from the statue, he might have been killed, it's quite a drop.

Yeah, leave him up there, either he'll fall or jump or he'll eventually climb down. You really don't even need an ambulance on standby as the guy is risking himself. Just a couple of rozzers to grab him when he climbs down (which he did in the end: the guy is obviously a pretty competent climber to have been able to get up there, so being able to climb down safely is a likely outcome if left alone long enough to get cold and/or hungry). Fire brigade don't need to attend unless/until the guy asks to be helped down. Hose the guy off, no, don't even think about it, not even if the guy was armed with e.g. a rifle: in which case the sort of response that actually occurred would probably be justified.

Finally not a nice way to treat a person with mental health issues.

Might be time for the council to look at some kind of alteration that can be done within the listing limitation to prevent future issues.

Ummm. There are nutters, there are protesters and there are exhibitionists (or "performance artists" as they tend to call themselves these days). If you're going to have statues, buildings or trees in public places, then you should expect that, from time to time, people will attempt to climb them. It's more of a concern that this particular statue was in an unsafe state to start off with, otherwise pieces could not be detached without considerable assistance from tools.

But my main point is that the probable reason for climbing a statue is to draw attention to oneself ... and the more disruption that is allowed to be caused, the more "successful" the exhibition will have been & the more likely it is that copycat "attacks" will be made. Minimum disruption should be the rule.

[BikerMike]

A force spokesman said: "You apply the appropriate amount of policing for the situation."

Just goes to show what nincompoops there are in power. Not really surprising, but look at the disproportionate, unnecessary consequences for local trade and traffic, and of course the expense to the taxpayer. They can only overreact like that because they are spending other people's money, and contrary to what the PCC election propaganda would have us believe, they are not accountable.

Regards, Mike

[willie45]

I'm not sure I'm all that comfy with the idea of killing someone mentally ill because they're annoying us

Willie

[Learning]

or if he jumped they have the needed safety kit.

If he had been hosed down from the statue

As there was no or I assum you was being serious.

The fire brigade would have used safety kit when they hosed him down (A dozen big blokes holding a tarp in the expected direction of fall). Any regular contributor to this forum knows that I don't use smileys. I expect to readers to have the gumption to know when to take my comments with a pinch of salt.
I think hosing him down was better than the police "pulling him off" as suggested by one of our respected moderators. ( A bit close to the knuckle that double entendre given the circumstances, but very funny)

[Learning]

I'm not sure I'm all that comfy with the idea of killing someone mentally ill because they're annoying us

Willie

Who is suggesting killing the bloke? We just wanted him down in safety with the minimum amount of fuss and the maximum amount of humour. There should have been a wonderful 'You Tube' clip from this.

[P_Stoddart]

Who is suggesting killing the bloke? We just wanted him down in safety with the minimum amount of fuss and the maximum amount of humour. There should have been a wonderful 'You Tube' clip from this.

I suspect you could not be totally sure which way the person would fall when being hit by a high pressure hose.

I think it is one of the reasons that water cannon I not seen as good crowd control.

He would only have to hit his head etc. Plus what if he had say a heart condition.

Ian Tomlinson comes to mind here.

Remember the emergency service are now bound by the HR act. The right to life.

(1) Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which the penalty is provided by law.

(2) Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this Article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary- (a) in defence of any person from unlawful violence;
(b) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;
(c) in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection.

The (2) is where you get problems. Would the use of a hose be absolutely necessary. No because you have other action available.

(b) can get tricky because arrest means you have to be fairly sure a crime has been commited and the person could understand commiting the crime ie no mental problems.

Finally businesses in London should have insurance to cover loss of trade during a police action. Not as if the information not available in the public domain. I suspect it has a police event reference number.