Forum Topic

Last night's riot panel

I just wanted to clarify some figures quoted by Eric Leach in the news story.  He said:"Lots of numbers of arrested, charged and sentenced were mentioned but apparently only three Ealing riot miscreants have been sentenced and only 17 have been charged. Some commented that it wasn’t just young people rioting."I think he was getting confused about what was said.  A very early speaker, Mr Alastair Romanes, Head of the Youth Offending Service told us that to-date only 17 Ealing juveniles had been arrested of which 12 had been processed by the courts so far.  Of these 3 had been given prison sentences, 3 had been given community sentences, 2 had been remanded for sentencing, 1 conditional discharge, 1 awaiting sentencing and 1 not guilty.  I realise that this leaves 1 missing - maybe my poor notes.  We will have to wait to see the written version of his evidence (which will have changed in time as more people are dealt with).  Later on the Borough Commander said there had been 236 arrests to-date and that 60% of crimes detected during the riot had been cleared up.  I may have missed figures regarding adults being processed through the courts.  Again, this will emerge in the written evidence.

Phil Taylor ● 5290d13 Comments

There are a few high level arguments on either side.FOR:- Allows enforcement officers to repel rioters without directly engaging with them- Works well when used against “large stationary crowds throwing missiles at police”- Creates an unpleasant environment - puts off rioters or looters who thought it would be an easy ride- Rioters keep away or disperse to avoid getting hurt or because they think they may not be able to get away with violent behaviour or looting- Allows enforcement officers to corral rioters into a particular area, effectively forced kettling- Having an extra source of high pressure water may be useful if rioters resort to arson- Gives a feeling of action and punishment – the community may feel that rioters are receiving their just dessertsAGAINST:- There is no evidence that water cannon prevent riots or allow enforcement officers to control the situation better than without them or increase the speed of dispersal or number of arrests- There would have to be more in London than the 6 in the whole of Northern Ireland – Ealing alone would have needed more than 1 – perhaps 1 in Bond Street, 1 on New Broadway and 1 in High Street?- Ealing would have to buy its own cannon, there’d be no point waiting for them to arrive from e.g. Hounslow or Wimbledon once a riot has already started- Cannon may be of little use against looting once it starts- Raising the level of violence is likely to mean that rioters will themselves be better prepared and more violent- Rioters are more flexible than water cannon – an upturned van or bus in the middle of the street will force police to try to move it, leaving them vulnerable to attack and allowing well-organised rioters to control the situation

Phil Kay ● 5286d

It's incredible imo that there are not half a dozen or so available for the mainland.

Keith Iddon ● 5286d

I believe so.

Tony Colliver ● 5286d

All the water cannons are in Northern Ireland aren't they?

Keith Iddon ● 5287d

My main arguemnt is that they would not just use them for riots - riots being just about the only public order situation likely to arise in the UK that I think could possibly justify them.

Tony Colliver ● 5287d

What are the arguments against water cannon?And does anyone know when we last had them?

George Knox ● 5287d

If you can get a fire engine down a street then you can get a water cannon down one.(Whether I agree with arming the UK Police with such devices or not is another matter however...)

Tony Colliver ● 5287d

I heard that water cannon could not be used in many streets because they were too narrow.

Barbara Yerolemou ● 5287d

"I am not certain about smart water because that might well cover many innocent people."I don't think that were many innocent people around at midnight kicking in windows and looting. It should be easy enough for, as example, a shopkeeper or local resident to establish their bona-fides should they be sprayed with smart water which has nothing but a 'tagging' effect.

Nigel Brooks ● 5287d

Well I heard a lady Police commissioner say this week that actually there are no water cannons in the country. Further she made reference to using force in a way that suggested that they might not be able to use cannon. Can't remember exact words but she was on Newsnight a few days ago with Paxman. He failed to remark that rioters use force and so should be met with force as well.I am not certain about smart water because that might well cover many innocent people.Years ago I was on the receiving end of a jet of water turned on quarter power from a fire engine. That was more than enough. I did not fall but it hurt enough to make me run away.I think that even one cannon driving from Ealing to west Ealing and back would have made a significant difference. And surely a cannon could be kept in that Council car park which houses those expensive executive cars which we have to pay for.

George Knox ● 5288d

Water cannon can take some time to get in place (and there probably wouldn't be many of them) - however, you could have some type of Super Soaker (connected to a backpack of smart water - maybe also with a mild irritant in it, which would help disperse the crowds even quicker).

D Fox ● 5289d

George , you are not alone, the BBC london poll found 72% in faviour of their use. I am trying to find the link to a Met. Police spokesman who said that if they had had water cannon they would have been deployed (they have trialled their use in the past but have never used them 'in anger'.I wonder if it would be possible to fill them with a dye or 'smart water' in order that the miscreants could be arrested at a future date, preferably dyed bright purple!

Nigel Brooks ● 5289d

Bring back water cannon?What do people think?

George Knox ● 5289d