2017-06-04 Rider down (police dooring leading to arrest), Dawes Road, Fulham

I wasn't quite sure whether to post it here or not, as it's not a 'regular' rider down, but a hire bike rider who gets knocked off his bike with a van door by a policeman who wants to arrest him for theft.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/shocking-moment-policeman-rams-thief-off-boris-bike-with-van-door-seconds-after-he-raided-a-car-a3583056.html

Is that sort of thing (putting a rider in danger, never mind that he's just stolen something) really permissible by police procedures?

I haven't watched the CCTV footage, so it may well have happened at very low speed, but the article notes that the rider went over the handlebars head first when he crashed, which is surely a very risky outcome. It's fortunate it wasn't worse in this case, but I do wonder whether this sort of manoeuvre shouldn't be expressly forbidden for police officers to employ.

I'm fine with this.

It doesn't look too recklessly executed, it is at low speed. And frankly if we introduce enough rules that prevent the police from catching someone red-handed just because they happen to be on a bicycle and might be hurt if forcefully stopped then all we'll have done it neuter the police's ability to catch someone.

I'm not in the least bit fine with it. The officers may well have seriously injured the guy. It isn't their job to dish out any punishment and it looked to be the easiest thing in the world to have arrested him using much safer procedures. If he was a clear danger to others maybe, but nicking stuff out of a car is no justification for this.

There's already an easy way to prevent the police from chasing you - ride a [stolen] moped without a helmet.

If he's gonna use a bike for a get away vehicle then he has assessed the risk of actions like this from the owners, vigilaties or the authorities, and decided it's worth it for his criminal activities.
I know criminal aren't the sharpest tool in box. But he had the opportunity to reduce chance of injury by being on foot if that was his concern. He decided not to. Instead prefer a quicker getway.
Fair game. It was his decision. There is no safe way to force someone to dismount.

Just watched CCTV - unnecessary at best I reckon

Using a car as a weapon against a cyclist is unacceptable by ANYONE, Police included, IMHO.

I understand the principle of not using car as a weapon, and he could have easily been apprehended otherwise, but I think rugby tackling or grabbing him off a moving bike would have had the same ultimate effect and he looks like a scumbag, there was no risk of error in IDing him as the criminal, so I'm less inclined to sympathise.

"looks like a scumbag"
Well that's OK then. Run him over.
And how do you or anyone else know he's the criminal? That's for a court to decide.
He could have been playing a prank on a friend for all anyone knows.

Eh. It's been recorded live, on CCTV, with Police controllers watching him and dispatching the car that then turned up in time to watch him as he made off from the vehicle, with an armful of stolen goods, then made the arrest? What burden of proof do you need before you can say "yep, we're pretty fucking confident this guy on the hire bike is the one we're looking for"?

And he wasn't fucking run over either, was he? He was pushed off at about 7mph. The amount of bags and clothing he was carrying probably acted as a fucking cushion anyway...

The police's inability to deal with stopping suspected criminals for fear of hurting them has led in part to the current wave of scrotes on scooters nicking mobiles, bags, etc. with impunity because they're aware that the police generally won't chase them for fear of it resulting in a serious injury.

The policy is understandable but, in the short term, doesn't do much for cutting down on the actual crimes being committed.

In this case it looked a bit unnecessary, he probably wasn't going to get away on a boris bike with armfuls of stolen stuff (although I don't know the area, there may be ginnels to nip down where a van couldn't follow).

Should have been done by the fashion police as well... looks like he's sporting the pants hanging outside your jeans look. Admittedly, I'm knocking on a bit, but do people still do that?

A not very interesting follow-up article. It basically says (surprise, surprise) that people disagree over whether the tactic was proportionate. I don't know how that is defined in the context of police work, but I don't think it's proportionate the way I understand the concept.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/police-defend-tactic-of-nudging-thief-off-bike-after-he-was-caught-redhanded-on-cctv-a3584596.html

Seems completely proportionate. The law requires that any use of force should be 'reasonable', this seems reasonable to me.

Would it have been "reasonable" if the guy was white?

'Reasonable' is just another vague criterion. Obviously, in this case the rider wasn't badly injured, but it's entirely possible that he might have been, which makes the use of this method quite unsafe. I could understand its use if police were pursuing someone who'd just committed a violent crime and might continue to commit violent acts during his/her flight--that could be 'proportionate', but a clothes thief?

Here are two other recent incidents, not for direct comparison purposes, as they're both motorbike incidents and there's too little information given about what happened:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/16/london-teenager-in-critical-condition-after-moped-collides-with-police-car

Here, a driver (a former police officer) tried to ram a moped ridden by violent robbers with his car:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/harry-potter-star-daniel-radcliffe-rushes-to-help-tourist-injured-in-moped-robbery-a3589376.html

It's a long piece that concentrates on Daniel Radcliffe, but here's the bit I mean:

They grappled with him on the pavement. He wasn’t going to give up the bag willingly. I tried to ram the bike with my car but I wasn’t able to.

That seems to have been in the course of trying to prevent a crime being committed, or at least to stop violent criminals getting away, which I find more understandable.

By the way, I can completely understand the police's exasperation while chasing criminals like this ...

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/police-smash-one-of-londons-most-prolific-moped-crime-gangs-a3589206.html

... when they're violent and clearly a danger to the public, especially when they're using mopeds as offensive weapons:

In a further case this year, a man suffered a broken leg after being run down by moped thieves as he walked outside a Park Lane hotel. Another rider drove onto the pavement outside Selfridges in Oxford Street on a Vespa to snatch two mobile phones.

Not an eye for an eye, but I agree the police need to be allowed to exercise discretion to stop people like that. I just think that in the case of this bike rider the risk of causing him serious injury is too great when he's merely committed a theft, has shown no signs of being violent, and it stands to reason that he could have been stopped in a different way.

Shoulda just punish-passed and turned left without indicating.

Yes.