Simple Answer

Here we go again…

Concerns about the mistreatment of people of colour by police in the UK are legitimate. The deaths of Oluwashijibomi Lapite in 1994, Mark Duggan in 2011, Edson Frederico Da Costa last month and Rashan Charles last weekend, to name just a few examples, show the severity of the problem. In all of these cases, the individuals died following police contact and all were black.

I can’t say that it hugely concerns me. Despite my general lack of respect for the police, I have little if any contact with them. This is because I don’t break the law and don’t get involved with gangs or drug running.

Certainly there seems to be a problem with how the police use reasonable force when carrying out arrests, but it all comes back to the same point – if you are engaging in criminal activities, then you will come to the attention of the police. The skin colour is irrelevant. If they die, well, it shouldn’t happen, but I’m not losing any sleep over it.

 Peaceful protests in response to the death boiled over into aggression, with people blocking roads and setting refuse alight – against, it should be said, the wishes of the dead man’s family. With various pundits dismissing protesters as rioters and thugs, it is important to remember the lessons of history.

That’s because they are rioters and thugs. Indeed, those thugs were so upset by Mark Duggan’s death (a vile little scrote who got what he deserved – Ed) that they just had to loot shops and set them alight.

Lesson one: when a black or minority ethnic individual dies following police contact, doubts about their character are often raised.

Because going armed or carrying crack cocaine tends to lead to people having doubts about their character. Surprising, that, isn’t it? We will always get stories about how wonderful these people are – loving fathers, sons or brothers. The usual sickly bollocks. The Kray brothers loved their mother, but they were still violent thugs.

They are portrayed not as victims of force but as criminals undeserving of sympathy.

Possibly they were victims of force. However, see above – they brought this on themselves, so, er, no sympathy is warranted. I certainly have none and I have no sympathy with the violent assembly that invariably follows.

Simon Laurence, the Met’s borough commander for Hackney, warned against premature speculation about the causes of Rashan’s death after himself implying causality and chronology by announcing that Charles was “seen to be trying to swallow an object” before he was “then taken ill”.

I’m with Laurence on this one. Besides, making the observation is not implying anything.

This is not dissimilar to the way the use of force against Lapite was justified by the allegation that he had tried to strangle an apprehending officer, or the narrative that Duggan’s brandishing of a firearm is what led to him being fatally shot.

Yes? And? They brought it on themselves. Tough.

The implication of Laurence’s statement is that Rashan Charles died as a result of swallowing drugs to evade arrest.

Yes? And? Entirely probable.

History makes us rightfully distrustful of police accounts of events.

This is a classic Tu Quoque fallacy. The reality here is that criminal scum ran afoul of the police – two groups that rightly deserve each other. If you are looking for sympathy for the scumbags who died, you are looking at a wasteland over here. The world became a better place when they departed it. The police, frankly, have become so politicised, they are verging on the useless.

Lesson two: any community reaction other than quiet, patient compliance is vilified, sensationalised and used to detract from the legitimacy of the cause.

Yeah, well, looting and arson does tend to have that effect. I wonder why?

Media outlets were quick to caricature the disturbances in Dalston as a “riot”.

Well, what do you want to call it? It was a riot. And the people concerned should be vigorously prosecuted for their actions. Oh, you were looking for sympathy for a bunch of thugs? Look elsewhere.