the officer then appears to floor. the officer then appears to stamp floor. the officer then appears to stamp on and kick their man in the head while other officers shout at onlookers to stay back. what happened, what do we know and what's your reaction to it? muhammad has been talking to me on the radio so far. and unleashed to a wider audience. you were going to make another point. i will let you do that right now and apologies for breaking off to speak to somebody else just before. breaking off to speak to somebody elsejust before. sam breaking off to speak to somebody else just before. sam will be joining us in a second, a serving police officer. mohammed, what was your further point? police officer. mohammed, what was yourfurther point? my police officer. mohammed, what was your further point?— your further point? my first point was this, i _ your further point? my first point was this, i think _ your further point? my first point was this, i think this _ your further point? my first point was this, i think this isn't - your further point? my first point was this, i think this isn't just - was this, i think this isn'tjust isolated. if we look at the pattern of policing in recent months and in particular since the demonstrations that have been taking place in relation to palestine, i think that there is a deliberate policy decision made somewhere along the

line to unleash police brutality on muslim protesters, and we have seen this in numerous other videos of very peaceful protests taking place where police officers are very aggressively arresting people, grabbing flags off them and doing this. i think this is part of that continuous behaviour. white make you think there is a pattern. on the other side people would say that there has been massive and vocal condemnation, there is a perception police have been too permissive. condemnation and vocal, what is actually happening to the police? we haven't seen any consequences for any officer, in particular, in recent involving muslims. you mentioned the tweet by the reform mp. when he says police officers, it's not rocket science, but you

have officers, armed officers at airports and you shouldn't mess with them because they have split—second judgments to make. there was no split—second judgment to make there, the guy is lying on the floor and he chose to smack him in the face. that officer is so lucky that he did not crack that man's skull or put him in a wheelchair. we crack that man's skull or put him in a wheelchair-— a wheelchair. we can hear from a servin: a wheelchair. we can hear from a serving police _ a wheelchair. we can hear from a serving police officer— a wheelchair. we can hear from a serving police officer to _ a wheelchair. we can hear from a serving police officer to react - a wheelchair. we can hear from a serving police officer to react to l serving police officer to react to what you said, mohammed. some people will say that is quite a conflation, and others will say, ok, fair point, there is a pattern. sam, a serving police officer, good morning. goad police officer, good morning. good mornini. police officer, good morning. good morning- what _ police officer, good morning. good morning. what you _ police officer, good morning. good morning. what you think _ police officer, good morning. good morning. what you think from - police officer, good morning. good| morning. what you think from what ou heard morning. what you think from what you heard from _ morning. what you think from what you heard from mohammed? - morning. what you think from what j you heard from mohammed? thank morning. what you think from what - you heard from mohammed? thank you. he onl has you heard from mohammed? thank you. he only has to — you heard from mohammed? thank you. he only has to look— you heard from mohammed? thank you. he only has to look at _ you heard from mohammed? thank you. he only has to look at how _ he only has to look at how emotionally charged these conversations are and how the emotion— conversations are and how the emotion that's overtaking clear thought— emotion that's overtaking clear thought and rationale before you put the facts _ thought and rationale before you put the facts first. some of these

conversations, likening us to hooligans, saying we are regularly out there — hooligans, saying we are regularly out there beating people up is absolutely ludicrous and so far—fetched. before you cast these judgments, before you cast these aspersions, come and jump in our shoes— aspersions, come and jump in our shoes for— aspersions, come and jump in our shoes for a — aspersions, come and jump in our shoes for a second. come for a ride along _ shoes for a second. come for a ride along with — shoes for a second. come for a ride along with us — shoes for a second. come for a ride along with us and see what it's really— along with us and see what it's really like _ along with us and see what it's really like to be a police officer. and let's — really like to be a police officer. and let's know the facts first, the full facts. — and let's know the facts first, the full facts, before we start making these _ full facts, before we start making these emotionally charged comments, that we _ these emotionally charged comments, that we are _ these emotionally charged comments, that we are all a bunch of hooligans or that _ that we are all a bunch of hooligans or that all— that we are all a bunch of hooligans or that all we are here to do is heat _ or that all we are here to do is beat people up. that couldn't be further _ beat people up. that couldn't be further from the truth. having been a police _ further from the truth. having been a police officer for ten years or so, no — a police officer for ten years or so, no one _ a police officer for ten years or so, no one goes on duty to assault people _ so, no one goes on duty to assault people no — so, no one goes on duty to assault people. no one goes on duty to hurt people _ people. no one goes on duty to hurt people with that intention. those officers. — people with that intention. those officers, the video doesn't look great _ officers, the video doesn't look great from the initial, there is no escaping — great from the initial, there is no escaping the fact the video doesn't look right, — escaping the fact the video doesn't look right, and i get that. however, in that— look right, and i get that. however, in that situation we have to put ourselves — in that situation we have to put ourselves in those shoes, that was a

heightened — ourselves in those shoes, that was a heightened situation. no one has commented on the video on how the ginger— commented on the video on how the ginger haired officer was clearly distressed, in tears, bless her, i dhint— distressed, in tears, bless her, i didn't know— distressed, in tears, bless her, i didn't know what to do. no one has spoken— didn't know what to do. no one has spoken about her. going back to the first point— spoken about her. going back to the first point that you made when you asked _ first point that you made when you asked the — first point that you made when you asked the other caller on what question— asked the other caller on what question you would ask the officer, the first— question you would ask the officer, the first question you would ask the officer~ _ the first question you would ask the officer~ this— the first question you would ask the officer. this is how out of touch people — officer. this is how out of touch people are _ officer. this is how out of touch people are. the first question i would — people are. the first question i would ask— people are. the first question i would ask the officer is, are you 0k? _ would ask the officer is, are you 0k? are — would ask the officer is, are you ok? are you ok? not, have you used force _ ok? are you ok? not, have you used force or— ok? are you ok? not, have you used force orjudgment, but are you ok. the officer— force orjudgment, but are you ok. the officer will not be sitting there — the officer will not be sitting there thinking, thank goodness i booted _ there thinking, thank goodness i booted that guy in the head. he will be extremely distressed at what took place, _ be extremely distressed at what took place, exhausted, drained, possibly injured _ place, exhausted, drained, possibly injured. let's put some perspective on this— injured. let's put some perspective on this and — injured. let's put some perspective on this and talk about the facts first of— on this and talk about the facts first of all— on this and talk about the facts first of all rather than the emotions, which are so clear to see, taking _ emotions, which are so clear to see, taking over— emotions, which are so clear to see, taking over our thoughts, before we actually _ taking over our thoughts, before we actually know the full picture. but this happens time and time again. this always happens, the police are

unfairly— this always happens, the police are unfairly berated in the media. the good _ unfairly berated in the media. the good work— unfairly berated in the media. the good work is never portrayed, it is in and _ good work is never portrayed, it is in and out — good work is never portrayed, it is in and out of— good work is never portrayed, it is in and out of the media in a flash. i in and out of the media in a flash. i would _ in and out of the media in a flash. i would like — in and out of the media in a flash. i would like mohammed to meet sam and respond to what sam, a hard—working man of integrity, who works to protect us, has said. sam obviously wasn't _ works to protect us, has said. san obviously wasn't listening to the conversation. the person who likened those officers to hooligans words are detective superintendents. this isn't somebody making those comments lightly. this is someone of experience from within the force that made those comments. he has made these very anodyne comments that the video doesn't look great. i think he should take responsibility and come out and say very clearly that it and come out and say very clearly thatitis and come out and say very clearly that it is absolutely awful and it should not be the behaviour of any officer at all. i should not be the behaviour of any officer at all.— officer at all. i can't say that at the moment — officer at all. i can't say that at the moment because - officer at all. i can't say that at the moment because we - officer at all. i can't say that at the moment because we don't| officer at all. i can't say that at - the moment because we don't know the facts. the moment because we don't know the facts it— the moment because we don't know the

facts. , ., , , the moment because we don't know the facts. , , , , facts. it is absolutely indefensible that ou facts. it is absolutely indefensible that you would — facts. it is absolutely indefensible that you would kick... _ facts. it is absolutely indefensible that you would kick... this - facts. it is absolutely indefensible that you would kick... this is - facts. it is absolutely indefensible that you would kick... this is notl that you would kick... this is not the idf. our police force are held to a different set of accountability. it's the sort of thing we see on idf videos, the way they treat palestinians. i thing we see on idf videos, the way they treat palestinians.— they treat palestinians. i would like if possible _ they treat palestinians. i would like if possible to _ they treat palestinians. i would like if possible to take - they treat palestinians. i would like if possible to take that - they treat palestinians. i would l like if possible to take that issue out of this situation. has a out of this situation. as a comparison, _ out of this situation. as a comparison, a _ out of this situation. as a comparison, a lot - out of this situation. as a comparison, a lot of- out of this situation. as a i comparison, a lot of videos out of this situation. as a - comparison, a lot of videos we out of this situation. is a. comparison, a lot of videos we have seen... a, comparison, a lot of videos we have seen... �* ., ., comparison, a lot of videos we have seen... ~ ., ., , seen... a lot of people will understand _ seen... a lot of people will understand and _ seen... a lot of people will understand and appreciate | seen... a lot of people will - understand and appreciate your logic and passion. others will say, hang on, what has that got to do with this? let's go with the latter, if you will allow me, because i want to talk about this particular video. can you ask the officer to respond about what he thinks and comparing the officer to a hooligan. i will ask the officer. _ the officer to a hooligan. i will ask the officer. i _ the officer to a hooligan. i will ask the officer. i will- the officer to a hooligan. i will ask the officer. i will play - the officer to a hooligan. i will ask the officer. i will play the | ask the officer. i will play the video again so that people watching on the television can see it and people listening on the radio can hear it.

shouting move back! (bleep). you are kicking people. _ move back! (bleep). you are kicking people. you — move back! (bleep). you are kicking people, you are on camera. shouting move back, move back. they clearly know they are being filmed, they know it will be seen. sam, respond to what you heard from our friend sam, respond to what you heard from ourfriend muhammad, and is that, people have seen it, may be for the first time just then, how can that ever be acceptable?—

first time just then, how can that ever be acceptable? listen, we have to... ever be acceptable? listen, we have to- -- every — ever be acceptable? listen, we have to... every amount _ ever be acceptable? listen, we have to. .. every amount of— ever be acceptable? listen, we have to... every amount of force - ever be acceptable? listen, we have to... every amount of force we - ever be acceptable? listen, we have to... every amount of force we have| to... every amount of force we have to... every amount of force we have toiustify~ _ to... every amount of force we have to justify the — to... every amount of force we have tojustify. the paperwork that backs that up— tojustify. the paperwork that backs that up is— tojustify. the paperwork that backs that up is ginormous. when we lay a hand _ that up is ginormous. when we lay a hand on— that up is ginormous. when we lay a hand on someone we have tojustify it. i hand on someone we have tojustify it i can't _ hand on someone we have tojustify it. i can't comment and i can't get it. ican't comment and i can't get drawn— it. i can't comment and i can't get drawn into the emotionally charged conversations taking place. we have to comment on the facts. the video, it doesn't— to comment on the facts. the video, it doesn't look great, but we don't know— it doesn't look great, but we don't know the — it doesn't look great, but we don't know the full story. we don't know what _ know the full story. we don't know what was _ know the full story. we don't know what was going on, we don't know whether— what was going on, we don't know whether that person may have said he had a _ whether that person may have said he had a weapon on him. we don't know whether— had a weapon on him. we don't know whether there were other factors that have — whether there were other factors that have taken place before that. that's _ that have taken place before that. that's what i'm asking people to do. before _ that's what i'm asking people to do. before theyjump on the bandwagon and say— before theyjump on the bandwagon and say all police are awful and we 'ust and say all police are awful and we just beat _ and say all police are awful and we just beat people up, let's be rational— just beat people up, let's be rational enough in our thoughts to have a _ rational enough in our thoughts to have a clear thought process and not let our— have a clear thought process and not let our emotions take over. mohammed, that point, we need to

stand back, take a deep breath, have a cool head and find out exactly what happened. i a cool head and find out exactly what happened.— a cool head and find out exactly what happened. a cool head and find out exactly what ha ened. ., , ,., , ., ., what happened. i absolutely have no issue with that. _ what happened. i absolutely have no issue with that. of _ what happened. i absolutely have no issue with that. of course _ what happened. i absolutely have no issue with that. of course this - issue with that. of course this needs to be fully and properly investigated. and the bare facts laid before the public and the full force of the law applied against all the perpetrators of the violence, and in particular that officer, because, as i said to you, if you look at the other videos leading up to that, this is a cold start incident where the officer has gone into this whole affair like a bull into this whole affair like a bull in a china shop. he was on a rampage. i am shocked that these offices around him did not reprimand him or question his actions. and thatis him or question his actions. and that is telling of the culture that is there within the police force. i

can hear sam reacting to that analogy of the bull in a china shop. sam is desperately looking for excuses to protect. ida. sam is desperately looking for excuses to protect.— sam is desperately looking for excuses to protect. it excuses to protect. no, i'm not. it is indefensible, _ excuses to protect. no, i'm not. it is indefensible, simple _ excuses to protect. no, i'm not. it is indefensible, simple as - excuses to protect. no, i'm not. it is indefensible, simple as that. . is indefensible, simple as that. that's not what i'm doing, you are simply— that's not what i'm doing, you are simply wrong. that's not what i'm doing _ simply wrong. that's not what i'm doing in— simply wrong. that's not what i'm doing in the — simply wrong. that's not what i'm doing in the slightest. i am not looking — doing in the slightest. i am not looking for excuses. i have admitted the video— looking for excuses. i have admitted the video doesn't look great. you are making _ the video doesn't look great. m. are making excuses. the video doesn't look great. you are making excuses. that's - the video doesn't look great. you are making excuses. that's not . the video doesn't look great. you i are making excuses. that's not what i'm doini. are making excuses. that's not what l'm doing- what _ are making excuses. that's not what i'm doing. what i'm _ are making excuses. that's not what i'm doing. what i'm saying - are making excuses. that's not what i'm doing. what i'm saying is - are making excuses. that's not what i'm doing. what i'm saying is we - i'm doing. what i'm saying is we should _ i'm doing. what i'm saying is we should gather all the facts before we start — should gather all the facts before we start having emotionally charged conversations like you are doing, and letting — conversations like you are doing, and letting your emotions overtake your thoughts before we cast a judgment. the problem is that this officer— judgment. the problem is that this officer is— judgment. the problem is that this officer is already guilty before we have known what is going on prior to this. �* �* �* this. all talk at once whatever _ this. all talk at once whatever the _ this. all talk at once whatever the context i this. all talk at once i whatever the context was, this. all talk at once - whatever the context was, on its this. all talk at once _ whatever the context was, on its own that shouldn't have happened, that's what we have heard earlier from a

former police officer earlier, and a high—ranking one. ido former police officer earlier, and a high-ranking one.— former police officer earlier, and a high-ranking one. do you know what it's like to be — high-ranking one. do you know what it's like to be a _ high-ranking one. do you know what it's like to be a police _ high-ranking one. do you know what it's like to be a police officer- high-ranking one. do you know what it's like to be a police officer and - it's like to be a police officer and have _ it's like to be a police officer and have you — it's like to be a police officer and have you come out with the police? let's _ have you come out with the police? let's find _ have you come out with the police? let's find out what it is like to be a firearms officer. darren recently retired as a firearms officer. thank you for getting in touch. what do you for getting in touch. what do you want to say?— you for getting in touch. what do you want to say? good morning, nice to be on the — you want to say? good morning, nice to be on the programme. _ you want to say? good morning, nice to be on the programme. basically, l you want to say? good morning, nice to be on the programme. basically, i | to be on the programme. basically, i would _ to be on the programme. basically, i would like _ to be on the programme. basically, i would like to — to be on the programme. basically, i would like to say— to be on the programme. basically, i would like to say it _ to be on the programme. basically, i would like to say it is _ to be on the programme. basically, i would like to say it is very— would like to say it is very difficult _ would like to say it is very difficult for _ would like to say it is very difficult for people - would like to say it is very difficult for people who i would like to say it is very- difficult for people who haven't been _ difficult for people who haven't been in — difficult for people who haven't been in that— difficult for people who haven't been in that firearms _ difficult for people who haven't been in that firearms officer's. been in that firearms officer's shoes— been in that firearms officer's shoes to _ been in that firearms officer's shoes to give _ been in that firearms officer's shoes to give their— been in that firearms officer's shoes to give their opinions . been in that firearms officer's . shoes to give their opinions and take _ shoes to give their opinions and take into — shoes to give their opinions and take into account _ shoes to give their opinions and take into account all— shoes to give their opinions and take into account all the - shoes to give their opinions and. take into account all the stresses and strains — take into account all the stresses and strains you _ take into account all the stresses and strains you are _ take into account all the stresses and strains you are put _ take into account all the stresses and strains you are put under- take into account all the stresses and strains you are put under in. and strains you are put under in that— and strains you are put under in thatiob — and strains you are put under in thatiob it— and strains you are put under in thatiob it was— and strains you are put under in that job. it was mentioned - and strains you are put under in i thatjob. it was mentioned earlier, officers _ thatjob. it was mentioned earlier, officers have — thatjob. it was mentioned earlier, officers have to _ thatjob. it was mentioned earlier, officers have to make _ thatjob. it was mentioned earlier, j officers have to make split—second decisions. — officers have to make split—second decisions, life _ officers have to make split—second decisions, life or— officers have to make split—second decisions, life or death— officers have to make split—second decisions, life or death decisions. decisions, life or death decisions in various— decisions, life or death decisions in various circumstances. - decisions, life or death decisions in various circumstances. my - decisions, life or death decisions. in various circumstances. my issue is,

in various circumstances. my issue is. with— in various circumstances. my issue is. with the — in various circumstances. my issue is, with the greatest _ in various circumstances. my issue is, with the greatest respect- in various circumstances. my issue is, with the greatest respect to - in various circumstances. my issue| is, with the greatest respect to the is, with the greatest respect to the superintendent— is, with the greatest respect to the superintendent who _ is, with the greatest respect to the superintendent who was _ is, with the greatest respect to the superintendent who was on, - is, with the greatest respect to the superintendent who was on, the i superintendent who was on, the retired _ superintendent who was on, the retired officer, _ superintendent who was on, the retired officer, first, _ superintendent who was on, the retired officer, first, did - superintendent who was on, the retired officer, first, did she - superintendent who was on, the i retired officer, first, did she ever served _ retired officer, first, did she ever served in— retired officer, first, did she ever served in a — retired officer, first, did she ever served in a firearms _ retired officer, first, did she ever served in a firearms officer - retired officer, first, did she ever served in a firearms officer role? j retired officer, first, did she everl served in a firearms officer role? i very much— served in a firearms officer role? i very much doubt _ served in a firearms officer role? i very much doubt it. _ served in a firearms officer role? i very much doubt it. it— served in a firearms officer role? i very much doubt it. it is— served in a firearms officer role? i very much doubt it. it is a - very much doubt it. it is a completely— very much doubt it. it is a completely different - very much doubt it. it is al completely different kettle very much doubt it. it is a - completely different kettle of fish. in a completely different kettle of fish. in a situation— completely different kettle of fish. in a situation like _ completely different kettle of fish. in a situation like hers, _ completely different kettle of fish. in a situation like hers, to- completely different kettle of fish. in a situation like hers, to give - in a situation like hers, to give her comments _ in a situation like hers, to give her comments on _ in a situation like hers, to give her comments on what - in a situation like hers, to give her comments on what took i in a situation like hers, to give - her comments on what took place, as opposed _ her comments on what took place, as opposed to _ her comments on what took place, as opposed to being _ her comments on what took place, as opposed to being on— her comments on what took place, as opposed to being on the _ her comments on what took place, as opposed to being on the ground, - her comments on what took place, as opposed to being on the ground, at l opposed to being on the ground, at the coal— opposed to being on the ground, at the coal face. — opposed to being on the ground, at the coal face, so— opposed to being on the ground, at the coal face, so to _ opposed to being on the ground, at the coal face, so to speak, - opposed to being on the ground, at the coal face, so to speak, dealingl the coal face, so to speak, dealing with those — the coal face, so to speak, dealing with those incidents. _ the coal face, so to speak, dealing with those incidents.— with those incidents. what did you think when you — with those incidents. what did you think when you saw _ with those incidents. what did you think when you saw the _ with those incidents. what did you think when you saw the video? - with those incidents. what did you l think when you saw the video? what was your first reaction? mr; think when you saw the video? what was your first reaction?— was your first reaction? my first reaction? _ was your first reaction? my first reaction? it _ was your first reaction? my first reaction? it looked _ was your first reaction? my first reaction? it looked extreme, i was your first reaction? my first reaction? it looked extreme, to was your first reaction? my first. reaction? it looked extreme, to be fair. reaction? it looked extreme, to be fair~ and _ reaction? it looked extreme, to be fair~ and i— reaction? it looked extreme, to be fair~ and i will— reaction? it looked extreme, to be fair. and i will say, _ reaction? it looked extreme, to be fair. and i will say, but, _ reaction? it looked extreme, to be fair. and i will say, but, being- reaction? it looked extreme, to be fair. and i will say, but, being in. fair. and i will say, but, being in positions — fair. and i will say, but, being in positions like _ fair. and i will say, but, being in positions like that _ fair. and i will say, but, being in positions like that previously- fair. and i will say, but, being in positions like that previously in. positions like that previously in the past, — positions like that previously in the past. you _ positions like that previously in the past, you have _ positions like that previously in the past, you have to- positions like that previously in the past, you have to look- positions like that previously in the past, you have to look at l positions like that previously in i the past, you have to look at the full context — the past, you have to look at the full context of _ the past, you have to look at the full context of what _ the past, you have to look at the full context of what happened i full context of what happened previously _ full context of what happened previously which _ full context of what happened previously which are - full context of what happened previously which are not - full context of what happened i previously which are not shown full context of what happened - previously which are not shown on videos _ previously which are not shown on videos all— previously which are not shown on videos. all that— previously which are not shown on videos. all that they _ previously which are not shown on videos. all that they show - previously which are not shown on videos. all that they show on - previously which are not shown on l videos. all that they show on videos is what _ videos. all that they show on videos is what people —

videos. all that they show on videos is what people want _ videos. all that they show on videos is what people want you _ videos. all that they show on videos is what people want you to - videos. all that they show on videos is what people want you to see. - videos. all that they show on videos is what people want you to see. i. is what people want you to see. i don't _ is what people want you to see. i don't know— is what people want you to see. i don't know what _ is what people want you to see. i don't know what happened - is what people want you to see. i- don't know what happened previously leading _ don't know what happened previously leading up— don't know what happened previously leading up to — don't know what happened previously leading up to that— don't know what happened previously leading up to that incident. _ leading up to that incident. ultimately— leading up to that incident. ultimately at— leading up to that incident. ultimately at the _ leading up to that incident. ultimately at the end - leading up to that incident. ultimately at the end of . leading up to that incident. | ultimately at the end of the leading up to that incident. - ultimately at the end of the day, the gentleman— ultimately at the end of the day, the gentleman on— ultimately at the end of the day, the gentleman on the _ ultimately at the end of the day, the gentleman on the floor, - ultimately at the end of the day, the gentleman on the floor, he l ultimately at the end of the day, l the gentleman on the floor, he was on the _ the gentleman on the floor, he was on the floor. — the gentleman on the floor, he was on the floor, great, _ the gentleman on the floor, he was on the floor, great, but _ the gentleman on the floor, he was on the floor, great, but how- the gentleman on the floor, he was on the floor, great, but how many. on the floor, great, but how many people _ on the floor, great, but how many people were — on the floor, great, but how many people were on _ on the floor, great, but how many people were on their— on the floor, great, but how many people were on their feet, - on the floor, great, but how many people were on their feet, still- people were on their feet, still fighting. — people were on their feet, still fighting. how— people were on their feet, still fighting, how many— people were on their feet, still fighting, how many officers - people were on their feet, still. fighting, how many officers were dealing _ fighting, how many officers were dealing with _ fighting, how many officers were dealing with the _ fighting, how many officers were dealing with the situation? - fighting, how many officers were dealing with the situation? was. fighting, how many officers were i dealing with the situation? was the gentleman— dealing with the situation? was the gentleman handcuffed _ dealing with the situation? was the gentleman handcuffed and - dealing with the situation? was the gentleman handcuffed and fully i gentleman handcuffed and fully restrained? _ gentleman handcuffed and fully restrained? it _ gentleman handcuffed and fully restrained? it didn't— gentleman handcuffed and fully restrained? it didn't look- gentleman handcuffed and fully restrained? it didn't look like i gentleman handcuffed and fully| restrained? it didn't look like it. if restrained? it didn't look like it. if he _ restrained? it didn't look like it. if he is— restrained? it didn't look like it. if he is not— restrained? it didn't look like it. if he is not handcuffed - restrained? it didn't look like it. if he is not handcuffed or- if he is not handcuffed or restrained _ if he is not handcuffed or restrained he _ if he is not handcuffed or restrained he still- if he is not handcuffed or restrained he still poses. if he is not handcuffed ori restrained he still poses a if he is not handcuffed or- restrained he still poses a threat and that— restrained he still poses a threat and that threat _ restrained he still poses a threat and that threat has _ restrained he still poses a threat and that threat has to _ restrained he still poses a threat and that threat has to be - restrained he still poses a threat and that threat has to be dealt l and that threat has to be dealt with _ and that threat has to be dealt with i'm — and that threat has to be dealt with i'm not— and that threat has to be dealt with. i'm not saying _ and that threat has to be dealt with. i'm not saying the - and that threat has to be dealt with. i'm not saying the way i and that threat has to be dealt. with. i'm not saying the way the officer— with. i'm not saying the way the officer had — with. i'm not saying the way the officer had dealt _ with. i'm not saying the way the officer had dealt with _ with. i'm not saying the way the officer had dealt with the - with. i'm not saying the way the officer had dealt with the threat| officer had dealt with the threat was the — officer had dealt with the threat was the best— officer had dealt with the threat was the best course _ officer had dealt with the threat was the best course of- officer had dealt with the threat was the best course of action, i officer had dealt with the threat . was the best course of action, but he has _ was the best course of action, but he has to— was the best course of action, but he has to be — was the best course of action, but he has to be dealt— was the best course of action, but he has to be dealt with. _ was the best course of action, but he has to be dealt with. unless. was the best course of action, butj he has to be dealt with. unless he is handcuffed _ he has to be dealt with. unless he is handcuffed and _ he has to be dealt with. unless he is handcuffed and restrained - he has to be dealt with. unless he is handcuffed and restrained the l is handcuffed and restrained the threat _ is handcuffed and restrained the threat still — is handcuffed and restrained the threat still has _ is handcuffed and restrained the threat still has to _ is handcuffed and restrained the threat still has to be _ is handcuffed and restrained the threat still has to be dealt - is handcuffed and restrained the threat still has to be dealt with.| threat still has to be dealt with. to stamp— threat still has to be dealt with. to stamp on— threat still has to be dealt with. to stamp on someone's- threat still has to be dealt with. to stamp on someone's head? i threat still has to be dealt with. i to stamp on someone's head? ho, threat still has to be dealt with. to stamp on someone's head? no, i am not sa in: to stamp on someone's head? no, i am not saying that — to stamp on someone's head? no, i am not saying that is _ to stamp on someone's head? no, i am not saying that is the _ to stamp on someone's head? no, i am not saying that is the best _ to stamp on someone's head? no, i am not saying that is the best course - not saying that is the best course of not saying that is the best course of action — not saying that is the best course of action. ultimately— not saying that is the best course of action. ultimately you - not saying that is the best course of action. ultimately you have i not saying that is the best course of action. ultimately you have a i of action. ultimately you have a tool box — of action. ultimately you have a tool box of _ of action. ultimately you have a tool box of tools _ of action. ultimately you have a tool box of tools to _ of action. ultimately you have a tool box of tools to deal - of action. ultimately you have a tool box of tools to deal with i of action. ultimately you have a . tool box of tools to deal with the situation — tool box of tools to deal with the situation. ultimately _ tool box of tools to deal with the situation. ultimately it _ tool box of tools to deal with the situation. ultimately it is- tool box of tools to deal with the situation. ultimately it is a - situation. ultimately it is a firearms _ situation. ultimately it is a firearms officer— situation. ultimately it is a firearms officer with - situation. ultimately it is a firearms officer with a i situation. ultimately it is a i firearms officer with a firearm. what _ firearms officer with a firearm. what would _ firearms officer with a firearm. what would have _ firearms officer with a firearm. what would have happened i firearms officer with a firearm. what would have happened if. firearms officer with a firearm. i what would have happened if he firearms officer with a firearm. - what would have happened if he had drawn— what would have happened if he had drawn the _ what would have happened if he had drawn the firearm? _ what would have happened if he had drawn the firearm? what _ what would have happened if he had drawn the firearm? what would i what would have happened if he hadj drawn the firearm? what would have been worse? —

drawn the firearm? what would have been worse? sta? _ drawn the firearm? what would have been worse?— drawn the firearm? what would have been worse? stay there. i would love to net been worse? stay there. i would love to get your — been worse? stay there. i would love to get your reactions _ been worse? stay there. i would love to get your reactions to _ been worse? stay there. i would love to get your reactions to this. - been worse? stay there. i would love to get your reactions to this. (all i to get your reactions to this. call us and text. i will come to our text console and read some shortly. what's your rational reaction, what's your logical reaction to this? what's your visceral reaction, your emotional reaction to the video that we are seeing and that so many people are viewing and is giving rise to such a passionate debate? thank you for watching on the television. we carry on on the radio. we have continuing coverage of the post office inquiry where the former business secretary is vince cable and greg clark will give evidence will stop the inquiry is examining how hundreds of subpostmasters were wrongly prosecuted for losses caused by a bug in the horizon it system.

we can go to azadeh moshiri in central london for us. what can we expect this morning? the appearance of sir vince cable _ expect this morning? the appearance of sir vince cable and _ expect this morning? the appearance of sir vince cable and greg _ expect this morning? the appearance of sir vince cable and greg clark- expect this morning? the appearance of sir vince cable and greg clark is i of sir vince cable and greg clark is a reminder of how long this scandal went on for and under several governments from different political parties. vince cable was part of the conservative lib dems coalition. greg clark was part of theresa may's government, both were cabinet ministers and both were business secretaries. but any oversight of the post office did not stop what is now seen as the widest miscarriage of justice now seen as the widest miscarriage ofjustice in uk legal history. we are talking about the period between 2010 and 2019. during that time subpostmasters were wrongly prosecuted and sir alan bates won his landmark court case alongside other subpostmasters against the post office in the high court. computer bugs were also found during that period. so what did these two

cabinet members make of all that? we often talk about the role of fujitsu employees, of post office officials, but what about the government which owns the post office, what about ministers and civil servants? could they have done anything to prevent or stop this scandal? that's what so many victims are reckoning with. lots of people have been giving evidence to this inquiry and a lot of the time they have been saying that if they had known what they know now then things would have been different. how do they get beyond that sort of narrative in this inquiry? that sort of narrative in this iniui ? . that sort of narrative in this in. ui ? ., , ., , that sort of narrative in this iniui ? ., ,~ inquiry? that something they are reiularl inquiry? that something they are regularly pushed _ inquiry? that something they are regularly pushed on _ inquiry? that something they are regularly pushed on by _ inquiry? that something they are regularly pushed on by the i inquiry? that something they are | regularly pushed on by the inquiry counsel, by victims up to you have evidence brought up and e—mails flagging issues to many of the victims in the last few months. when it comes to ministers, we have already seenjunior it comes to ministers, we have already seen junior ministers appear

and we also saw sir ed davey here recently. what they often say is that the problem either arises from post office officials who were not giving accurate information. we have also heard that civil servants perhaps had a role in all of this as well. that is for the inquiry chaired to understand but there was a significant day this week where we had baroness neville wolfe, a former junior minister, who had oversight for the post office appearing, and she said she came to the belief that after seeing so much evidence and testimony that civil servants perhaps were working against her. she said at times perhaps she felt like she was fighting them and they were either unable or unwilling to properly scrutinise the post office. as for post office officials themselves, she said in a meeting where she tried to pass on concerns to mps about what was happening to their constituents, she felt threatened and she was made to feel like she had to watch out. these are

issues that will come up today at the inquiry. issues that will come up today at the inquiry-— issues that will come up today at the inuui . . ., .,, the inquiry. vince cable was under the inquiry. vince cable was under the do business _ the inquiry. vince cable was under the do business department - the inquiry. vince cable was under the do business department as . the inquiry. vince cable was under the do business department as a i the do business department as a junior minister in charge of postal affairs. in the past we have heard from ministers that they took a while to get into the brief. tell us a bit about what we know about vince cable and how he is framing his arguments to the inquiry... i have to stop you there because we can listen in to the inquiry. i to stop you there because we can listen in to the inquiry.— to stop you there because we can listen in to the inquiry. i swear by almiuh listen in to the inquiry. i swear by almighty god _ listen in to the inquiry. i swear by almighty god that _ listen in to the inquiry. i swear by almighty god that the _ listen in to the inquiry. i swear by almighty god that the evidence i | almighty god that the evidence i shall give shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. iii whole truth and nothing but the truth. , ., ., ~ ., whole truth and nothing but the truth. ,, ., ~ ., ., ~ whole truth and nothing but the truth. ., ~ ., .,~ ., truth. if you would like to take a seat. truth. if you would like to take a seat- thank— truth. if you would like to take a seat. thank you. _ truth. if you would like to take a seat. thank you. good - truth. if you would like to take aj seat. thank you. good morning, truth. if you would like to take a - seat. thank you. good morning, my name is jason _ seat. thank you. good morning, my name is jason beer _ seat. thank you. good morning, my name is jason beer and _ seat. thank you. good morning, my name is jason beer and i _ seat. thank you. good morning, my name is jason beer and i asked - name is jason beer and i asked questions on behalf of the inquiry. can you give us your full name,

please. can you give us your full name, lease. , ., . ., , can you give us your full name, please-_ fori please. john vincent cable. for those listening _ please. john vincent cable. for those listening and _ please. john vincent cable. for those listening and watching, l please. john vincent cable. forj those listening and watching, if please. john vincent cable. for- those listening and watching, if i'm speaking in more than usually loud voice today, and if i'm getting closer to the microphone than is usual, there is good reason for that, which sir vince cable understands.— that, which sir vince cable understands. ., ~ , ., , . ., understands. thank you very much and i a- reciate understands. thank you very much and i appreciate it- — understands. thank you very much and i appreciate it. can _ understands. thank you very much and i appreciate it. can you _ understands. thank you very much and i appreciate it. can you look— understands. thank you very much and i appreciate it. can you look at - understands. thank you very much and i appreciate it. can you look at the - i appreciate it. can you look at the witness statement you have kindly prepared for the inquiry please, in front of you. it should be 53 pages long and dated the 27th ofjune 2024. if long and dated the 27th ofjune 202a. if you look at the last page, page 53, do you see your signature? yes, i do. share page 53, do you see your signature? yes, i do. �* . ., , page 53, do you see your signature? yes, i do. �* _, , ., yes, i do. are the contents of the witness statement _ yes, i do. are the contents of the witness statement are _ yes, i do. are the contents of the witness statement are true - yes, i do. are the contents of the witness statement are true to - yes, i do. are the contents of the witness statement are true to the best of your belief? yes witness statement are true to the best of your belief?— best of your belief? yes they are, to the best _ best of your belief? yes they are, to the best of _ best of your belief? yes they are, to the best of my _ best of your belief? yes they are, to the best of my knowledge - best of your belief? yes they are, to the best of my knowledge and | to the best of my knowledge and belief. ., ~' , ., to the best of my knowledge and belief. . ~ , ., , ., to the best of my knowledge and belief. . ~ i. ,, , to the best of my knowledge and belief. . ~ , ., , ., , ., belief. thank you, you can put that to one side- _ belief. thank you, you can put that to one side. all _ belief. thank you, you can put that to one side. all the _ belief. thank you, you can put that to one side. all the other- belief. thank you, you can put that i to one side. all the other documents i will show you will come up on the screen. i think by training and background you are an economist, is that right? background you are an economist, is that riuht? ., �* , background you are an economist, is

that riuht? . �*, _, . background you are an economist, is that riuht? . �*, . , , that right? that's correct, yes. after university _ that right? that's correct, yes. after university and _ that right? that's correct, yes. after university and the - that right? that's correct, yes. after university and the like i that right? that's correct, yes. | after university and the like you entered the civil service, correct? for a couple of years, yes. and then i was later a special adviser within the department for trade and industry. but mostly not in the civil service but i had a stretch there. �* , ., civil service but i had a stretch there. �* ., ~' there. and then you worked in business before _ there. and then you worked in business before being - there. and then you worked in business before being elected | there. and then you worked in i business before being elected to parliament in 1997.— business before being elected to parliament in 1997. correct, yes. and so far _ parliament in 1997. correct, yes. and so far as _ parliament in 1997. correct, yes. and so far as concerns _ parliament in 1997. correct, yes. and so far as concerns this - parliament in 1997. correct, yes. l and so far as concerns this inquiry, the most important office you held was as secretary of state for business, innovation and skills, and was that between the 12th of may 2010 and the 12th of may 2015? yes. 2010 and the 12th of may 2015? yes, that was the — 2010 and the 12th of may 2015? yes, that was the full _ 2010 and the 12th of may 2015? yes, that was the full length _ 2010 and the 12th of may 2015? use; that was the full length of the coalition government. 50 that was the full length of the coalition government.- that was the full length of the coalition government. so five years. five years. — coalition government. so five years. five years. yes- _ coalition government. so five years. five years, yes. at _ coalition government. so five years. five years, yes. at all— coalition government. so five years. five years, yes. at all times - coalition government. so five years. five years, yes. at all times during l five years, yes. at all times during that period — five years, yes. at all times during that period is _ five years, yes. at all times during that period is it _ five years, yes. at all times during that period is it right _ five years, yes. at all times during that period is it right that - five years, yes. at all times during that period is it right that there - that period is it right that there was a junior minister responsible for postal affairs?—

for postal affairs? yes, i think there were — for postal affairs? yes, i think there were six _ for postal affairs? yes, i think there were six or— for postal affairs? yes, i think there were six or seven - for postal affairs? yes, i think there were six or seven junior| there were six or seven junior ministers and one was responsible for postal affairs amongst other things. most notably i think labour relations, consumer protection. you list them in — relations, consumer protection. you list them in paragraph 21 of your statement, there is no need for it to be turned up. but there were a succession ofjunior ministers with responsibility for postal affairs in that five year period, is that right? that five year period, is that ri . ht? , ., was right? yes, there were four. was that a regular — right? yes, there were four. was that a regular or— right? yes, there were four. was that a regular or normal- right? yes, there were four. was that a regular or normal number| right? yes, there were four. was i that a regular or normal number of junior ministers holding down a post over that kind of period dressed in yellow well, i think there was quite a high turnover generally the yellow well, i think there was quite a high turnover generally— a high turnover generally the four ministers we _ a high turnover generally the four ministers we have _ a high turnover generally the four ministers we have referred - a high turnover generally the four ministers we have referred to - a high turnover generally the four. ministers we have referred to were people from my party. the other junior ministers were conservatives.

but they had a turnover which was really directed by the prime minister, my group of ministers were essentially appointed by nick clegg and worked with me. did essentially appointed by nick clegg and worked with me.— essentially appointed by nick clegg and worked with me. did you get any sense that there _ and worked with me. did you get any sense that there was _ and worked with me. did you get any sense that there was churn, - and worked with me. did you get any sense that there was churn, as - and worked with me. did you get any sense that there was churn, as it - and worked with me. did you get any sense that there was churn, as it is l sense that there was churn, as it is sometimes referred to, in that ministerial post, that may have made it difficult for the person occupying it to grass, fully understand, get to grips with post office issues? i understand, get to grips with post office issues?— office issues? i wouldn't say abnormally _ office issues? i wouldn't say abnormally so. _ office issues? i wouldn't say abnormally so. i— office issues? i wouldn't say abnormally so. i was - office issues? i wouldn't say| abnormally so. i was unusual office issues? i wouldn't say i abnormally so. i was unusual in having five years in my office. i think under the governments that havejust think under the governments that have just passed, we think under the governments that havejust passed, we had cabinet ministers who held jobs for a few months. but it was unusual. i think injo swinson plasma case there was interruption because of maternity leave. that was very understandable, that wasn't really churn, but the

others changed because of an overall mix in the ministerial portfolio. ed davey became a secretary of state, for example. did davey became a secretary of state, for example-— for example. did you get any sense in our for example. did you get any sense in your period _ for example. did you get any sense in your period of — for example. did you get any sense in your period of office _ for example. did you get any sense in your period of office that - for example. did you get any sense in your period of office that the - in your period of office that the brief held by the person responsible for postal affairs, the minister responsible for postal affairs, was too broad, that is to say there was too broad, that is to say there was too much to do?— too much to do? there was a vast amount within _ too much to do? there was a vast amount within the _ too much to do? there was a vast amount within the department. . too much to do? there was a vast amount within the department. i | amount within the department. i think we may come to this in more detail later but in the briefing pack, the topical briefing pack, i noticed there was a list of 100 items which came within my portfolio, roughly. and the post office was one of them. and the portfolio had to be divvied up between ministers and civil servants. the post office was part of a junior minister's portfolio and

i think that was proportionate given the wide range of things we had to do. , ., , ., ., , , do. did any of the 'unior ministers in our do. did any of the 'unior ministers in your time _ do. did any of the 'unior ministers in your time ever — do. did any of the junior ministers in your time ever raise _ do. did any of the junior ministers in your time ever raise with - do. did any of the junior ministers in your time ever raise with you i in your time ever raise with you problems as to capacity, such that they couldn't give postal affairs sufficient attention? ida. they couldn't give postal affairs sufficient attention?— they couldn't give postal affairs sufficient attention? no, i don't think so. sufficient attention? no, i don't thinkso- in— sufficient attention? no, i don't think so. in my _ sufficient attention? no, i don't think so. in myjudgment - sufficient attention? no, i don't think so. in myjudgment they l sufficient attention? no, i don't - think so. in myjudgment they were highly conscientious and very intelligent ministers and very capable and perfectly capable of handling the responsibility. i met them regularly as party colleagues and ministers. we talked formally and ministers. we talked formally and informally. they kept me abreast of issues which they found particularly important. in the second paragraph _ particularly important. in the second paragraph of- particularly important. in the second paragraph of your - particularly important. in the - second paragraph of your witness statement, no need to bring it up, but you say that you were informed of a large number of documents that should have been retained cannot be located, such as my official diary

and minutes of meetings. sir ed davey and jo swinson have said similar things to the inquiry. do you know why such papers, including your official diary, which is presumably an important record of your activities, was not retained? i have no idea why they weren't retained, but in my case there were some what i would call seminal meetings that were never recorded. i had a first courtesy call meeting with paula vennells and alice perkins for example and there doesn't seem to be any record of that, although i registered with them some of my concerns about the post office at that point. there was a meeting where a member of parliament, andrew bridgen, brought the federation to tell me about some of the distressing cases of subpostmasters. there appears to be no record of that either. haste subpostmasters. there appears to be no record of that either.— no record of that either. have you asked why — no record of that either. have you asked why there _ no record of that either. have you asked why there is _ no record of that either. have you asked why there is no _ no record of that either. have you asked why there is no record? - no record of that either. have you | asked why there is no record? yes, no record of that either. have you i asked why there is no record? yes, i was told that —

asked why there is no record? yes, i was told that people _ asked why there is no record? yes, i was told that people had _ asked why there is no record? yes, i was told that people had searched i was told that people had searched and couldn't find it. i think probably it has to do with the transition which was taking place from paper to digital. when i first started thejob, almost from paper to digital. when i first started the job, almost everything was done on paper, letters came into the department stop i think by the end of it, it was e—mail based. and for a variety of reasons complete records were not kept. you for a variety of reasons complete records were not kept.— for a variety of reasons complete records were not kept. you tell us also in paragraph _ records were not kept. you tell us also in paragraph two _ records were not kept. you tell us also in paragraph two of _ records were not kept. you tell us also in paragraph two of your- also in paragraph two of your witness statement that in your five years in office problems with horizon barely came across your desk, is that right breast yellow it is correct. and when they did it was usually in a very uncontroversial way and was not drawn to usually in a very uncontroversial way and was not draw- way and was not drawn to my attention _ way and was not drawn to my attention as _ way and was not drawn to my attention as an _ way and was not drawn to my attention as an issue - way and was not drawn to my attention as an issue i - way and was not drawn to my attention as an issue i should way and was not drawn to my - attention as an issue i should focus on. , ., , ., attention as an issue i should focus on. , ., , ., ., on. the five year period was a significant _ on. the five year period was a significant one _ on. the five year period was a significant one in _ on. the five year period was a significant one in relation - on. the five year period was a significant one in relation to l on. the five year period was a l significant one in relation to the unfolding events concerning horizon, including within that five year period, because campaigning work was

being undertaken by thejustice force of most pastors —— justice for subpostmasters alliance, with a class action being brought by the post office in the courts. there had been the discovery of evidence in that five year period which cast doubt on the safety of criminal convictions obtained by the post office when acting as a private prosecutor. the ccrc, the criminal cases review commission, had commenced an investigation into the safety of some convictions. at second sight, the forensic accountants, they had been instructed and had produced four reports in that five year period. it marked the beginning, middle and end of the initial complaint and mediation scheme run by the post office. deloitte, the forensic accountants, had completed reports on the horizon system. i have given

you a smattering of things that happened in that five year period where you say horizon barely came across your desk. looking at it in the round, how do you think it is that horizon barely came across your desk in that five year period? i think the general reason is that the officials who were briefing the ministers on the subject hadn't seen it as a particular problem. i think with hindsight i should have been told at the outset about horizon, what it was. it was just a word. i should have been told that people were querying, good, competent people, and computer weekly for example, i was told nothing of their work. people were suggesting there was a risk factor and i should have been told about alan bates and the justice group. i never heard his

name until i had been in thejob five years, at the end when the whole issue came to a head. but certainly i wasn't briefed on them and i think probably this came down to civil servants making a judgment. studio: vince cable giving evidence to the post of his inquiry, the former business secretary who was one of the ministers responsible for the post office. he said that with hindsight he should have been told more about horizon. you can continue watching on our website at bbc news. live from london, this is bbc news anger over a video of a policeman kicking a man's head at manchester airport. us presidentjoe biden appears on television from the white house, to explain his decision to exit the presidential race. former business secretary sir vince

cable gives evidence to the post office inquiry. the partnership between the government and the crown estate to help the uk become energy independent will be announced later today. a police officer has been a police officer has been spent a police officer has been spent —— a police officer has been spent —— suspended after a video circulated online with a man being kicked in ahead at manchester the man has been removed from all duties after the incident on tuesday. let's look at the footage, but you may find it distressing to watch. the police force said it understood the deep concerns widely raised after the video sparked a protest outside rochdale police station. greater

manchester police said three officers