policing

Picture post: Police remove campaigner from tower at N Yorks fracking site

171002 KM tower eviction 4 Eddie Thornton

Campaigner in tower outside Third Energy’s fracking site at Kirby Misperton, 2 October 2017. Photo: Eddie Thornton

Police officers using specialist climbing gear removed an anti-fracking protester this afternoon from a small wooden tower outside Third Energy’s gas site at Kirby Misperton.

A fire engine with a cherry picker was used to the take down the man at about 4.45pm. He had been filming officers policing anti-fracking protests.

171002 KM tower eviction 3

Operation to remove campaigner at Third Energy’s fracking site at Kirby Misperton, 2 October 2017. Photo: Eddie Thornton

The man continued to film and broadcast as fire and police officers prepared to remove him. He was arrested for obstructing the highway.

The tower, which is about 7ft tall, had been constructed during the weekend on the grass verge next to the site entrance.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Lock-on protest

171002 KM Eddie Thornton

Two person lock-on protest at Kirby Misperton, 2 October 2017. Photo: Eddie Thornton

At about 4am today two men locked themselves together at the site entrance. Protesters said police and security guards intervened to try to stop the protest, known as a lock-on.

Supt Alisdair Dey said:

“A police officer and a member of the public have been injured in this incident. This kind of behaviour is completely unacceptable and will be investigated thoroughly and dealt with appropriately.”

Kirby Misperton Protection Camp said in a statement:

”Our actions are always peaceful, at no point do we wish to enter into any kind of confrontation with the police or security. We ask North Yorkshire Police and Next Level Security to please consider everybody’s safety to avoid the risk of serious injury.”

The two men were cut apart by a specialist police team and arrested.

Update on arrests

On the lock-on protest in the early hours of Monday 2 October, North Yorkshire Police said in a statement:

“A 65-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of assaulting a police officer, common assault and obstructing the highway. He has been released on bail as enquiries continue.

“A 23-year-old man was arrested and has been charged with assaulting a police officer and obstructing the highway.”

The police added that a 49-year-old had been charged with obstructing a police officer after being removed from the tower.

According to police figures, 26 people were arrested at the site in September. Of these:

  • 2 were released with no further action
  • 2 accepted cautions
  • 22 were charged with offences including obstructing the highway, assaulting a police officer and obstructing a police officer

 

12 replies »

  1. Hmm I do believe we should state the fact that the security guard was bitten! Just to paint the true picture of what we are having to deal with! And that is the information held with the police so it is verifiable.

    • The security guard had no jurisdiction outside the gates . On two occasions at PNR a police officer ( corporate enforcement officer ) and security personnel had their hands around protectors throats . Their are only one set of criminals here .

      • Precisely Lily, I work part time with ASD sufferers since i retired from engineering, and we are taught how to and how not to deal with someone who has their hands around your throat.
        Grasping someone by the throat is a life threatening situation, you have three seconds before losing consciousness, that is the ONLY situation where you are authorised to use all reasonable force to release the throat hold.
        The videos of police action reveal that they use a throat grip, that is illegal and constitutes physical assault with intent to threaten life.
        You, me, anyone can use all reasonable force to release that grip, including, if that is the only option, to bite but not with intent to harm.
        The fact that the victim, the protester was conscious after the attack on their life, just proves that totally legal attempt to get the throat grip released worked, or the person would be in hospital on a breathing machine.
        The police actions on recorded on video exceed all legal restraint procedures and are hence illegal.

  2. @GottaBKidding. The security guards have no jurisdiction on the outside of the gates/fence! Neither, legally are they allowed to touch you!! They ONLY have jurisdiction on the inside of the fence!

    How is a tower on the grass verge obstructing the highway?

    You also must remember that that road is a public highways!

  3. [Edited by moderator]

    I just hope the courts deal with this matter as appropriate [edited by moderator] and trust Ineos has it all documented.

  4. And there we have it folks, three replies from three separate antis and not one condemns the ‘biting’ of an individual but in fact they stick up for the assailant! Hopefully the police come down harder on you going fwd and Ineos kick you into the long grass where you belong. You really are building a pretty bad name for yourselves now.

      • Phil I know your nature is to follow rather than lead (despite the fact you think you do the opposite) but please stop following what Hobbit tells you as he is simply wrong in assuming my american friend and I are one person. Use your common sense to work out that I would be in the land of nod. Anyway, whilst I don’t read what you write anymore generally (you’re a little too out there for me) I did actually glance over your comment on this particular story. Needless to say it was of no surprise to read that in your eyes the security guard was trying to ‘kill’ the protestor and thus biting was acceptable in this instance. In actual fact the security guard was trying to prevent an illegal protest and the person lashed out at him with their gnashers.

        • I know you know I know you know i know nothing of the sort. Which of the many multiple fake id’s are which? It doesnt matter? what reveals covalence is, language, terminology, attitude, choice of phrases, composition and general demeanour, all reveal common origin, but that is digression and is irrelevant to the subject in hand.

          I don’t follow anyone, particularly not “these type” of posts from people who I know that they know that i know that they know nothing about what I know and know even less than anyone else knows!
          I know of no “hobbit” of which you speak, other than fictitious beings in books by J.R.R.Tolkein and the subsequent movies?
          Perhaps you could elucidate and expand upon that remark, since it seems to have little or no bearing on the subject in hand?

          How did you know what I write if you don’t read what I write, I know you know I know that isn’t true you know?
          So if this private security personage was outside of his, or her jurisdiction, and was in a position where the face of the protester was being smothered, how would anyone be in a position to bite to release a life threatening “throat grip” if that private security person who was well outside his or her jurisdiction was not in such a position on or near the protesters face for such a bite to even occur in the first place (first face?)?
          Clearly the private security personage was outside of his or her jurisdiction in even having a part of his or her anatomy anywhere near the protesters face? That is a fundamental deeply seated personal protection zone, the autonomic response of such a threat is to immediately release the grip and the threat, that is an autonomic response, the body will protect itself automatically in such a situation, you, me, the private security personage all would do the same, indeed we cannot prevent that autonomic response from occurring, it is instinctive and cannot be prevented in the slightest. To use that as an excuse to prosecute a person is tantamount to prosecuting a person for breathing and protecting airways, it cannot be stopped, it is instinctive.
          One would presume that the protesters hands and arms were being held so that the simple and non aggressive tactic to remove a life threatening throat grip was rendered impossible. That act renders little choice, the autonomic response kicks in, the ancient survival imperative makes a split second move, a bite is an ancient response, way way below conscious control, it’s is fight or flight syndrome, it is unstoppable.
          Therefore in order to protect their life and to prevent the inevitable rapid onset of unconsciousness, which is only for three seconds remember, the body reacts automatically, anyone, you, me, anyone has the legal right to use all reasonable force to release a life threatening throat grip, we couldn’t stop the reaction if we tried.
          The assailant is the one who aggressively acted in a manner to grip a person around the throat and is as a result subject to potential criminal prosecution for endangering anyone’s life, in a situation which is exceeding their limited privately declared jurisdiction and responsibility.
          You know that I know that you know that is true.
          But I doubt if you will read it and I know that you will not agree with it, and you know that I know that you know that is the case.
          PS you used the word “kill” i do not, I say it is an action that endangers life and is as such a life threatening action that is illegal and the autonomic response to that is not conscious. It is the original life threatening action that is unacceptable and liable for criminal prosecution.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s