Met police put spit hood on 90-year-old woman and pointed Taser at her
Watchdog investigating incident at woman’s home in Peckham in which she was also handcuffed
@Emine_SinmazTue 30 May 2023 12.22 BST
A 90-year-old black woman was handcuffed and had a spit hood placed over her head and a Taser pointed at her by the Metropolitan police.
The woman was reportedly left with cuts and bruises to her wrists and one of her arms after being restrained at her home in Peckham, south-east London, on 9 May.
She was handcuffed behind her back, had a mesh spit hood placed over her head and a Taser trained on her before she was taken to hospital without being arrested.
The Independent Office for Police Conduct is investigating the incident. One officer has been suspended and barred from using a Taser, while five others have been placed on restricted duties so they have no contact with the public.
The Met said officers were called to an address in SE15 on 9 May after reports of a disturbance between a woman and her carer.
A spokesperson said: “The Met officers attended and identified a 90-year-old lady, who was distressed. After officers attempted to engage with her, she was restrained using handcuffs and a spit hood applied after it was alleged one officer was spat at. The woman was then taken to hospital. She was not arrested.
“During the course of the incident, an officer issued a red-dot challenge with their Taser but did not discharge it.”
The IOPC launched an investigation on 17 May after the Met’s directorate of professional standards referred the case to the watchdog. A family member of the woman has been allowed to watch footage of what happened from the officers’ body-worn video cameras.
DCS Seb Adjei-Addoh, who is in charge of policing in the borough of Southwark, said the incident raised a number of questions.
“There are limits to what I am able to say in relation to this incident given it is now subject to an IOPC investigation. However, it is clear that this will have been a distressing experience for the lady involved and that the circumstances raise a number of questions that need to be answered,” he said.
“While I do not wish to pre-judge this process, officers know that they must be able to justify any use of force or restraint and we will expect that of the officers involved in this incident. They also know that we expect them to show compassion and to adjust their approach in real time according to the circumstances they are faced with.”
An IOPC spokesperson confirmed it was investigating and added: “We have also received a public complaint concerning the level of force that was used and the injuries it is alleged the woman sustained, including cuts and bruising on both her wrists and one arm. We have been in touch with the woman’s family to explain our role.”
The free press is under attack from multiple forces. Media outlets are closing their doors, victims to a broken business model. In much of the world, journalism is morphing into propaganda, as governments dictate what can and can’t be printed. In the last year alone, hundreds of reporters have been killed or imprisoned for doing their jobs. The UN reports that 85% of the world’s population experienced a decline in press freedom in their country in recent years.
We hope you will consider supporting the Guardian to do something about this. Despite the financial challenges plaguing the media industry, we’ve decided to keep our journalism paywall-free, because we believe everyone has the right to high-quality, fact-checked reporting. And we maintain our independence thanks to generosity from readers all over the world, who understand that supporting the free press is an investment in an informed and empowered public.
Unlike many others, we have no billionaire owner – this helps us maintain the freedom to fearlessly chase the truth and report it with integrity. Your support will allow us to continue to work with trademark determination and passion to bring you journalism that’s always free from commercial or political interference.
Help power the Guardian’s reporting for the years to come, whether with a small sum or a larger one. If you can, please support us on a monthly basis from just £2. It takes less than a minute to set up, and you can rest assured that you’re making a big impact every single month in support of open, independent journalism. Thank you.
£3 per month
£5 per month
ContinueRemind me in July
We hope you enjoy looking back and sharing your memories on Facebook, from the most recent to those long ago.
On this day
1 year ago
Townhead & Adjacent Districts Westmoreland · So my #DefensivePractice is enough to #jail the #AtoZ of #Criminals and #haters and #trolls ARCHIE AM GOING TO MAKE SURE THE WORLD KNOWS THAT THE GUARDIAN PUBLISH https://fight4justiceadvocacy.business.site AND NAME THE GUARDIAN AS MODERN SLAVERY REPORTERS WHO FAILED TO PUBLISH https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taA14IVIm9g Report IS MODERN SLAVERY THRIVING IN THE UK? NOW FUCK OFF AND GO AFTER THE PAEDOPHILES AT www.leyf.org.uk and www.uel.ac.uk and https://www.gov.ukDepartments MERVELEE MYERS Sent from my Galaxy——– Original message ——–From: Archie Bland <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: 31/05/2022 06:29 (GMT+00:00) To: email@example.com Subject: Is Russia running out of tanks? | First Edition from The Guardian 31/05/2022Tuesday briefing:What Russia’s failing tanks tell us about how war is changingArchie Bland Good morning. On Monday, Russian troops began to advance into Sievierodonetsk, the largest city in Donbas still held in Ukrainian hands. The city is important to the control of Luhansk, one of two provinces in Donbas. If it falls, that success – achieved at the cost of the city’s ruination and 1,500 civilian lives – will be viewed as grim vindication for Vladimir Putin’s decision to consolidate Russian forces in the region and bombard targets with artillery fire.There’s something else about the battle for Sievierodonetsk, though: while Russian tanks are moving into the centre of the city, they were not able to encircle it first. Cutting a city off from its supply lines to soften it up is brutally effective, as the siege of Mariupol indicated. So why hasn’t that happened here?For today’s newsletter, I spoke to Philips O’Brien, professor of strategic studies at the University of St Andrews, about a compelling explanation that could have much bigger consequences: Russia may be running out of tanks. That’s after the headlines.Five big stories1 Energy | The European Union agreed to an embargo on most Russian oil imports after late-night talks in Brussels. The sanctions, hailed as a “remarkable achievement”, will immediately impact 75% of Russian oil imports, rising to 90% by the end of the year.2 Partygate | Momentum is building for a leadership challenge to Boris Johnson as soon as next week. As three more MPs called on Johnson to go, rebels expressed anger at what they said was a lurch to the right after Partygate.3 Champions league final | Uefa commissioned an independent report into chaotic scenes outside the Stade de France on Saturday where some Liverpool fans were teargassed. France’s interior minister admitted access to the ground had been “disorganised” but blamed counterfeit tickets sold to English fans.4 Justice | Police and prosecutors have been told to stop the mass collection of personal information from rape victims by the UK’s data watchdog. The information commissioner said police are going on unjustified “fishing expeditions” into complainants’ personal information.5 Music | Glastonbury festival announced its full lineup for this summer, with acts including Sam Fender, Megan Thee Stallion and Foals among those added to the bill. Billie Eilish, Paul McCartney and Kendrick Lamar had already been announced.In depth: The chink in Russia’s armourFew assets of conventional warfare are more intimidating than the tank, and when Russia attacked Ukraine, its invasion force of around 1,500 (out of a total of about 2,800) was often judged to be among the most formidable in the world. Phillips O’Brien was never especially convinced by that analysis, and given the accuracy of his earlier assessments of Russian might – in January, he wrote that Russia “lacks the ability to mount sustained military operations and deploy a wide range of military forces at the same time” – it’s worth paying attention to his view of the current situation.So, what should we expect next in Ukraine? O’Brien believes that Russian advances have largely stalled because the country’s forces are running very short of tanks, and other armoured vehicles. It’s a view he laid out in a Twitter thread on Sunday, and which built on a piece for the Atlantic last week, based on evidence from the eastern Donbas region. I asked him how he reached that conclusion, and what it might mean.What are tanks supposed to do?Tanks are powerful, well-armoured, and move fast in open country. “They’re usually used to seize the land between cities quickly and surround an enemy,” O’Brien told me. “In Russian doctrine, you have these battalion tactical groups which are supposed to have maybe 10 tanks alongside 30 armoured personnel carriers (APCs) carrying the infantry.”The theory – dating back to the second world war – is that tanks allow you to punch a hole in the enemy lines and cut forces or a strategic target like a city off from supplies, softening them up before a final assault. All of that relies on effective air support to neuter the threat that enemy jets and drones pose to the progress of the armour on the ground.What’s happened in reality?Nothing which Vladimir Putin will be pleased to hear about. “When I look at Donbas, I don’t see the kind of breakthroughs which you would want to see in modern armoured warfare,” O’Brien said. “You want to get through the line and then exploit the situation by quickly encircling the enemy. What we’re seeing is that the Russians may make a hole in the line, but then they are stopped.”He points to the failure to encircle Sieverodonetsk, and declining numbers in Ukrainian claims of Russian tanks being destroyed. That could mean a change in Russian deployment or in Ukraine’s ability to attack them. But since at the same time the Russian machine has failed to break through after its artillery has softened the Ukrainian forces up, it is more likely to indicate that there are simply fewer tanks in the fight in the first place.While exact measures of the scale of the damage to Russian armour are hard to come by, Ukraine has claimed more than 1,300 Russian tanks have been destroyed. The lowest independent assessments are more than 700 destroyed or captured. The Pentagon, which does not appear to have made unrealistically high estimates so far, puts it at about 1,000 – a number which O’Brien thinks is “probably a safe bet”.“Those are vast losses,” O’Brien said. In its usually reliable defence intelligence update on Friday, the UK Ministry of Defence said that Russia was now moving 50-year-old T-62 tanks out of storage for deployment. “These tanks are antiquated,” O’Brien said. “The Russians don’t have nearly the frontline armoured capability that they had.”Why has that happened?The military doctrine that sees tanks as all-powerful is pretty out of date, as you might expect given its second world war foundations. There are many examples of videos that appear to show Russian tanks being destroyed by handheld missiles, some of which – like the British-manufactured Next-generation Light Anti-armour Weapon (NLAW) (pictured below held by a Ukrainian soldier shortly after destroying an armoured personnel carrier) – are designed to strike on top of the tank, where its armour is weakest.Most importantly, Russia has failed to secure the air superiority which is a prerequisite of effective tank warfare – instead finding that Ukrainian planes and drones continue to be able to stop Russian tanks in their tracks. “They’re far more vulnerable than they need to be,” said O’Brien. “They’re not flying air patrols, or close air support. So they’re running into considerable defensive firepower.”How did Russia get itself into this position?Because it overestimated its prospects of air superiority, and underestimated the capacity of simple, cheap anti-tank systems to stop it in its tracks. If, as O’Brien has written, “we are witnessing in Ukraine the final war of 20th-century militaries”, we might be shocked that the Kremlin entered such a fight without a clear-eyed assessment of the likely risks – but “dictators on the whole have systems that tell them what they want to hear, and Putin has clearly done that”.As for the failure of analysts worldwide to spot the same flaw: “A lot of people fell for what we could call ‘the American trap’: because the US military was able to do something, people looked at other militaries, and just view it as a scaled-down version of the US. And that is not the case here. The Russian military is an entirely more deficient beast. The US can overwhelm an enemy with complex air systems and defeat their air defences, it still has the capacity to do these ‘break out’ operations. Russia just can’t.”What does it mean for the future of this war – and wars around the world?It’s obviously favourable to Ukraine if the tanks are failing, but as Russia’s grim progress in Sieverodonetsk indicates, it doesn’t signal an end to the fight. “If they’re bringing out obsolete equipment they probably can’t keep going with their current approach for that much longer,” said O’Brien.“The problem the Ukrainians then have is: can they drive the Russians back? I wouldn’t be surprised if we have a summer of ranged warfare, mostly – more attritional combat with both sides trying to destroy the other’s resources.” That’s why, as the Guardian’s defence and security editor Dan Sabbagh wrote yesterday, Ukraine has been pleading with its western allies for longer-range rocket systems.There is, meanwhile, a wider positive for those who fear Russia’s invasion signals a new era of military expansion around the world. “The one hopeful thing to come out of this is that this conflict demonstrates that going to war is really hard,” O’Brien said. “And it may be that militaries around the world look at it and realise that war is fraught with enormous new risks because of the power of cheaper forces. So maybe people will be less likely to take that risk in the future.”What else we’ve been reading• Guessing how many Tory MPs have submitted no-confidence letters in the prime minister is essentially a game of pin the tail on the donkey, but Katy Balls’ well-informed piece helps you peek from behind the blindfold a little. She paints a picture of a party that is “disunited and fast running out of goodwill”. Archie• There’s been much speculation over Emma Raducanu’s difficult sophomore year – this piece offers some hints as to why that might be. Brittany Collens’ tale of life on the professional tennis tour, away from home for most of the year, hopping from hotel to hotel, is a fascinating insight into the gruelling toll elite sport takes on athletes. Toby Moses, head of newsletters• The latest instalment of Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett’s excellent Republic of Parenthood column focuses on birth trauma, and the importance of talking through the experience before, and after, it happens. Archie• Not a reading pick, but the US podcast Normal Gossip is absolutely worth your time. Offering anonymised normie tattle from, and about, non-celebrities, it proves that stories don’t need to feature a starry name to be hilarious and jaw-dropping. Its second series has just kicked off. Hannah J Davies, deputy editor, newsletters• If you’ve watched the utterly compulsive US documentary series Couples Therapy, you will inhale this New Yorker piece about the show’s star, therapist Dr Orna Guralnik. If you haven’t, book out your free evenings for the rest of the week and expect to get through all of it on iPlayer (in the UK). ArchieSportFootball | Todd Boehly promised to build on Chelsea’s “remarkable history of success” after the American’s consortium completed its £4.25bn takeover of the club on Monday. The deal was signed off a day before Chelsea’s operating licence was due to expire.Tennis | The 19-year-old Holger Rune caused the biggest upset of the men’s draw in the French Open so far, outplaying Stefanos Tsitsipas 7-5, 3-6, 6-3, 6-4 to reach a grand slam quarter-final for the first time in his careerRugby union | Scottish referee Hollie Davidson will make history when she leads an all-female team of match officials for next month’s Portugal v Italy men’s international. It will be the first time an all-female team have taken charge of a men’s Test match.The front pagesThe Guardian’s print splash today is “PM’s sudden lurch to right fuels anger of Tory rebels” while the i has “Tory threat to Johnson growing by the day”. The Telegraph says “Police leave 999 callers hanging” saying targets for picking up the phones are being missed. The lead story in the Financial Times is “Qualcomm seeks Arm investment alongside rivals to spur neutrality”. The Daily Mail begs “Save us from the £100 tank of fuel, Rishi” as “Forecourt prices hit record high”. Elsewhere, travel chaos occupies the front pages. “Tears and fury as travel ‘carnage’ worsens” says the Express while the Mirror bemoans a “Summer of chaos”. In the Times it’s “Getaways at risk as chaos blamed on airline cuts”. The Metro has “Wish we weren’t here” as it reports on “half-term holiday chaos”.Today in FocusBreaking the silence on Brunel: abuse in the modelling industrySix former models have alleged sexual abuse against the fashion agent Jean-Luc Brunel. Lucy Osborne investigates how the fashion industry failed victims of abuseCartoon of the day | Martin RowsonThe UpsideA bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all badThe tiny Pacific island state of Niue has announced plans to protect 100% of its ocean – an area around the size of Vietnam – against illegal fishing and the effects of the climate emergency.Having originally committed to safeguarding 40% of its waters in 2020, the island will now take measures to defend all 317,500 sq km (122,000 sq miles) of it, following the lead of the neighbouring Cook Islands.The new policy has seen the creation of a marine park, including an area for scientific studies and a conservation zone. “The ocean is everything to us. It’s what defines us,” said Dalton Tagelagi, premier of the island.Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every SundayBored at work?And finally, the Guardian’s crosswords to keep you entertained throughout the day – with plenty more on the Guardian’s Puzzles app for iOS and Android. Until tomorrow.• Quick crossword• Cryptic crosswordSee how the average temperature in your area is changing. Explore Climate Science InfoShareYou’re All Caught UpCheck back tomorrow to see more of your memories!
This is my response to Nationwide Decision
Dear Jayne Finch
Thanks for your decision, but I think it would be remiss of me not to address the contradictions in your decision and how this decision was made. You and I did not discuss most of what you made the DECISION about. You said you would call me back, so I don’t understand the conclusion.
Why are you sorry for twisting my concerns and contradicting yourself and all involved in what I considered the defamation of my name and character as a valued customer of the Nationwide Building Society.
- I did not ask any such thing and this is where the levels of my work as a Basic School Teacher from Jamaica and EYFS coordinator, SENCO, and Multigenerational Working Approach Facilitator must be considered. The letter did not explain that I could not come to the branch to discuss the matter. For a person with mental and physical impairments
- I did not ask any such thing. Because when I raised the questions to the person who mysteriously appeared from break about what happened to our SAVINGS, she reassured my husband his accounts would not be affected. Nationwide did not address the warning threatening letter to me as if it is a “Joint Account”. The person I spoke to refused to answer my questions.
- You and I did not discuss the threats of closing the account
- Again you and I did not have any such conversation
- All this was in written correspondences
I will not be arguing with Nationwide Building Society except present the facts.
I am the person who asked the Person serving me to let me put the transaction through and I would bring the ID next day.
There was nothing about trying to bypass the system. Person I spoke to said she identified me as a “REGULAR CUSTOMER”.
The transaction went through until I was told there was no such account
She then read me some instructions about what happened if I go ahead with the transaction
Then she asked if I still want to go through with the transaction
I did not shout and yell at the cashier, I told her the person for the transaction live local, I will go and get her
I only spoken to the black man who was ridiculing me
How did the cashier get to the point of making the transaction when she said there was no such account?
Was the cashier upset because I refused to allow her to put the transaction into an account she said did not exist?
The person who I spoke to on Monday 15/5/2023 said she was the witness who filed the report
She said she was the person who identified me as a “REGULAR CUSTOMER”
Why was she not concerned about the behaviour of a REGULAR CUSTOMER knowing Mr. Arnold Tomlinson is 100 years old?
Return to Nationwide
When the person and I returned I was told to wait for another person to serve me
The question Nationwide need to answer is why was nothing said to me when I returned with the person for whom the transaction was to go to?
Nationwide continues to contradict the matter and making the situation blown out of all proportion with blacklisting and networking against me
Where in the letter is the warning?
When I spoke to the person, she claimed I should not be at Nationwide about the letter, but this was not made clear for me to understand.
Nationwide must provide evidence of my ACTIONS that cause Nationwide to threaten to close my account
I explained why I had to take out the JOINT ACCOUNT with my HUSBAND.
The THREATS to close my ACCOUNT is a deliberate act of breaching my RIGHTS under the Equality Act 2010 Protected Characteristics being the CARER for Mr. Arnold Ebenezer Tomlinson.
I went to Nationwide to seek advice and even asks the person to write it down so I did not make any mistakes
I recently taken out a SAVINGS account and this was done at Nationwide for me
Nationwide must explain what would happen to our JOINT SAVINGS
My MONEY has been STOLEN before, so please don’t BLAME me if the actions of Nationwide TRIGGER me
Any ALERT on my account would be based on FALSE ALLEGATIONS that Nationwide could have resolved amicably
If Nationwide chose to treat me like a TERRORIST from FALSE ALLEGATIONS, I hold those involved responsible
I am not interested in your explanation about the £100.00 because you refuse to continue the conversation when I had to answer my phone
I find it strange that when I came into the branch with my husband who was triggered the person refused to answer our concerns
I am sorry, your email is very confusing
I am carer who have mental and physical impairments for my 100 year old husband.
Mervelee Myers FD (Open)
Mental Health & SEND Advocate
Sent from Mail for Windows
From: Nationwide Building Society
Sent: 22 May 2023 16:14
Subject: Our response to your complaint
|Having trouble viewing this email? Read Online|
Our Reference: NBS7804091Myers
We’ve got a decision for you
Dear Mrs Myers
Thank you for speaking to me recently. I’m just writing to confirm some of the things we talked about and to send you our decision in writing.
I’m really sorry that you’ve raised the following things:-
- You’ve asked why your allowed to visit Brixton Branch shortly after getting a warning letter from us.
- You want to know what accounts both you and your husband hold with Nationwide.
- The threat of closing your account is clear evidence that Nationwide intends to steal your money.
- You’re not happy that your photo will be made public on your profile.
- You want a written apology and compensation for everything that Nationwide has done to you.
However, I’m afraid I can’t agree that we’ve done anything wrong.
How did we reach our decision?
To reach this decision, I’ve read all the statements following your visit to our Brixton Branch. You wanted to make a bill payment for £5,000 over the counter but the system required additional ID. As you didn’t have this on you at the time the cashier tried to bypass the system, but at that stage you started shouting and yelling at the cashier and also swearing at other customers. Despite the cashier managing to get to the point of making the payment you continued to swear and shout and then left the branch. This left the cashier and other members of staff and customers shocked and upset.
Therefore we were correct in giving you the warning but this didn’t mean you couldn’t continue to visit branch it just means that if you were to act like this again we would look to close your accounts with us.
You’ve asked what accounts you hold jointly with your husband, I can confirm that these are; Flexaccount ending 5981; 1.40% 2yr FRB (A) ending 5839; 1% 2yr FRB (A) ending 0613;
If any of your accounts were to be closed we would write to let you know and give you information on how to do a SWITCH OUT to another account or send you a cheque for the balances that remain in your accounts when we close them. As we follow the rules of the Financial Conduct Authority we wouldn’t be allowed to steal anyone’s money.
An alert on your account is something that’s written on your account to tell staff that a warning has been given to you. It’s not a photo of any kind so it doesn’t breach any laws, legislations, codes of conduct or malpractices.
I’m sorry but we won’t be in a position to offer you compensation nor a written apology. Neither are we responsible for how you’ve been treated in the past by Barclays Bank, Santander, the Police Force or any other criminal cases you’ve raised.
The £100 Nationwide Fairer Share payment is not compensation towards your complaint but as a result of profits made by Nationwide during the last financial year. As a building society, and not a bank, we can do things a little differently, like share profits with our members. We’ve given members £100 as part of our ongoing commitment to you all. Members need a current account plus either a savings account or mortgage account to qualify for this payment. As you and your husband have both, this is why you’ve received this payment if you don’t wish to receive it please let us know.
We’re here to help
I hope this email explains things clearly.
If you think I’ve missed anything, you have any questions or you’d like to talk about my decision, please email firstname.lastname@example.org or call me on 0161 605 3425 ext 1222. We’re here Monday to Friday, 9am – 5pm. You’ll just need your reference number, which is NBS7804091.
If you’re not happy with the decision we’ve made, you have the right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, free of charge – but you must do so within six months of the date of this email.
If you do not refer your complaint in time, the Ombudsman will not have our permission to consider your complaint and so will only be able to do so in very limited circumstances. For example, if the Ombudsman believes that the delay was as a result of exceptional circumstances.
You’ll find all the information you need in this leaflet or at financial-ombudsman.org.uk
How we use your information
We’ll hold the information you’ve given us, and we’ll only use it when we’re dealing with your complaint. To find out more, please visit nationwide.co.uk/privacy
Snr Member Relations Consultant