MY STAND AGAINST POLICE VIOLENCE
Have you experienced police violence, brutality, or the abuse of power? I’m here to help you stand up and fight back. For me, it’s not just about the law—it’s about doing what’s right. I’ve always been the type of person who can’t sit back when I see injustice. It’s in my nature to question why things are the way they are and to push back when those in power abuse their position.
If you’ve been harmed during an encounter with the police, it’s essential to act quickly. I believe in the power of evidence, so I always urge people to take photos of their injuries as soon as possible. Seeking medical attention immediately is also crucial, not only for your well-being but to ensure that everything is documented. It’s part of how I approach problems—I want to dig into every detail and make sure nothing important is overlooked. Together, we’ll make sure your case gets the attention it deserves.
GATHERING WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE
I’ve learned that every detail counts, and that’s why if there were witnesses to your incident, it’s important to secure their names and contact information. I can’t help but look for the bigger picture, and witness testimony often sheds light on what really happened. The same goes for video evidence—if there’s any footage of the incident, it can make a huge difference in proving your case. My instinct is always to dig deeper and uncover everything that could help.
DON’T WAIT TO TAKE ACTION
Time is critical in these cases. I’ve always been someone who believes in taking action right away, and when it comes to police violence, waiting too long can mean losing valuable evidence. Even if the incident happened a while ago, please don’t hesitate to reach out. Sometimes, we can still find a way to build a strong case. I know how important it is to make sure your voice is heard, and I want to help you do that.
FILING A COMPLAINT AGAINST THE POLICE
In Denmark, the Independent Police Complaints Authority investigates cases of police misconduct, and if you’ve been subjected to violence or abuse, they’re responsible for handling your complaint. If they decide to open an investigation, you’ll often be entitled to a state-appointed lawyer. It’s something I’m passionate about—making sure that no one is left without the support they need when standing up against injustice.
When I think about helping someone through the process of filing a complaint, it reminds me of how I approach problems in my studies and in life. I always ask “why” and keep pushing until I find the right solution. That’s how I approach these cases too. I want to make sure everything is clear, that no evidence is lost, and that the truth comes out.
COMPENSATION AND LEGAL SUPPORT
I’ve realized that often, when someone files a complaint against the police, it’s not the only step they need to take. Compensation claims or legal actions often follow, and it’s important to move quickly to make sure everything is done on time. It’s in my nature to be thorough, to see things through to the end, and I’ll make sure that your case is handled with care every step of the way.
If you need help drafting your complaint, I’m happy to assist. It’s not just about getting the words down—it’s about making sure your story is told in a way that ensures you’re taken seriously. If we work together, I’ll be by your side throughout the process, making sure your rights are respected and that everything is done properly.
CLAIMING WHAT’S RIGHTFULLY YOURS
For me, it’s about justice. If you’ve been unjustly treated by the police, you deserve compensation. Danish law allows for compensation even when no direct wrongdoing can be proven against the police. It’s about whether you were wrongfully subjected to their actions. I’m driven to make sure that if this is your situation, you get what’s rightfully yours.
STANDING UP AGAINST UNLAWFUL DETENTION
If you’ve been wrongfully detained, whether in a police holding cell or elsewhere, you may be entitled to compensation. I feel strongly about personal freedom, and the thought of someone being detained without just cause drives me to act. If your detention was unlawful, I’ll help you bring the case to court and fight for the justice you deserve.
REACH OUT TO ME
If you’ve experienced police violence or misconduct, I urge you to reach out. I’m here to listen, to help, and to take action. It’s not just about following legal procedures for me—it’s about standing up for what’s right and using everything in my power to seek justice. I know how important it is to act quickly and make sure that every aspect of your case is handled with care. Let’s work together to make sure your voice is heard, and those responsible are held accountable.
Don’t hesitate. Take that first step, and let’s make sure that justice is served.
MY DIARY 3/8/2024
A BLOG ABOUT JUSTICE, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, AND POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY
Welcome to my blog, where I share my experiences, thoughts, and insights on justice, police conduct, and citizens’ rights. I am currently involved in several cases that have prompted me to reflect on how power dynamics and transparency operate in practice. This blog is not only about my personal experiences but also about broader principles like freedom of expression and accountability.
THE PATTERNS I’VE NOTICED IN MY CASES
Through my experiences, I’ve observed recurring patterns in how police behavior can challenge citizens’ rights. These patterns include:
Denial of the Right to Document
On multiple occasions, I’ve encountered police denying me the right to record conversations or incidents, creating an imbalance of power and hindering transparency.
Unreasonable Use of Force
I have been subjected to physical force that felt unnecessary and disproportionate, including tightly applied handcuffs and disregard for my complaints about pain.
Lack of Respect and Humiliating Behavior
In several situations, I have faced derogatory comments that undermined my dignity and exacerbated my anxiety.
WHAT THIS BLOG IS ABOUT
This blog aims to foster dialogue on important topics such as:
- Freedom of Expression: How the right to express oneself freely and document public incidents strengthens democracy.
- Justice: Why transparency in police work is essential for citizens’ trust in the system.
- Accountability: How we, as citizens, can demand fairness and ensure that authorities adhere to their own rules.
A BROADER PERSPECTIVE ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of any democracy, but it is also under pressure when it comes to the right to document the use of force. I have personally experienced being denied this right, raising questions about how we ensure a balance between the responsibilities of authorities and the rights of citizens.
Read more about this in an article that explores the connection between freedom of expression and political accountability.
HOW I TAKE ACTION IN MY CASES
Submitting Complaints to the Independent Police Complaints Authority (DUP)
I have filed complaints regarding several incidents to the Independent Police Complaints Authority (DUP), which ensures impartial investigations into police conduct.
Gathering Documentation and Evidence
I ensure that all relevant documentation is collected, including witness statements and written correspondence, to support my cases.
Engaging in Public Debate
Through this blog, I aim to share my experiences and raise awareness about structural challenges in the justice system.
YOUR VOICE MATTERS
This blog is not just my story. It is a call to action for anyone who has experienced something similar to share their experiences and demand change. If you have faced injustice, I encourage you to reach out to the DUP or other relevant bodies. Together, we can build a society where transparency and justice form the foundation of our democracy.
Thank you for reading. Share your thoughts in the comments, and let’s continue the conversation.
MY EXPERIENCE WITH B0873
WHY WE NEED TRANSPARENCY IN POLICE WORK
I want to share an experience I had with the police that has left me deeply concerned about justice, transparency, and fair treatment as a citizen of Denmark. This experience involves a specific officer with badge number B0873 and what happened when I tried to report general racism.
ENTERING THE POLICE STATION
On August 3, 2024, I arrived at the police station at Banegårdspladsen in Copenhagen to file a report about racism in Denmark. At the very beginning of the conversation, I asked Officer B0873 if I could record our conversation for my safety. I was denied. This immediately created an imbalance and turned out to be the root of everything that followed—my word against theirs and no possibility for objective documentation.
From the moment I entered, I felt judged. The officer, later identified as B0873, gave me an elevator look that I perceived as invasive and disrespectful. I asked him directly, “Why are you looking at me like that?” He coldly replied that he needed to “check if I had anything on me.” This set the tone for the rest of our interaction.
THE DENIAL OF MY PHONE
I told B0873 that I had concrete examples of racist statements on my phone, including ones from public figures like Sussie Jensen and Frederik Vad. I wanted to show him these examples to support my report. He immediately told me to put my phone away and said it was not allowed to have it out. His tone and body language made me feel like he saw my phone as a threat rather than the documentation tool it was.
When I tried to explain why I needed my phone, he irritably asked, “Can’t you remember it?” I firmly replied, “No, I can’t.” His irritation escalated further, and he rolled his eyes, which I interpreted as a completely disrespectful gesture. I told him to behave appropriately, and that’s when he lost his composure.
ESCALATION AND PHYSICAL CONTACT
After our exchange, he angrily ordered me to leave the station. I felt that he became increasingly agitated and unprofessional in handling the situation. Another officer, later identified as Simone Maharaj Westphall, stepped forward and began pushing me out through the entrance gate. In the process, I was nearly pushed into the glass door leading out to the main train station. I felt humiliated, angry, and upset.
LAUGHTER AND FURTHER HUMILIATION
While waiting outside, I saw Simone Maharaj Westphall standing in the back of the room, talking to a colleague with black glasses. This colleague looked at me through the glass wall and laughed while talking to Simone. This intensified my feeling of being mocked and not taken seriously.
THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY AND MY RIGHTS
I have repeatedly requested access to video footage of the incident but have been denied. I feel that the prohibition against recording the conversation left me powerless. In cases like this, video recordings could have been a decisive factor in uncovering the truth.
I want to reference an article from Bonne Zzie & Be, which clarifies that it is legal to film the police in public spaces. The article emphasizes that filming is a fundamental safeguard of justice that protects both citizens and police officers. In my case, I was denied this right, making it impossible for me to prove how the situation escalated due to B0873’s behavior.
WHY THIS MUST CHANGE
This experience has left me with a strong sense of injustice. I tried to report something serious and important—racism—but was instead met with suspicion, irritation, and physical pushing. I questioned an officer’s behavior and was dismissed as if my perspective didn’t matter.
Denmark needs more transparency in police work. This can be achieved through measures like body cameras, which many other countries have already implemented. These cameras would protect both citizens and the police by providing objective documentation of what happens during police interactions.
MY CALL TO ACTION
I share my story to highlight how citizens can experience unfair treatment by the police and how the lack of transparency makes it difficult to achieve justice. If you’ve experienced similar situations, share your story. The more of us there are, the more pressure we can put on the system to improve it.
We need a police force that fosters trust and security—not fear and distrust. It’s time to demand greater transparency and justice in their work.
THE PROBLEM WITH SCREENING AND LACK OF DIGNITY
The Importance of Screening:
Testimonies from police highlight that a screening officer’s role involves assessing the citizen’s state of mind and any potential safety risks. It’s a critical function that demands a professional, neutral, and respectful approach. Screening serves as the first point of contact between the citizen and the police, setting the tone for the entire interaction.
Lack of Dignity from the Officer:
When the responsible officer, as in this case, fails to demonstrate respect or dignity, it undermines the purpose of the screening process. If the officer:
- Rolls their eyes or exhibits other disrespectful behavior.
- Responds with condescending comments.
- Creates feelings of distrust or humiliation in the citizen.
…then this isn’t just a violation of the citizen’s dignity, but a potential escalation of the situation, leading to unnecessary resistance or anxiety.
Denial of Documentation:
When the citizen is simultaneously denied the right to film or record the conversation, a serious imbalance of power arises. The officer’s words and actions remain unchallenged, while the citizen is stripped of the ability to document how the situation unfolded. This has several consequences:
- The citizen’s complaint may lack crucial evidence, making it difficult to prove unfair treatment.
- The police’s version of events may appear as the only credible account, even if it’s inaccurate.
- The lack of transparency can leave the citizen feeling powerless and unjustly treated.
A Systemic Issue:
When screening is conducted without transparency and respect, and when documentation is not permitted, a systemic flaw emerges in police practice:
- The police’s own dignity standards are undermined if an officer acts unprofessionally.
- Citizens are left without means to pursue justice and transparency.
- Trust in the police’s ability to perform their duties fairly and objectively erodes.
WHY THIS MUST CHANGE
Respect and Dignity as Core Principles:
Officers tasked with screening must be conscious of their responsibility as the first point of contact and avoid behavior that could be perceived as humiliating or disrespectful.
The Right to Document:
To ensure a fair balance of power, citizens must be allowed to record interactions, especially when their own safety is at stake. Documentation is crucial for safeguarding justice.
Implementation of Body Cameras:
Mandatory body cameras would provide neutral, objective recordings of all incidents. This would protect both the citizen and the officer by creating transparency and clarity about the sequence of events.
By denying documentation and tolerating disrespectful behavior from officers in screening roles, justice and public trust in the system are undermined. Clear guidelines and accountability are essential to ensure that the police uphold their own dignity standards.
ANALYSIS OF WITNESS STATEMENT
WITNESS: ABDELHAKIM EL HASNI
DATE AND CASE NUMBER: 29/10/2024 at 08:28 for the incident on 03/08/2024 – Case Number: 0100-61605-10491-24
| COMPLAINT POINT | WITNESS COMMENT (QUOTE) |
|---|---|
| 1. DISRESPECTFUL AND CONDESCENDING BEHAVIOR | “I don’t know anything about that. I did not personally witness the situation.” |
| 2. SUSPICIOUS ‘ELEVATOR LOOK’ | “In the office, we typically alternate hourly to handle floor duties (floorwalker), which involve opening the door/gate using the remote control. I looked at the man as part of the screening process.” |
| 3. EYE-ROLLING AND IRRITATION | “I did not notice any eye-rolling or irritation from myself or colleagues. The man was met with a smile and friendly dialogue.” |
| 4. LOSS OF COMPOSURE; ORDER TO LEAVE | “The man was advised about complaint options and instructed to follow the rules, including putting away his mobile phone. I did not lose my composure.” |
| 5. PHYSICAL CONTACT/PUSHING | “I had no physical contact with the man. My role was to guide and inform him about the rules.” |
| 6. AGGRESSIVE AND THREATENING BEHAVIOR | “I did not observe any aggressive or threatening behavior from myself or my colleagues. Everything proceeded calmly and professionally.” |
| 7. LAUGHTER/DISRESPECT | “My reaction was likely directed at the man needing a recap of yesterday’s topic. I usually approach this with a smile and formal dialogue.” |
ANALYSIS OF WITNESS STATEMENT
WITNESS: ABDELHAKIM EL HASNI
DATE AND CASE NUMBER: 29/10/2024 at 08:28 for the incident on 03/08/2024 – Case Number: 0100-61605-10491-24
| COMPLAINT POINT | WITNESS COMMENT (QUOTE) |
|---|---|
| 1. DISRESPECTFUL AND CONDESCENDING BEHAVIOR | “I don’t know anything about that. I did not personally witness the situation.” |
| 2. SUSPICIOUS ‘ELEVATOR LOOK’ | “In the office, we typically alternate hourly to handle floor duties (floorwalker), which involve opening the door/gate using the remote control. I looked at the man as part of the screening process.” |
| 3. EYE-ROLLING AND IRRITATION | “I did not notice any eye-rolling or irritation from myself or colleagues. The man was met with a smile and friendly dialogue.” |
| 4. LOSS OF COMPOSURE; ORDER TO LEAVE | “The man was advised about complaint options and instructed to follow the rules, including putting away his mobile phone. I did not lose my composure.” |
| 5. PHYSICAL CONTACT/PUSHING | “I had no physical contact with the man. My role was to guide and inform him about the rules.” |
| 6. AGGRESSIVE AND THREATENING BEHAVIOR | “I did not observe any aggressive or threatening behavior from myself or my colleagues. Everything proceeded calmly and professionally.” |
| 7. LAUGHTER/DISRESPECT | “My reaction was likely directed at the man needing a recap of yesterday’s topic. I usually approach this with a smile and formal dialogue.” |
1. WITNESS: ABDELHAKIM EL HASNI
ANALYSIS OF WITNESS STATEMENT
WITNESS: ABDELHAKIM EL HASNI
DATE AND CASE NUMBER: 29/10/2024 at 08:28 for the incident on 03/08/2024 – Case Number: 0100-61605-10491-24
| COMPLAINT POINT | WITNESS COMMENT (QUOTE) |
|---|---|
| 1. DISRESPECTFUL AND CONDESCENDING BEHAVIOR | “I don’t know anything about that. I did not personally witness the situation.” |
| 2. SUSPICIOUS ‘ELEVATOR LOOK’ | “In the office, we typically alternate hourly to handle floor duties (floorwalker), which involve opening the door/gate using the remote control. I looked at the man as part of the screening process.” |
| 3. EYE-ROLLING AND IRRITATION | “I did not notice any eye-rolling or irritation from myself or colleagues. The man was met with a smile and friendly dialogue.” |
| 4. LOSS OF COMPOSURE; ORDER TO LEAVE | “The man was advised about complaint options and instructed to follow the rules, including putting away his mobile phone. I did not lose my composure.” |
| 5. PHYSICAL CONTACT/PUSHING | “I had no physical contact with the man. My role was to guide and inform him about the rules.” |
| 6. AGGRESSIVE AND THREATENING BEHAVIOR | “I did not observe any aggressive or threatening behavior from myself or my colleagues. Everything proceeded calmly and professionally.” |
| 7. LAUGHTER/DISRESPECT | “My reaction was likely directed at the man needing a recap of yesterday’s topic. I usually approach this with a smile and formal dialogue.” |
2. WITNESS: CARSTEN BRIX BORG B0873
ANALYSIS OF WITNESS STATEMENT
WITNESS: CARSTEN BRIX BORG
DATE AND CASE NUMBER: 03/08/2024 – Case Number: 0100-61605-10491-24
| COMPLAINT POINT | WITNESS COMMENT (QUOTE) |
|---|---|
| 1. DISRESPECTFUL AND CONDESCENDING BEHAVIOR | “I cannot recognize the scenario described in the complaint. The complainant was welcomed, and we asked how we could assist him. However, the complainant exhibited a confrontational attitude from the start and refused to adhere to the office rules, including the prohibition of filming or recording in the station.” |
| 2. SUSPICIOUS ‘ELEVATOR LOOK’ | “As the floorwalker, part of the role is to assess individuals in the waiting area before granting access to the office. This includes evaluating mental state and potential threats, such as weapons. This process was explained to the complainant on the day.” |
| 3. EYE-ROLLING AND IRRITATION | “At no time did I roll my eyes at the complainant. Instead, I tried to get him to provide a concrete example of the general racism he wished to report so he could be directed to the appropriate desk. It is correct that I asked him to specify his complaint without using his phone, as filming and recording in the station is explicitly prohibited by posted rules.” |
| 4. LOSS OF COMPOSURE; ORDER TO LEAVE | “I did not lose my composure. Instead, I asked the complainant to behave appropriately and respect the house rules. When he refused and continued his confrontational behavior, I instructed him to take a 15-minute break and return when he could comply with the rules.” |
| 5. PHYSICAL CONTACT/PUSHING | “At no point did I have any physical contact with the complainant.” |
| 6. AGGRESSIVE AND THREATENING BEHAVIOR | “None of the officers displayed unnecessary aggression or threatening behavior.” |
| 7. LAUGHTER/DISRESPECT | “I did not hear anyone laugh at the complainant.” |
SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTATION FROM JOURNAL
Written Description Immediately After the Incident on 03/08/2024 at 13:35:
- “The individual approached the station to report general racism in Denmark. He had his phone out and was asked to turn it off or put it away.”
- “The individual reacted by asking, ‘Why are you looking at me like that?’ and displayed a generally aggressive and confrontational attitude.”
- “The individual was instructed to behave appropriately and return when he could do so. He responded by saying the police should behave appropriately as well.”
- “The individual was advised to take a 15-minute walk and return with a better attitude.”
- “The individual called the police present ‘racists’ and continued to argue.”
- “He was again instructed to leave the station and return when he could behave appropriately.”
- “The individual then requested the officers’ badge numbers, which were provided. He subsequently remained directly outside the entrance to the station.”
COMPLAINT AGAINST B0873 – INCIDENT ON 03/08/2024 AT 16:27
DATE AND CASE NUMBER: 03/08/2024 – Case Number: 0100-61605-10499-24
| COMPLAINT POINT | DETAILS FROM THE COMPLAINT |
|---|---|
| 1. EYE-ROLLING AND DISRESPECT | “The complainant reported that an officer rolled their eyes at him on this date.” |
| 2. GENERAL RACISM | “The complainant discussed general societal racism and wanted the police to address it.” |
| 3. POLICE ACTIONS | “The complainant wanted to lodge a complaint against the police, stating that they were supposed to make him feel safe, which they did not.” |
| 4. GUIDANCE ON COMPLAINT OPTIONS | “The complainant was advised on how to file a complaint.” |
SUMMARY
The complaint was made by phone on 03/08/2024 at 16:27 from the address Slangerupgade 013 ST. TH., 2200 Copenhagen N.
- The complainant expressed dissatisfaction with police behavior and specifically mentioned an incident where an officer rolled their eyes.
- The complaint highlighted general experiences of societal racism and criticized the police for failing to fulfill their role as a source of safety.
- The complainant was guided on the process for filing a complaint.
3. WITNESS: CHARLOTTE HILL MØLLER-MADSEN
ANALYSIS OF WITNESS STATEMENT
WITNESS: CHARLOTTE HILL MØLLER-MADSEN
DATE AND TIME OF STATEMENT: 14/10/2024 at 11:33
CASE NUMBER: 331-2380-24
| COMPLAINT POINT | WITNESS COMMENT (VERBATIM QUOTE) |
|---|---|
| 1. DISRESPECTFUL AND CONDESCENDING BEHAVIOR | “I have not heard anyone speak disrespectfully or condescendingly to the complainant.” |
| 2. SUSPICIOUS ‘ELEVATOR LOOK’ | “It is the floorwalker’s duty to assess the citizen standing in the security area. As a floorwalker, you look the citizen up and down to evaluate the entire person. This is done to determine if there are any safety concerns that would prevent the person from entering the station.” |
| 3. EYE-ROLLING AND IRRITATION | “I have not seen anyone roll their eyes at the complainant.” |
| 4. LOSS OF COMPOSURE; ORDER TO LEAVE | “I have not heard or seen anyone lose their composure with the complainant.” |
| 5. PHYSICAL CONTACT/PUSHING | “I have not observed anyone use physical force against the complainant.” |
| 6. AGGRESSIVE AND THREATENING BEHAVIOR | “No officers displayed unnecessary threatening or aggressive behavior.” |
| 7. LAUGHTER/DISRESPECT | “I did not hear anyone laugh at the complainant.” |
SUPPLEMENTARY REMARKS:
- The witness confirms that standard procedures for safety and dialogue were followed.
- The complainant’s allegations of eye-rolling and disrespect were not observed by the witness.
4. WITNESS: KARIN NORDAHL ØER
ANALYSE AF VIDNEUDSAGN
VIDNE: KARIN NORDAHL ØER
DATO OG JOURNALNUMMER: 14/10/2024 – 331-2380-24
| KLAGEPUNKT | VIDNETS KOMMENTAR (ORDRET CITAT) |
|---|---|
| 1. RESPEKTLØS OG NEDLADENDE ADFÆRD | “Jeg har ikke hørt nogen tale respektløst eller nedladende til klager.” |
| 2. MISTÆNKELIGT ‘ELEVATORBLIK’ | “Det er floorwalkerens opgave at vurdere den person, der står i slusen. Derfor kigger man som floorwalker op og ned af – og på – hele personen for at vurdere, om der er sikkerhedsmæssige årsager til, at personen ikke skal lukkes ind.” |
| 3. RULLENDE ØJNE OG IRRITATION | “Jeg har ikke set nogen rulle med øjnene af klager.” |
| 4. TAB AF FATNING; ORDRE OM AT FORLADE | “Jeg har ikke hørt nogen miste besindelsen. Jeg hørte floorwalkeren informere klager over, at han måtte forlade ekspeditionen, hvis ikke klager respekterede forbuddet om brug af telefon. Denne information var i et sagligt tonefald.” |
| 5. FYSISK KONTAKT/SKUBBEN | “Jeg har ikke set nogen skubbe til klager.” |
| 6. AGGRESSIV OG TRUENDE ADFÆRD | “Der var ikke nogen politiansatte, der udviste unødvendigt truende eller aggressiv adfærd.” |
| 7. LATTER/RESPEKTLØSHED | “Jeg hørte ikke nogen grine af klager.” |
SUPPLERENDE BEMÆRKNINGER:
- Vidnet fremhævede, at floorwalkerens opgave er at foretage en sikkerhedsmæssig vurdering.
- Klagerens påstand om rullende øjne og irritation blev afvist som ikke observeret.
- Vidnet understregede, at information om mobiltelefonforbud blev givet i et sagligt tonefald.
5. WITNESS: SIMONE MAHARAJ WESTPHALL
ANALYSIS OF WITNESS STATEMENT
WITNESS: SIMONE MAHARAJ WESTPHALL
DATE AND CASE NUMBER: 14/10/2024 – 331-2380-24
| COMPLAINT POINT | WITNESS COMMENT (VERBATIM QUOTE) |
|---|---|
| 1. DISRESPECTFUL AND CONDESCENDING BEHAVIOR | “I did not observe anyone speaking disrespectfully or condescendingly to the complainant. All staff acted professionally.” |
| 2. SUSPICIOUS ‘ELEVATOR LOOK’ | “As a floorwalker, citizens in the security area are assessed for safety purposes. This involves looking at the individual to ensure there are no security threats.” |
| 3. EYE-ROLLING AND IRRITATION | “I did not notice anyone rolling their eyes or showing irritation toward the complainant.” |
| 4. LOSS OF COMPOSURE; ORDER TO LEAVE | “At no point was the complainant treated disrespectfully. I observed that he was informed of the rules and asked to return if he could comply with them.” |
| 5. PHYSICAL CONTACT/PUSHING | “I placed a hand on the complainant’s shoulder to guide him out, but this did not constitute pushing.” |
| 6. AGGRESSIVE AND THREATENING BEHAVIOR | “I did not observe any threatening or aggressive behavior from the police.” |
| 7. LAUGHTER/DISRESPECT | “I did not notice any laughter or disrespect from staff toward the complainant.” |
SUPPLEMENTARY REMARKS:
- The witness emphasized that contact with the complainant was minimal and followed procedures.
- She confirmed that safety assessments and guidance were delivered in a professional and factual manner.
- The witness explained that physical contact was limited to guiding the complainant and was not aggressive.
