how many petrol bombs?

I missed all the fun down at Stokes Croft, but Mal lives down there, and she spent some time last week holding a banner protesting against the new Tesco, outside the shop. And she got to talk with the security guards and to visit the squat opposite the store that was raided on the evening of the riot.

Her perspective is interesting, because it seems that the story of the 'petrol bombs' originated with the security guards, and the squat itself seemed rather less than a bomb factory, from her description. Which contrasts with the early media coverage of the riot, which claimed that petrol bombs had been thrown at the Tesco shop; and the Daily Mail's report, which reckons that "A hoard of petrol bombs were earlier recovered from a notorious squat opposite known locally as 'Telepathic Heights'

Here's the interview that Mal gave on BBC 5 Live



and here is a transcript of what Mal says

I’ve been protesting outside the new Tesco shop since Friday… I was getting increasingly puzzled at the amount of security that were there because we were just peacefully protesting; we weren’t a threat or a danger to Tesco at all.

And because I was there for different long periods, I was chatting to the security people and I discovered that two of the firms were employed by Tesco; one was from Cornwall and one was from London; and another third company were Geordie boys and they were very tough. They said that they weren’t at liberty to disclose – it was a London firm that employed them (edit: they were from Shergroup - see Tweet below - Dru)- but as you got chatting they said that they were specialists in evicting squats along the Thames.

And I thought as the days went past that their professionalism was not what I’d expect, because they kept referring to the people in the area as ‘street scum’ and said that if they lived where they came from they’d be smashed to bits -I’m actually quoting them- and I was a bit worried by this and I said “Smashed to bits by who then?” and one of the chaps said “By normal people” and I said “Who are normal people?” and he said, “Why, me”

“I left… I was the only one there, last night, with my placard, and as I was leaving I was looking at this enormous police presence that was amassing; it was a balmy summer evening, people were sitting outside cafes and bars drinking, and the security -a completely inappropriate amount of security –were focussing on the squat opposite.

. And the chap that had been describing the local people in such a derogatory way said “They’ve got petrol bombs in there” and I said, “I don’t think so!” –‘cause I’d been there over the four days and there were about four people in the building itself, and I hadn’t seen any evidence of any of that” and they reported it to the police who immediately responded with a huge over-the-top reaction, I believe. I don’t think it was about the Tesco protest at all; it’s a volatile area, richly diverse, and I think it was instigated for other reasons”.

postscript: 24 April 1400hrs. In response to tweets questioning the role of the security guards, I've just talked with Mal and asked her to clarify. She says that the security guard said to her "They've got petrol bombs over there!" at roughly 8:30pm; and the police arrived at about 9:00pm. The security guards said nothing about reporting anything to the police. But they were talking about petrol bombs before the police arrived.
Cllr Jon Rogers has tweeted me to say "From my briefings, it was an individual threat and police observation that led to #stokescroft raid, not Tesco security guard." Given the quality of police statements and press reporting over the events of Thursday night, a sceptical response to such a briefing may be warranted.

Update 25th April 1030hrs further tweets from Cllr Jon Rogers:

"Alleged sighting reported at 16:15. Understand it was police that had spotted, but may have also been Tesco staff. "

"beat police on scene at 16:15, petrol bomb suspected, police plans made, 20:30 raid on squat."

"Police confirm police operation started at 21:15 not 20:30 as I had been briefed. "

Questions:

What was the nature of the alleged sighting of a petrol bomb? A bottle seen across a street?

If a suspected petrol bomb was seen by the beat police, why did they withdraw rather than take action?

How was it that the Tesco security guards were talking about petrol bombs before the police operation began?

Given the size of the evening's police operation, including fully-equipped riot police from Wales, it seems reasonable to suppose that it had been some time in the planning. And serendipitous that the petrol bomb should have been sighted just before that operation swung into action, using that sighting as justification.

postscript: 10th May it was reported by Chris Chalkley, of PRSC, that he was told by the police that the petrol bomb claim was made by the Tesco security guards.

here come the gender police

What with talking about Cordelia Fine's book on gender, and the action of popular culture in reinforcing and policing gendered behaviour, here's something I just happened upon yesterday. When you've looked at it, try putting a date to it. And then look in the 'comments' section, where I'll post the date it was published.

getting knocked off the bike

On 30th September, I was knocked off my bike in Clifton. I was turning right into Worcester Road from College Road, and a car that was waiting to emerge from Worcester Road pulled out into me, knocking me off the bike, and injuring me.


View Larger Map



Last week I got a phone call from the Collisions Support Unit, telling me that they were not going to charge the driver with anything, as they had received a witness statement claiming that I had been going too fast, and that I was not signalling, and that I was cutting the corner. None of this is true, so I was really rather upset. I wrote back to them, as follows:

To: Collision Support Unit

Avon and Somerset Constabulary

Re; ROAD TRAFFIC COLLISION Worcester Road junction with College Road, Clifton, Bristol. Time: 12:30 Hours Date: 30^th September 2009

Dear Sir or Madam,

I refer to this incident, when I was knocked from my bicycle and injured, while turning into a side road, by a car emerging from that side road.

I received a phone call from a member of your unit on Wednesday 4^th November, advising me that you did not propose to take action against the driver involved in this incident. I understand that a witness has given his opinion that I was to blame, alleging that:

1. I was riding too fast
2. I was not indicating
3. I was cutting the corner

I am very concerned by this, on the following grounds:

1. In my opinion, I was going at a safe and appropriate speed. What is ‘too fast’, and why did the witness think that I was going ‘too fast’?
2. I was indicating, precisely as described in my statement. As I was about to turn into a junction where a car was waiting to emerge, it would have been foolish of me not to signal my intentions. I am a cyclist, a car driver, and a sometime motorcyclist. I understand the importance of making my intentions clear to other road users. I always indicate before manoeuvring when riding my bicycle.
3. It would have been impossible for me to cut the corner even had I wanted to, as the Ford Galaxy that was waiting at the junction was straddling the white line at the middle of Worcester Road, the side road into which I was turning. The position of the car can be seen in the photograph which I attached to my statement.
4. I understand that the witness in question was working in a house opposite the junction. The house is set back from the road, with a courtyard at the front, and the witness’ large white van was parked in that courtyard. He came across to the scene of the collision, and spent some time talking with the driver; I was sitting on the ground in a dazed condition, and missed what was said. I question how much of the incident he actually saw, and what grounds he had for venturing his opinion that I was at fault.

I appreciate that you are busy, but I feel that I have been wronged. As it seems that I shall be denied the possibility of cross-examining the witness at a hearing, I should be most grateful if you would question him further to clarify what he actually saw, as I am sure that he would not willingly be understood to have said something which is not true.

Yours sincerely,

Drusilla Marland

...well, I heard back from the police this morning; a police officer phoned me and said that they were not going to take the matter any further, as they can't just go around interviewing people who have sent witness statements in, in case it discourages them from doing it, or something. So I (and indeed the police) will never get to ask the mystery man why he said what he said.