The Camera Never Lies...

PC Patterson, wearing his work uniform, did not speak at the hearing.

He did, in his statement of the arrest, admit punching the boy with a closed fist and applying pressure, multiple times, behind his right ear.

The defence claimed the boy was “extremely hard to control” which is why PC Patterson believed his actions were appropriate. The father was “not overly concerned” about his son’s behaviour despite calling 999, the panel was told.

This would normally be a cause celebre in the local newspaper, cries of 'police brutality!' from the usual suspects, but for an amazing modern twist:

However, the defence claimed the father “presented himself very differently” on the body-worn camera.

Well, well, well....

They say the teenager’s dad acts like “someone who is terrified” of the behaviour of his own child.

The use of the word 'child' there is willful obfuscation on the part of the reporter, I suspect. The image it conjures up will play no part in the reality facing the cops.

The hearing has been adjourned until April so the panel can hear evidence from PC Patterson’s two colleagues who were with him at the scene - one of which caught some of it on their body-worn camera.

The usual suspects might have cause to regret their demands for more cameras, once juries get a glimpse of what these 'children' are really like...