Tasers with a side order of wallops

Coming soon to your high street. Here is an example of what we may come to expect from police officers in England/Wales, in any situation from the genuinely dangerous down to the simply inconvenient - from the police point of view, of course.
So far, all the blandishments and bland assurances we have been given by police spokesmen about Tasers, as indeed about basic police behaviour, are looking like hot air.
Their statement, on this occasion that they had, because public trust in the police was considered very important, referred this to the IPCC, must also be read with some scepticism: considering their concern for PR on one hand and the specious addition of the word 'independent' to the title of the new complaints body on the other. The IPCC, (a.k.a. the PCC) like its predecessor the PCA, relies almost totally on the police for its evidence-gathering. The results are selective and inevitably biased. The citizen reporter who captured this example of undeniable brutality did well.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/8101763.stm

Here is an excerpt from Henry Porter's blog on this subject:
After the G20 demonstration the IPCC did everything in its power to try to remove video evidence showing the police's treatment of Tomlinson from the web. The handling of the Jean Charles de Menezes case does not give us confidence about the transparency of the IPCC's processes, or of the reliability of the police. I am not suggesting that police in County Durham have lied but I am saying that Richards' death should be treated as a matter of grave concern and be thoroughly and openly investigated.
This country has no capital punishment for very good reasons. What we cannot allow to develop is a shoot to kill policy, in which the police are executing people who may, in time, be persuaded to drop their weapons or who can be rendered harmless by non–fatal shots to the body.