All rooms are equipped with an overhead projector
Rooms C, D, E, F, G and H (H only on Saturday): slide projector (framed slides, carrousel. There are extra carrousels available to set up your presentation in advance)
Rooms C, D, M, N, O, U and Committee Room 2: beamer to connect your laptop. You have to bring you own laptop. (If you want to use your Apple notebook, please contact us, as it may be incompatible.)
Rooms C, T and U: VCR
|Getting away with murder? Police accused of causing death and injury in Berlin, Paris and London c.1900-1914|
|Studying the process of modernisation of policing in Western Europe in the early 20th century one is tempted to assume that in countries with limited democratic accountability towards the public, the authorities tended to be more lenient towards violent policemen compared to countries where government had to take public opinion into account. Yet, as many cases have shown, there is no obvious connection between systems where public opinion could hold government to account and lax attitudes among public authorities towards police brutality.
Those who managed to successfully bring a policeman to justice and have him convicted for manslaughter or for causing grievous bodily harm were almost invariably people with considerable influence and connections in society. Less influential people would rarely get anywhere with their complaints.
In different countries police authorities developed various ways of warding off accusations. Comparison of these mechanisms is essential for understanding of the functioning of police public relations. This paper seeks to identify some of the key points of differences in the functioning of police-public relations in Berlin, Paris and London 1900-1914, by looking at three cases which led to police constables being put on trial and convicted of having caused death in the course of exercising their duties.