Enoch was right.

That's the bottom line

If the cop had been in the wrong he would have been suspended.

Don't think the investigation has been completed yet.

The thing is you can't win because if i decided to join them &
paint my face black id still be seen/classed as a racist!

Surely won't be the police carrying out the investigation though. I would imagine he will have received what is the usual course of action when a complaint gets made then the investigtion is carried out by the Police complaint commission. I doubt Human resources will have made a decision based on what they thought of the video and if they did I doubt that would mean anything to the Police Complaints Commission.

Would be a matter of procedure to suspend if any doubt that he acted outwith the law.

Though this attitude that 'the police are always right' is a fairly modern thing in England really.

Imagine a random stop and search policy had been introduced in Medieval London . The entire city would have been a smoking ruin within a week.

The government stopping people in the street searching their pockets asking where they were going ..... the pitchforks would have been out in no time....

cooperate
kəʊˈɒpəreɪt/Submit
verb
work jointly towards the same end.
"the leaders promised to cooperate in ending the civil war"
assist someone or comply with their requests.

What a lovely word cooperate is, so simple to understand surely.

not for some it seems

In they're failed experiment i reckon its best we just have black or muslim
Police.
That should help assist the Chip on the shoulder merchants surely.

A motorway Cop on a highly powered motor bike in the full burqa chasing you

The officer in that scenario would be interviewed immediately and a decision taken whether to suspend or not.
In this case the evidence is clear for all to see so if he'd acted illegally he'd have been suspended.

That's not true. If you think what happens when a police officer gets a complaint made against them is that they get interviewed by another police officer, immedediately,  who then makes a decision on whether or not they have possibly done something wrong, immediately, then you are barking.

As I've said it will be the Police Complaints Commission who decides whether has has done anything wrong. It's in the name.

BTW the PCC said they had taken over the investigation.

first impessions on seeing this was that the cop had "lost it" but on thinking, a few points have to be made ,  looking  at it from the cops point of view , all supposition till facts emerge , 1. what went on before filming starts ? what was said  by both partys ? ,presumably cops had info on suspect car before pulling driver over , intelligance could have been owner  disqualified ,known to be dangerous ,possibly armed ,had previous for driving off at speed and putting innocent pedestrians and drivers at risk?,why not, if driver has nothing to hide  get out of car  ? also possible that driver was not actual owner of car ? ,also is it not possible that police pulled car over and informed driver that he was suspected of being a disqualified driver, but in reality used that as ploy so  as to not panic him into speeding off when the owner was suspected of something more serious .

^ Only a logical progression of events if you are mental.

What parts of Dr Cs post are wrong kincsem?

****Should warn that there is lots of swearing in the video****

To balance the post by Gin here's a few examples of excessive police force -

1979: Blair Peach was fatally assaulted by an officer of the Special Patrol Group (SPG) during an anti-racism demonstration in London. A police investigation into the SPG found that they had a cache of unauthorised weapons.[9] The Metropolitan Police reached an out-of-court settlement with Peach's family in 1989.[10] The police eventually published their internal report in 2010, concluding that Peach had probably been killed by an officer, but officers within that unit had refused to identify the culprit.[11]
1985: the Battle of the Beanfield occurred in Wiltshire when police attempted to stop a convoy of New Age travellers from reaching Stonehenge. After a stand-off, police attacked both vehicles and people, smashing windows and beating travellers on the head with truncheons. A court judgement six years later found the police guilty of wrongful arrest, assault and criminal damage.[12]
1994: Richard O'Brien died in Metropolitan Police custody. He was arrested while drunk, and held face down in a police van. An inquest returned a verdict of unlawful killing, but three officers charged with manslaughter were acquitted.[13]
1998: Christopher Alder died at the Queen's Gardens police station from Asphyxiation. He was arrested for breach of the peace at Hull Royal Infirmary. Footage of Christopher, lying handcuffed and half-naked on the floor of a police cell, surrounded by five officers making monkey noises is available online. An inquest returned a verdict of unlawful killing, but the five officers charged with manslaughter were acquitted.[14]
1999: Harry Stanley was shot dead by Metropolitan Police, thinking he was armed, although he was found to be carrying only a table leg. The coroner controversially returned an open verdict. The Crown Prosecution Service accepted the police's assertion that they were acting in self-defence.[15]
2009: policing at the 2009 G-20 London summit protests included the technique of kettling. A bystander, Ian Tomlinson, died shortly after being pushed to the ground by a police officer. An inquest found that Tomlinson was unlawfully killed. An officer in the Metropolitan Police's Territorial Support Group was charged with manslaughter, but found not guilty.[16]

Don't believe that is an exhaustive list, more like the tip of the iceberg.