Die Wissenschaftler:innen von Forensic Architecture haben dazu ein Video erstellt; sehr interessant. "Einkesseln" trifft es wohl am besten.

Aber die Original-Wortwahl ist schon etwas eigenartig, oder?

In der Tat. Things that engulf are usually crowds, a wave, the sea, a swarm... Subsume, too, tells me that the thing doing the encompassing is much larger than that which is encompassed. The police are somehow huge here (to me, at least), not just in terms of numbers, more in terms of volume, force. The suspect can disappear without a trace in them.

Für alle, die an dem im OP geschilderten Vorfall interessiert sind, hier der Link zum Coroner's Report:

Microsoft Word - Schedule 5 PFD Report.doc (judiciary.uk)

Die Schilderung des Vorfalls findet sich auf S.5f.

maybe? I don't have a good enough feeling for verschlucken to be sure...

The verbs here seem impersonal to me, engulf and subsume are not predatory at all, they are not like "swallow up" or "gobble down". More like a wave, the sea, as I said. But "with the intention" is personal, which I find kind of jarring. I'm not quite sure what to make of this sentence, but it seems clear to me that it is deliberately evocative, not written in the standard terms for suddently apprehending a suspect with a larger force of officers.

Yes, but a normal way of saying that would be, say, swarm and subdue, not engulf and subsume... There is something more force of nature than force of numbers about this sentence. Except for the intent.

You said, and I quote: more force of nature than force of numbers

That suggests violence, at least for me.

The last part of the last sentence in the OP reads: "enveloped and subsumed by violence", so there is violence involved.

Thanks.

And sorry for the confusion, re. violence. Welle von Gewalt would fit pretty well I think, if you can get the intention in there somehow.

I was trying to convey the impersonal sense of the verbs, and the irresistible dominance they imply. I wouldn't want to go too much further into the Naturgewalten than that.

What makes it so difficult is that the extra veil of meaning is really just in these 2 verbs, there is no other imagery there.

Re 22. sind die im Text gewählten Begriffe dafür etwas unpassend.

I can see why you'd think that. And it would be good to get more opinions from (near) NES. But I think the verbs were chosen deliberately, to convey a subjective rather than descriptive view of the event, which I understand as seeing the event as a impersonal, irresistible force descending on a person and causing him to vanish, and doing it intentionally, which makes it a malevolent impersonal irresistible force. But the kicker is that the sentence that conveys this view is structured very much like a sentence in a police report might be. The more I think about it, the more I impressed I am.

Correction re. my # 9, suddenly did not suddenly grow a t after the n.