Man who died during the G20 protest was pushed to the ground by a police officer- video

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7988828.stm

this is posted on the "J0rdan approves of cops killing protestors (challops)" thread

also he doesn't just push him, he hits him in the back of the knees with his baton then pushes him.

didn't see it, but it's a story that will run and run so deserves it's own thread and will be easier to find when it needs to be revived when the whitewash report comes out

Your new username is kinda rough for this thread.

(x-post)

when I saw the beginning of this thread title I thought it was going to be another horrible "what's on yr iPod" thread

the way the thread title started i though it was going to end in a "what's on yr iPod?" : \

lol xpost

dont give anyone ideas

"Push It"
"Keep on Pushing"
"I'm Your Pusherman"

(Sorry, that's awful.)

"Sheer heartattack".

more awful

"Hello, Again We Bludgeon"

A++++ combination of display name and content xxp

Really wish someone would shove Daniel Sandford onto the ground by thrashing him with batons so the film of him dying could have the "HE HITS THE GROUND AND DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE BADLY HURT" voiceover.

What happened to Marcello? I thought he would be all over this thread with his challops

Earlier, Mr Tomlinson's family made an appeal for witnesses.

A statement from the family said: "Ian was a massive football fan and would have looked distinctive in his Millwall top.

"He was probably on his way back from work to watch the England match and got caught up in the crowds."

Old habits die hard for the police.

I'm pretty sure Marcello disapproves strongly of innocent people being attacked on the street by police to the extent that they subsequently die, but feel free to carry on being either naive or disingenuous, whichever one it is.

didn't wanna risk the SBs

When I first saw this I thought the guy was actually hit in the back of the head with a baton, which properly freaked me out. Still, it already seems pretty evident that the police witheld the bit about knocking him to the floor and hitting him from any statement following his death.

official police story is probably that he slipped on a banana peel that had been deliberately placed there by drunken, irresponsible, violent anarchists

If only they'd had a taser, they wouldn't have pushed him like that.

Ned T to thread

This story makes me sick to my stomach.

I think the key thing that's going to be used in argument *for* the police, is whether the heart attack can be linked to the pushing. WhichI foresee as, *uses crystal ball* = no connection.

It's common assault at least, whatever way you look at it.

Less than five minutes after being roughly pushed to the ground from behind, he had a heart attack. Nope, no connection.

also, i'm sure that we haven't heard the last of that dude's alcohol problem

despite him not having had a drink that day

What possible relevance could that have? Maybe he had a heart condition, was anemic, had diabetes, and was addicted to crack. So what?

I think lex's referring/comparing to when they said De Menezes had taken cocaine at some point in his past and therefore it was OK he got shot.

Ah I see

"the message"

i'm guessing something like "he was behaving strangely" - idk maybe he was twitching or slow to respond, as alcoholics can be - therefore they were justified in their actions or some other bs

When I first saw this I thought the guy was actually hit in the back of the head with a baton, which properly freaked me out. Still, it already seems pretty evident that the police witheld the bit about knocking him to the floor and hitting him from any statement following his death.

this was like a little bit before he died though right? i mean they might not even know that this happened until the video came out? what were the timings of the events from pushing to dying?

worse than alcohol problem, guys

A statement from the family said: "Ian was a massive football fan and would have looked distinctive in his Millwall top.

It was less that five minutes I believe, ken.

if that group of poilcemen were no longer at that scene (e.g. if either party had moved elsewhere) it is quite plausible that they hadn't linked the two things together.

it's quite miraculous actually that whoever took the video had spotted it was the same guy

Just a small incident, everyone calm down.

this was like a little bit before he died though right? i mean they might not even know that this happened until the video came out? what were the timings of the events from pushing to dying?

Yeah, there were only about a dozen officers who witnessed this going on.

Jacqui Smith has apparently now called for an enquiry after seeing videos of a man shoved forcibly to the ground after receiving a baton from behind.

Ned T to thread

― ljubljana, Wednesday, April 8, 2009 2:39 AM (9 hours ago) Bookmark

Haha. Well I'm not as up-to-date as I once was, Riot City is all houses now, it's a new era, etc. and it's been a while since I chatted with the Met about their tactics. If only they'd listened to me...But this isn't really about tactics. I personally think that the British policing of protests generally is amongst the best in the world, which is not saying much. Oh shit, I already want to write a thousand words qualifying that last statement.

i must say the man was already walking around like a zombie, probably had a heart attack coming anyway. (not that the police officer isn't way too rude)

fuck off

hi jim!

lol

srsly the guy looks drunk.

just to save my image here. i don't think he was expecting that push at all. so maybe it scared him to death.
(yet my first opinion stands) :)

the city o' london is like the most cctv'd up place in the whole world. there'll blatantly be more video evidence a mysterious bug that wipes all the cctv footage

I'm no lawyer but I'd imagine it is very difficult to make a watertight case that the heart attack was a direct consequence of the assault? Even if there weren't cops involved. Especially if he had eg a weak heart.

Some friends of mine witnessed a (fairly vicious) fight in their late teens - one of the guys involved was epileptic, had a seizure and died as a result. The other guy wasn't prosecuted. I'm not saying this a direct parallel for loads of screamingly obvious reasons but I would be amazed if anyone was prosecuted as a result of this.

yeah thanks Matt, that's what I was trying to say in my dumb post.

i wonder if the police could even identify the cop who did this, what with all that gear he had on. let's hope so, at least. (this may have already been determined in which case it's news to me)

Again, there about a dozen policeman who witnessed the incident. Assuming that they're deployed in teanms, I'd be pretty sceptical if none of them could identify who it was that pushed him.

I don't see it as relevant to question whether or not the heart attack was caused by the earlier incident. As has already been mentioned, the violent push looks like an unprovoked assault, and totally inappropriate behaviour by a police officer. So, even if Tomlinson was alive now, there would still be a case to answer.

it certainly wouldn't have made headline news.

No-one else, on that day, got pushed to the ground by a riot policeman in an unprovokeed assault?

I don't see it as relevant to question whether or not the heart attack was caused by the earlier incident. As has already been mentioned, the violent push looks like an unprovoked assault, and totally inappropriate behaviour by a police officer. So, even if Tomlinson was alive now, there would still be a case to answer.

― dubmill, Wednesday, April 8, 2009 3:03 PM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

yeah, but not of manslaughter. pretty sure the police cracked a few other heads last wednesday.

In summary, a man walks past a line of police, with hands in pockets. Presumably not expecting to get hit from behind.

He falls to the ground after getting hit from behind.

The shock happened at the moment of unexpected impact. Not when he landed on the ground.

He turns and sees riot police waving batons. In his direction.

He gets more shock.

Five minutes later he dies of a heart attack.

Did I miss anything out?

what happened before your first sentence.

not defending the police, but that's what you missed out, and it's relevant.

The crucial point here is the video evidence. It is so obvious that the amount of force used was way over the top, resulting in him being sent flying, not propelled gently on his way.

I am sure there were loads of other incidents but without video evidence it's impossible to prove.

OK, so what did I miss out?

if you missed nothing out, then the only piece of evidence in the trial will be the video, so there's nothing to worry about.

Well, clearly, that's a big if.

However, at this point the question is:

If he had not been hit as per that video, would he be alive today?

the Fatima Mansions had it right

pretty sure the police cracked a few other heads last wednesday

i was in there between about 11 and 4 (just managed to get out before they kettled us again) and even early on, when it was fairly peaceable, a couple of friends got cracked on the head trying to get out so they could get to work, don't know exactly how badly (only saw a couple of bleeding head wounds, both kids dressed like anarchists, both seemed a little bit proud). but, you know, being part of a group trying to get through a police cordon probably counts as due provocation or something.

Well, clearly, that's a big if.

No kidding. This why he have inquiries and trials.

Other than the having-a-heart-attack-and-dying thing, and the being-set-upon-by-a-vicious-gang-of-armed-psychos thing, that feeling of falling fowards with your hands stuck in your pockets is just the worst thing ever isn't it?

and ILX threads, xp.

are you sure that's an xp?

Yes, thank God he was spared that.

Witnesses said that, prior to the moment captured on video, he had already been hit with batons and thrown to the floor by police who blocked his route home.

One witness, Anna Branthwaite, a photographer, described how, in the minutes before the video was shot, she saw Tomlinson walking towards Cornhill Street.

"A riot police officer had already grabbed him and was pushing him," she said.

"It wasn't just pushing him – he'd rushed him. He went to the floor and he did actually roll. That was quite noticeable.

"It was the force of the impact. He bounced on the floor. It was a very forceful knocking down from behind. The officer hit him twice with a baton when he was lying on the floor.

"So it wasn't just that the officer had pushed him – it became an assault.

"And then the officer picked him up from the back, continued to walk or charge with him, and threw him.

"He was running and stumbling. He didn't turn and confront the officer or anything like that."

So things had been happening further up the street, before the bit captured on video. It reminds me a bit of that advert on TV about "not getting the whole picture", where it seems some lout has stolen a woman's purse and is running down the road with it, but in fact she had dropped it and he was running after her to give it back. Whole story needed, etc.

Intersting...

Ian Tomlinson death: police watchdog considers independent inquiry

Pressure is growing on the IPCC to use its powers to conduct an independent investigation. Brian Paddick, a former deputy assistant commissioner at the Metropolitan police, demanded that police be removed from the case and said any officer who struck the innocent passerby could face a manslaughter charge.

He said the officers from the City of London force would be key witnesses in the investigation.

Paddick told the Guardian: "How can the City of London do the investigation independently? I'm sorry but there are three City of London officers in that video, how can they do the investigation? It certainly needs to be a full-blown criminal investigation … into whether there is a provable link between the death and assault, because an assault is a criminal offence. Police are allowed to use force, provided it is justified."

Like Paddick has any influence.

Good thing there was all that fuss about Boris being put in charge of the MPA so that he can spend the days writing his newspaper columns and getting Malthouse to do all the real work:

Boris Johnson, the London mayor, is pressing for a "speedy and thorough" inquiry by the police complaints body, his chief spokesman said. He said the mayor watched the footage today and had been seriously concerned by what he witnessed.

Johnson, who is chairman of the Metropolitan Police Authority, is sending his vice-chairman, Kit Malthouse, who is deputy mayor for policing, to meet the IPCC tomorrow.

any officer who struck the innocent passerby could face a manslaughter charge.

But that's right, isn't it? In the same way as a burglar who hits a old lady on the head who weeks later succumbs to a heart attack can be found guilty of manslaughter. Isn't this basically why the manslaughter charge exists?

that's my understanding

i thought so, but now it turns out i agree with paddick i'm starting to doubt myself.

stopped clock etc

So things had been happening further up the street, before the bit captured on video. It reminds me a bit of that advert on TV about "not getting the whole picture", where it seems some lout has stolen a woman's purse and is running down the road with it, but in fact she had dropped it and he was running after her to give it back. Whole story needed, etc.

― C J, Wednesday, April 8, 2009 3:42 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

haaha, posted this ad -- which was for the guardian! -- on the other g20 thread.

i wonder if the police could even identify the cop who did this, what with all that gear he had on.

I bet none of his pals will be able to remember who he was.

Just think - all you'd have to do is see which officer's baton had Tomlinson's DNA on the end of it. If only there some kind of national database to store this kind of information etc etc.

Channel 4 News has more footage which will be on the programme at 7pm.

And here it is...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2009/apr/08/g20-police-assault-ian-tomlinson-video

pissed city boys blocking the view

From the Guardian:

Breaking news:
* LATEST: Police officer thought to be shown in footage striking Ian Tomlinson has come forward, IPCC spokesman says. More details

bloody hell
xpost

Call me a cynic, but these anti-terror raids in Manchester and Liverpool that "had to be brought forward because of a security leak" are, er, convenient.

Not really. Dimwitted terrorism head went to meeting in Downing Street this morning clutching memo which the media could blatantly read.

http://i36.tinypic.com/15not2f.gif

More footage of the aftermath.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/09/g20-video-ian-tomlinson-death

I'm not really sure this shows what the Guardian says so much. To me it shows police trying to contain the area around an injured man which is quite difficult during a protest. The police clearly trying to hide their faces and (possibly) their numbers (as the officer who did the original pushing is alleged to have done) is a big dud however. Also note one of the bystanders says "he's not injured he's just too pissed" (or something) which just shows how easy it is to make the wrong assessment in situations like this, and how difficult it is to make the right one.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/04/11/g20-cop-who-hit-ian-tomlinson-has-a-heart-attack-115875-21272200/

you couldn't make it up

Just think - all you'd have to do is see which officer's baton had Tomlinson's DNA on the end of it. If only there some kind of national database to store this kind of information etc etc.

― James Mitchell, Wednesday, April 8, 2009 10:50 AM (3 days ago) Bookmark

lol are you actually advocating a nat'l DNA database?

there already is one, it's a bit controversial.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/science-research/using-science/dna-database/

good luck, uk

btw, how long would someone normally stay in hospital after a heart attack? the whole "suspected heart attack" thing seems a bit, well, suspect...

Oh dear oh dear.

well my dad has angina and one of his angina attacks are down in his medical records as a heart attack and he wasnt hospitalized.(and it was like a year after it happened he found out that was what it was classed as!) And I didn't find out til a year after that hehe.
And ive heard of people having a minor heart attack and not knowing and they go to the docs a few weeks later not feeling too great but not thinking its serious and they run a test and it turns out it was a minor heart attack.
So i dont see why this copper is lying. After all if he was he would be exposed.

it's really the idea of someone going into hospital and leaving, very quickly, and them still not knowing if he had a heart attack or not which seemed odd. shouldn't really cast aspersions tho.

It's too convenient. It just feels like something the PR consultant for operation "the public's sympathy" would think of.

I think the PR agent would be focusing on the smears to Tomlinson's character/behaviour. The officer's heart attack is a slightly bizarre but entirely believable chain of events.

Okay, that's more likely, you're right. This heart attack thing is just... don't know... it just feels like he was shocked and maybe fainted and this was intentionally blown up with a purpose.

So obviously a panic attack.

Yesterday had to deal with one of those 'smelly protestors, dole scum I'm paying for' types who probably pays less in taxes per year than it costs to run half a cop. How that view sat with 'rich people, think they can buy their way out of everything' I'll never know.

lol are you actually advocating a nat'l DNA database?

lol i thought my intended humour was clear but obviously not lol wtf

The Metropolitan Police said video footage on YouTube which appears to show an officer hitting a woman during the G20 protests would be examined.

^Happened at memorial vigil for Tomlinson. Niiiiiiiiice.

Can anybody link to the footage without newcasters talking over it?

The only thing I heard him say was batoñ

Starts about 3.40

Interesting (for public order policing junkies like me) to see the contrast between the police officers who shove the black guy and the one who hits the woman and the more senior officer (I think) who comes forward when robocop has retreated. Different dress, different attitude, different outcome.

What is the cop wearing on his hands? He's all "I am THE CLAW, do not trifle with me woman!"

jesus. i don't know why, but i get just fucking possessed with rage when watching clips like that. i hope that copper with the baton catches a shit ton of flak for that.

I get that same anger; I think it's a sense of frustration at not being able to do anything.

yeah, frustration, and the abuse of power, and the sense that a lot of people wouldn't care about it, as long as they're not the person being attacked (and not realising how easily they could be that person). i've been researching the LAPD's activities at Black Flag shows recently, and interviewing people who were at the infamous Elk's Lodge 'riot', and feeling the same sort of response to their stories.

I don't understand the 'kettling' that's going on here at all. The trouble seems to start when the black guy wants to get through and the woman police officer says "And I'm telling you you're not..." - you can't see whether he then tries to get past her (she is quite titchy after all) but then two Met officers pile into him with their usual tact and discretion. This leads to the woman getting in the face of the robocop (TSG? Can't see his shoulder number but I don't know if that's because of the film quality or if he's deliberately covered it up) who then slaps her for reasons beyond my understanding.

But why stop the guy passing in the first place? There are obviously groups of photographers/pub on both sides of the cordon. By the end of the video you see two lines of officers (who mostly seem to to Forward Intelligence (in fact you get a good shot of a police photographer) who seem to be keeping two sections of the public apart? The whole operation seems a bit pointless.

All in all this whole thing seems to have shown up the limitations of 'kettling', at least the limitations of relying on it so heavily.

Good excuse to beat on some defenseless citizens, innit?

Well, they don't need kettling for that. They could go back to the methods of confrontation. Guaranteed to kick off then.

uh, without saying i'd have done it myself, i can kinda see why she got whacked there. she was really in his face in an already tense situation. yeah i'm sure he didn't handle it brilliantly but, ah well it's all on the j0rdan thread i suppose.

you mug

I can see why that woman got whacked too: because the cop thought he could get away with it. We can also argue that any police who attend a demonstration with their ID numbers obscured might as well admit they're out for an afternoon of the old ultraviolence. The officer, who has been identified and suspended, was a sergeant.

i'd of bet the head off her, no respect nowadays. used to be you could kick a protester in the street, etc.

look, i'm not backing this cop up in the slightest, but from reading comments before watching the video one would assume she got hammered at random by a prick cop with a baton. the reality is she got hammered because she was doing her level best to aggravate a prick cop with a baton, no more no less.

No, it looks like bad policing to me. They know exactly what to expect in this situation, a ton of abuse, it's not pleasant but they get trained in why doing what he did is the wrong response. He lashes out and then, completely disproportionately considering the "threat", whacks her, he's lucky he didn't spark more aggro.

As I said upthread look at the difference between his approach and the City of London officer at the end - hands up, asks the crowd to move back "please", and get's what he wants.

"I'm going to have to ask you gentlemen to stop sticking it to The Man for a moment, if you don't mind."

"Certainly, officer, we were getting a bit hot under the collar I'm afraid"

Health and Safety Culture gone mad tbh.

nobody's come close to describing it as 'good' policing. i'm making the case that it was 'bad' protesting.

You can't make a homily without breaking heads.

They know exactly what to expect in this situation, a ton of abuse, it's not pleasant but they get trained in why doing what he did is the wrong response. He lashes out and then, completely disproportionately considering the "threat", whacks her, he's lucky he didn't spark more aggro.

As I said upthread look at the difference between his approach and the City of London officer at the end - hands up, asks the crowd to move back "please", and get's what he wants.

^^^^^^QFT

just saw that clip on evening news here in australia

Officers have a great deal of latitude in dealing with protestors in terms of what they can identify as public order offences or threatening behaviour. None of this allows them to hide their ID numbers while backhanding a woman half their size.

again, i'm not arguing that that was a perfect demonstration of policing, it was clearly a dumb move on his part on any number of levels. they're both complete fuckwits, on the available evidence. i'd still rather have him live next door to me out of the pair of them.

i'm not someone shouting in your face is any easier whether someone is half your size or not, if that's relevant.

the backhand thing is not cool, but it would be no more acceptable if she were the giant man from twin peaks. that kind of thing should be off the table for police.

not sure why the stick to the legs thing is getting play. that must have happened to dozens of people on the day -- in fact I'm pretty sure I've seen footage of it and personally i am ok with it being an option in principle.

i guess the question we have to ask is that if someone was shouting at us, would backhanding them and then striking their legs with a beton be considered a reasonable response?

pretty sure if i did that in the pub i would be arrested, or at least face consequences. also, it isn't something i would do.

if you tried to forcibly handcuff someone in a pub, which is something you are presumably OK with police doing, you'd probably be arrested too.

not sure why you in this pub of yours is relevant to police officers policing demonstrations.

its a really great pub.

hahaha

So lets analyse this:

the incident is partly sparked by a white racist cop on the right hand side look at the they we he pawed the black guy twice. This inflamed the crowd.

the sargeant was a thug in uniform acting more like a rogue bouncer than a policeman, make no mistake about it, this uniformed goon was up for some action, look at his arrogant body language throughout the video

then you hear him say "Go away" out comes a backhander like a lowlife street thug

notice he was the only cop that drew his baton, like a thug-in-uniform he reaches out and gives the woman a calculated whack to the legs

notice how he snakes away after the incident

q: when are we going to see this thug cop charged by the CPS with assault and unprofessional conduct, appearing in court and found guilty, then sent to jail.

even the Guardian are using the phrase "police brutality"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2009/apr/14/g20-police-brutality-at-tomlinson-memorial

question re: media law and the policeman that is being investigated / currently suspended

if say The Guardian find out the name of the thug cop are they allowed to name him?

CASE SOLVED

http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/C/htmlC/columbo/columboIMAGE/columbo.jpg

"Just one more thing, ma'am, PLANK CANNON MUST GO BRING IN SYSTEMS RAINCOAT JESSICA FLETCHER AT FULL BACK FOR ENGLAND turns out it was Dabney Coleman all along."

good to see djmartian coming out against racism

Rich Ragheads want Manchester City to be England's biggest club, and break into the top 4 this season - get with it

-- djmartian, Monday, 1 September 2008

'even the Guardian are using the phrase "police brutality"'

yeah it's not like the guardian to... ah forget it

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_43eTiSQptSY/RY0hCTPkwNI/AAAAAAAAAN8/NBTDDdxqa3o/s320/DSC01813.JPG

It later emerged that the woman at the centre of the second alleged assault, is to be represented by PR agent Max Clifford.

nice last sentence: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8000246.stm

I can see why that woman got whacked too: because the cop thought he could get away with it. We can also argue that any police who attend a demonstration with their ID numbers obscured might as well admit they're out for an afternoon of the old ultraviolence. The officer, who has been identified and suspended, was a sergeant.

lol

It later emerged that the woman at the centre of the second alleged assault, is to be represented by PR agent Max Clifford.

....

i guess the question we have to ask is that if someone was shouting at us, would backhanding them and then striking their legs with a beton be considered a reasonable response?

fuck it- i'd probably consider it if the tools were to hand, yeah.

the met do recruit directly from ilx

i hear they can see who voted for 'the church' vs 'ask chaki' and that's pretty much the entire process.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8004222.stm

WHAT THE ABOVE LINKS TO

G20 death was not heart attack
Breaking News

A new post mortem says Ian Tomlinson died from an abdominal haemorrhage not a heart attack after contact with police during the G20 protests.

The statement from the City of London Coroners Court overturns the initial assessment that the newspaper seller died of natural causes.

Mr Tomlinson was hit and pushed over by a police officer on 1 April.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) is investigating Mr Tomlinson's death.

The Coroner's statement said the second post-mortem's conclusions were provisional.

In its statement, the Coroner's Court said that the inquest had looked at the first post-mortem carried out after Mr Tomlinson collapsed and died on the evening of 1 April.

That examination, carried out by Dr Freddy Patel, concluded that Mr Tomlinson had diseased heart and liver and a substantial amount of blood in the abdominal cavity.

"His provisional interpretation of his findings was that the cause of death was coronary artery disease," said the statement.

"A subsequent post-mortem examination was conducted by another consultant forensic pathologist, Dr Nat Cary, instructed by the IPCC and by solicitors acting for the family of the late Mr Tomlinson.

"Dr Cary's opinion is that the cause of death was abdominal haemorrhage. The cause of the haemorrhage remains to be ascertained.

"Dr Cary accepts that there is evidence of coronary atherosclerosis but states that in his opinion its nature and extent is unlikely to have contributed to the cause of death."

The statement concluded that both the opinions remained provisional and subject to further investigations and tests.

So guys, it looks like he was a disgusting alky and on his way out anyway, the copper was probably doing him a favour, well done everybody take the afternoon off :-( :-(

Oh, well done the fuzz.

I feel confident that if the police knew he would hemmorhage all over the place after they shoved him to the ground from behind, they wouldn't have done it.

the police officer has now been interviewed under caution for manslaughter. I think theyre treating the haemorrhage as being caused by the blow by the police officer. Whether they can prove that who knows, but its more serious than the heart attack, as they could argue that it was gonna happen. If the haemorrhage is caused directly by the blow then he's going down.

i have no interest in defending the Pc, but legally it's not as simple as "if the haemorrhage is caused directly by the blow then he's going down".

e.g. 17 people were killed by rubber bullets in northern ireland and i don't think any of the people who fired them (directly at people with the intent of hitting them) were tried for manslaughter.

will just have to wait and see. Both parties lawyers will feel confident of winning a case.

That's nice to know.

they can blame his alcoholism or a stomach ulcer if he had one. The other side can say it was his being pushed and landing on his stomach that caused it.

The interview under caution for manslaughter is directly because of the 2nd post mortem. So clearly this is not something the police were hoping for. It appears to be more serious than a heart attack as that couldve been natural causes (according to expert on sky news)

Or they could say there was no intent to kill/cause serious harm. If this goes to court for manslaughter it's more about PR than the odds of getting a conviction.

blame it on the a-a-a-alcohol

Wonder if the first coroner will get shit for this?

this just in: heart attacks can be caused naturally. Well done, expert on sky news.

Jules Carey of Tuckers, the family's solicitor, said the family had known about the results of the second post-mortem for the past week - but had reluctantly agreed to remain silent while the IPCC continued its investigations.

"The findings of Dr Nat Cary significantly increase the likelihood that the officer will now face the more serious charge of manslaughter," said Mr Carey.

"The IPCC opposed the disclosure of Dr Cary's findings until they satisfied themselves that it would not prejudice their investigation of the officer.

"It is of some comfort to the family that the record is now being put straight, but they hope that the IPCC investigation will be expedited and thorough, and that there will be a prompt referral to the CPS for charge," he added.

Investigations

The IPCC launched a full-scale investigation of the death after video footage revealed the officer's contact with Mr Tomlinson, despite earlier reports to the contrary. The officer involved has been suspended from duty.

The news of the second post-mortem's results came as the Metropolitan Police remained under pressure over the G20 strategy. Another officer from the force's Territorial Support Group has also been suspended after a woman alleged she was hit on the second day of the protests.

Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson has called in the Inspectorate of Constabularies to look at policing tactics on the day and how to handle future large protests.

In a statement, the Metropolitan Police said it wished to reiterate its "sincere regret" over Mr Tomlinson's death but would not comment on the post-mortem while the IPCC continued its investigations.

Wonder if the first coroner will get shit for this?

Pathologist in Ian Tomlinson G20 death case was reprimanded over conduct

"was reprimanded" != "will get shit for this", of course.

A third incident involving policing of the G20 protest in London is referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

A new video released by demonstrators shows a police officer beating a man in the head with a riot shield at the London G20 protest earlier this month.

ouch i felt that just watching it

Shit's fucked up.

Just lucky these have been caught on cam or they would get away with it. Makes you wonder what has gone on that hasn't been captured on cam.

This clearly wouldn't have happened if cameras and camera cell phones had been banned. (Been reading what someone from a record company had to say about the Pirate Bay trial and his kind of reasoning was so amusing I think I'm going to try it everywhere)

Hey, here's a radical thought. Perhaps things that weren't captured on camera were witnessed by some of the hundreds of people who were there. Imagine a world where eyewitnesses could be interviewed and evidence could be gathered and events that happened while not being filmed could be investigated and dealt with! It's a crazy notion, I know.

xpost, obviously.

Well since it is now illegal to photograph a police officer in England and Wales, we may have to rely on this anyway.

http://www.bjp-online.com/img/show.html?img=312728
journalists and photographers are being monitored and recorded by the Metropolitan Police's Forward Intelligence Team (FIT)

Imagine a world where eyewitnesses could be interviewed and evidence could be gathered and events that happened while not being filmed could be investigated and dealt with! It's a crazy notion, I know

Yeah but eyewitness testimony is actually notoriously unreliable and subject to all sorts of biases and mis-rememberances, tbh.

Well since it is now illegal to photograph a police officer in England and Wales.

― zero learnt from nero (Neil S), Saturday, April 18, 2009 10:51 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

If this is what you're referring to, it's a bad law, but that's not what it says:

It permits the arrest of anyone found "eliciting, publishing or communicating information" relating to members of the armed forces, intelligence services and police officers, which is "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism".

likely to be useful

Way to not define what exactly you mean, lawmakers, leaving this open to the whim of any police officer who sees a camera anywhere.

That's the one caek, I think it's part of the recent Coroners Act?

xpost

leaving a decision to arrest open to the whim of the police officer. Then they have these trial things where the policeman has to prove the other bit.

Oh christ, don't even get me started.

"Permits the arrest" = permits the intimidation.

Not even physical intimation - "if you do not stop taking photos I will arrest you" is gonna be pretty persuasive for most people.

Yeah, in practice you can't exactly tell them that section X of act Y refutes what they're saying, even if it's true.

The police use "security reasons" as a panacea for absolutely anything they'd like to do in the moment, and failure to comply with a police officer in that context has the potential to become an arrest for a public order offence even if your actions were otherwise lawful. Yes, they will probably let you go without charge but prosecution isn't the point: you've argued, so they will detain you for the best part of a day and swab you for DNA even though you shouldn't be databased. The British way is to throw a shit-ton of red tape at people and leave them with the consequences.

We now have over 90 incidents from G20 headed for this inquiry; a lot of these were carried out by police who were not wearing badge numbers. This by itself should be gross misconduct; a sackable act. What's really weirding me out is the fishing expedition to find dirt on Shami Chakrabarti. That's going to end well for the police, isn't it?

Where's Jordan S. on this thread?

Wisconsin sleeps.

that's jordan w/o the "s"

I wrote this somewhere else but it bears repeating...

Just to be clear on one point made upthread - Section 76 of the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 adds detail to an existing offence under Section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and is not a blanket ban on taking photographs of police officers, no matter what they (the police) or we (innocent photographers) might have read. It's quite possible that the police might try and use this law to stop people photographing but that is not the same thing - and anyway they have plenty of other (much more mundane and much older) laws to use if they choose to make life difficult for a photographer.

...for me it's worrying that the myth that it is suddenly illegal to take photos of police officers seems to be so widely believed which makes it easier for the police to bully people into not taking photographs and possibly makes it less likely for some people to take photographs when it might be useful for them to do so.

from meisenfek's link:

Photojournalist and NUJ member Marc Vallee, who was hospitalised after covering the unlawful 'Sack Parliament' protest in London on 09 October 2006, added: 'Press freedom is a central tenet of our democracy and it is extremely unpleasant to have Metropolitan Police FIT officers take notes, film and photograph you when working.

not that I don't support the central argument but it's a bit rich to have photographers complaining about being photographed while working...

xp Of course in the meantime the exact opposite has happened - I've seen loads more photos of police officers on flickr since the amendment.

Guy's not complaining about being photographed as such. I'd be curious to know what value the police really place on the practice of going up the nose of credentialed journalists outside of low-level intimidation of people who supposed to be there in a neutral capacity. I'm concerned about the profiling of journalists and photographers (both freelance and staff) who were in the kettle or covering the protests.

A few years back, I was in Chinatown one afternoon and there was a small demonstration/petition about rising rents and gentrification. The organiser, who was pretty well-known in that community, was sitting at a picnic table talking to people so I stopped to see what it was all about. We'd been chatting for about five minutes when a policeman approached and began asking us what we were doing etc (he could have read the sign). I didn't like his presence or tone, both of which made me feel like he would rather we weren't sitting there talking. So I replied that I was a journalist and I thought it was very interesting that he was so fascinated by our private conversation, but there was 'nothing to see here'. It's not like Chinatown wasn't giving him anything else to do as a beat cop that day, but noooooooooo....

[...must not quote well known film starring Jack Nicholson...ahh...can't stop self....]

Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown.

I once went out on patrol with some officers Chinatown Unit at Charing Cross (with some police officers from China and Taiwan - oh, the stories I could tell), anyway upshot was they had a big board of photos of...erm...Triad "associates" who they try to keep tabs on when they pass through (just like on the TV!) I'm guessing you must have been on their board Suzy.

LOL. The guy I was speaking to was the civil rights activist Jabez Lam.

A request has been made for a 3rd post-mortem
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8008980.stm

On Monday it was revealed that a third post-mortem could be ordered into Mr Tomlinson's death.

It is thought the post mortem request may have come from the representatives of the police officer at the centre of the allegations.

Let's all have a go!

Oh god, I wish ledge's comment hadn't just made me laugh.

Police are clearly going for best of three like this is a game of rock, paper, scissors.

Anyone got plans for May Day?

no

It's been confirmed there will be a third post mortem.

So far the Independent Police Complaints Commission has had almost 90 complaints relating to the London protests.

given that russell brand and jonathan ross got 38,000 complaints, I think we can safely say that all of the police brutality added together amounted to about 1/422 of a prank call. so we should just suspend two policemen without pay for 8 hours and be done with it?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8009404.stm

An attempt to stop new footage being broadcast of the moments leading up to the death of Ian Tomlinson has failed.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) tried to secure a court order preventing Channel 4 News showing the film of the G20 protests.

But a judge refused to grant the injunction and the footage will be shown on Wednesday.

The IPCC said the film could damage its investigation, but ITN said it was a "responsible piece of journalism".

An IPCC spokeswoman said: "We can confirm that we attempted to seek an injunction this evening against Channel 4 as it came to light that they were due to broadcast further evidence which we believe at this moment would potentially damage our criminal investigation into the death of Ian Tomlinson.

"This injunction was specific to what was due to be broadcast this evening."

Suspension

A spokeswoman for ITN, which produces Channel 4 News and More 4 News, said the broadcast was "a responsible piece of journalism that brings important new information into the public domain".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8011418.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8016620.stm

A police officer is being investigated after allegedly writing on a website that he was keen to "bash some long haired hippys" at the G20 protest.

Pc Rob Ward apparently put the note on Facebook on the evening of 1 April, the first day of City of London protests.

A Scotland Yard spokeswoman said: "The matter has been recorded and will be investigated appropriately."

The Independent Police Complaints Commission received 185 complaints about police behaviour at the protests.

'Can't wait'

The police officer's profile page on social networking site Facebook contained a message apparently written by Pc Ward at 2017 BST on 1 April.

It stated: "Rob Ward can't wait to bash some long haired hippys up @ the G20."

Twenty minutes later another Facebook user posted a reply that said: "Dats bad but good in da same way lol [laugh out loud]."

The message was later removed from Pc Ward's Facebook page.

The police spokesman said officers from the Directorate of Professional Standards would carry out the initial assessment in the investigation.

Pc Ward, who could face disciplinary action over the message, has not been suspended while the investigation takes place.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission received more than 80 complaints from people who said they were assaulted or witnessed an assault by police during the G20 protests.

It also received more than 50 complaints about police tactics.

Ian Tomlinson, a 47-year-old newspaper vendor, died minutes after he was pushed over by a policeman during the demonstrations on 1 April.

The police officer at the centre of that allegation has been suspended and interviewed under caution on suspicion of manslaughter in connection with the death.

The cop was Facebook friends with Ashley-Paul Robinson?

lol [laugh out loud]

Unsurprisingly, grammar, punctuation and spelling a stranger to Met police in the off-hours too.

(all strangers, that is!)

shame the police wasn't 1337 [leet [[elite]] ], or someone would have had lots of fun translating amirite [am i right]

Whoop-de- doo, having avoided the G20 circus in London, Obama is bringing it to Pittsburgh.

yeah I don't know if that's really gonna be the best thing for Pittsburgh, which is a town that deserves more love than it gets

The family of Ian Tomlinson were told by a senior investigator he may have been assaulted by a police impersonator shortly before he collapsed and died, it was revealed today.

The suggestion by the City of London Police was made after video evidence showed the newspaper vendor being attacked with a baton and pushed to the ground by an officer in riot gear.

According to an officer investigating the 47-year-old's death he could have clashed with a protester "dressed in police uniform" before he collapsed at the G20 demonstrations on 1 April.

what the shit

what. the. fuck???

OH PLEASE is the correct response to this bullshit. Who's doing the PR down the Met, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad?

ha ha holy shit. what fucking clowns - obviously no-one is taking this seriously.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/jun/30/ian-tomlinson-inquiry-g20-protests

sounds plausible enough.......

in other news, new zapruder footage suggests that JFK may have committed suicide.

i wondered what happened to Comical Ali

no but seriously folks, this is how the police work: introduce something batshit into the case so lawyers can harp on and on about numberless cop and ARE YOU SURE, to scupper the 'beyond reasonable doubt' business. They're trying to win on a technicality while attempting to rubbish their critics as 'that protestor lot'.

Being inaccessible or unaccountable to the family in the days after the death also sounds like a 'create reasonable doubt' action-plan. I am afraid that in all this fake incompetence, the Met know exactly what they are doing.

Keep expecting this thread title to finish "what's on your iPod?"

no but seriously folks, this is how the police work: introduce something batshit into the case so lawyers can harp on and on about numberless cop and ARE YOU SURE, to scupper the 'beyond reasonable doubt' business. They're trying to win on a technicality while attempting to rubbish their critics as 'that protestor lot'.

Isn't this just how, umm, lawyers work?

yes

'beyond a reasonable doubt' is not a technicality lol
this is bullshit though

Lawyers are paid to advocate for one side or the other but the police are supposed to be there to serve and protect us all equally, even when their practices are called into question by the public. We only pay for the Met directly out of our council tax in London, you know, why the fuck shouldn't we object to this?

If a cop (a senior investigator, no less) brings this up 'as part of the investigation' then the police themselves are introducing bullshit to create enough 'doubt' to preclude any convictions or accountability. It takes some kind of zombie mendacity to do this to a grieving family who know they're being played.

Metropolitan police commanders at the G20 demonstrations ordered officers to clear the streets of protesters using "reasonable force" if necessary, minutes before a police constable attacked the newspaper vendor Ian Tomlinson, it emerged tonight.

A police officer who allegedly struck a woman during the G20 protests in London a woman is to be charged with assault, the Crown Prosecution Service said today.

A Sgt. Smellie would you believe.

delroy smellie, and the poor guy looking like that. he is never going to get fair press.

What to do against the American Police State? Nuthin, it seems. squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeek

(I refer to the now-standard smackdown of protest in Pittsburgh last week)

did you do anything?

He complained about it here.

Hey Morbz do you read Digby (digbysblog.blogspot.com)? She's awesome on providing coverage on taser deaths, police militarization, civil rights, etc. and has lots of suggestions for activism on those fronts. (Asked in all seriousness.)

new to me.

Awesome police work:

A policeman struck a Brighton G20 protester twice with a metal baton after mistaking a carton of orange juice in her hand for a weapon, a court heard today.

Metropolitan Police Sergeant Delroy Smellie, 47, said he lashed out in a "pre-emptive strike" during a confrontation outside the Bank of England on April 2 last year.

we need J0rdan S. to weigh in here

what the

bear in mind orange juice is slightly acidic

yeah, you get OJ in your eye and that shit will sting tbqf

Wait a minute -- "Delroy Smellie?"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8583760.stm

A G20 protester allegedly assaulted by a police officer was acting like a "lunatic", a court has been told.

A Metropolitan police sergeant who was filmed hitting a woman with a baton at the G20 demonstrations walked free from court today after a judge ruled he acted lawfully.

After the verdict, Delroy Smellie nodded to the judge and said: "Thank you very much."

Smellie hugged his brother and left the courtroom, joking and laughing with lawyers.

not even gonna bother with puns

haha, where is all this supposed pro-cop j0rdan dogma

Senser would have a field day.

if you drink oj at a protest you deserve to get shot

I once killed a man with a carton of orange juice

in Reno, just to watch him die

when i was just a baby
my momma told me son
always drink your oj
and hope the cops don't have guns

Juice Train number 1
Is comin'

whiney: a challop (i think) in the midst of G20

There's no justice, Just Juice

Tropicannibals From Outer Space

People, a woman was BRUISED here

Ma, take this carton offa me
I can't drink juice anymore

Cit Rick - (Stored) Behind Bars

beaten with extra pulp

blah blah something by Squeeze blah blah Slap and Tickle blah blah

Black Coffee Orange Juice In Bed

Tempted by the fruit of banana

stop

in the name of juice

genuine roffle, genius timing

He hit her with a baton, but really he was just trying to Club Tropicana.

lol

Wham!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otacja5LDJY

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/apr/27/blair-peach-killed-police-met-report

Makes me feel v. old. I went to a demo about this at the time. Disband the SPG!

Archbold 38th edition para 2528: 'In case of riot or rebellious assembly the officers endeavouring to disperse the riot are justified in killing them at common law if the riot cannot otherwise be suppressed'."

What?!?!??!

"Without condoning the death I refer to Archbold 38th edition para 2528: 'In case of riot or rebellious assembly the officers endeavouring to disperse the riot are justified in killing them at common law if the riot cannot otherwise be suppressed'."

O_O

xpost!

I don't know how that can be a surprise to anyone really?

Unless they're armed, how are they going to kill them, batter them to death with truncheons? Nice.

doesn't sound like a shortage of weapons was a problem:

It was already known that when Cass raided lockers at the SPG headquarters he uncovered a stash of unauthorised weapons, including illegal truncheons, knives, two crowbars, a whip, a 3ft wooden stave and a lead-weighted leather stick.

One officer was caught trying to hide a metal cosh, although it was not the weapon that killed Peach. Another officer was found with a collection of Nazi regalia.

re: it's ok to kill protestors, it was news to me that it could be lawful for police to kill someone who isn't presenting a threat, just because others nearby may be threatening violence. i'd assumed that the reasonable force test still applied.

Of course it's complicated. When I went to see police training in riot control they gave various examples of what might happen that might result in the death of a bystander, for example throwing a brick that had been thrown at you back into the crowd. A lot of this happened at Southall, incidentally, I think the police might have even tried to say that Peach (and Clarence Baker for that matter) were hit by bricks thrown by their own "side". To be fair the training given was that it was A Bad Idea to do this (not least because you were giving ammo back to the rioters).

I wish World In Action was archived, they did an excellent programme on this (Blair Peach that is).

afaict that volume (of police regs, not legal statutes) dates from the mid-19th century, but anyway it clearly says you can only kill 'em if they present a threat: " 'In case of riot or rebellious assembly the officers endeavouring to disperse the riot are justified in killing them at common law if the riot cannot otherwise be suppressed'."

Hello, Peterloo

I wish World In Action was archived

The good old days of ITV, eh?

Good old Granada certainly.

I used to get stupidly excited at the music and titles - I was a very lonely child.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK3iniTXxjg

Good old Wynder K Frog!

Ian Tomlinson death: police officer will not face criminal charges

G20 riot officer filmed striking down newspaper seller will not face charges, CPS rules

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jul/22/ian-tomlinson-police-not-charged

fuck this

that's no good at all.

xp or what you said

the cps' tardiness is inexcusable too

yeah especially as they basically say "it was definitely an assault, but we were still looking at the other options for charges and then the six month deadline for assault had passed." negligent imo.

good to know that merely assaulting someone for no reason doesn't constitute "misconduct in public office" though. keep that one in the back pocket, coppers!

Protest outside Scotland Yard at 1pm (at the behest of the Tomlinson family) should be fun...

Hope no-one there is provocative enough to walk in front of a policeman

Has the cop ever been identified?

i think they know who it is, but no one has published a name for some reason probably related to the police federations litigious ways. he apparently was facing a disciplinary charge for road rage but retired on medical grounds, rejoined the police in a civilian role, got a job as an officer elsewhere then transferred to the met, by which time the disciplinary had been forgotten. ffs.

the role of freddie "49,500 results for my name and 'cover up'" patel in this is profoundly depressing too.

there's no name for this guy anywhere out there? that's impressive information management tbh

he is named in the article

ha ok so he is.

eh

presumably not this guy then

http://www.blackburncitizen.co.uk/news/8122482.Darwen_beat_bobby_up_for_national_award/

honestly thought that was gonna be about some guy called Darwen

darwen awards

he is named in the article

― al-goreda (s1ocki), Thursday, 22 July 2010 13:59 (55 minutes ago) Bookmark

lol @ me. but afaict that's the first time he's been named so it's a bit weird for them to quote "media reports".

fuck this bullshit

You knew what was going to happen anyway. We all did.

yes

still depressing though

Even if the cop is not being prosecuted for manslaughter, why is he not being prosecuted for assault? Is there some law that means that cops can deck people whenever they like?

oh right, I see, the CPS sat on it and coincidentally this means he cannot be tried for assault. Right.

Should set up a 'Simon Harwood U Legernd!!!' Facebook group if we want Cameron to say anything about this.

funny how the CPS did that innit?

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l6dczun4H31qz4vjro1_500.jpg

well everyone knows now.

can that stuff/will that stuff be printed in the media? assuming not

:(

is there an injunction on or something?

Why does a charge need to be made within six months? What's that about?

this BBC article names him: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-10788750

wait he was already named before? No idea what yous are on aboot tbh.

Police officer is now on the stand at the inquest, and (surprise!) he's a mendacious little obfuscating fuckpig. Just so you know.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/blog/2011/apr/05/ian-tomlinson-inquest-live-updates

Let's not forget he was supposed to be there as a van driver

Tomlinson's counsel is now ripping the piss out of him by asking about various scary hardships of a Nato'd-up fucktard on a bash bender at the demo and taking them down one by one: 'So, you say it was raining missiles?' *shows video footage from relevant place and time with zero airborne objects in it*

"nato'd"?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00s6b06

Harwood: At the time I wrote this, I thought I fell to the floor.
Thornton: Do you now accept that this is not correct?
Harwood: Yes
Thornton: That you lost your baton – that is not correct?
Harwood: Yes
Thornton: That you received a blow to the head – that is not correct?
Harwood: Yes
Thornton: And that there were violent and dangerous confrontations – that is not correct?
Harwood: Yes.
Thornton: And you were struck by a missile – that is not correct?
Harwood: Yes.

Please please please go down in flames.

lol, this dude should be screwed

lol

3.45pm: Testimony is now focusing on the moment, earlier in the evening, when Harwood was based with fellow van drivers stationed around their vehicles.

If you recall, Harwood had been expected to remain by his carrier on the evening Tomlinson died.

He conceded that he was bored at some points. He joined his colleague PC Hayes in his vehicle. Harwood's evidence is that he then could not get to his carrier because the crowd became too dense. He then spotted a male protester daubing graffiti on a van.

It has been pointed out that it was not too crowded for him to try to arrest the suspect, but "too dense" to travel just over two metres further to get to his van.

predict a rehab campaign by the mail then a slot on 'dancing on ice'

Certainly dancing on ice right now IMO.

Before this, another protestor Harwood attended to 'ran into a door'.

Ryder: You're ahead of him? But he has run into the door has he?
Harwood: ... I don't know, you'll have to ask him.
Ryder: From the video, can you see him running into the door?
Harwood: He has gone and hit the door, collided with the door, yes.
Ryder: Do you understand the word 'run', PC Harwood?

hahaha

he knows it doesn't matter what he says, how bad his testimony is, when he's never going to be prosecuted.

I'd lay odds he's hanging himself out to dry, imo.

If there's no prosecution after testimony like that, wld lv to see some spontaneous rioting.

Me too; here's today's blog link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/blog/2011/apr/06/ian-tomlinson-inquest-live-updates

Retracing snippets of video, Matthew Ryder is suggesting that the newspaper vendor was moving in the direction police wanted him to go. The footage shows Tomlinson moving slowly, but continuously, away from police in a south-westerly direction. Ryder said this showed Tomlinson was clearly not moving toward police.

Harwood: "From the peripheral vision I had at the time, he was."
Ryder: "I thought you told us yesterday that your balaclava didn't give you peripheral vision?"
Harwood: "I meant from the perceived angle that I could see."

The exchange continues in this way, until Ryder again accuses Harwood of lying.

Ryder: "That is rubbish PC Harwood, and you know it."
Harwood: "I was there and I saw what I saw."

Dude should certainly lose his position on the police force, as he clearly has a neurological disease that prevents him from telling the difference between "ahead of" and "behind," "moving towards" vs. "moving away," "being hit in the head" vs. "not being hit in the head," etc.

I'd lay odds he's hanging himself out to dry, imo.

yeah his testimony is SO poor that this actually seems plausible

Go to prison? This dude is getting early retirement with a full pension, more like.

This dude is getting the full force of justice, if only to prove that it can happen...

Mark, what do you think the full force of justice would be in this case?

hey not all cops are bad u know, lol.

Well, forced to resign, gets jail sentence, that's about it.

No "full" pension.

How long has he been a PC?

Right now, he's cannon fodder for the rest of the force to show they are 'not beyond the law' so they can carry on regardless.

I thought there would be no criminal charges because there was a fuck up with the coroners report.

OK, so delete "jail sentence", the rest stands though.

It's just what I reckons, prob wrong.

On 22 July 2010, Keir Starmer, director of the CPS, announced there would be no prosecution because of the medical disagreement between the three pathologists. Freddy Patel's conclusion about natural causes conflicted with the conclusions of Nathaniel Cary and Kenneth Shorrock, who found that the cause of death was internal bleeding caused by blunt force trauma to the abdomen, in association with cirrhosis of the liver. The CPS decided that the conflict made prosecution difficult because Patel was the only pathologist to have seen Tomlinson's body intact, placing him in the best position to make a judgment, which meant his evidence would have undermined that of the other two pathologists, in the view of the CPS. The CPS therefore concluded it would not be able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that there was a causal link between Tomlinson's death and the alleged assault. The CPS described the disagreement between the pathologists as an irreconcilable conflict. Starmer said there was enough evidence to charge the officer with assault, but there was a six-month deadline for that, which had expired while the CPS procrastinated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ian_Tomlinson#Legal_aftermath

Good old Freddy Patel:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/31/g20-pathologist-freddy-patel-suspended

^Helpful, historyyyyyyyy. (many xposts)

My uncle, who I probably miss the most of all my dead rels, was a lieutenant detective in charge of vice and special forces investigations, who apparently also pioneered victim restitution schemes and did consulting work for film and television on the side (most of that work was for David Chase in the late '70s and '80s). Every once in a while he'd give the local press heads-up on corruption within the ranks, as he took the protect/serve thing pretty fucking seriously.

My blood is boiling over this asshole's conduct in uniform specifically because my uncle was an excellent cop who would never have stood for this shit on his watch.

Oh, Freddy Patel, you're a mug. Dodgy forensic examiner in not-Quincy shocker:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/blog/2011/apr/13/ian-tomlinson-inquest-live-updates

man who died during the G20 protest was killed by a police officer - verdict

PaulLewis Paul Lewis
Ian Tomlinson was unlawfully killed by a police officer, a jury has found. 2 minutes ago

I couldn't see how they could come to any other conclusion based on the testimony posted/linked

you're right, but getting a ruling of unlawful killing involving a police officer in the uk is v rare, especially in a crowd situation. usually something like the dodgy first postmortem would have held up. it's only because so many people have video cameras now that we've been able to establish the truth, so it's sort of historic.

and there's a political dimension in the initial failure of prosecutors to bring charges. although apparently they still can? i think i got this wrong upthread.

That's what I expected, yes.

getting a ruling of unlawful killing involving a police officer in the uk is v rare

yep

Wow, timing: Pick a day it's unlikely to appear on the front pages.

xp 9 since 1991 - several later overturned. none successfully prosecuted.

http://inquest.gn.apc.org/website/statistics/unlawful-killing-verdicts

and there's a political dimension in the initial failure of prosecutors to bring charges. although apparently they still can? i think i got this wrong upthread.

my recollection is that They decided that the cop in question could be prosecuted for a lesser charge, but then revealed that oh-dear They had not got round to making a decision until the statute of limitations for said lesser charge kicked in. With the more serious charge of murder or manslaughter there is no statute of limitations relevant here.

A prosecution would still be difficult, given that there was the first dodgy postmortem, but the inquest decision here would have had the same standard of proof as a criminal trial, except that the inquest only rules that Tomlinson was unlawfully killed, not that Maniac Cop in particular killed him.

LATEST: Director of public prosecutions will announce tomorrow whether police officer who pushed Ian Tomlinson at G20 protests will be prosecuted for manslaughter. More details soon ...

*braces self for CPS fuck-up*

to redeploy an old private eye joke, police manslaughter vs policeman's laughter

PaulLewis Paul Lewis
Breaking *unconfirmed*: Met police officer to face trial for manslaughter over death of Ian Tomlinson

yes just announced on the radio

when I saw the beginning of this thread title I thought it was going to be another horrible "what's on yr iPod" thread

― maybe u should tell that to your laughing vagina (HI DERE), Tuesday, April 7, 2009 9:22 PM (2 years ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

It does *almost* read like that, yes...

A police officer accused of killing newspaper seller Ian Tomlinson during the G20 protests in London in 2009 is to stand trial at the Old Bailey.

Scotland Yard Pc Simon Harwood appeared at City of Westminster Magistrates' Court charged with manslaughter. He was bailed until 17 October.

I think this qualifies as 'thrown to the lions', I reckons.

Breaking news:

Jury clears PC Simon Harwood of killing Ian Tomlinson during G20 protests in London in April 2009. More details soon …

The verdict, after four days of deliberations, brings about something of a legal contradiction: 14 months ago another jury, at the inquest into Tomlinson's death, ruled that he was unlawfully killed by Harwood. The inquest ruling was made on the same burden of proof, beyond reasonable doubt, as a criminal trial.

Neither jury heard details of Harwood's prior disciplinary record, which can only be reported now. This includes how he quit the Met on health grounds in 2001 shortly before a planned disciplinary hearing into claims he illegally tried to arrest a driver following a road rage incident while off duty, altering his notes to retrospectively justify the actions. Harwood was nonetheless able to join another force, Surrey, before returning to serve with the Met in 2005.

He allegedly punched, throttled, kneed or threatened other suspects while in uniform in other alleged incidents.

Seems like a nice lad

No police officer has been convicted for manslaughter for a crime committed while on duty since 1986.

The issue of cause of death saw the testimony of the first pathologist, Dr Freddy Patel, who reasserted his belief that Tomlinson died from heart failure, placed against that of Dr Nat Cary, who told the court that even a relatively small amount of internal bleeding would have caused death. The jury was not told that Patel has twice been suspended by medical authorities for mistakes in other postmortem examinations and is no

ladies and gentlemen, big freddy patel

oh the last line i missed was, unsurprisingly;

- longer on the Home Office's register of approved pathologists.

Earlier this month, the disciplinary panel found Patel's 2002 reports on the death of Sally White – the first victim of the "Camden ripper" Anthony Hardy – were "irresponsible, not of the standard expected of a competent forensic pathologist and liable to bring the medical profession into disrepute".

Patel decided that White, a 31-year-old sex worker, had died of natural causes despite blood staining her clothing, bedding and a wall at Hardy's flat. Patel said she had died of a heart attack during consensual sex. This discouraged a police investigation that might have saved two later victims of Hardy, an earlier hearing was told.

You can see why they might not have mentioned it.

Harwood was nonetheless able to join another force, Surrey, before returning to serve with the Met in 2005.

Worst/most hamfisted motto of these English police forces

Surrey's motto: 'With you, making Surrey safer'

More on that 2001 complaint from the Standard:

The jury was never told that the police officer who struck Ian Tomlinson had faced a series of allegations of violence and has admitted entering "red mist mode".

In 12 years from 1997 until his suspension after Mr Tomlinson's death, PC Simon Harwood was subject to 10 complaints.

The police watchdog has now raised "grave concerns" about the Met's vetting procedures after details of Pc Simon Harwood's disciplinary record were published.

Harwood was due to face internal proceedings in 2001 after being accused of unlawful arrest, abuse of authority and discreditable conduct but these were discontinued when he retired on medical grounds.

He was accused of shouting at another driver and knocking him over his car door, then announcing he was a police officer and arresting the motorist on a common assault charge.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jul/19/simon-harwood-disciplinary-proceedings

Within 18 months Harwood had successfully applied to become a uniformed officer again, this time with the neighbouring Surrey police force.

Less than a year later, in January 2004, he was again accused of using excessive force, in a complaint lodged by a fellow officer who was disturbed by how he had treated a suspect during a raid on a flat.

Two officers said they saw Harwood grab the man by the throat, punch him twice in the face and push him into a table, causing it to break.

Dr Freddy Patel acted with "deficient professional performance" over his postmortem investigation into the death of Ian Tomlinson during the G20 protests, a medical tribunal has concluded.

The pathologist's fitness to practise is "impaired by reason of misconduct", the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service said.

The MPTS will now decide whether Patel should be struck off the medical register.

It found that Patel had "brought the profession into disrepute" and that his integrity could not be relied upon.

He also breached one of the "fundamental tenets of the profession" through his dishonesty, the panel said.