The comments by the jury make this sound more like murder than manslaughter:
The jury decided Pc Harwood acted illegally, recklessly and dangerously, and used “excessive and unreasonable” force in striking Mr Tomlinson.
Jurors added that the newspaper seller, who was not taking part in the protests, posed no threat.
Unfortunately the jury cannot compel a prosecution, so my bet is that the killer, PC Simon Harwood, will get off scot free. But at least a British jury has shown its historic independence of authority has survived – an independence which was denied it in the case of the murder of Jean Charles De Menezes by the utterly disgraceful Sir Michael Wright, grovelling tool of the authoritarian state.
Talking of which, it seems to me that Dr Freddy Patel needs to be sacked and struck off for the disgraceful lie that Tomlinson died of a heart attack. The last thing this country needs is bent pathologists tailoring their evidence to suit the police.
I would think that Patel was handpicked for the job.
Ruth, funny you should say that.
Patel, who’s now suspended from the GMC register for issues relating to a different case, was not on the Met’s duty pathologists list, which the City Of London Police are also supposed to use, at the time Of Ian Tomlinson’s death.
Why don’t we just get rid of the police?
.
We managed for thousands of years without them, and evolution is a damn sight smarter than any parliament.
REMEMBERING JEAN-CHARLES PBUH
The murder of Jean Charles de Menezes, son of a brick-layer and a man with indefinite leave to remain in the UK was given an ‘open verdict’ having been shot in the head seven times Israeli ‘Kratos’ style with hollow bullets.
The resulting cover-up and false rape allegations against Menezes were denied and (once again) useless CCTV and ‘off the record’ police statements prevailed confusing the evidence.
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, of Blair conversion fame, lead a memorial service on the 27th July 2005 at Westminster Cathedral.
The operational commander received the Queen’s Police Medal in the 2010 New Year’s Day honours.
I have to agree with the comments and when you look at the video in isolation the push does look bad. When you look at all the video you see Tomlinson acting like a drunk idiot getting in the way of police deliberately obstructing them and walking in front of them with hands in pockets smiling knowing he was provoking them. Should the Police have taken the bait? Probably not. Should the officer have shoved him away? At the precise time he was shoved probably not as he was walking away and was no threat or obstruction that I could see. If I was that officer I would have certainly have pushed him away earlier when he was acting like a drunk prick walking in front of a shield line of police. I can only second guess as you can, but with maybe more authority. But I do believe that the officer acted innapropiately by pushing him at that precise moment, probably more through anger and frustration than through duty. But did he intend to kill him? I am 100% certain he didnt I am certain he didnt even want to push him to the ground or injure him. It is unfortunate that he had a medical weakness that killed him.
I attended a playground incident once where a child was pushed he fell over and due to an unknown skull weakness the child died. It was a very very tragic incident. In the end it was treated very sensibly as a tragic accident as the other child had no idea of his fragility. Although case law dictates he could still have been charged and convicted of murder. I am not saying that the officer is totally innocent but a momentary lapse of professionalism that had tragic results does not constitute murder. Police training is changing and adapting and lessons need to be learnt lets not turn this into a witch hunt.
Steve,
But he didn’t have a medical weakness that killed him. He died from internal injuries consequent from a fall he could not break because his hads were in his pockets, after being aggressively pushed over from behind. There was no need to do it, and to describe as a “witch-hunt” the notion that a policeman who needlessly kills an innocent person should go to jail is daft.
Steve’s posting sounds like the sort of apologetics that were being put forward last night on the news by the Met – lessons learnt, a sad one off, a rotten apple maybe and the rest; no need to worry we’ve got it sorted.
But then go to the police behaviour – the attempted cover up until the video emerged, the delays, the obfuscation and the rest – and add in the semi offical masking of faces, removal of numbers and I can’t see this is a once off. On the individual point it is instructive that however drunk or obstructive Mr Tomlinson may and may not have been not one of the highly paid and trained police officers had the nous to say let him through the kettle, he’s not part of the demonstration. not one police officer went to help him; not one police officer could be seen to remonstrate with Constable Harwood about his violent actions. The events in Parliament Square show cosmetic change but the police still coshed a disabled demonstrator. However, in their defence, you might say they are fulfiling the role they’ve always had on behalf of the establishment – to take out the fears of their betters on the bodies of their equals.
He did have a weakness do you really believe that a push really killed him. If it only took a push then thousands of people woulod die every day from playing ice hockey rugby football wrestling. You are intelligent people here dont show your ignorance by thinking a shove can cause this death without an underlying weakness.
“Earlier, a consultant liver expert, Dr Graeme Alexander, told the jury his view was that Tomlinson had died of internal bleeding in the abdomen, caused by trauma to his liver after his fall.
He said that Tomlinson’s serious liver disease would have made him much more susceptible to collapse from internal bleeding than another person.
Alexander added that Patel’s suggestion that an absence of damage to a capsule surrounding the liver indicated it could not have been the source of bleeding was “not a relevant argument at all”.
As you see above he had a susceptability to liver bleeds.
Richard
Masking of faces is what police do when they wear full NATO protective gear. It is to stop flames or chemicals burning the face. Numbers missing is not a cover up it was due to the arsehole of a previous Commissioner dropping standards and discipline to such a low level officers didnt care about uniform or standards, because no one picked up on it for a long time this has been addressed and no one goes anywhere near a demo without name badges and numbers fully displayed. As for no officers remonstrating with him over his actions, It is possible they didnt see it clearly or they may have after the event. If all they saw was a push not a clubbing or a punch even if they were concerned that was probably not the time to point out your concerns. If you dont like the behaviour of Police or tactics then complain by all means dont try and hang an individual for a collective perceived failure.
Steve
The fact that a shove of that nature would not kill a normal healthy person is immaterial.
The ‘Eggshell skull’ principle applies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggshell_skull.
If the shove leads to death then it is manslaughter. It is up to the judge to decide if the circumstances justify a lenient sentence.
If you or I had done that to a policeman we would have been up before a judge pretty darned quick. So should Harwood.
Alfie Meadows, a 20 year old student, underwent a three-hour operation after he suffered bleeding to the brain. He was batoned by police during the December 9 tuition fees protest in London as he tried to leave the Westminster Abbey area after being “kettled”. He described his injury as “the hugest blow he ever felt in his life.”
Derek
If you read my comment again. If so then I am assuming you wanted that schoolchild put before a judge on manslaughter charges for him to decide? If so you are a callous bastard. Decisions are made all the time by police and CPS on public interest and other grounds. I hope you never get drunk and knock someone over for them to die and have you as judge and jury. There by the Grace of God go all of us. And you raise an interesting point what would happen if it were the other way round. I am sure the Police would be clamouring for a prosecution probably wanting him hung drawn and quatered. But as the CPS prosecute they would make the final judgement and believe me they are totally independent and look purely at he facts without emotion or bias.
Ruth
And? please make comments or points not obscure statements. What was he doing to get battoned on the head? Where was he? Was he armed with weapons as many were that day. was he trying to get somewhere he shouldnt? Again you are blaming individual officers for the decisions of the elected establishment.
The police are not accountable to the people, to those that they are notionally protecting and serving. This is the root cause of their collectively insouciant attitude. An insider’s view is irrelevant because insiders become institutionalised (‘go native’) and perceive the interests of the minority group to which they belong (the police) as equal to the interests of the majority (society). This clearly cannot be the case and the interests of the minority group must be subordinated to those of society at large (this is democracy). In other words do not ask a policeman if the police are doing a tolerable job as the answer is invariably yes.
.
In theory a contract should exist between the police and society that is continuously negotiable. In practice, there is a 3rd party that distorts this relationship – the ruling elite. Their wings need to be clipped, but how?
.
Dissolving the police force would be a step backwards. The state’s monopoly on coercive power is the ‘gain’ in the system that allows society’s energy to be directed and focussed. Without this power of the state to organise society, less is achievable. But the thing that causes this state power to be misdirected must be addressed – the fact that we the people are not ultimately in charge of the state and therefore cannot use its power to benefit the majority at all times.
Two officers attended a house after reports of a domestic disturbance. After arresting the husband for assaulting his partner. His wife picked up a pair of scissors stabing a female PC twice in the face. Then stabbing the male officer in the arm before being restrained.
A police officer was doing a routine stops with ticket inspectors on a bendy bus when a male who was wanted for serious offences slashed the officers throat.
I could go on for pages. It is pointless. Policing is dangerous on both sides and is a physical thing nobody wants to be stopped from doing what they want but police sometimes need to use force to prevent crime or restrain people after they have committed crime. Any physical contact has the potential to cause harm. Look at the way other countries including European countries deal with protests Tear gas baton rounds water cannon even live rounds. If you want a lawless society where police are scared to touch someone for fear of criticism or prosecution then I hope you never get punched by your old man or get mugged or attacked for police to turn up and plead with them over loud speakers from the safety of their car to stop hitting you or he/she will get in alot of trouble!
Steve
The “callous bastard” we are discussing is PC Simon Harwood who was filmed first flinging a BBC cameraman to the ground from behind, and then shoving a middle aged man to the ground from behind resulting in his death.
I am not asking to be anyones ‘judge and jury’. I am content for PC Harwood to be tried in a properly constituted court of law. I am at a loss to understand why asking for a grown man to account for his actions in court makes me a callous bastard.
The charge would be manslaughter not murder. The sentence for manslaughter can be whatever the judge thinks fit.
The example I used was a twelve year old kid pushing another 12 year old kid to the ground during an argument. By your terms he should have been prosecuted for manslaughter. He wasnt because the prosecuting authorities saw sense. Thats the callous bastard bit. Life isnt black and white and judgements have to be made in all things weighing up intent, Justification, Lawful authority, mitigation The relevant authorities Police DPS, IPCC (who would make recomendations to CPS if needed), CPS and the coroner will make a final decision as to the officers fate. This decision will never be accepted by some as impartial or fair but if you are so mistrusting of the system then you will never be satisfied. The DPS and the IPCC would happily reccomend a prosecution if they thought it was needed they really are impartial. The law and the system is a quirky beast that only those within pretend to understand. I think 12 years of new Labour laws made the whole thing worse. Our good old fashioned common law was based on years of common sense but that didnt make money for the chambers did it?
Freddy Patel’s first autopsy report actually concluded that Tomlinson was not dead.
Steve
Yes I agree no purpose would have been served by prosecuting the 12 year old in your example. But that does not mean PC Harwood should not be prosecuted. The eggshell skull principle is part of the common law you praise. It means that any serving police officer should think twice before assaulting someone.(As of course should members of the public)
You write as if you are a former or serving police officer. Is so I would be interested to hear your comments on this video in the context of your earlier remarks about police concealing their numbers.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/video/2009/jun/21/fit-watch-kingsnorth-arrests
Is this a case of officers simply forgetting to dress properly? If so why did the officer refuse to give his number when politely asked, and why was it necessary to truss two women up like turkeys and put them in the cells for several days?
“Paul Lewis: Met told us to ‘lay off’ Tomlinson story”
That inquest relied heavily on video and other evidence brought to light by The Guardian – which handed a dossier to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. Here Guardian reporter Paul Lewis reveals the story behind the story.
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=47050&c=1
@Ruth Since then Alfie has been charged withn ‘violent disorder’.
Orwell lives.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-13206792
Simon Harwood has been exposed as a violent thug and should be jailed.
The CPS are corrupt and the IPCC are weak and inefficient.
Bent police lied about what happened and blamed protesters for attacking them with bottles. Liars. They then brought in discredited pathologist Freddy Patel to obstruct the course of justice. Criminals.
I agree with Chezzy,it absolutely reeks of a cover-up by the police.
Why else would you employ Mr patel,could it be because he’s incompetent and corrupt??
I’m pretty sure it was! This is what I find to be unforgiveable.My sympathies lye with Mr Tomlinsons family,not only has he needlessly been taken from them,the police have tried their best to heap even more misery on them in their attempt to cover it all up!
I applaud you in your pursuit in seeking some kind of justice for the loss of a loved one.
The police should hang their head in shame!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13299606
The TSG yet again.
5 May 2011
Terror suspect Babar Ahmad ‘taunted over God’ by police.
Babar Ahmad was arrested in a dawn raid on his home in south London in 2003
A terrorist suspect was forced into a praying position and asked “where is your God now?” during arrest at his south London home, a court has heard.
Four Metropolitan Police officers allegedly beat up and mocked Babar Ahmad in a raid in Tooting in 2003.
The atmosphere was “very intimidating”, Mr Ahmad told Southwark Crown Court .
Pc Nigel Cowley, 34, Det Con John Donohue, 37, Pc Roderick James-Bowen, 40, and Pc Mark Jones, 43, all deny assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
Police smashed their way into Mr Ahmad’s semi-detached property in Fountain Road, Tooting, at about 0500 on 2 December 2003.
/…
The four accused officers were at the time part of the Territorial Support Group, which assisted the Anti-Terrorist Branch in the raid.
/….
re Steve
“…When you look at all the video you see Tomlinson acting like a drunk idiot getting in the way of police deliberately obstructing them and walking in front of them with hands in pockets smiling knowing he was provoking them …”.
hmmmm … and you are writing like a sober idiot. Period.
Ha!
.
Tomlinson case prompts police watchdog IPCC ‘concern’
Ian Tomlinson collapsed at the G20 protests in London two years ago
It is a matter of concern that only one officer who saw Ian Tomlinson pushed over at the G20 protests wrote it up in a log, the police watchdog says.
A report by the IPCC also said it was “reckless” that an officer incorrectly told a pathologist the newspaper seller fell in front of a police van.
But it found no evidence of any attempt to cover up Mr Tomlinson’s death at the protests in London on 1 April 2009.
The Met welcomed the findings and lack of evidence over misconduct claims.
Last week an inquest jury returned a verdict of unlawful killing of the newspaper seller, 47, by Met Police officer Simon Harwood.
Mr Tomlinson collapsed and died after he was hit by a baton and pushed to the ground.
The IPCC (Independent Police Complaints Commission) has now published three separate reports – one into Mr Tomlinson’s death, one on whether a Met officer misled pathologists, and one into claims that the media was misled.
The watchdog said: “It is a matter of concern that only one officer who did see the push expressed concern and made a written record of what she had seen.
“However it is not surprising, in the context of a major policing operation in which thousands of officers were deployed and many were using force, that Pc Harwood’s push, no matter how forceful, was not the subject of reporting.”
.
/….. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13334642
Yeah! the I P C C likes to have it both ways. A defenceless man not provoking or acting in an abusive manner (ignore STEVE) is repeatedly thrashed and assaulted from behind by an absolutely vicious riot cop and other cops immediatly nearby looking on aren’t expected to intervene to stop such illegal barbarity to protect an innocent member of the public huh?! More like a load of “Old My Eye P C C”. Talk about giving free reign for other barbarous occasions.