guy that died during G20 protests. video

[clapham_gull]

I have seen the video on the Guardian website. If he was hit with a baton before the push, it couldn't have been a heavy blow. You get hit on the back of the legs hard then you react. If it was about knee height then your knees would buckle or if it was higher then you would see some sort of reaction. He does neither. I'm looking at about 1min 28 seconds when it is showed in slow motion. Just before that he gets caught a bit by the black dog although there is no suggestion that it bit him. Still, you see what you want to see.

Still not convinced....

G20 protest death: new video shows Ian Tomlinson was hit with baton - Telegraph

My word.

Why do you think they hit him ? It would have been down to shock him before getting him on the ground. It's one of the things the batons are for, and as it happens I saw one used in a similar fashion recently to get somebody on the ground.

You've quite obviously backed yourself in a corner over this one, but just admit you are wrong. Very very wrong.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Thats the one I referred to in my last post and stand by those comments. If that officer really caught him with the baton like that then Tomlinson must have been a real tough cookie (apart from the dodgy heart) because you can see from the first video that he doesn't even flinch!

I cannot recall another thread which has so many, normally opposed, NSCers in total agreement. Even me and Bushy are aligned on this one. You're pretty much on your own Drew.

 

[drew]

I accept that, from the telegraph footage it does seem the officer took a swipe with the baton although judging from the original video, ie the view from the front, it doesn't seem to have had much effect on Tomlinson. However, I don't really see how that alters my original comments in that most of the posts were acting like judge jury and executioner. The guy was in the wrong place and did little to get out of the way. We don't know what had gone on before nor what happened after he walked away and upto the time of his death. We have had a female reporter claiming she was trying to help (that would be a first for the press) but that she, note she says she and not the crowd she was in, was baton charged by the Police. Not yet seen any video of that but I'm sure someone will point me in the right direction if there is.

NMH cries out that that it is clearly manslaughter yet there has been no medical link that the officers actions caused his heart attack. It may well prove to be the case but until the evidence comes out NMH is being purely speculative. This whole issue with the baton proves my point. There is no way that anyone can categorically say that the first published video shows a clear view of the baton being swung, it was only when subsequent evidence emerged that suggests otherwise. I have also never condoned the officers actions and no doubt he will be dealth with by the judicial system rather than a forum lynch mob.

 

[jonny.rainbow]

I accept that, from the telegraph footage it does seem the officer took a swipe with the baton although judging from the original video, ie the view from the front, it doesn't seem to have had much effect on Tomlinson. However, I don't really see how that alters my original comments in that most of the posts were acting like judge jury and executioner. The guy was in the wrong place and did little to get out of the way. We don't know what had gone on before nor what happened after he walked away and upto the time of his death. We have had a female reporter claiming she was trying to help (that would be a first for the press) but that she, note she says she and not the crowd she was in, was baton charged by the Police. Not yet seen any video of that but I'm sure someone will point me in the right direction if there is.

NMH cries out that that it is clearly manslaughter yet there has been no medical link that the officers actions caused his heart attack. It may well prove to be the case but until the evidence comes out NMH is being purely speculative. This whole issue with the baton proves my point. There is no way that anyone can categorically say that the first published video shows a clear view of the baton being swung, it was only when subsequent evidence emerged that suggests otherwise. I have also never condoned the officers actions and no doubt he will be dealth with by the judicial system rather than a forum lynch mob.

I like the way you use the fact that the swipe is partially obscured to defend your pathetic opinion that the baton might not have made contact but fail to see that it may also be obscuring the 'reaction' you claim would be evident from Tomlinson if any such blow took place.

He was in the wrong place? What his place of work?

He should've attempted to get out the way? Reports suggest he had been trying to make his way home for some time to watch the football.

No matter what you think you ARE condoning the officers actions because you are continuously apportioning blame to an innocent man. That's right INNOCENT. The only person who we both know is potentially guilty of an offense from that video is the police officer.

 

[NMH]

The baton strike was probably into the leg behind the knees, to get the victim to the ground - after which the pig decided on a clandestine method. BUT - what was this copper's obsession with getting the man to the ground? It does not speed him away from the scene, it didn't control a fellow with dangerous attitude likely to cause problems while standing.
The man had his hands in pockets and was strolling along a pavment, ffs.

 

[clapham_gull]

There is no way that anyone can categorically say that the first published video shows a clear view of the baton being swung, it was only when subsequent evidence emerged that suggests otherwise.

To be read as:

Because I was obviously talking complete b*llocks, I'll back track a little bit by suggesting the whilst people are right now, they didn't have the evidence to be right earlier on.

The fact you can't keep up with the news is hardly anyones else's fault now is it.

 

[drew]

I like the way you use the fact that the swipe is partially obscured to defend your pathetic opinion that the baton might not have made contact but fail to see that it may also be obscuring the 'reaction' you claim would be evident from Tomlinson if any such blow took place. look at the first video again and tell me when you see a reaction to being belted on the back by a baton.

He was in the wrong place? What his place of work?Sorry, didn't realise standing in the middle of the street was his place of work, at least not that street!! If we accept he was making his way home, why would anyone in their right mind not move away from the police line quicker than he did. He was dragging his heels with his hands in his pockets. He might be a slow walker or it just might be his way of sticking his fingers up at the establisment.

He should've attempted to get out the way? Reports suggest he had been trying to make his way home for some time to watch the football.

No matter what you think you ARE condoning the officers actions because you are continuously apportioning blame to an innocent man. That's right INNOCENT. The only person who we both know is potentially guilty of an offense from that video is the police officer.

Please don't try to tell me what I am thinking. I have stated that the actions of that officer were wrong and I don't condone what he did. It was however, one officer, not the entire police. It is not me that is apportioning the blame. I am saying that you need to wait for all the evidence, of events that day and also medical evidence of his health and the cause of his death. It's called due process. However, I do agree with your last sentence.

 

[drew]

The baton strike was probably into the leg behind the knees, to get the victim to the ground - after which the pig decided on a clandestine method. BUT - what was this copper's obsession with getting the man to the ground? It does not speed him away from the scene, it didn't control a fellow with dangerous attitude likely to cause problems while standing.
The man had his hands in pockets and was strolling along a pavment, ffs.

Don't understand what point you're trying to make. The officer shouldn't have done what he did. I never argued anything different.

As regards 'hands in his pockets and strolling along a pavement' why didn't he get out of the way of the Police line quicker, everyone else had!

 

[Brixtaan]

The only suspicious activity that day were the RBS windows being smashed in.Did anyone else see a stage managed act designed to appease an angry public?? How come all the window smashers wore the same clothing? How come all the worlds press were there yet no police?

 

[jonny.rainbow]

look at the first video again and tell me when you see a reaction to being belted on the back by a baton.

In none of the 3 videos can you see the moment of potential impact or the potential reaction immediately afterwards as the view is obscured. Therefore you can not say he didn't react. What we do know from the footage is that the time between the potential baton strike and the shove was less than two seconds which gave him very little time to react before being knocked off his feet anyway.

Sorry, didn't realise standing in the middle of the street was his place of work, at least not that street!! If we accept he was making his way home, why would anyone in their right mind not move away from the police line quicker than he did. He was dragging his heels with his hands in his pockets. He might be a slow walker or it just might be his way of sticking his fingers up at the establisment.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? I am sure you know well that he was a street newspaper vendor and worked nearby. He had been forced by the police to walk exactly the way he was walking because of their inhuman 'kettling' tactic.

Please don't try to tell me what I am thinking. I have stated that the actions of that officer were wrong and I don't condone what he did. It was however, one officer, not the entire police. It is not me that is apportioning the blame. I am saying that you need to wait for all the evidence, of events that day and also medical evidence of his health and the cause of his death. It's called due process. However, I do agree with your last sentence.

You are apportioning blame because you are claiming the reason the man was shoved was because he provoked the reaction by walking slowly, was a Millwall fan, looked slightly worse for wear etc. NOT because the police officer, as seen in the video, felt he had the right to swipe at and shove over a middle age man posing no threat to him or anyone else.

 

[drew]

In none of the 3 videos can you see the moment of potential impact or the potential reaction immediately afterwards as the view is obscured. Therefore you can not say he didn't react. What we do know from the footage is that the time between the potential baton strike and the shove was less than two seconds which gave him very little time to react before being knocked off his feet anyway.In the first video you see tomlinson from the front and that is probably the best view to see if there was any reaction from the impact of a baton. You definitely see the reaction from the barge as he flies forward



Are you being deliberately obtuse? I am sure you know well that he was a street newspaper vendor and worked nearby. He had been forced by the police to walk exactly the way he was walking because of their inhuman 'kettling' tactic.according to earlier reports he worked at Cannon Street or the Monument. I don't know where he lived but why did he not get on the underground from those two locations to avoid any involvement with protestors. If he had been working in London all day he would have been aware there were problems getting about. If he wanted to get home to watch the football I would suggest, although I admit I don't know for certain, that he could have gone about it better



You are apportioning blame because you are claiming the reason the man was shoved was because he provoked the reaction by walking slowly, was a Millwall fan, looked slightly worse for wear etc. NOT because the police officer, as seen in the video, felt he had the right to swipe at and shove over a middle age man posing no threat to him or anyone else.

I have never said he provoked the reaction because he was walking slowly, I have merely pointed out to the mob on here that you don't know what happened other than the videos. You don't know what he did or said to the Police during the minutes leading up to the video and you don't know what the Police did or said. As for him being a millwall fan, this was pointed out by someone else and if you are bothered to read my post, you will note an element of sarcasm, but hey, that may have gone over your head.

 

[drew]

The only suspicious activity that day were the RBS windows being smashed in.Did anyone else see a stage managed act designed to appease an angry public?? How come all the window smashers wore the same clothing? How come all the worlds press were there yet no police?

The old conspiracy theorists are out. I take it you didn't see the confrontation around midday outside the bank of england where there was one guy with a head wound, no suggestion on how he got, standing shouting at the Police, another with his face covered, running up to the Police line and striking them with a 6ft stick. The Police merely maintained their line and didn't react. They could have dived into the crowd with a snatch squad but that was the reaction that small part of the mob would have wanted. Still, you only see what you want to see.

 

[jonny.rainbow]

I have never said he provoked the reaction because he was walking slowly, I have merely pointed out to the mob on here that you don't know what happened other than the videos. You don't know what he did or said to the Police during the minutes leading up to the video and you don't know what the Police did or said. As for him being a millwall fan, this was pointed out by someone else and if you are bothered to read my post, you will note an element of sarcasm, but hey, that may have gone over your head.

The fact that no one knows what he said or did is EXACTLY the point I and others are making. At present all that you or I know from the video is that a man who is not known to have committed any crime or provocation is swiped at and shoved over by a police officer and then five minutes later died of a heart attack.

You have gone out of your way on this thread to excuse the actions of that police officer and have littered it with conjecture on why Tomlinson is in some way responsible.

It is quite clear to me now that you, for whatever reason, are getting a sense of enjoyment fighting this cause, so won't bother to post again.

 

[clapham_gull]

I take it you didn't see the confrontation around midday outside the bank of england....

Hardly the best person to criticise other peoples interpretations now are you ?

 

[glasfryn]

The fact that no one knows what he said or did is EXACTLY the point I and others are making. At present all that you or I know from the video is that a man who is not known to have committed any crime or provocation is swiped at and shoved over by a police officer and then five minutes later died of a heart attack.

You have gone out of your way on this thread to excuse the actions of that police officer and have littered it with conjecture on why Tomlinson is in some way responsible.

It is quite clear to me now that you, for whatever reason, are getting a sense of enjoyment fighting this cause, so won't bother to post again.

Nail on the head mate ....the thing to ask yourselves is that if the boot were on the other foot and it was the policeman who had been hit and subsequently died the said newspaper vendor would now be in a cell awaiting trial and probably a long prison sentence.

the points about whether he was swiped across the legs would only be relevant if it had been the only strike but the fact that he was struck by a policeman wielding shield that put him on the ground was enough to give him shock and consequently die from a heart attack.....it was not the severity of the blow or how many blows it is the fact that it was enough to shock him and if you watch the first video you can see him looking at the officers with a somewhat questioning look.
the officer has been suspended ......but if that had been you or me we would have been immediately arrested,in the time I was a prison officer my thoughts about the police were never very good nor were they before I joined up as a prison officer and as time has gone on things have worsened the police have little opinion of anyone who questions them or their actions ...but when push comes to shove(please excuse the pun) and things get a bit hairy they are found wanting or look the other way.
things have got to change............very soon.

 

[NMH]

Don't understand what point you're trying to make. The officer shouldn't have done what he did. I never argued anything different.

As regards 'hands in his pockets and strolling along a pavement' why didn't he get out of the way of the Police line quicker, everyone else had!

I wasn't making any point directed at you, so the point I am making is a 'standalone' one (that you say here you aren't arguing against, great!).

But for him getting away from the police line - do you not think he felt some detachment from the bubbub going on nearby? Why should he rush towards the crowd to be considered a part of the angry melee? He was a casual spectator who likely didn't want to change his way home for a bunch of malcontents he probably didn't remotely side with. He looked fairly bemused, like a spectator to that, who just happened to be in their vicinity.
Caught between angry rabble and uniformed rabble, it was the 'peace keeping officers' charged with public protection who are culpable in his death - which is now an issue.

In court you'd have to imagine the prosecution; "was this man acting in a threatening manner? was he misbehaving in a manner that could be construed as a danger to himself and others? Was he confrontational? Did his body language suggest he was a threat to the officers or the course of their duty? Was the physical assault on him provoked or even necessary?
I would conjecture that the answer to all these questions is categorical and unanimous, and would in all sensibility be a resounding NO to every one of them m'lud"

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Nail on the head mate ....the thing to ask yourselves is that if the boot were on the other foot and it was the policeman who had been hit and subsequently died the said newspaper vendor would now be in a cell awaiting trial and probably a long prison sentence.

the points about whether he was swiped across the legs would only be relevant if it had been the only strike but the fact that he was struck by a policeman wielding shield that put him on the ground was enough to give him shock and consequently die from a heart attack.....it was not the severity of the blow or how many blows it is the fact that it was enough to shock him and if you watch the first video you can see him looking at the officers with a somewhat questioning look.
the officer has been suspended ......but if that had been you or me we would have been immediately arrested,in the time I was a prison officer my thoughts about the police were never very good nor were they before I joined up as a prison officer and as time has gone on things have worsened the police have little opinion of anyone who questions them or their actions ...but when push comes to shove(please excuse the pun) and things get a bit hairy they are found wanting or look the other way.
things have got to change............very soon.

Interesting you say this. I know two people who have to deal with the police on a professional level. Their opinion is very very low. At best they are incompetent, at worst arrogant and patronising.

 

[NMH]

Incidentally, I have myself been in a crowd where a battle between the angry and the unformed broke out within inches of me. Suddenly there were riot shields pushing, night-sticks flailing, boots kicking and a general melee. I had no intent to be part of this anger and was not in any hurry - and thankfully the old bill did not pick me out for a bashing! (In Italy or Spain the cops would have indiscriminately laid into anyone and everyone). It was all too easy to become too proximate to the action and be seen as a hoolie - and basically be sucked into the scene, the head-hitting and the arresting and subsequent court appearances to plead my own innocence.

Now back to this poor fellow - he was right to remain detached, he was correct to maintain a distance from the mob, and the cop was very wrong to select him as a target for a violent physical attack. Those Are Facts.

 

[clapham_gull]

Another video

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


You can see a few small missiles come over, but it's the crowd themselves telling others to give the Police space and not to throw anything.

The aftermath, seems to somewhat contradict initial reports that the "rioters" stopped the police helping the man.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

May I remind everyone of the police press statement prior to the G20.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/mar/27/g20-protest

The police certainly were 'up for it'

I felt rather uncomfortable when I read this quote. It now leaves a very bad taste. I always think statements like this become self-fulfilling as they attract the wrong attention and people and scare off the genuine peaceful demonstrators. It really do not understand how anyone charged with crowd control can use such inflamatory language.