guy that died during G20 protests. video

[Herr Tubthumper]

In case anyone is in any doubt here's another video

Met officer comes forward as Ian Tomlinson death investigation begins - Times Online

A Met spokesman said last night that the officer identified himself to his team leader as “being potentially involved in the incident shown on the video footage”.

'Potentially' involved....what a scum bag. I guess he doesnt want to incriminate himself incase there is insufficient evidence. One person out there knows they pushed this guy. Do the decent thing for everyone (including you colleagues) and own up to pushing him.

 

[drew]

dont be silly. get a grip. the bloke was trying to earn a crust and got f***ing killed by the police. I am on his side, not trying to score points on a website against some stranger for my own self esteem.

So you know for a fact he wasn't taking a passing interest in the protests or for that matter you don't even know if he was there supporting the protestors purely on the basis that we know he had been at work that day. You don't know if he has a criminal record and was looking for trouble to kick off. Maybe he is an ageing anarchist who doesn't give a shit about the Police hence his apparent reluctance to move on quicker. You are just surmmising to suit your own anti establishment agenda. It's hysterical.

when we have to put up with legislation for football related offences based on mid 80s problems and the abuse of police power on the back of them then they can expect no sympathy.
.

So you are against all seater stadia because of 'mid 80s' problems. What about the violence in the 70s that led to the introduction of fencing? Do you think they should go back to open terracing and unrestricted access. Wouldn't it be a surprise to see a return of all the shitheads who caused all the problems (and deaths or are you blaming that all on the police as well) back into our grounds, just so you can stand up. Perhaps we should bring back the monkey chants and any other abuse.

 

[drew]

I see this Mr Tomlinson is a Millwall fanatic. Aged 47 so he would have been brought up during the great F-Troop era. Probably a bit partial to the odd scuffle with plod or am I jumping to conclusions on the basis of one line in the telegraph report. Heavin forbid!!!!

 

[The Spanish]

So you know for a fact he wasn't taking a passing interest in the protests or for that matter you don't even know if he was there supporting the protestors purely on the basis that we know he had been at work that day. You don't know if he has a criminal record and was looking for trouble to kick off. Maybe he is an ageing anarchist who doesn't give a shit about the Police hence his apparent reluctance to move on quicker. You are just surmmising to suit your own anti establishment agenda. It's hysterical.



So you are against all seater stadia because of 'mid 80s' problems. What about the violence in the 70s that led to the introduction of fencing? Do you think they should go back to open terracing and unrestricted access. Wouldn't it be a surprise to see a return of all the shitheads who caused all the problems (and deaths or are you blaming that all on the police as well) back into our grounds, just so you can stand up. Perhaps we should bring back the monkey chants and any other abuse.

YES i do know for a fact that he was not taking a passing interest in the protest. anyone who has spent time round cannon street and monument stations knows that he was a well known character selling papers smart arse. next question please.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

if you smack someone and he has a heart condition and the fact you smakced him causes his death then you are guilty of an offence. Ignorance is no defence under the law.

What a stupid line of thought.

If that were the case then no Police Officer could subdue or physically engage anyone ever.

I mean truly, You make it sound like officers should enquire about any medical conditions a crim/hoodlum/suspect has before they engage them.

Ludicrous.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

YES i do know for a fact that he was not taking a passing interest in the protest. anyone who has spent time round cannon street and monument stations knows that he was a well known character selling papers smart arse. next question please.

Which probably rules out any of the officers present being privvy to such local information.

 

[GNF on Tour]

Which probably rules out any of the officers present being privvy to such local information.

Given they were mostly Met or City Plod then I doubt that.

 

[itszamora]

What a stupid line of thought.

If that were the case then no Police Officer could subdue or physically engage anyone ever.

I mean truly, You make it sound like officers should enquire about any medical conditions a crim/hoodlum/suspect has before they engage them.

Ludicrous.

It's not stupid, it's the law. You take your victim as you find them is roughly the principle of it. Of course here proving that the policeman smacking him caused the heart attack will be very difficult.

Think of it this way though. If you punch someone in the face and unfortunately they suffer from one of those conditions that makes their bones very brittle and your blow kills them, you will be charged with murder or manslaughter. Seems reasonable to me.

 

[kalinski]

Hang on...it's clear that the bloke was shoved and fell over. No question.

It is not clear what killed him (other than the already reported news that he suffered a heart attack). I doubt they'll ever be able to prove a causal link between him being pushed over and him suffering a heart attack, though I imagine the officer in question will still have to answer a few questions.

Thin Skull rule applies and therefore this would be a manslaughter charge

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I see this Mr Tomlinson is a Millwall fanatic. Aged 47 so he would have been brought up during the great F-Troop era. Probably a bit partial to the odd scuffle with plod or am I jumping to conclusions on the basis of one line in the telegraph report. Heavin forbid!!!!

I really think you're missing the point. The point is that even if he was taking a previous interest in the riot, an 'old anarchist', had abused the police or whatever it doesnt give the force the license to use the force they did on him. The police have to follow the law not to mention their own guidelines for their protection as much as ours. Unless this man was a serious threat and a danger to the police or the public I cannot see how the force was justified.

Absolutely nothing has come up to suggest he was a serious threat from either the police or the public. In an area which was drowning in cameras and witnesses I can only assume he wasnt. Further, a shard of evidence to suggest he was a major problem would be pounced upon by the police to provide an escape route.

 

[Dandyman]

YES i do know for a fact that he was not taking a passing interest in the protest. anyone who has spent time round cannon street and monument stations knows that he was a well known character selling papers smart arse. next question please.

Well said. As far as I can tell he was very well known to office workers in that area.

I'd love to know Drew's view on the fact that the PC concerned in this assault can clearly be seen in the various videos to have removed his ID number and covered his face, presumably in an effort to hide his identity. The video(s) also show that Mr Tomlinson was not only shoved in the back but hit with a baton as well.

I have no idea if the assault lead to the heart attack or not but the conduct of the Police Officer concerned would in my work place be regard as gross misconduct warranting summary dismissal. It is hard not to also regard it as criminal behaviour.

 

[Dandyman]

I see this Mr Tomlinson is a Millwall fanatic. Aged 47 so he would have been brought up during the great F-Troop era. Probably a bit partial to the odd scuffle with plod or am I jumping to conclusions on the basis of one line in the telegraph report. Heavin forbid!!!!

Out of interest do you normally seek to excuse common assault or do you have a personal interest in this case?

 

[The Spanish]

Given they were mostly Met or City Plod then I doubt that.

London is a bit bigger than Auckland mate.

 

[CHAPPERS]

They said on the news that he was actually walking around the protest to try and avoid it but was told to turn around, that's just before he got hit and shoved in the back for no reason.

Poor guy died trying to avoid any kind of bother. Sickening.

 

[drew]

I really think you're missing the point. The point is that even if he was taking a previous interest in the riot, an 'old anarchist', had abused the police or whatever it doesnt give the force the license to use the force they did on him. The police have to follow the law not to mention their own guidelines for their protection as much as ours. Unless this man was a serious threat and a danger to the police or the public I cannot see how the force was justified.

Absolutely nothing has come up to suggest he was a serious threat from either the police or the public. In an area which was drowning in cameras and witnesses I can only assume he wasnt. Further, a shard of evidence to suggest he was a major problem would be pounced upon by the police to provide an escape route.

If I'm missing the point then so are you. Firstly, I agree that the force used by that one officer (as seen in the video) was extremely excessive. However, it is quite clear that the Police were clearing that area with a line of them walking/shepherding the protesters along. I very much suspect that 99.9% of the protestors that day did not pose a serious threat however, the Police cannot stand back and let everyone do as they like as that would give a free reign to the minority to cause whatever damage they like. It appears on this occassion that the worse they did was chuck some posts through the RBS bank window. I'm sure the employees of that bank were grateful for that!

Perhaps it would be useful if at any demonstration like this the protestors could perhaps be split into two groups and clearly identify themselves, Maybe with a tatoo on the forehead, one saying 'I'm a peaceful protestor' and the other saying 'I'm an anarchist out for trouble'. That would of course make the job easier for the police.

The Police are in an impossible situation damned if they do anything and damned if they don't. If this one officer had not used excessive force then I very much suspect the reports would have been that this had been a successful operation with minimal trouble, ie the only real conflict seems to have been outside the Bank of England and when the RBS branch was attacked.

 

[British Bulldog]

They said on the news that he was actually walking around the protest to try and avoid it but was told to turn around, that's just before he got hit and shoved in the back for no reason.

Poor guy died trying to avoid any kind of bother. Sickening.

I heard on the radio as well last night that he was forced to go the way he did because the police had cordoned off other areas, Your right it is sickening and I sincerely hope that so called police officer faces the justice he deserves.

 

[The Spanish]

Perhaps it would be useful if at any demonstration like this the protestors could perhaps be split into two groups and clearly identify themselves, Maybe with a tatoo on the forehead, one saying 'I'm a peaceful protestor' and the other saying 'I'm an anarchist out for trouble'. That would of course make the job easier for the police.

what job? The job of deciding who to assault or kill?

It is indefensible. Just as if some protestor had brained a copper and he died. Give it up. Are you a policeman?

 

[drew]

Out of interest do you normally seek to excuse common assault or do you have a personal interest in this case?

Read my posts, I have never condoned what that single officer did. I am just suggesting that people get a bit of perspective and wait for all the facts before jumping to conclusions. At the moment, everyone has already assumed that the heart attack was a direct result of the assault. It may eventually be proved to be the case but the important thing is it hasn't yet. The second post mortem may reveal this, it might not.

 

[The Spanish]

If this one officer had not used excessive force then I very much suspect the reports would have been that this had been a successful operation with minimal trouble

hahaha. That reminds me of the Day Today spoof docusoap about the swimming baths, where Steve Coogan as the lifeguard rattles off all the years someone DIDNT drown.

 

[drew]

Out of interest do you normally seek to excuse common assault or do you have a personal interest in this case?

hahaha. That reminds me of the Day Today spoof docusoap about the swimming baths, where Steve Coogan as the lifeguard rattles off all the years someone DIDNT drown.

I'm in stitches!!!!