Jump to content

"innocent" man dies after police assault


Seats

Recommended Posts

deesidejambo
I've been reading a bit of this thread, I feel the guy was simply walking through the area to go home, he didn't like the situation he was in, his heart started racing a bit, he felt faint/unwell, he tried to calm himself down by slowing everything down a bit, the policeman then pushed him to the ground thinking he's a protester, he get's up, the pressure of the incident has sent his heart over the edge and he's had a heart attack.

 

I feel so sorry for the guy, I hope the policeman is really feeling bad for what he has done and learns something from it, if not, I hope something terrible happens to him, his actions have caused death to another human being, under the eyes of the law, this IS murder, undoubtedly the good old British Justice system will make sure there is no evidence linking the 2 incidents and he'll get let free to kill again. :(

 

I agree. The Policeman is a serial murderer. The evidence is clear that he murdered the guy in cold blood. We should all vote Liberal to stop this mass murdering of our citizens by the Police.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 305
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • djf

    51

  • jamboceej

    32

  • maroonlegions

    26

  • deesidejambo

    22

Watched this video again with an A+E consultant at my hospital yesterday and he says it looks like the guy is suffering from the onset of a heart attack before he's struck by the policeman. He looks dazed, confused and punch drunk when he's walking away from the cops. These are primary symptoms of a heart infarction and that's why he looked drunk and a bit away with it. The police guy was obviously not to know that and thought the guy was maybe drunk or on drugs so struck him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been reading a bit of this thread, I feel the guy was simply walking through the area to go home, he didn't like the situation he was in, his heart started racing a bit, he felt faint/unwell, he tried to calm himself down by slowing everything down a bit, the policeman then pushed him to the ground thinking he's a protester, he get's up, the pressure of the incident has sent his heart over the edge and he's had a heart attack.

 

I feel so sorry for the guy, I hope the policeman is really feeling bad for what he has done and learns something from it, if not, I hope something terrible happens to him, his actions have caused death to another human being, under the eyes of the law, this IS murder, undoubtedly the good old British Justice system will make sure there is no evidence linking the 2 incidents and he'll get let free to kill again. :(

 

 

He didn't murder anyone as there was no way he could have known his actions would lead to the guys death. If anything he could be disciplined / sacked.

 

However, as for the other couple of posters making their pathetic childish attempts at trolling :stroker:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Watched this video again with an A+E consultant at my hospital yesterday and he says it looks like the guy is suffering from the onset of a heart attack before he's struck by the policeman. He looks dazed, confused and punch drunk when he's walking away from the cops. These are primary symptoms of a heart infarction and that's why he looked drunk and a bit away with it. The police guy was obviously not to know that and thought the guy was maybe drunk or on drugs so struck him.

 

when's that ever been justification?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well blow me down-Thank feck your not on jury service.By watching a video 100's of miles away,you have called the guy drunk then to top it off a nerd.Any chance of telling me the lottery numbers in advance?

 

 

 

When i see an actual flesh and blood worker in conflict with his natural enemy the policeman,I do not have to ask myself which side i am on.

(George Orwell)

 

Would you like to re-read your post and change it to something that makes sense and which I can therefore respond to?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I P Knightley
Watched this video again with an A+E consultant at my hospital yesterday and he says it looks like the guy is suffering from the onset of a heart attack before he's struck by the policeman. He looks dazed, confused and punch drunk when he's walking away from the cops. These are primary symptoms of a heart infarction and that's why he looked drunk and a bit away with it.

 

Sounds perfectly plausible and was my untutored rationale for the events.

 

If the guy is disorientated due to his condition, he's not going to respond to police requests to get out of his way (if that's what they were doing).

 

If the police made repeated requests to get out the way & he didn't respond, a push on the back might have been a reasonable course of action.

 

If that course of action was taken (and it appears to me that the copper doing the pushing may have been a bit over-exuberant) & Tomlinson was disorientated, it's no surprise that he fell over.

 

Putting his hands out at the last moment is a natural reflex and would have prevented him getting visible damage to his face.

 

If the above is right, I'd say it's over the top to use this incident to hammer the entire police force once again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds perfectly plausible and was my untutored rationale for the events.

 

If the guy is disorientated due to his condition, he's not going to respond to police requests to get out of his way (if that's what they were doing).

 

If the police made repeated requests to get out the way & he didn't respond, a push on the back might have been a reasonable course of action.

 

If that course of action was taken (and it appears to me that the copper doing the pushing may have been a bit over-exuberant) & Tomlinson was disorientated, it's no surprise that he fell over.

 

Putting his hands out at the last moment is a natural reflex and would have prevented him getting visible damage to his face.

 

If the above is right, I'd say it's over the top to use this incident to hammer the entire police force once again.

 

Also, if you look at the video carefully, it looks like the black doggy bites him about his arse and it barely registers with his movement or expression. Looks to me like he might have been in grave danger before he was knocked to the ground.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bomber Harris' Best Mate

Let's set aside the whole right to protest etc and what they unwashed ***** inbreds were actually protesting about. The fact is the guy has his hands in his pockets, with his back turned to the police walking, slowly, away from them, its assault, plain and effing simple. This isn't about the polis as a whole its what this one guy did. if the man was such a risk why aren't the other polis rushing to get him away ?

 

If anybody has been to a game where riot police are involved its fairly obvious there are a certain few who love the thrill of batoning or using excessive force, look at rome v man utd. This policeman was likely bullied at school. How anyone can justify hitting someone from behind like that, he was hardly one of the lefty ***** with face covered up charging at them.

 

And its no coincidence through the police actions that this has lead to his heart attack.

 

I hope the policeman never has another decent nights sleep and retires to bridgend.

Link to post
Share on other sites
maroonlegions
if the officers involved were so sure of their actions,why did none of them come forward and admit to pushing the guy to the ground.

 

Correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Correct.

 

Maybe he would have been identified quicker if he didn't have his face covered. Real strange that our police are now doing that huh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm fairly sure that the area it happened in would have a CCTV network covering it.

 

Correct. Every single inch of that part of London is covered by CCTV. The truth will out. Maybe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I P Knightley

And its no coincidence through the police actions that this has lead to his heart attack.

 

I hope the policeman never has another decent nights sleep and retires to bridgend.

 

Bridgend? Never been to the place myself but not heard such bad things about it. Surely Maryhill or Bermondsey would be more of a pox upon the man?

 

The bit in blue is where your argument may not stand on its own two feet. As cosanostra pointed out (with some informed medical support), the heart attack may well have been in progress at the time. You can't say from the video evidence and the uninformed rantings of the press and some on these forums that the push in anyway contributed to the heart attack, let alone "led" to it.

 

My take on it is that the guy was dying and would have done so whether or not the copper shoved him.

 

In other news, I doubt that the copper's shove was entirely warranted - even though caught on video, it wouldn't have made the news had it not been for the guy dying.

 

Let's just hope that the post mortem and the inquest unearth the facts and lead to a satisfactory conclusion without the rabid prejudice being shown by many commentators.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In other news, I doubt that the copper's shove was entirely warranted - even though caught on video, it wouldn't have made the news had it not been for the guy dying.

 

Kinda makes me wonder what else went on that hasn't made the news...

Link to post
Share on other sites
maroonlegions
Maybe he would have been identified quicker if he didn't have his face covered. Real strange that our police are now doing that huh.

 

True, i also think there is a possibility of so called "agent provocatives", the fact that the CTV cameras were turned off on the Wednesday also is real strange too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe he would have been identified quicker if he didn't have his face covered. Real strange that our police are now doing that huh.

 

 

I reckon the copper only came forward because he's the only left handed person in the line. Otherwise he'd have got away with it.

 

Also, how do people think a policeman would react they witnessed one member of the public strike and push another member of the public to the ground. they would aprehend and make an arrest.

 

I can't believe the number of people who appear to have trouble understanding that the job of the police is to protect the public.

Link to post
Share on other sites
maroonlegions
The copper that wacked him should be knighted.

That ersehole that died could have been a suicide bomber/gun man/knifer.

Well done the Rozzers.

 

Quite brave saying that on an internet site.Try saying that to the guys family and friends face to face eh.Would you still want the copper knighted if it was you who had been assaulted coming home from work and had survived and lived to tell the tale???:nah:

Edited by maroonlegions
internet bravery??
Link to post
Share on other sites
maroonlegions
Bridgend? Never been to the place myself but not heard such bad things about it. Surely Maryhill or Bermondsey would be more of a pox upon the man?

 

The bit in blue is where your argument may not stand on its own two feet. As cosanostra pointed out (with some informed medical support), the heart attack may well have been in progress at the time. You can't say from the video evidence and the uninformed rantings of the press and some on these forums that the push in anyway contributed to the heart attack, let alone "led" to it.

 

My take on it is that the guy was dying and would have done so whether or not the copper shoved him.

 

In other news, I doubt that the copper's shove was entirely warranted - even though caught on video, it wouldn't have made the news had it not been for the guy dying.

 

Let's just hope that the post mortem and the inquest unearth the facts and lead to a satisfactory conclusion without the rabid prejudice being shown by many commentators.

 

And of course let not the the video evidence and some witness testimony's get in the way too , the policeman attacked him and that in its self is an injustice and disgraceful way to treat a member of the public .After all we pay taxes for policemen like him to protect and respect members of the public, it was missing on that day.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest S.U.S.S.
Quite brave saying that on an internet site.Try saying that to the guys family and friends face to face eh.Would you still want the copper knighted if it was you who had been assaulted coming home from work and had survived and lived to tell the tale???:nah:

 

Perhaps he would have moved when told by the police.

Link to post
Share on other sites
maroonlegions
Perhaps he would have moved when told by the police.

 

Pity the dude that died did not have that luxury eh, still not a very nice thing to say about someone or anyone who has just lost their life and that was not directed at your reply.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdFBHxNjfD4, he was moving in this clip.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A few people seem to be discussing whether or not the push was warranted, but seem to be forgetting about striking him with a batton as well........with his back turned and hands in his pockets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
maroonlegions
A few people seem to be discussing whether or not the push was warranted, but seem to be forgetting about striking him with a batton as well........with his back turned and hands in his pockets.

 

My very thoughts too,the thing is even if he had been showing signs of non cooperation to the police there is no justification in the police using that kind of excessive force.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My very thoughts too,the thing is even if he had been showing signs of non cooperation to the police there is no justification in the police using that kind of excessive force.

 

 

That's what i don't understand about this thread, there IS NO JUSTIFICATION. Even if the guy was acting like a complete tool, showing no co-operation, shouting abuse whatever (which it certainly looks like he wasn't), then the police would still not be justified in going up behind him, striking him with a baton and throwing him to the ground. They're there to uphold the law, not break it or make it up as they go along.

 

All the people going on about liberals or lefties should think for a second. If they're tough on law and order you'd think they'd actually like the law upheld!!:20:

Link to post
Share on other sites
maroonlegions
That's what i don't understand about this thread, there IS NO JUSTIFICATION. Even if the guy was acting like a complete tool, showing no co-operation, shouting abuse whatever (which it certainly looks like he wasn't), then the police would still not be justified in going up behind him, striking him with a baton and throwing him to the ground. They're there to uphold the law, not break it or make it up as they go along.

 

All the people going on about liberals or lefties should think for a second. If they're tough on law and order you'd think they'd actually like the law upheld!!:20:

 

 

Correct again mate, the, "NO JUSTIFICATION " points on this event stand out like the empty hobo seats at the big semi.

Link to post
Share on other sites
deesidejambo
That's what i don't understand about this thread, there IS NO JUSTIFICATION. Even if the guy was acting like a complete tool, showing no co-operation, shouting abuse whatever (which it certainly looks like he wasn't), then the police would still not be justified in going up behind him, striking him with a baton and throwing him to the ground. They're there to uphold the law, not break it or make it up as they go along.

 

All the people going on about liberals or lefties should think for a second. If they're tough on law and order you'd think they'd actually like the law upheld!!:20:

 

Just to correct you. He was not thrown to the ground. We was hit on the back of the leg with a baton, presumably to make him move. He didn't move so he was pushed. The Police are permitted to use "reasonable force". The question is - was the push "reasonable force"?

 

As it is coming out that the guy was involved in at least 3 earlier skirmishes with the Police over a 90 minute period prior to the one in the video, it is probably reasonable to assume that he wasn't just walking home from work. He was there to be part of the pagger, otherwise he wouldn't have been there for 90 minutes for the earlier altercations.

 

However, it is true that someone who is about to have a heart attack may well be walking slowly as he may have been experiencing the early signs of attack.

 

So how to analyse this? In my view - if it is confirmed that he was there for 90 minutes and had 3 previous altercations during that period then I would say he was there for the pagger.

 

Conversely, if it is shown that there was no earlier altercation, then he could have been innocently caught up in it and may have been already suffering the onset of heart attack. In that case the copper should be fired.

 

The evidence will come out - there were cameras everywhere so if he shows up as being involved in paggers earlier then I am sorry but he should not have been cruising for more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bomber Harris' Best Mate

Skirmishes ? One photo in the sun shows him with a fag in his mouth standing side on infront of a police wagon looking like he is about to step out the way. At no point has he been shown to be aggresive or threatening. Does hanging around and walking slowly now justify being thrown to the ground and batonned. As I've said there are some pigs who can't wait to get stuck in when the full riot gear is on, but its backfired big time. If I had done that to a policeman regardless of the circumstances my front door would be smashed in at 6am the next day. One law for them one law for us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
boabyarsebiscuit
Just to correct you. He was not thrown to the ground. We was hit on the back of the leg with a baton, presumably to make him move. He didn't move so he was pushed. The Police are permitted to use "reasonable force". The question is - was the push "reasonable force"?

 

As it is coming out that the guy was involved in at least 3 earlier skirmishes with the Police over a 90 minute period prior to the one in the video, it is probably reasonable to assume that he wasn't just walking home from work. He was there to be part of the pagger, otherwise he wouldn't have been there for 90 minutes for the earlier altercations.

 

However, it is true that someone who is about to have a heart attack may well be walking slowly as he may have been experiencing the early signs of attack.

 

So how to analyse this? In my view - if it is confirmed that he was there for 90 minutes and had 3 previous altercations during that period then I would say he was there for the pagger.

 

Conversely, if it is shown that there was no earlier altercation, then he could have been innocently caught up in it and may have been already suffering the onset of heart attack. In that case the copper should be fired.

 

The evidence will come out - there were cameras everywhere so if he shows up as being involved in paggers earlier then I am sorry but he should not have been cruising for more.

 

Couple of things. On your "story", you're so off the mark, you've got to be a Policeman. He worked at Bank Station as an Evening Standard seller, he was trying to get home FFS!

 

Secondly. CCTV? Don't make me laugh. It malfunctions any time someone in a yellow jacket and a helmet commits a crime (or if coppers shoot a man who has already been restrained on a tube train). Those wee hoody neds have got it all wrong. They should just stick on a copper uniform and then go on the rampage with no fear of arrest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
maroonlegions

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1168315/G20-tragedy-Damning-new-film-shows-riot-officers-beat-man-times-died.html

 

 

This is really interesting from today's Daily Mail.HE was in fact moving away and not confrontational , 3 times he was hit, no justification is the point here , not the fact that he may or may not have had the heart attack which caused his death.I do also think that if this was the cause of his heart attack that led to his death then it is even more of a disgraceful way to treat a member of the public. It just beggars belief that some people feel that using that kind of excessive force on someone who is so easily controlled or moved away in other LESS excessive ways is beyond me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I P Knightley
Kinda makes me wonder what else went on that hasn't made the news...

 

Good point.

 

But if the news was full of reports of the police pushing people out of the way who were not responding to their requests to do so, some of those pushed people falling over, and all of them going on their way without dying, I'm sure that the reaction would be more of a muted, "tsk, eh? pfft", with a few people questioning the priorities of the news reporters delivering such stories.

 

It's hardly the savage beating that some on here seem to be making out.

 

I'm not taking the same stance as the OP - I don't think it should be glossed over or dismissed but I'm prepared to wait until the facts are out.

 

And of course let not the the video evidence and some witness testimony's get in the way too , the policeman attacked him and that in its self is an injustice and disgraceful way to treat a member of the public .After all we pay taxes for policemen like him to protect and respect members of the public, it was missing on that day.

 

Some of the testimonies I've read are contradictory. I reserve the right to be sceptical about the motives of some of the witnesses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to correct you. He was not thrown to the ground. We was hit on the back of the leg with a baton, presumably to make him move. He didn't move so he was pushed. The Police are permitted to use "reasonable force". The question is - was the push "reasonable force"?

 

As it is coming out that the guy was involved in at least 3 earlier skirmishes with the Police over a 90 minute period prior to the one in the video, it is probably reasonable to assume that he wasn't just walking home from work. He was there to be part of the pagger, otherwise he wouldn't have been there for 90 minutes for the earlier altercations.

 

However, it is true that someone who is about to have a heart attack may well be walking slowly as he may have been experiencing the early signs of attack.

 

So how to analyse this? In my view - if it is confirmed that he was there for 90 minutes and had 3 previous altercations during that period then I would say he was there for the pagger.

 

Conversely, if it is shown that there was no earlier altercation, then he could have been innocently caught up in it and may have been already suffering the onset of heart attack. In that case the copper should be fired.

 

The evidence will come out - there were cameras everywhere so if he shows up as being involved in paggers earlier then I am sorry but he should not have been cruising for more.

 

My brain can't even comprehend this level of stupid. Seriously.

 

THERE WAS NO REQUIREMENT FOR REASONABLE FORCE. THE MAN WAS NOT POSING A THREAT TO THE POLICE OFFICER.

 

And where are you getting the information that he was involved in three previous "altercations"*? I can't find a source for that anywhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
maroonlegions
Couple of things. On your "story", you're so off the mark, you've got to be a Policeman. He worked at Bank Station as an Evening Standard seller, he was trying to get home FFS!

 

Secondly. CCTV? Don't make me laugh. It malfunctions any time someone in a yellow jacket and a helmet commits a crime (or if coppers shoot a man who has already been restrained on a tube train). Those wee hoody neds have got it all wrong. They should just stick on a copper uniform and then go on the rampage with no fear of arrest.

 

Was the CTV cameras in that area not SWITCHED OFF on the Wednesday and why?You are right about the malfunctions point, so easy to have as a weapon for disinformation and putting the truth down the toilet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Secondly. CCTV? Don't make me laugh. It malfunctions any time someone in a yellow jacket and a helmet commits a crime (or if coppers shoot a man who has already been restrained on a tube train). Those wee hoody neds have got it all wrong. They should just stick on a copper uniform and then go on the rampage with no fear of arrest.

 

You don't know how right you are.

 

From the BBC report

 

Initially the force said it was unaware he had sustained the alleged assault and said its officers' first contact with him was when they gave him medical aid before he died.

 

"It is now clear that Mr Tomlinson did come into contact with police prior to his death and that a number of the officers depicted in the footage on a national newspaper's website have identified themselves as MPS officers,"

 

 

Translation: We lied through our teeth. Again. Our bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Good point.

 

But if the news was full of reports of the police pushing people out of the way who were not responding to their requests to do so, some of those pushed people falling over, and all of them going on their way without dying, I'm sure that the reaction would be more of a muted, "tsk, eh? pfft", with a few people questioning the priorities of the news reporters delivering such stories.

 

It's hardly the savage beating that some on here seem to be making out.

 

I'm not taking the same stance as the OP - I don't think it should be glossed over or dismissed but I'm prepared to wait until the facts are out.

 

 

 

Some of the testimonies I've read are contradictory. I reserve the right to be sceptical about the motives of some of the witnesses.

 

Sorry but I think you're missing the point. What possible evidence could come out that would justify the action shown clearly on the video?

 

In response to your first query. As we can see from previous videos on this thread, the police response to peaceful protest is now baton rushes and condensing the crowd. It's happening time and time again. This response is clearly now standard. I'd imagine the response of many to this would be "tsk, bloody hippies". Let's just hope none of the people who would respond in such a fashion ever feel the need to take a stand against something.

Link to post
Share on other sites
maroonlegions
Good point.

 

But if the news was full of reports of the police pushing people out of the way who were not responding to their requests to do so, some of those pushed people falling over, and all of them going on their way without dying, I'm sure that the reaction would be more of a muted, "tsk, eh? pfft", with a few people questioning the priorities of the news reporters delivering such stories.

 

It's hardly the savage beating that some on here seem to be making out.

 

I'm not taking the same stance as the OP - I don't think it should be glossed over or dismissed but I'm prepared to wait until the facts are out.

 

 

 

Some of the testimonies I've read are contradictory. I reserve the right to be sceptical about the motives of some of the witnesses.

 

You can reserve all you want mate that's your right but the CTV footage to me shows other wise .The release of today's further CTV footage and witness statements are even more interesting.

Edited by maroonlegions
further CTV
Link to post
Share on other sites
deesidejambo
Couple of things. On your "story", you're so off the mark, you've got to be a Policeman. He worked at Bank Station as an Evening Standard seller, he was trying to get home FFS!

 

Secondly. CCTV? Don't make me laugh. It malfunctions any time someone in a yellow jacket and a helmet commits a crime (or if coppers shoot a man who has already been restrained on a tube train). Those wee hoody neds have got it all wrong. They should just stick on a copper uniform and then go on the rampage with no fear of arrest.

 

lol

 

I said in my post - if it is confirmed by evidence he was involved in paggers earlier then he should not have been there. Conversely, if that is not confirmed then the copper should be fired.

 

I gave both sides of the argument and the evidence will confirm one or the other. I didn't mention CCTV.

 

You on the other hand just jump to a single conclusion.

 

The evidence will come out one way or the other and depending on the evidence a proper judgement can be made.

Link to post
Share on other sites
lol

 

I said in my post - if it is confirmed by evidence he was involved in paggers earlier then he should not have been there. Conversely, if that is not confirmed then the copper should be fired.

 

I gave both sides of the argument and the evidence will confirm one or the other. I didn't mention CCTV.

 

You on the other hand just jump to a single conclusion.

 

The evidence will come out one way or the other and depending on the evidence a proper judgement can be made.

 

Any chance of a source that suggests he was involved in previous "paggers".

 

 

PS. that wouldn't excuse what happened anyway but lets see all the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites
maroonlegions
My brain can't even comprehend this level of stupid. Seriously.

 

THERE WAS NO REQUIREMENT FOR REASONABLE FORCE. THE MAN WAS NOT POSING A THREAT TO THE POLICE OFFICER.

 

And where are you getting the information that he was involved in three previous "altercations"*? I can't find a source for that anywhere.

 

Exactly, no were on the CTV footage does he appear or show or be any kind of threat to the police.Even if he had previous arguments or mouthed off to them there are other ways to control him and why did the policeman feel that this kind of excessive force was necessary on ONE man in his late forties.He was clearly outnumbered by the police.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting story in the Guardian today, with a former senior officer calling for the arrest of the officer involved.

 

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

 

fresh pictures suggested he had removed his shoulder number and covered his face with a balaclava before hitting Tomlinson

 

The officer involved could face a manslaughter charge if a link between the assault and Tomlinson's fatal heart attack minutes later is proved. "There is no excuse for what he did," a senior police source told the Guardian, adding that, at the very least, the officer had committed a serious disciplinary offence and a criminal assault.

 

As an aside, although the original smack with the baton looks fairly innocuous, those things are bloody heavy and would go someway to explaining his staggered walk. They're designed for breaking bones when used at full force after all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
deesidejambo
Any chance of a source that suggests he was involved in previous "paggers".

 

 

PS. that wouldn't excuse what happened anyway but lets see all the same.

 

It came from the Icke forum. I expect that the videos are being analysed at the moment. The evidence will come out one way or the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I P Knightley
Sorry but I think you're missing the point. What possible evidence could come out that would justify the action shown clearly on the video?

 

In response to your first query. As we can see from previous videos on this thread, the police response to peaceful protest is now baton rushes and condensing the crowd. It's happening time and time again. This response is clearly now standard. I'd imagine the response of many to this would be "tsk, bloody hippies". Let's just hope none of the people who would respond in such a fashion ever feel the need to take a stand against something.

 

I'm not saying the pushing is justified; I've previously said I think it was over-exuberant. But on its own it wouldn't be newsworthy.

 

I am saying that there isn't a proven link between the pushing over and the guy's heart attack and that those who are calling for the head of the copper are being a trifle premature.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not saying the pushing is justified; I've previously said I think it was over-exuberant. But on its own it wouldn't be newsworthy.

 

I am saying that there isn't a proven link between the pushing over and the guy's heart attack and that those who are calling for the head of the copper are being a trifle premature.

 

I only offered he should be charged with assault. I'm sure the more legal-minded amongst us could clarify the possibility of a manslaughter charge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/g20-summit/5129138/G20-protest-death-new-video-shows-Ian-Tomlinson-was-hit-with-baton.html

 

That is the only mention of a previous incident involving Mr Tomlinson. Supposedly 1hr 15 minutes before he died. Strange it's buried half way down the story and no other news outlet has picked up on it.

 

Also strange that the police wouldn't have commented on it in any way.

 

As an aside, what does allowing the London Police to investigate incidents involving their own remind you of ;)

Edited by djf
Link to post
Share on other sites
deesidejambo
Just post the link.

 

You're wrong about everything else. Seriously.

 

Hope the paste works - this is from Icke forum -

 

Investigators have been told by witnesses that Mr Tomlinson, who was fighting alcoholism, was involved in three separate incidents with police in the hour and a half before his death.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/f...ith-baton.html

 

As for me being "wrong about everything else" well, all I have said is if it can be proven that he was there for 90 minutes then the "just walking home" argument is not true. I'm just trying to establish some evidence. I know that may not be welcome but there you go.

Edited by deesidejambo
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've also not claimed he should be charged in connection with the guy dying, unless it is proved he was responsible.

 

It does look, however, that he could at least be charged with assault. The comments in the Guardian from the former police officer should have more bearing here in terms of what may / may not happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hope the paste works - this is from Icke forum -

 

Investigators have been told by witnesses that Mr Tomlinson, who was fighting alcoholism, was involved in three separate incidents with police in the hour and a half before his death.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/f...ith-baton.html

 

As for me being "wrong about everything else" well, all I have said is if it can be proven that he was there for 90 minutes then the "just walking home" argument is not true. I'm just trying to establish some evidence. I know that may not be welcome but there you go.

 

Just walking home is not an and never was an arguement.

 

The evidence is there. In complete clarity for anybody to see. Unfortunately some people can't bear to accept any wrong-doing from the police for some bizarre reason and are determined to cloud the issue with "battling alcoholism" and "antagonising the police".

 

It's a simple yes or no question. Did you witness an assault on the video footage?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The tactics of the police to pen everyone in may account for how long he was there. I, however, obviously have no idea how long he was there, just like everyone else on this forum........i presume.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...