G20: Getting to the truth- the death of Ian Tomlinson RIP

[editor]

Maybe she just hates men ?

Best to just stick to the facts in this case, I reckon.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

<snip> Perhaps, but again being cynical the state / Police might turn around and excoriate this officer but claim that it wasnt representative of events on the day.

They might, but if they did throw him to the wolves, who knows what he might say with say Michael Mansfield or Gareth Pierce coaching him?

"The boss told us to go out there and make those soap dodgers think twice about coming on another demo.

I wasn't doing anything other officers weren't doing or anything we don't all do dozens of times on every demo we police."

 

[laptop]

It shows Ian Tomlinson being pushed over by a man who certainly looks like he is a policeman, in a police uniform and a riot helmet with a visor. This man is standing alongside other police officers

Had I written that, it would have been a deeply sarcastic nod to the Police Federation's very able libel lawyers.

 

[editor]

I've started a separate thread about that. Doesn't seem to be any interest tbh. http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=285371

I think we've got enough threads on the topic already, to be honest. Not bothering to tag new threads also makes them harder to find, btw.

 

[free spirit]

The police never made such a claim.

odd that there's been no admission up til this point from the police that any officer had actually done anything to him prior to this video footage coming out though.

I reckon it's highly doubtful that not one of the coppers in that video remembered what had happened once his face was picture was published, yet either none of them had voluntarily come forward to set the record straight, or the Met as an organisation had decided that this information didn't need to be made public. Either way, it's a poorly executed attempt at a cover up, and to me says a hell of a lot about why nobody with any sense trusts a word the police say.

Had this footage not come to light, I sincerely doubt any of those copper would ever have said a thing about it.

I hope you're deeply ashamed of the organisation you work for right now.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Christ you wouldn't believe the shite I'm getting from police forums.

Maybe the officer was pushing the man away from the dogs

This is from a plod forum:

With reference to the guardian news clip I tried, but unfortunately could not hear any of the dialogue between the officers and Mr Tomlinson and purely because of that I'll choose to reserve judgement, I think..... unless someone has a transcript!!!!

As if something Tomlinson might have said justifies assault

 

[FridgeMagnet]

The thing is though, and being entirely cynical and self-serving (rather than public-spirited) here, you wouldnt want to not be the grass if you were one of those officers who were near Tomlinson when he was pushed.

If they dont come forward - and they all may well have (as may have the officer involved), for all we know - they are all going to be justifiably dealt with when the investigation does find them, either through detective work or because someone else comes forward.

Well hold on, on past evidence they aren't, are they? At the very worst they might be have to retire on full pay. Whistleblow, though, and you're facing the opprobrium of the whole force.

 

[editor]

It's made UK Yahoo's lead story: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090407/tuk-g20-victim-assaulted-by-policeman-dba1618.html

G20 victim 'assaulted by policeman'

A man who died during the G20 protests was roughly shoved to the ground by a baton-wielding police officer, new video footage shows.

Ian Tomlinson, 47, a newspaper seller who worked in the City and who was not part of the demonstrations, is shown walking away from a group of officers on the evening of April 1.

He has his hands in his pockets and does not appear to speak to any of the policemen - some of whom are in riot gear and some who have dogs - or offer any resistance.

When slowed down, the footage, which was shot at about 7.20pm at Royal Exchange Passage, shows an officer wearing a helmet apparently hitting Mr Tomlinson from behind with a baton on the leg. He then uses both hands to shove him in the back.

Mr Tomlinson is propelled forward and lands heavily. He sits on the ground for a few seconds where he remonstrates with police. None of the officers appears to offer him any help.

 

[Fullyplumped]

This is from a plod forum:

Can you supply a link to this?

 

[paolo]

The thing is though, and being entirely cynical and self-serving (rather than public-spirited) here, you wouldnt want to not be the grass if you were one of those officers who were near Tomlinson when he was pushed.

A complication here is that what those other officers saw was not of the same scale then as it is now.

They perhaps saw a colleague act "out of hand", but it appears "no harm done". They'll have seen many situations in reverse. A colleague gets bowled over on pub-chuck-out scenario, but doesn't go for assault, because he was okay afterwards.

So it's a bit embarrassing, but you don't go running to the professional standards people, because it's not as if anyone really got hurt.

But then, quite possibly out of sight of those officers, something much more tragic happened.

And it's only becoming "joined up" now things like this video are emerging.

It's now at this point you have to switch, and report some behaviour that you didn't previously. And of course you should. But I can see some human psyche thinking - "err, well nothing to report before, so I'll stay with that."

I'm being very speculative here, I'll admit.

 

[Tankus]

If there is a will... the officer can easily be traced , just track back on the street security cameras to see where they came from and where they went , the vans are all numbered , there will be top grade digital cameras to hard drives there , not the grainy stuff you see on TV

 

[maomao]

I disagree... as I said above, this appears to be a relatively junior officer

Could you explain the reasoning behind that statement?

 

[paolo]

Whistleblow, though, and you're facing the opprobrium of the whole force.

Quite. I can't imagine life is much fun in the job if you get labelled as a grass.

 

[maomao]

Does anyone genuinely think they would create a vast (and necessarily implausible) conspiracy to save one Pc from the consequences of his own actions?

No, if the identity of the officer who did it becomes clear he will be crucified. But his identity will not be revealed by any of his colleagues.

 

[agricola]

odd that there's been no admission up til this point from the police that any officer had actually done anything to him prior to this video footage coming out though.

I reckon it's highly doubtful that not one of the coppers in that video remembered what had happened once his face was picture was published, yet either none of them had voluntarily come forward to set the record straight, or the Met as an organisation had decided that this information didn't need to be made public. Either way, it's a poorly executed attempt at a cover up, and to me says a hell of a lot about why nobody with any sense trusts a word the police say.

Had this footage not come to light, I sincerely doubt any of those copper would ever have said a thing about it.

I hope you're deeply ashamed of the organisation you work for right now.

You have no idea of whether or not the IPCC already know who that officer is, who the officers with him (or her, it seems) are, or even whether they knew that this push had taken place (indeed, given some of the earlier media reports which did say that the bloke had been pushed, they may have).

 

[maomao]

You have no idea of whether or not the IPCC already know who that officer is, who the officers with him (or her, it seems) are, or even whether they knew that this push had taken place (indeed, given some of the earlier media reports which did say that the bloke had been pushed, they may have).

We all know your a copper/ex-copper but is there any chance of giving us a quick summary of your role in the police force and your current position so we know who we're speaking to? Nothing too revealing obviously, just give us a quick summary.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

No, if the identity of the officer who did it becomes clear he will be crucified. But his identity will not be revealed by any of his colleagues.

As above, I think that might be tricky, especially if he has a good lawyer. He wasn't doing anything that a vast number of his colleagues weren't also doing, it's just he was unfortunate enough to have killed someone and they weren't.

So IMO the potential for arguing that he was 'just following orders' or at least professional norms by acting in that manner gives him considerable leverage.

 

[free spirit]

Quite. I can't imagine life is much fun in the job if you get labelled as a grass.

yep.

problem is that these are supposed to be the people who are paid to uphold the law, not some playground gang who'll bully anyone who tells on them

 

[agricola]

A complication here is that what those other officers saw was not of the same scale then as it is now.

They perhaps saw a colleague act "out of hand", but it appears "no harm done". They'll have seen many situations in reverse. A colleague gets bowled over on pub-chuck-out scenario, but doesn't go for assault, because he was okay afterwards.

So it's a bit embarrassing, but you don't go running to the professional standards people, because it's not as if anyone really got hurt.

But then, quite possibly out of sight of those officers, something much more tragic happened.

And it's only becoming "joined up" now things like this video are emerging.

It's now at this point you have to switch, and report some behaviour that you didn't previously. And of course you should. But I can see some human psyche thinking - "err, well nothing to report before, so I'll stay with that."

I'm being very speculative here, I'll admit.

Well exactly. Being cynical again, this now becomes about your job, pension, and not going to prison following Tomlinson's death, when it was previously about Pc X's unjustifiable use of force.

Could you explain the reasoning behind that statement?

I cant believe anyone above an Inspector would be in that situation (which is why I said junior), and TBH I have a hard time believing that officer is either an Inspector or Sergeant, because of the manner of kit (Insps and Sgts should have coloured flashes on their shoulders for public order gear).

 

[SpookyFrank]

Can you supply a link to this?

Certainly:

http://www.policeoracle.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11474&PN=8

 

[Stoat Boy]

Utterly disgusted at this footage.

Its disgusting to see them hitting this man from behind when he was presenting zero threat.

I suppose I have not got anything to add to this thread beyond that but unlike many of you I DID have faith in the Police prior to this but its now gone.

They have been allowed to become a power unto themselves. Its fucking shocking, simple as.

And there has to be a comparison to the softly softly approach taken to the illegal protest by the Tamils at Westminster.

 

[maomao]

I cant believe anyone above an Inspector would be in that situation (which is why I said junior), and TBH I have a hard time believing that officer is either an Inspector or Sergeant, because of the manner of kit (Insps and Sgts should have coloured flashes on their shoulders for public order gear).

Above an inspector? To be honest, I'm not popo so I have no idea what that means. The only inspector I ever met was the one who game me a caution and he looked 50+ so you're stretching the definition of junior surely?

 

[agricola]

We all know your a copper/ex-copper but is there any chance of giving us a quick summary of your role in the police force and your current position so we know who we're speaking to? Nothing too revealing obviously, just give us a quick summary.

low management, not on the streets currently, not public order trained (and never have been).

 

[maomao]

low management, not on the streets currently, not public order trained (and never have been).

Cool, so you have no direct experience of how such units are organised and you've never had experience in crowd control at an event of this type?

 

[free spirit]

You have no idea of whether or not the IPCC already know who that officer is, who the officers with him (or her, it seems) are, or even whether they knew that this push had taken place (indeed, given some of the earlier media reports which did say that the bloke had been pushed, they may have).

you don't think the IPCC might have added that some of the witnesses to the push who'd come forward were coppers then? or that the met maybe should have issued a statement to that affect if the coppers had come forward as you suggest, so as to help correct the misleading impression given by their earlier statements?


this is the exact same arse covering bullshit media strategy the met employed with de menezes, and it stinks of a deeply rotten organisation.

 

[Fullyplumped]

Certainly:

http://www.policeoracle.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11474&PN=8

Thank you - very interesting.

 

[jayeola]

Just seen the video. Shame. Condolenses to his family. The Police have really fucked up this time. Some one must be held accountable.

 

[paolo]

Cool, so you have no direct experience of how such units are organised and you've never had experience in crowd control at an event of this type?

I don't think Agricola has made any claim to that though?

 

[agricola]

Cool, so you have no direct experience of how such units are organised and you've never had experience in crowd control at an event of this type?

The way public order units are organized isnt that different from non-public order trained units - they both usually comprise the same number of officers to a serial and have the same proportion of supervisory officers.

Basically there are three levels of public order training in the Met - level 1 (which is the TSG), level 2 (which is local officers who have been on at least one two-day course where tactics are practiced and who have access to riot gear) and level 3, which is everyone else who has just basic training and normal gear. I have always been level 3 - which means you usually do some low-risk demos (though these can kick off), some football (same), and other public events, in addition of course to usual duties and incidents that one comes across during the course of a shift.

So no, I have never been part of a shield line or anything like that, nor have I ever kettled anyone - but then I am also aware of what is and what is not permitted for an officer to do, or not do, in those circumstances - because those arent any different for the lowliest Pc on a relief than they are for someone on the TSG.

 

[maomao]

I don't think Agricola has made any claim to that though?

No, but he's been the voice of police on this thread and just wanted to make crystal clear his actual experience.

ACAB - no exeptions.