Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

If the policeman is charged with anything, his defence team will use the fact that he was drunk and obstructing the police. They will allege he had a long history of alcoholism, and that he was drunk, was one of the reasons he fell so easily. If the prosecution use the video of him being pushed over, then the defence team will use the video of him drunk in the middle of the road blocking a police van, despite being asked to move. They will also jump on the fact , that it was not the first time he had obstructed the police, and may have possession of more videos of him.
The bummer about videos being used against the policeman, is that his defence can do the same to defend him.

Just pointing this fact out.

If he was that obstructive I dont see why they didnt arrest him. There is no way on earth the situation was handled correctly. If the defence want to blame IT for his own killing that is the sort of thing lawyers do for vast amounts of money. But if the scumthug gets off people are rightly going to be very angry, not really in the realms of Rodney King but not totally dis-similar.
 
Well if we see the pictures it will be useful. the rest is not terribly substantiated. To be honest the met are such liars they could easily be planting witnesses anyway.

the report sonny61 quotes is from the sun - already been linked to here numerous times. There are pics in the article.
 
If the policeman is charged with anything, his defence team will use the fact that he was drunk and obstructing the police. They will allege he had a long history of alcoholism, and that he was drunk, was one of the reasons he fell so easily. If the prosecution use the video of him being pushed over, then the defence team will use the video of him drunk in the middle of the road blocking a police van, despite being asked to move. They will also jump on the fact , that it was not the first time he had obstructed the police, and may have possession of more videos of him.
The bummer about videos being used against the policeman, is that his defence can do the same to defend him.

Just pointing this fact out.

Except that there is no evidence he was drunk. As already pointed out, someone suffering from concussion, a stroke or hypoglycaemia can display the same symptoms. Even if he was drunk, this still doesn't justify batoning him.

You're grasping at straws.
 
He did nothing to deserve being struck with a baton. He was not violent or abusive towards the police. Surely they could've moved him on in a better way than attacking him with a blunt instrument?

A push, maybe, the strike on the back of the legs, may be something the policeman will have to defend in court.( other European police must be baffled by such a big issue of a blow to the back of the legs by a policeman, when many other European police forces would have clubbed him the first time he did not move)
What happened, is not as black and white as some on here think.
 
A push, maybe, the strike on the back of the legs, may be something the policeman will have to defend in court.( other European police must be baffled by such a big issue of a blow to the back of the legs by a policeman, when many other European police forces would have clubbed him the first time he did not move)
What happened, is not as black and white as some on here think.

grasping mate
 
the report sonny61 quotes is from the sun - already been linked to here numerous times. There are pics in the article.

Explains a lot, it's not neccessarily Sonny grasping at straws but The Scum.
Frankly I reserve the right to assume all establishment rags are deliberately putting out disinfo.
 
other European police must be baffled by such a big issue of a blow to the back of the legs by a policeman, when many other European police forces would have clubbed him the first time he did not move)

Other European policemen have reputations for being just as (if not more) violent and thuggish as our own. This is not a good thing. Just look at the riot police in places like Spain and Italy.

Other European citizens mights empathise slightly more.
 
No. If he was guilty of anything, but him before a court, but I have doubts, which does not mean he is not guilty of something, or is innocent.
The posts on here would make a lynch mob blush.

The police actions at the G20 would make a lynch mob blush.
 
No. If he was guilty of anything, but him before a court, but I have doubts, which does not mean he is not guilty of something, or is innocent.
The posts on here would make a lynch mob blush.

your posts on here should make you blush
 
A personal concern for me is that if the police try and justify their actions as he appeared to be a bit drunk that doesn't hold any grounds imo.


Numerous ill-healths can give that appearance as has been mentioned above. Personally, my brother has diabetes and occasionally struggles to balance his medication. If, for example, he can't get access to food at the required times he quickly developes slurred speach, walks and acts as if he is drunk. Kettling people, many of whom would have been Diabetic is frighteningly dangerous.


I still think more useful footage will come to light.
 
I can't believe what i have just heard, amongst other outrages.. there is NO CCTV footage of the areas involved.:mad::mad:


I would laugh if this wasn't so serious.
 
''fresh pictures, which were taken by IT worker Ross Hardy, seem to complicate events surrounding the 47-year-old's death.

'I'd been watching some of the protests and saw this older guy standing in the road,' he said.

'Cops were there already but a police riot van was trying to make its way up the road towards the Bank of England.

'Tomlinson stood out because of his football shirt and seemed in his own little world.

'It was weird. The van approached and a cop leaned out to shout at him to get out of the way.

'But he didn't go anywhere. He just mumbled something and raised his arm a bit unsteadily.

'It was then it became obvious he was drunk because he wasn't really coherent and couldn't move well.

'The officer yelled at him again and when he didn't move the riot van moved slowly up against him.

'It just nudged him gently but Tomlinson still didn't get out of the way. They tried nudging him again.

'When that didn't work four riot police moved in and dragged him on to the pavement.

'The van moved past but Tomlinson stuck around for at least another half an hour.''

That's the version from the Sun isn't it?

Your failure to source that quote amounts to a lie ... :mad:
 
The Mail.

So the Hate Mail and the Scum are running exactly the same quotes, edited in exactly the same way?

Now that is interesting.

How did they receive the copy? Doesn't seem to be a Press Association job - and it'd be unusual for the PA to get such an interview - unless the witness was sent to them...
 
If the policeman is charged with anything, his defence team will use the fact that he was drunk and obstructing the police. They will allege he had a long history of alcoholism, and that he was drunk, was one of the reasons he fell so easily. If the prosecution use the video of him being pushed over, then the defence team will use the video of him drunk in the middle of the road blocking a police van, despite being asked to move. They will also jump on the fact , that it was not the first time he had obstructed the police, and may have possession of more videos of him.
The bummer about videos being used against the policeman, is that his defence can do the same to defend him.

Just pointing this fact out.

What's your agenda here exactly sonny? In whose interests are you posting?

What do YOU think? :hmm:

Honestly? :confused:
 
sonny61 said:

So the Hate Mail and the Scum are running exactly the same quotes, edited in exactly the same way?

Now that is interesting.

How did they receive the copy? Doesn't seem to be a Press Association job - and it'd be unusual for the PA to get such an interview - unless the witness was sent to them...

AHH OK, answered my question just above.

Leaves the question about why sonny61 is parroting the Mail/Scum agenda so uncritically, even more pertinent ... :hmm:
 
I find that very hard to believe, considering the type of shops in the royal exchange. (tiffany, hermes and various other massively expensive establishments) that there is no CCTV keeping an eye on the passage at the rear of the building.

Every office building in the city has CCTV outside and inside. I've worked in a lot of them. i also find it difficult to believe there is no City of London CCTV in the area. It's just not right.
 
re the IPCC interview

"We would have preferred the Guardian not to have printed the pictures and footage". Well, yea, of course you would, then the original internal inquiry could have been forgotten and swept under the carpet. It was only the swell of public concern and the US banker sharing his footage with the Guardian that got this case so far(interesting that even an American din't trust London police).

Serioussly though, is he really telling me that with all of the many police spotters, and CCTV in the heart of the European Financial Zone, at a time of 'High Terrorist Risk" and in the middle of a "Summer of Rage Riot" the authorities were unable to obtain any footage of relevant incidents?? Bullshit. Don't the police cars and wagons have camera's on them now?
 
Back
Top Bottom