Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

cesare said:
I'd like to think that "vomment" was a deliberate shortening of 'vomit inducing comment' but sadly it's more likely a result of the c and v being next to each other on the keyboard. Nonetheless, I think we should adopt it for the future :D
Click to expand...
Doh! :oops:

But you're right. "Vomment" is a very good neologism/contraction for "vomit inducing comment"! :D
 
On the timing thing, the Sun are still running the '6.09' story (along with all the shit about him being drunk). Interestingly though - IF they are 1 hour out - they might themeselves have captured the first attack.

Go to the Slideshow and see images 2 and 3. These are supposed to be taken after Ian Tomlinson was in the way of the van. Speculative on my part, but image 3 looks like it could have been the start of the attack referred to by other witnesses.

Interesting also that there don't seem to be any credits on the photographs (unless they are buried somewhere on the page). Would be handy to know who took these and whether other unprinted images showed what happened next.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2368505.ece
 
4thwrite said:
On the timing thing, the Sun are still running the '6.09' story (along with all the shit about him being drunk). Interestingly though - IF they are 1 hour out - they might themeselves have captured the first attack.

Go to the Slideshow and see images 2 and 3. These are supposed to be taken after Ian Tomlinson was in the way of the van. Speculative on my part, but image 3 looks like it could have been the start of the attack referred to by other witnesses.

Interesting also that there don't seem to be any credits on the photographs (unless they are buried somewhere on the page). Would be handy to know who took these and whether other unprinted images showed what happened next.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2368505.ece
Click to expand...

The article says the pictures were taken by "IT worker Ross Hardy".
 
I love they they are saying things like 'drunken' - how do they know? what are they basing that statement on exactly? and how they say 'mr tomlinson sits up and asked what happened' same thing? its like fucking story time, they have no idea what he said or if he said anything.

not that it really matters either way :rolleyes:
 
One of the eyewitnesses that I was speaking to on another froum said that he spoke to Ian just after the first assault, and he said that he could smell alchohol on his breath. Ian apparently also told him that he'd only had a couple. In reguards to being hit bu the police, Ian allegedly said "I'm a millwall fan, I'm used to it" This is of course, word of mouth stuff, so who knows for sure. But it's not that far off from thinking that he had a quick drink on his way home.
 
ska invita said:
to prosecute one policeman for a push and hit from behind would open the door for thousands of other cases and the high court judge just isnt going to allow that to happen.
Click to expand...
High Court judges don't often get to decide who gets prosecuted in the first instance, it's that turncoat Starmer's job.
 
shaman75 said:
The article says the pictures were taken by "IT worker Ross Hardy".
Click to expand...

Ooops! :oops: My basic point still stands though.

I'd kind of assumed that Ross Hardy must have been watching events from an office window (its unlikely that he was a demonstrator). However, if he took the pictures, that implies he was stood outside. Also, given that he says:

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

.. that implies he himself stood there for 'at least half an hour'. Not impossible, but slightly odd behaviour. Okay, he might have come out of work and done a bit of rubbernecking, but did he really remain at the same place, for over half an hour? Much more likely - if he (Hardy) did hang around for so long - that he'd have wandered around the area... putting in doubt his claim to have observed Ian Tomlinson for that length of time.

Be interesting to see if that Guardian get to find/interview him. The Sun will probably have him all sown up by now.
 
Callie said:
Does anyone actually know if the Freedom of Information Act covers shop CCTV footage?
Click to expand...
No it doesn't, but Data Protection Act does, anyone on Cornhill/Royal Exchange Buildings at the time could make applications to the relevant CCTV controllers.
 
sonny61 said:
Well your question is little of the thread's subject. But no, I would not beat anyone, but I would defend myself, and have done. The protesters were annoyed because the OB would not let them at the Bank of England, they charged the police lines, and were pushed back. A policeman is allowed to use his baton when he feels himself, or his fellow officers are under threat. This was the case, when it appeared at one stage the police lines would be overran. A policeman is taught to strike on the shoulders(painful), but they can hit the head if they think it is justified.
Try standing in a line with a baying mob in front of you mate, it's scary.

Back to the subject, like I said before the policeman's defence team, if it comes to court, will use the footage/photo, and other clips, of him being drunk, and obstructing the police. People on here can't use a video to prove the policeman's guilt, then complain when another is used in his defence. No agenda, lets have the truth, not mob justice.
Click to expand...

rubbish

facts

- the protesters were AT the BoE .. there was a party there .. the protesters could do nothing to the building .. oh sorry maybe a bit of graffiti .. the decision was simple from the police to attack and wind up demonstrators NOT to stop any disorder of which there was minimal (two buildings attacked, TWO, in the whole City!)

- this incident was 7 hours after rthe BoE 'trouble' .. most people were pissed off as they could not go home!

- this PC is clearly NOT defending himself

- so the police lines were overun .. so what? were any PCs surrounded and beaten? no .. there was NO attack on the police this day ..

- what injuries DID the police receive? absolutely minimal as afaik .. no bricks, no glass bottles, no metal bars, no petrol bombs were used .. what minimal violence there was from protesters involved throwing plastic bottles and fag packets and using their bare hands

- and since when has obstruction been to legitimise assault? .. IF the copper thinks it is obstruction then he can arrest the man .. simple

it is clear as always that policing this day was not to contorl 'disorder' but to hype violence and so intimidate protest .. and this time they have it seems killed a man
 
ffs according to the Daily Fail:
The officer who has been suspended is said to have collapsed at home after discovering he was at the centre of the row.
He came forward on Wednesday and could face a manslaughter charge, but has not yet been interviewed by the IPCC.
A Met source said: 'He genuinely didn't know it was him until he saw the video. His wife came home to find him unconscious on the floor, having had some sort of panic attack.
'He was admitted to hospital and has been released but is not yet in a fit state to be interviewed.
Click to expand...
source

oldest trick in the book innit...
 
AKA pseudonym said:
ffs according to the Daily Fail:

source

oldest trick in the book innit...
Click to expand...

To be fair though I think I would be absolutely bricking it if I could possibly be facing a manslaughter charge for doing something my superiors told me to do in the first place.

No i'm obviously not condoning what he did but I wouldn't be surprised if it was true.
 
Of course he's bricking it. He killed someone, and the cover-up isn't going well.
 
 
A second postmortem on Tomlinson's body was conducted by Dr Nathaniel Carey, one the UK's most respected forensic pathologists, yesterday. He is understood to have been instructed to consider injuries Tomlinson may have suffered before his heart attack - identified as the cause of death by the first postmortem.
Click to expand...

why wouldn't have such injuries been considered in the first PM??? surely the coroner who carried out the first PM should have been looking for any injuries that might be present on the body, not just concentrating on the heart attack?? it almost sounds like the first PM was carried out to confirm the police's view of the cause of death, not to actually establish all the factors that may have led to his death?
 
_pH_ said:
why wouldn't have such injuries been considered in the first PM??? surely the coroner who carried out the first PM should have been looking for any injuries that might be present on the body, not just concentrating on the heart attack?? it almost sounds like the first PM was carried out to confirm the police's view of the cause of death, not to actually establish all the factors that may have led to his death?
Click to expand...
Because the police had already announced it was natural causes and the Home Office pathologist was told to confirm their version of events. He wasn't looking for injuries, and would have ignored them if he found them.
 
ymu said:
Because the police had already announced it was natural causes and the Home Office pathologist was told to confirm their version of events. He wasn't looking for injuries, and would have ignored them if he found them.
Click to expand...

That's fucking shit though isn't it?

Aren't pathologists supposed to be independent of the plod?
 
_pH_ said:
That's fucking shit though isn't it?

Aren't pathologists supposed to be independent of the plod?
Click to expand...

Did you see the quote from one of the witnesses about a policeman's 'it would take a brave coroner' remark? It's believing that they're beyond reproach that leads to this sort of behaviour in the first place.

ETA: Shouldn't have said 'remark', that would have been an ideal place to use the new word 'vomment'. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Vigil to be held for man who fell to his death after Metropolitan Police used Taser: 30 September 2023
Replies
5
Views
729
likesfish
likesfish
Dystopiary
Petition to save man with intellectual disability sentenced to death in Singapore
Replies
4
Views
547
Joe Chi Min
Joe Chi Min
Boris Sprinkler
Can we help this dude get a taxi? Do we do gofund me's here?
2 3
Replies
77
Views
4K
Magnus McGinty
Magnus McGinty
Tom A
The long, drawn out, and unlamented death of Indymedia
2 3 4
Replies
97
Views
12K
Tom A
Tom A
Cloo
Getting meals to people in need: any ideas?
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
5K
Stanley Edwards
Stanley Edwards
Back
Top Bottom