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

[Pickman's model]

Hang on, did I really hear on the news (BBC London) just now that the person who killed Ian Tomlinson may have been 'a protestor dressed as a police officer'

wtf

link to nutty claim: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tigators-claim-Ian-Tomlinson-hit-fake-Pc.html

 

[_pH_]

I know! I'm sure that's what I just heard, was in the kitchen and not watching it. Am trying to find out!

e2a: cheers Pickman's.

still wtf

Investigators told the family of Ian Tomlinson he might have been struck by a police impersonator, a report revealed tonight.

Campaigners claim a City of London Police officer said he could not rule out that the 47-year-old clashed with a protester dressed in police riot uniform.

The claim was made in a conversation soon after Mr Tomlinson died at the height of G20 protest clashes on April 1.

 

[Pickman's model]

I know! I'm sure that's what I just heard, was in the kitchen and not watching it. Am trying to find out!

pls see my post 2011

 

[_pH_]

pls see my post 2011

yeah, seen it, have edited.

 

[Pickman's model]

in case article taken down:


G20 investigators told family of man who died in protests that he may have been hit by 'fake Pc'

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 6:25 PM on 30th June 2009


Investigators told the family of Ian Tomlinson he might have been struck by a police impersonator, a report revealed tonight.

Campaigners claim a City of London Police officer said he could not rule out that the 47-year-old clashed with a protester dressed in police riot uniform.

The claim was made in a conversation soon after Mr Tomlinson died at the height of G20 protest clashes on April 1.


Ian Tomlinson in video fiootage which shows an officer shoving him to the ground
The newspaper seller's death is at the centre of an inquiry after video footage emerged of him being struck and pushed to the ground by a policeman.

The claim was contained in a report published tonight by campaign group Inquest who have interviewed Mr Tomlinson's widow Julia.

The report was highly critical of the role of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) in the days after his death.

Its authors accused officials at the watchdog of an 'obvious error of judgment' by failing to launch an independent inquiry immediately.

They said valuable forensic evidence may have been lost as a result and said officials failed to treat police accounts with a 'healthy degree of scepticism'.

The report also contained new information about the events of April 1 and the ensuing inquiries, including:

A post mortem examination found Mr Tomlinson suffered an injury to his right calf that may have been a police dog bite;
His family are unhappy they were not given the opportunity to identify his body. Fingerprints were used instead;
The Tomlinson family were not able to see his body for six days after his death;
The IPCC was blocked from attending the first post mortem by the coroner. The Tomlinson family were not told they could attend;
There are concerns that police officers delayed an ambulance from reaching Mr Tomlinson as he lay dying in Cornhill.
Deborah Coles, co-director of Inquest, said there are striking similarities with the death of anti-fascist activist Blair Peach in 1979.

She said there were also claims in the aftermath of his death that he may have been attacked by police impersonators.

Mrs Coles said: 'We felt it is important that the death is not looked at in isolation, but in the broader context in which it occurred.

'The context is policing generally, about our experience of investigating deaths following police contact and the investigation of police misconduct.

'There is a deep frustration this family feel, which is common with other families where they were given misinformation, with the initial police investigation.

'This is not an uncommon experience with the families we see but what was different in this case was the mobile phone and video footage.

'If it was not for that there is a danger it would have been swept under the carpet.'

The first of a raft of inquiries into the events of April 1 and 2 in the City of London were published yesterday.

The Home Affairs Committee said police chiefs must rethink the controversial tactic of 'kettling' participants of mass demonstrations.

Mrs Tomlinson, of the Isle of Dogs, has said her husband might still be alive if officers had let him leave the area as he tried to make his way home.

The committee also warned that inexperienced and untrained officers must never again be left isolated at the frontline of volatile public protests.

HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary Denis O'Connor will reveal his preliminary findings of the police operation next week.

The IPCC has launched inquiries into the death of Mr Tomlinson and claims the Metropolitan Police misled the public.

Other inquiries are also under way after Nicola Fisher was slapped by an officer and after riot police cleared the impromptu climate camp in Bishopsgate.

Last week Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson said a secret report into the death of Mr Peach must be published by the end of the year.

There have been repeated claims Mr Peach was killed by police officers who struck him over the head as he walked home.

Metropolitan Police officers were also conducting an internal review of all of the video footage recovered from the demonstrations.

The Inquest report was published as solicitors acting on behalf of G20 protesters submitted a legal challenge to the High Court today.

Experts will bring a judicial review of police tactics such as "kettling" to contain people and the excessive use of force.

 

[Pickman's model]

what i don't understand about all this is that NOW we're told the filth were untrained and inexperienced. at the time we were told that the cops could cope with anything they could have thrown at them. we were told that what we saw was the cops doing what they were told. the most experienced public order cops were on duty in gt, the control room, with the commissioner and the home secretary certainly being kept in touch with events. so, i suppose what i'm really getting at is a rather simple question, what the bloody fuck are they on about, telling us a pile of shit which on their own prior statements is a load of bollocks?

 

[winjer]

Wrong thread for that discussion.

The Inquest briefing mentioned by the Mail is here.

 

[editor]

Hang on, did I really hear on the news (BBC London) just now that the person who killed Ian Tomlinson may have been 'a protestor dressed as a police officer'

wtf

Yep. It's quite the most fucking ridiculous thing the Met have come up with.

Police Suggest Tomlinson Cop Could Be Fake

Could the policeman who pushed Ian Tomlinson have been an impostor - a member of the public in disguise? This novel possibility was raised by a senior police investigator looking into the death of Tomlinson, who died at the G20 protests shortly after an alleged push from a police officer. According to a report released yesterday, Tomlinson's widow was told by the investigator that they 'couldn't rule out' the possibility that the assailant was a member of the public wearing a stolen police uniform, a scenario that the family judge as 'fantastical'. By saying such things, the City of London Police 'completely failed to persuade the Tomlinson family of its impartiality'. In other words, for a police officer to deflect blame for the incident to a notional impostor undermines confidence that the investigation is unbiased. But should it? Surely it is an investigator's duty to keep all possibilities open until evidence rules them out. While the idea seems wildly unlikely, it is not impossible that a far-left protest group might wish to agitate the crowds by simulating police brutality. It was perhaps unwise of the officer to mention this unlikelihood to the grieving widow, before serious analysis of the video evidence was complete. But the admission that he was keeping an objective mind to alternative theories does not, in our view, show the investigation to be biased.


http://londonist.com/2009/07/police_suggest_tomlinson_cop_could.php

 

[butchersapron]

I want to laugh bit i feel sick.

 

[editor]

From today's Grunaiud:

Police floated imposter theory over Ian Tomlinson's death at G20 protests

A senior police officer who investigated the death of Ian Tomlinson told his family that the officer who struck him at the G20 demonstrations could have been a member of the public "dressed in police uniform", it emerged last night.

The City of London police investigator made the comment at an emergency meeting with Tomlinson's family and the Independent Police Complaints Commission on 8 April, hours after the Guardian released footage showing the attack on the 47-year-old newspaper vendor.

Tomlinson collapsed and died of internal bleeding shortly after being struck with a baton and pushed to the ground. He had been trying to find a way home through police cordons near the Bank of England on 1 April.

The footage prompted the IPCC to launch a full criminal inquiry.

A report on issues surrounding Tomlinson's death by Inquest, the group that assists the families of people who die in police custody, said yesterday that the suggestion he might have been attacked by an imposter gave the impression that the investigation was biased .

"The City of London police completely failed to persuade the Tomlinson family of its impartiality, not least when they were told by an investigating officer that he was not ruling out the possibility that the alleged assailant may be a member of the public dressed in police uniform," it said. A source present at the 8 April meeting said the senior investigator's comment was made after he was pressed on how the identity of the officer could be established from the video.

The investigator agreed that the man who struck Tomlinson was likely to have been a police officer, but could "not rule out" the possibility that he was a member of the public.

The family believed this theory was fantastical. The video of the attack clearly showed that the officer who struck Tomlinson, who has since been suspended from duty and questioned under caution for manslaughter, was surrounded by more than a dozen police officers. The source said that the investigator claimed one possibility was that a member of the public had stolen a Metropolitan police uniform and equipment from the back of a police van before initiating the attack.

Tomlinson's family also said this week's home affairs select committee report into policing of the G20 protests failed to properly identify the issues that may have contributed to his death. "I feel very upset by the report," said Julia Tomlinson, his widow. "It refers to Ian collapsing but does not mention the video evidence showing that he was struck."

She said her family was particularly frustrated that the inquiry appeared to focus on the inexperience of some officers, suggesting they should receive more training.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/jun/30/ian-tomlinson-inquiry-g20-protests

Or maybe it was the pixies wot dun it.

 

[butchersapron]

I wonder, did any officers report getting knocked out and their uniform nicked? Maybe the police would know?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

I wonder, did any officers report getting knocked out and their uniform nicked? <snip>

Probably by those anarchists with catapults ...

 

[Idris2002]

Hang on, did I really hear on the news (BBC London) just now that the person who killed Ian Tomlinson may have been 'a protestor dressed as a police officer'

wtf

The Ogre does what ogres can,
Deeds quite impossible for Man,
But one prize is beyond his reach:
The Ogre cannot master speech.

About a subjugated plain,
Among it's desperate and slain,
The Ogre stalks with hands on hips,
While drivel gushes from his lips.

(Auden)

 

[Pickman's model]

I wonder, did any officers report getting knocked out and their uniform nicked? Maybe the police would know?

there was a load of city police uniforms went walkabout apparently...

 

[Louloubelle]

Interesting development

http://www.thecnj.co.uk/camden/2009/070209/news070209_02.html

 

[two sheds]

Another interesting development:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/jul/05/query-g20-assault-case-officer

"Details of the past of the officer at the centre of the IPCC inquiry into Tomlinson's death emerged yesterday. He had been on a disciplinary charge and facing a misconduct hearing earlier in his Met career.
The charge related to an incident while he was on sick leave with a shoulder injury when the officer became involved in a road rage incident.

It is understood he tried to arrest the other driver involved in the incident, who later complained that the officer had used unnecessary force.
Before the discipline board convened, however, the officer took early retirement from the Met on medical grounds, and was awarded a medical pension.
"

Interestingly enough I was just thinking today of a statement I made some time ago that police officers have been able to avoid disciplinary action for actual misconduct just by retiring from the force. Detective boy pulled me up on it, and I said I'd come back to him next time I saw an example. Well, it's taken a while but this looks like one

 

[paolo]

Blimey. So it's not someone who 'merely' had a moment of very poor judgement, he's basically long term dodgy.

 

[ymu]

So he took early retirement to avoid disciplinary action for being a violent twat, and then rejoined to beat up people in the TSG? How many times are they allowed to pull that one then? Fuck's sake!

 

[two sheds]

Yep, not just single bad apple - systemic failure where responsibility has to go up to the top, too. Same with Louloubelle's link. Same with statements from top police about them being "up for" a summer of violence. Same with police covering their badges up. Same with police saying they had "a little surprise" for the protestors at the climate camp.

The relevant press release will no doubt say they have now tightened procedures. The relevant previous press release also no doubt said they had then tightened procedures - tighten procedures all you like if you're not following the written procedures anyway .

The report coming out that the article talks about sounds interesting.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Yep. It's quite the most fucking ridiculous thing the Met have come up with.

If only. I still fancy "protestors were bottling Tomlinson and/or the police at the time, and they prevented police medics from reaching Tomlinson" for that particular award. I believe there is now footage of the police forcibly preventing a trained civillian medic from treating Tomlinson...

 

[ymu]

IIRC at least one of the recent reports criticises them for holding up the ambulance too. I'll see if I can dig out a link.


E2A: OK, it's from what looks like an Inquest press release, not one of the "official" reports. http://www.esnews.co.uk/?p=4091&mode=1 (same text as the "imposter" article linked above, so presumably a press release).

 

[DaveCinzano]

It will be interesting to see how deeply both the IPCC and HMIC will be looking into how demonstrably false information came to be published in the earliest reports of the G20 protests, such as the 'bricks thrown at brave police medics' line which was immortalised in print in the Evening Standard.

Readable PDF of article

Given the interest that the HAC showed in the issue of 'communication' (or lack thereof) in big policing operations, and how one of the IPCC investigations is focused on misinformation, are we likely to see any real change in the culture of black and grey propaganda being churned out of police headquarters, an end to 'protesters given packed lunches' and 'samurai sword-wielding rioters stockpile weapons' and 'drunk fans urinated over corpses' and all those other made-up stories?

And will the individual police officers and unwarranted employees actually writing and briefing these falsehoods, and their superiors who directed them or permitted them to do so, be named, and disciplined?

/rhetorical questions

 

[Bakunin]

Given the interest that the HAC showed in the issue of 'communication' (or lack thereof) in big policing operations, and how one of the IPCC investigations is focused on misinformation, are we likely to see any real change in the culture of black and grey propaganda being churned out of police headquarters, an end to 'protesters given packed lunches' and 'samurai sword-wielding rioters stockpile weapons' and 'drunk fans urinated over corpses' and all those other made-up stories?

And will the individual police officers and unwarranted employees actually writing and briefing these falsehoods, and their superiors who directed them or permitted them to do so, be named, and disciplined?

/rhetorical questions

Given that the Met has a long and well-deserved reputation for attempting to cover up just about anything that has ever implied its officers either are, or might be, at fault, I'd say the chances are very slim.

For example, anyone who remembers how the Met did its best to hide the endemic corruption of a broad selection (and large numbers) of its officers back in the 1960's and 1970's, including some senior ones, will know what I mean.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

It's an interesting point though. There was one brief period where even the BBC were saying Mr Tomlinson had actually been killed by the more or less mythical 'hail of bottles'

As far as I can tell there is no actual sanction that would act as a disincentive for the police to discourage their established habit of telling pre-emptive lies to the media when they fuck up, knowing that they'll stick.

Even to this day I run into people that think the unfortunate Mr De Menezes was 'acting suspiciously, jumping turnstiles, wearing a bulky jacket and trailing wires'

 

[david dissadent]

Should there not be an outcry to re-vet all police officers?

 

[DaveCinzano]

I'm not sticking my arm up their arses.

 

[DaveCinzano]

HMIC's interim report into G20 policing and other issues now available (PDF):

http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmic/docs/ap/

 

[ymu]

Bloody hell!

Newsnight just now, Keith Vaz (Chair of the HASC) with Brian Paddick and Jenny Jones. Short film about a TSG assault allegation, Brian Paddick talking about how highly trained they were. Then Keith Vaz says "we (the committee) weren't told about them. We were told they were all inexperienced officers on the front-line. Noone told us about this TSG." The rest of the panel go "huh?!" and he says "we can only rule on evidence we're given".

Fuck's sake!

There's another thread on this. I'll go find it.

 

[ymu]

.

 

[DaveCinzano]

I emailed Keith Vaz on 29th June with my concerns at the Committee's findings, specifically referring to highly-trained, experienced specialist units such as the Forward Intelligence Teams and TSG. I received a reply from the HAC acknowledging the issues I had raised with the suggestion that they may be dealt with in the near future. Interesting!