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

[DaveCinzano]

Isn't that a bit odd? Swift was appointed by Harwood's team. Shouldn't the jury know that all the non-discredited pathologists on both 'sides' agree with each other?

They do know that because a summary of Swift's findings to that effect was read out to the jury.

 

[ymu]

Nice one, thanks.

 

[shaman75]

Jurors at the inquest into the death of Ian Tomlinson will consider whether the actions of a police officer amounted to unlawful killing, a coroner has said.

...

Judge Thornton said the jury had to decide if the baton strike and push were "unlawful" and "dangerous" and whether they inadvertently caused Mr Tomlinson's death.

The judge said the push on Mr Tomlinson did not have to be the "sole or principal" cause of death for the jury to return an unlawful killing verdict.

The jury was told the three other possible verdicts were misadventure, natural causes and open.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13225062

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

from twitter - ALERT Ian Tomlinson jury back in court - verdict expected shortly

 

[ymu]

Unlawfully killed - C4.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

Unlawful killing verdict, 5 live just said.

 

[big eejit]

Wow!

3.37pm: Ian Tomlinson's family could be heard shouting "yes" at the verdict. His wife, Julia, six of their children are present at the hearing and have broken down, crying.

3.34pm: The jury has concluded Ian Tomlinson was unlawfully killed by a police officer at the G20 protests.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/blog/2011/may/03/ian-tomlinson-inquest-verdict-live-blog

 

[ddraig]

wow indeed!

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

The jury said both the baton strike and the push were "unreasonable".

 

[Balbi]

Nail the fucker to a plank and bury him at sea

 

[shaman75]

Brilliant result. Let's hope the CPS decide to look again.

 

[ddraig]

from that guardian link

3.42pm: The court was caught unaware by the jury's quick decision. They returned to the room and answered four short questions, known as the inquisition.

What was the name of the deceased?
Ian Tomlinson.

What was the cause of his death? Injury or disease?
Answer: Abdominal haemorrhage due to blunt force trauma to the abdomen in association with cirrhosis of the liver.

If the person died of injury, what were the circumstances?
Mr Tomlinson was on his way home from work on the 1st of April 2009 during the G20 demonstration. He was fatally injured at around 19.20pm on Royal Exchange Buildings ... This was the result of a baton strike from behind and a push by the officer which caused Ian Tomlinson to fall heavily.

The jury said both the baton strike and the push were "unreasonable".

"As a result, Mr Tomlinson suffered internal bleeding which led to his collapse within a few minutes and his subsequent death." The jury decided that at the time of the strike and push Tomlinson was was walking away from the officer and "posed no threat".

What is the jury's conclusion as to the death?
Unlawful killing.

 

[big eejit]

Maybe a succession of recent events is leading people to realise that the police have gone way too far in what they think they can do. And this swift verdict is a sign of that discontent?

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

Or maybe simply such compelling evidence that this was a stitch-up from start to finish, when dealt with by the establishment initially?

 

[Badgers]

Blimey!!

 

[ymu]

Well done, that jury. And coroner, to be fair.

 

[Streathamite]

YESSS!! Viva the jury. Justice comes that little bit nearer.

 

[ymu]

Unlawful killing is an 'unreasonable doubt' verdict too. The CPS will be under very heavy pressure to bring a prosecution for manslaughter.

 

[xes]

One step closer to justice. Massive good thing

Still don't think that this cunt'll ever see the inside of a jail cell. Same goes for Patel. Criminal cunts. Shoot the fucking lot of them.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Or maybe simply such compelling evidence that this was a stitch-up from start to finish, when dealt with by the establishment initially?

Yep, I mean I don't believe for a second that things would ever have got this far without a good clear video capture of Constable Savage attacking Mr Tomlinson.

That's necessary but not sufficient, as demonstrated by the "Robocop vs tiny woman" incident, but without the video there's zero chance of bringing violent cops to justice, wheras if you've got one or more videos of the attack, there's a faint hope.

 

[embree]

Great news

You know what though? Over the last week and a half I've seen them do as bad and worse in my neighbourhood. It's routine for riot cops to act like this.

 

[winjer]

Or maybe simply such compelling evidence that this was a stitch-up from start to finish, when dealt with by the establishment initially?

Having heard Patel give evidence and some details of his other as yet unpublicised fuck-ups there's no way you'd want him involved in any plot.

 

[plurker]

Brilliant result. Let's hope the CPS decide to look again.

That review will now take place and will be thorough. It will take into account all of the evidence now available, including any new evidence that emerged at the Inquest, the issues left by the Coroner to the jury and the conclusions they reached.

http://blog.cps.gov.uk/2011/05/cps-to-revi...-tomlinson.html

 

[Mr.Bishie]

One step closer to justice. Massive good thing

Isn't it just! Fingers crossed the fucker does see the inside of a cell!

 

[TopCat]

3/1 he does no more than six months. Takers?

 

[DotCommunist]

whose that dead copper who has had 3 whole fit ups done to innocents supposed to have killed him only later to be proven innocent? Total joke- its taken two years to get to the point of 'review decision not to prosecute' in Tomlinsons case ffs.

 

[MellySingsDoom]

Harwood's solicitors have just released a statement on his behalf:

"Pc Harwood would like to repeat how sorry he is that Mr Tomlinson died.
"Although Pc Harwood's contact with Mr Tomlinson lasted only a few seconds, it has been examined in great detail over several weeks of evidence.
"The mass of video and other evidence gathered by the IPCC now presents a picture very different from the one which Pc Harwood had on the day.
"In particular, he wishes that he had known then all that he now knows about Mr Tomlinson's movements and fragile state of health.
"Pc Harwood did not intend, or foresee at the time, that his push would cause Mr Tomlinson to fall over, let alone that it would result in any injury.
"Pc Harwood gave evidence to the coroner and jury for three days. He did his best to answer truthfully every question he was asked, even when he was told by the coroner that he did not have to.
"Pc Harwood is not a medical expert, but he has tried to follow the evidence which the many doctors have given, and recognises that the jury will have considered all that evidence with the greatest possible care."

Self-serving bullshine, but you wouldn't expect anything else really.

 

[shaman75]

Even if they lock him up and throw away the key, even if he is banished from the force, the policing of protests will not change and now they want to make complaints against the police even less independent than they supposedly are.

The bill, which is making its way through parliament, will bring the most radical change to the police complaints procedure we have seen since the reforms that followed the death of Stephen Lawrence. The Police Reform Act 2002, which replaced the much-criticised Police Complaints Authority with the Independent Police Complaints Commission, has in recent years been the gatekeeper to all complaints against the police and the only body to which complainants can appeal following local and supervised investigations by the police's professional standards departments. But that will no longer be the case from May 2012. The safeguards that were put in place by the publication of the IPCC's statutory guidance in April 2010 will be removed and an unregulated system of police complaints will result.

Schedule 14 of the bill at paragraph 8 (5) will give police forces unfettered discretion in determining which complaints they wish to record and – although, as exists today, there will be an appeal process to the IPCC for non-recording – one suspects the police will put up a fight when their authority is challenged.

But the most shocking and controversial aspect of the bill will be the loss of the independent appeal to the IPCC following a local or supervised investigation. This important element of the complaints procedure, although it does not uphold all appeals, does ensure that a fresh review of the complaint is carried out. Where the appeal is upheld, a reinvestigation is ordered.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2011/apr/08/police-reform-bill-accountability

 

[gawkrodger]

get in!

 

[newbie]

this wasn't one bad apple acting recklessly on his own. This should really result in charges relating to the way senior police behaved before during and after the event. Something about corporate manslaughter and attempting to pervert the course of justice perhaps. But there's even less chance of that than there is of topcat losing his bet.