Ian Tomlinson being treated by Paramedics - Scotland Yard wrongly claimed on their website that police were pelted with rocks and glass as he was being treated - They later took down the claim
PC Simon Harwood, a member of the Metropolitan Police's Territorial Support Group, used "excessive and unreasonable force" against Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests in London on 1st April 2009, a jury has decided and they found that the newspaper seller had been unlawfully killed. To reach an unlawful killing conclusion in English Law the jury were required to have been satisfied to a higher burden of proof than the other possible verdicts, which could have been reached "on the balance of probabilities". They had to be convinced "beyond reasonable doubt", the same threshold used in criminal trials.
Ian Tomlinson walking past the police before he was struck
Tomlinson, a 47-year-old father of nine, had been trying to walk home from work through the demonstrations near the Bank of England on the evening he died. An alcoholic, he had been drinking heavily and was looking vacant and confused as he was repeatedly turned away from police cordons. At 7.20pm he stumbled on to Royal Exchange Buildings, a passage police had been ordered to clear. Tomlinson had his hands in his pockets and was walking away from police when he was struck with a baton and pushed from behind by Harwood.
http://daithaic.blogspot.com/2010/07/ian-tomlinson.html
Now, there are many strange stories to be told in relation to the sad and needless death of Ian Tomlinson who is no longer alive due to the actions of those who should protect us.
There is the story of a Met Police Officer who resigned rather than face disciplinary proceedings relating to a road rage incident, later joined Surrey Police as a civilian worker, applied and was accepted as a Police Officer and then transferred back to the Metropolitan Police?
There is the story of the same Police Officer who in the 17 minutes prior to assaulting Ian Tomlinson had roughly arrested a protester for graffiti to a Police vehicle, had assaulted from behind and thrown to the ground a BBC cameraman before attacking Ian Tomlinson who was walking away and posing no threat, all in view of fellow officers all sworn to uphold the law and "The Queen's Peace"?
This is the story of a Home Office pathologist Freddy Patel, who’s verdict on the cause of death (heart attack) was different to two other highly respected pathologists. Dr. Patel has since been struck off the medical register for misconduct in two previous cases where he acted as a Home Office pathologist. The Crown Prosecution Service justified its decision not to prosecute PC Simon Harwood as they said Patel's findings would provide a jury with enough reasonable doubt that the attack by the officer contributed to the death?
This is the story of Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions, acknowledging there was evidence that the officer assaulted Tomlinson minutes before he died, but saying there was no realistic prospect of conviction because of "sharp disagreements" between pathologists?
This is the story of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) saying it could not bring an assault charge because such a charge must be brought within six months, and it had taken 11 months to reach a decision, due to delays by the Police in submitting evidence?
This is not a story not of a single rogue officer but of a Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) which denied the true version of events until citizens and photographers who were indiscrimately “kettled” with protesters proved that the version of events circulated by the MPS was a pack of lies?
Ian Tomlinson being helped by a member of the public just after he was assaulted by PC Simon Harwood circled in the background. Police initially claimed they went to his assistance when he became ill and they had no previous contact with him
At first, the police strenuously denied any involvement with Tomlinson prior to his collapse. Witness statements immediately contested the police position. But it was the video footage shot by Chris La Jaunie and passed to the Guardian Newspaper that proved Tomlinson had been struck and pushed to the ground by a police officer. Were it not for this visual evidence, the Metropolitan police service (MPS) would have successfully denied and defused allegations of police violence, as it has on so many occasions in the past.
The police officer who attacked Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests could be prosecuted for manslaughter after an inquest jury ruled that he unlawfully killed the newspaper seller. Returning their verdict after three hours of deliberation, jurors said Tomlinson died of internal bleeding in the abdomen after being struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by the officer.
The director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer, immediately said he would "review" his decision last July not year not to prosecute Harwood. There were shouts of "yes" from Tomlinson's family when the jury confirmed their verdict that he was unlawfully killed. For legal reasons, the verdict did not name the officer, Metropolitan police constable Simon Harwood. However, they said that "excessive and unreasonable" force was used when he struck the newspaper vendor who "posed no threat".
A police cordon during the G20 summit protests. Thousands of protesters had been "kettled" by cordons as Tomlinson was trying to make his way home.
The family's lawyer, Jules Cary, said: "Today's decision is a huge relief to Mr Tomlinson's family. To many, today's verdict will seem like a statement of the blindingly obvious, however this fails to take account of the significant and many obstacles faced by the family over the last two years to get to this decision." Today's verdict brings to an end a two-year wait for Tomlinson's family, who maintain police attempted to cover up officers' involvement in his death.
Let us think how it would have happened if it was the other way around? If a police officer had been assaulted by a protestor and died minutes later. Would there have been “mistakes” in collecting evidence which meant charges were time expired? Would they have waited 16 months to decide not to prosecute? The police are paid from our taxes to protect us not to kill us. They must operate with our consent and within the Law and they must be held accountable.
Before we get too excited at the possibility of judicial accountability for the death of a harmless slightly sozzled newspaper vendor who was wandering public streets just minding his own business and trying to find his way home consider this. Despite over 1,000 people dying in police custody or due to police action since the late 1960s if the police officer who the DPP said had assaulted Ian Tomlinson was charged with manslaughter it would have been the first time this has ever happened in Britain. Ask yourself the simple question - what is the statistical possibility that these over 1,000 human beings who died in police custody or as a result of police action were all killed lawfully? I suspect you would get a better answer to this question from bookmaker Paddy Power than you would from the Metropolitan Police Service, Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions, or the myriad other per functionaries paid out of our taxes to protect us.
This is the story of an institutionally violent Police Force whose members believe they can behave in this manner with impunity? This is the story of one law for the Police and a different law for the public? This is the story of collusion to ensure Police Officers who commit crimes on duty are not held to account? This is the story of an innocent victim whose family are still searching for justice?
The Guardian Newspaper obtained this footage of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protest in London shortly before he died. It shows Tomlinson, who was not part of the demonstration, being assaulted from behind and pushed to the ground by baton-wielding police.
No comments:
Post a Comment