boboafc Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 (edited) Video images of an officer appearing to strike a passer-by minutes before he collapsed and died at the G20 protests "raise obvious concerns", the head of the Metropolitan Police has said. ian tomlinson photos ....... G20 murder Edited April 8, 2009 by boboafc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Video images of an officer appearing to strike a passer-by minutes before he collapsed and died at the G20 protests "raise obvious concerns", the head of the Metropolitan Police has said. ian tomlinson photos ....... G20 murder Sweet baby Jesus Bob. What he did was exceptional. Wrong. But Murder? Pull the other one it's got bells on! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 You wouldn't even get him on manslaughter I don't think, unless you could link his death directly to it. It looks like assault to me though, but you could do a fair few coppers for that at an large scale demo if you fancied it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 You wouldn't even get him on manslaughter I don't think, unless you could link his death directly to it. It looks like assault to me though, but you could do a fair few coppers for that at an large scale demo if you fancied it. People who give it "he's got his hands in his pocket and is walking away" annoy me too. He's clearly enticing them to come at him, walking as slow as he can so as to delay their creation of a strategic hold position. Now, none of the above makes the action of the cop in question a legitimate solution, but it does explain it to some extent. So to then claim murder, manslaughter or even asault to some extent is just grasping, for my money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I can only go off the couple of seconds on the news last night: 1) The bloke looked spaced out before he got knocked over 2) There is no way he should have been pushed to the ground Rightly or wrongly, it ain't murder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 People who give it "he's got his hands in his pocket and is walking away" annoy me too. He's clearly enticing them to come at him, walking as slow as he can so as to delay their creation of a strategic hold position. Now, none of the above makes the action of the cop in question a legitimate solution, but it does explain it to some extent. So to then claim murder, manslaughter or even asault to some extent is just grasping, for my money. There is a facebook group for people who want to punch slow walkers in the back of the head, and I confess I've been tempted to join it. However, it is still an illegal action, even if you have a tit on your head at the time of doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 There is a facebook group for people who want to punch slow walkers in the back of the head, and I confess I've been tempted to join it. However, it is still an illegal action, even if you have a tit on your head at the time of doing it. I know what you're saying. But if on any given Friday you were in a city centre and someone pushed you over (a drunken scuffle, if you will) and a cop was stood 5 feet from you there is no way that the person would be arrested. If they were they'd be given a D&D warning after sleeping it off in the cells... to say what this cop has done is any worse, to me, is incorrect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikejh45 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Once again, Bob, you've thrown a little seed of a controversial argument into the mix and stood back and let it grow!!! What is your reasoning for wanting the policeman "done" for murder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I know what you're saying. But if on any given Friday you were in a city centre and someone pushed you over (a drunken scuffle, if you will) and a cop was stood 5 feet from you there is no way that the person would be arrested. If they were they'd be given a D&D warning after sleeping it off in the cells... to say what this cop has done is any worse, to me, is incorrect. The copper's mate also hit the guy with a big stick just before the shove, taking the two together could up the anti somewhat. I can't say I think it is a national scandal to be honest, it's more worrying that the coppers came out with a blanket denial of any wrongdoing until the evidence came out. Their first instinct always seems to be to cover it up, just as they did after that Brazillian iron was accidentally shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ritchie82 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 To be fair we all know Bob loves unfair and over the top punishment/retaliation. As said he was winding them up and thinking he was funny. We do not know what is actions before the footage and if you get in the way of a line of riot police on purpose your either going to get nicked, whacked or pushed out the road. Shame for him but there you go. I'm not an expert but I'm guessing he had a heart problem, maybe he shouldn't have been in the middle of a riot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beag_teeets Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Wasn't he just walking home after a day at work? He does look dazed and a bit out of it before the baton whack and push. If that is the case then I think there is a case for the police to answer for and it removes it from wrong place, wrong time. Bloke trying to get home, possibly to watch the England match that night gets caught up in the G20 protest, has a funny turn then gets whacked and pushed by an officer of the law. A trained copper should be able to distinguish between Tarquin on the G20 march and Joe Q Public having a turn/ had one too many. When the bloke is on the ground it is pretty clear that he isn't part of Tarquin's mob, surely one of the boys in blue could've enquired about his well being or at least got an easy collar for D&D? Or even, lets imagine that he was part of the March, would it be right for the police to treat him as they have on the footage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ritchie82 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 (edited) Wasn't he just walking home after a day at work? He does look dazed and a bit out of it before the baton whack and push. If that is the case then I think there is a case for the police to answer for and it removes it from wrong place, wrong time. Bloke trying to get home, possibly to watch the England match that night gets caught up in the G20 protest, has a funny turn then gets whacked and pushed by an officer of the law. A trained copper should be able to distinguish between Tarquin on the G20 march and Joe Q Public having a turn/ had one too many. When the bloke is on the ground it is pretty clear that he isn't part of Tarquin's mob, surely one of the boys in blue could've enquired about his well being or at least got an easy collar for D&D? Or even, lets imagine that he was part of the March, would it be right for the police to treat him as they have on the footage? It looks to me that they want him to move and he doesn't. When the riot police ask me to move I move, he didn't and got pushed out of the way. Its not like he was co-operating with them. Shame he died but the police felt he needed to be moved and moved him. If he had removed himself maybe he would still be here but he played silly beggers with the riot police, not wise in the middle of a mass riot. He got up quite quickly, no need for the police to check on his welfare seen as they were in the middle of a riot and it was hardly an accident, they wanted him out of the way. Perhaps if they showed more of this aggresion the knob heads who rioted would think again about doing it. Edited April 8, 2009 by ritchie82 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 It looks to me that they want him to move and he doesn't. When the riot police ask me to move I move, he didn't and got pushed out of the way. Its not like he was co-operating with them. Shame he died but the police felt he needed to be moved and moved him. If he had removed himself maybe he would still be here but he played silly beggers with the riot police, not wise in the middle of a mass riot. He got up quite quickly, no need for the police to check on his welfare seen as they were in the middle of a riot and it was hardly an accident, they wanted him out of the way. Perhaps if they showed more of this aggresion the knob heads who rioted would think again about doing it. I’m quite happy for giving the long handle to people who are smashing up property, trying to impose a lentilist world order and so on, but the coppers can create trouble themselves by over-aggressively policing. We would all accept, I guess, that it doesnm’t help the atmosphere on the now thankfully rare occasions when we get penned in and treated like murders because we happen to be football fans, even though there is small hardcore among us who are out for trouble and perhaps a bigger number who might get involved if trouble came their way. Same goes for these demonstrators. In fact I’d say that freedom of expression is actually more important than football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Murder? Its assault maximum. The bloke was walking home the wrong way (he must have known there was a protest on and I bet he could have gone home the long way round). He walks quite slowly past some riot police who move him on a bit and then when he doesn't move with speed they move him on with some force (as they probably would have done if he was a protestor). This force was a hit round the back of the knee and a shove in the back- probably standard procedure as neither is likely to cause any serious damage to the person involved. The bloke then dies of a heart attack (and my condolences to the family) which was almost certainly caused by the stress of the situation/something in his system/medical/family history as opposed to shove in the back. The coppers concerned have to live with the consequences that doing their job (for the most part) killed someone who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Its something that can happen with a lot of professions and the victim is unfortuante but its not even close to murder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I’m quite happy for giving the long handle to people who are smashing up property, trying to impose a lentilist world order and so on, but the coppers can create trouble themselves by over-aggressively policing. We would all accept, I guess, that it doesnm’t help the atmosphere on the now thankfully rare occasions when we get penned in and treated like murders because we happen to be football fans, even though there is small hardcore among us who are out for trouble and perhaps a bigger number who might get involved if trouble came their way. Same goes for these demonstrators. In fact I’d say that freedom of expression is actually more important than football. I totally agree with Andy here. England is a free country, this guy wasnt even taking part in the protest. Walking slow? So what, he did nothing wrong. I dont know if the police said anything to him but there is no law saying that if the police ask him to move he has to run. That copper should be done for assualt, nothing worse can come of it. I also agree with Andy's point further up, the police aggrevate situations and can make them worse. You only need to watch an episode of Road Wars on sky one and you will soon see that sometimes, it is the public that cause the problems and other times the police make the situation worse with their actions. I'm sad to say that if the guy wouldnt have died, the copper will have got away with it. I hope he doesnt... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I dont know if the police said anything to him but there is no law saying that if the police ask him to move he has to run. Come on. Run, maybe not. But if they asked him to move quickly and he's doing what he does then they have every right to move him along. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 If I were to happen to be caught up in something like that and the riot rozzers told me to move along I would. It was obvious there were problems on the street, do as you are told and there is no problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 If I were to happen to be caught up in something like that and the riot rozzers told me to move along I would. It was obvious there were problems on the street, do as you are told and there is no problem. Exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 We dont know if anything was said... from the video, the guy is cleary seen walking towards another street, from my understanding away from the area. Even if it was slow, he was moving out of the way... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 We dont know if anything was said... from the video, the guy is cleary seen walking towards another street, from my understanding away from the area. Even if it was slow, he was moving out of the way... But you're dismissing slow as if it's not a significant contributing factor. In the middle of a riot the police are trying to establish a strategic hold position and this person is deliberatly walking slowly in the middle of this position. I don't care who said what. If 20 riot police are trying to establish a line in the middle of the road you're on and you're walking slowly in their way you have to question what you're doing/thinking. He can't (forgive the terminoligy, I appreciate he can't do anything now) claim he didn't notice them, he can't claim he didn't know what they were doing. It's clear for all to see. [EDIT] On the video he is clearly pushed 'gently' once, and twice 'nudged' by police dogs before the final shove which knocks him to the ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Not that I a saying this is what happened but for the sake of hanging back for 10 seconds this copper shoved this guy to the ground causing injuries which lead to his death? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futchers briefs Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 If he'd have been on this forum, he would have been told to 'jog on!' then there wouldn't have been a problem! If you are at a football match, in a pub full of hooligans and you've had time to leave before it 'kicks off' and you don't, get caught up in it, then some may say you should have known better -does the same would apply if you want to 'riot!' sorry - no sympathy!! the S H I T that the police have to put up with at these type of demonstrations, there is no wonder they 'react' sometimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Not that I a saying this is what happened but for the sake of hanging back for 10 seconds this copper shoved this guy to the ground causing injuries which lead to his death? I'm not being funny with you mate. But, if you're assuming that he's caused the death by shoving then you're basing future actions on vast unknowns and this is greatly flawed. What the copper knows as he pushes the guy: 1. He's had 3 physical (and possibly several verbal) warnings to move on and is continuing to be uncooperative. 2. He appears to be able to walk and is in reasonable physical health (the guy is not, by appearance, struggling to walk, nor is he obese etc.). 3. He's preventing the construction of a valuable strategic position during a riot. What he can not foresee: 1. Possible internal physiological weaknesses of the guy. 2. What may happen if this position, which his superiors have deemed important, is not secured. What you're proposing is that he should have foreseen the death of this man as the result of minimal physical contact. That's not a fair weight for this person to bear when making a decision in a riot situation. This is not Rodney King getting his face beat in by a gang of armed cops. This is reasonable force. This is less force than you or I would sustain during an average football game with mates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nervous_Tic Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 One thing that often gets me about these sorts of incidents that rarely gets discussed, is the disproportionate amount of uproar that comes about dependent on who the perpetrator was. Suppose the boot was on the other foot, and one of these Tarquins was waving around his placard/piece of electrical equipment he'd stolen from the bank he'd just smashed up, and he happens to wallop a passer by causing that person to collapse and die. Would it make such prominent headlines as it has here? Would CCTV footage of the incident be bandied about the media? Would there be such an international witch-hunt calling Tarquin a murderer and calling for a Full Independent Enquiry into the incident? Why oh why does it cause such a delirious reaction when it happens to be someone in a position of authority who is at fault? Back to the argument here. I haven't seen the video, not particularly bothered about getting a load of it either, but from what people seem to be saying on here is that this guy didn't exactly cooperate fully with those who were there to try and restore order from what was a rather pathetic protest anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beag_teeets Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I would recommend watching it before commenting on it. Here's one angle: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2009/ap...e-assault-video And another http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2009/ap...tomlinson-video To answer your point, If a Tarquin did cause physical harm to a "bystander" I for one would like to see the full weight of the law brought down on them. I would also like to see the ones that did cause criminal damage to be prosecuted. I support their right to protest, I support the anti-war protesters right to protest at the home-coming of the troops but if you do something on these lines then there are consequences that have to be faced. Now, where did I put that tree in need of a hug? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.