Hardwood found not guilty

[DSM2]

Words fail me.

[DSM2]

La Liga said:

I know. Tragic this "jury" and "trial" thing we have. Much better to convict emotively.

It wouldn't be the first time the trial system got it wrong.

Anyway, we all saw what happened, and it appears it was entirely in character.

[DSM2]

heebeegeetee said:

Leadfoot said:

The whole thing was a joke, a down & out drunk has a heart attack after being shoved by a copper & it ends up in the dock. Regardless of who did what/why/previous character, people don't die from being pushed away.

They do if they're not well, which is why policemen (or anybody else) can't go knocking people down willy nilly.

Well they shouldn't but it seems that they can, sadly.

[DSM2]

Derek Smith said:

blindswelledrat said:

0000 said:

Derek Smith said:

The chap, hands in his pcket or not, was a demonstrator. He had been demonstrating earlier on.

So he was overdue being shoved because he'd been demonstrating earlier?

This wasn't crowd control.

When having a discussion about these type of things, it achieves absolutely nothing to remove a sentence like this and quote it out of the context it was made and try to imply that the person was saying something they weren't.
Why do you/people do that?

If it is alright to push football hooligans then why isn't it alight to push demonstrators? Thomlinson was a desmonstrator. He wasn't this old boy taking a short cut home as was suggested in the papers, he was a demonstrator.

If it isn't alright for police officers to push people in such situations then by all means, let us tell them so. Mind you, how do they then police disturbances?

Kettling is seen a a terrible affront to a demonstrator's human rights yet it is a safe a secure way of plicing demos. So what do the police do?

Pushing is a minor assault. If you were walking along the high street with a shopping bag in your hand and then were pushed you'd be upset, and quite rightly. Being a demonstrator on a violent demonstration, do you have the same right to be affronted?

The CPS think yes so policing will have to change in this country. It will be rubber bullets and water canon. Now, think on this. If a bloke dies because he is pushed, how many others will die when water canon is used as well as rubber bullets?

Further, how are the police to control the riots when they kick of next time? Can they push a rioter they do not intend to arrest?

My point is that not so long ago a police officer in a violent demonstration would have been praised for pushing demonstrators. That was their job. Keep the peace and if anyone is taking the mickey, point it out to them.

If, as this case shows, merely by the prosecution of it, police cannot push people in a disturbance then what do they do?

Harsh words? An apologetic cough? An excuse me? They cannot arrest in the vast majority of cases of illegal activity. Yet, inlaw, a police officer cannot assulat a person except to arrest.

Things have changed radically.

You're trying to defend the indefensible, Derek.

The guy was walking away, he has hit with a baton from behind and pushed over. He suffered internal bleeding that could have been there earlier, but probably wasn't.

It appears that Harwood is not much more than a thug in uniform. I wonder how the jury feel now that his history is out?

As has been said, he'll soon be out of the force in all likelihood, the sweep up will begin and, once again, lessons will be learned.

[DSM2]

Derek Smith said:

XCP said:

I am sure I have seen video of him obstructing a police van, and being moved out of the way.

Indeed. Haven't we all.

Frankly, this is getting pathetic.

The guy was clearly walking away at the relevant moment when he was attacked from behind by someone we now know to be a thug, of whom even the Met is clearly ashamed.

If his past history was irrelevant in deciding this case, as you say, then what Tomlinson was doing earlier in the day is more so. The guy may have been a drunk but he didn't deserve to be killed.

Anyway, this appears to have a long way to run, neither Hardwood nor the Police are free of it yet.

[DSM2]

La Liga said:

So in the many pages since I last posted we have:

1) People trying to discredit juries and rationalise all sorts of improbable non-sense to justify their conclusions.

2) People who are unable to think a little more about the complaints aspect. I read the front of a few papers today and they are all a little too excited about this part and are deliberately avoiding any perspective as the jury didn't deliver what they wanted. It must be annoying for the media not to be able to manipulate everything in society. An average of just over 1 complaint a year isn't unusual. When I worked in the town centre doing lots of Friday and Saturday nights the complaints my team and I would receive were greater than that average. Now I work away from the town centre, I've had one in 3 years. There's a lot one can do to avoid complaints, but it greatly depends on role and area. Without that context, we cannot make and valid judgements about Harwood's complaints. That really is the reality of the situation. A little boring, but the truth.

The one thing that is strange is the business surrounding the retirement, rejoining, transferring etc. If there is any wrong-doing here then no doubt some national policy etc will be forthcoming to prevent it occurring again.

'a little boring but the truth'?

In all honesty, some of the comments on here lead me to believe that the average police officer is unable to recognise the truth. Sadly.

As for a national policy to prevent it occurring again, that must rank as one of the most naive posts ever.

[DSM2]

TallbutBuxomly said:

Vipers said:

I always thought the ruling was their badge numbers should be visible, seem tomrecall this from an incident a couple of years when they were hotmdisplayed.

Anyway my opinion is this copper is a bad apple, and should be dismissed, and good luck in Tomlinsons family bringing a civil action against him, can you imagine if any of us had pushed Harwood to the ground.

Yup good luck to his family who will sue met police who will pay out hundreds of k in compo of tax payers money due to someone they apparently cared little about dying.

You are welcome to your opinion on the copper.

As for if anyone of us had pushed him over sure we possibly would have ended up in jail even though we shouldn't have. Where do we stop with this stupidity. Bump someone in the pub get a year in jail for assault ?

This whole thing is much like the john terry race trial. A complete and utter waste of taxpayers money and police time.


IT and harwood were unlucky their paths met on that day. IT due to his alcoholism and life threatening physical health and Harwoods for his temper. Harwood pushed him harder than he should being of short temper not taking into account his hands in his pockets meaning more likely to lose his balance and take a fall.

That was harwoods only mistake. Not the biggest crime in the world. He was not to know that they guy was one fall away from death.Had he had any reason to believe that to be the case I very much doubt he would have been so rough.

Knock anyone over they are unlikely to suffer anything more serious than a grazed knee or elbow.

Why do you apologists keep forgetting to mention the the thug first attacked Tomlinson with a baton, from behind, and then pushed him over?

I wonder if you'd be so forgiving if it was one of your relatives?

[DSM2]

Milky Joe said:

Studio117 said:

normal copper:

Riot copper

no numbers.

I'm both and have to wear epaulettes at all times, have been told a complaint will be upheld if we're not wearing them and it will be a disciplinary matter.

But I'm sure that it has occurred to you that you won't be identified in the first place for if you aren't wearing them?

Or maybe it hasn't........