No Charges over G20 man's death
Discussion
I am still of opinion the officer should maybe be done for assault but no more. He pushed the guy a fair but harder than was necessary but tbh Mr Tomlinson was not without blame nor prior medical issues making the case more complicated to prove.
Worst thing to come out of all this is that the family are going to get a huge payout which imho stinks.
Worst thing to come out of all this is that the family are going to get a huge payout which imho stinks.
Tallbut Buxomly said:
I am still of opinion the officer should maybe be done for assault but no more. He pushed the guy a fair but harder than was necessary but tbh Mr Tomlinson was not without blame nor prior medical issues making the case more complicated to prove.
.
If that was Mr Joe Public who did the same thing, the charge would probably be murder, reduced to manslaughter using the circumstances as mitigation. Why should it be any different for Plod??.
Tallbut Buxomly said:
Worst thing to come out of all this is that the family are going to get a huge payout which imho stinks.
Why? They should be due whatever is appropriate, Ian Tomlinson was unlawfully killed (by the actions of a PC), I for one have a degree of symapathy for their loss. Ian Tomlinson was a flawed man, the family have admitted as such, that does not mean he should have been subjected to the full force of arrogant and overbearing Police action. He wasn't even taking part in the demonstration FFS, he was a drunk trying to get home.Merc the reason i made comment ref the family is that as far as i am concerned they are due nothing. they have played to the press and public about how they have been denied a father and husband but what hasnt been reported is the fact they had in effect disowned him i am led to believe in the years prior to this happening.
As far as i am concerned the only reason they had any interest in this was due to the compo they will be able to claim. That imho is simply wrong.
I have previously explained my "liberal" view on why i feel the officer should not be punished any further than assault charges. MR Tomlinson was asked/told to move along by the police and refused we see that much in the video. Mr Tomlinson was both very drunk and had serious medical conditions due to his drinking habit.
The police are not above the law however they are allowed to do certain things the public are not within certain criteria. In this circumstance they were right ish but too much force was used and its hard to tell whether deliberate or mere misjudgement.
As far as i am concerned the only reason they had any interest in this was due to the compo they will be able to claim. That imho is simply wrong.
I have previously explained my "liberal" view on why i feel the officer should not be punished any further than assault charges. MR Tomlinson was asked/told to move along by the police and refused we see that much in the video. Mr Tomlinson was both very drunk and had serious medical conditions due to his drinking habit.
The police are not above the law however they are allowed to do certain things the public are not within certain criteria. In this circumstance they were right ish but too much force was used and its hard to tell whether deliberate or mere misjudgement.
Tallbut Buxomly said:
Merc the reason i made comment ref the family is that as far as i am concerned they are due nothing. they have played to the press and public about how they have been denied a father and husband but what hasnt been reported is the fact they had in effect disowned him i am led to believe in the years prior to this happening.
As far as i am concerned the only reason they had any interest in this was due to the compo they will be able to claim. That imho is simply wrong.
I have previously explained my "liberal" view on why i feel the officer should not be punished any further than assault charges. MR Tomlinson was asked/told to move along by the police and refused we see that much in the video. Mr Tomlinson was both very drunk and had serious medical conditions due to his drinking habit.
The police are not above the law however they are allowed to do certain things the public are not within certain criteria. In this circumstance they were right ish but too much force was used and its hard to tell whether deliberate or mere misjudgement.
You do like the confrontational stance don't you. Hmm As far as i am concerned the only reason they had any interest in this was due to the compo they will be able to claim. That imho is simply wrong.
I have previously explained my "liberal" view on why i feel the officer should not be punished any further than assault charges. MR Tomlinson was asked/told to move along by the police and refused we see that much in the video. Mr Tomlinson was both very drunk and had serious medical conditions due to his drinking habit.
The police are not above the law however they are allowed to do certain things the public are not within certain criteria. In this circumstance they were right ish but too much force was used and its hard to tell whether deliberate or mere misjudgement.
mercGLowner said:
Am no lawyer, but if assault leads to death in those circumstances, is that not at least manslaughter?
Not as I understand it.Murder is getting out of bed with the intention to kill.
Manslaughter is the momentary intention to kill.
I can't see them proving the higher charge on the basis of what I've seen. They should have got him for assault; I'd have said 'Guilty' from the video we've all seen. I couldn't say the same for a Manslaughter charge; I don't think he meant to kill him.
Tallbut Buxomly said:
Worst thing to come out of all this is that the family are going to get a huge payout which imho stinks.
After a family member (breadwinner?) was unlawfully killed by the plod in question...The worst thing is that a meathead like Harwood was allowed into the force.
Mojocvh said:
Tallbut Buxomly said:
Merc the reason i made comment ref the family is that as far as i am concerned they are due nothing. they have played to the press and public about how they have been denied a father and husband but what hasnt been reported is the fact they had in effect disowned him i am led to believe in the years prior to this happening.
As far as i am concerned the only reason they had any interest in this was due to the compo they will be able to claim. That imho is simply wrong.
I have previously explained my "liberal" view on why i feel the officer should not be punished any further than assault charges. MR Tomlinson was asked/told to move along by the police and refused we see that much in the video. Mr Tomlinson was both very drunk and had serious medical conditions due to his drinking habit.
The police are not above the law however they are allowed to do certain things the public are not within certain criteria. In this circumstance they were right ish but too much force was used and its hard to tell whether deliberate or mere misjudgement.
You do like the confrontational stance don't you. Hmm As far as i am concerned the only reason they had any interest in this was due to the compo they will be able to claim. That imho is simply wrong.
I have previously explained my "liberal" view on why i feel the officer should not be punished any further than assault charges. MR Tomlinson was asked/told to move along by the police and refused we see that much in the video. Mr Tomlinson was both very drunk and had serious medical conditions due to his drinking habit.
The police are not above the law however they are allowed to do certain things the public are not within certain criteria. In this circumstance they were right ish but too much force was used and its hard to tell whether deliberate or mere misjudgement.
grumbledoak said:
mercGLowner said:
Am no lawyer, but if assault leads to death in those circumstances, is that not at least manslaughter?
Not as I understand it.Murder is getting out of bed with the intention to kill.
Manslaughter is the momentary intention to kill.
I can't see them proving the higher charge on the basis of what I've seen. They should have got him for assault; I'd have said 'Guilty' from the video we've all seen. I couldn't say the same for a Manslaughter charge; I don't think he meant to kill him.
Merc was correct in that, for a normal member of the public they would be looking at a manslaughter charge.
And to the people saying "why should it be any different for the police?" Id like to point out that you wouldnt be saying that if it was your property they were protecting.
grumbledoak said:
Not as I understand it.
Murder is getting out of bed with the intention to kill.
Manslaughter is the momentary intention to kill.
I can't see them proving the higher charge on the basis of what I've seen. They should have got him for assault; I'd have said 'Guilty' from the video we've all seen. I couldn't say the same for a Manslaughter charge; I don't think he meant to kill him.
No intention to kill is needed to prove manslaughter.Murder is getting out of bed with the intention to kill.
Manslaughter is the momentary intention to kill.
I can't see them proving the higher charge on the basis of what I've seen. They should have got him for assault; I'd have said 'Guilty' from the video we've all seen. I couldn't say the same for a Manslaughter charge; I don't think he meant to kill him.
You need to prove that the defendant committed an unlawful act (e.g. an assault - but without an intent to kill or seriously injure, arson, criminal damage etc) and that as a result of this act the victim died.
E.g. I set your wheelie bin on fire intending to damage it because I don't like you, but the fire spreads to your house and kills you, even though I had no intention for this to happen, you died as a result of my unlawful act = manslaughter.
Or in this case, PC Harwood pushes/batons Tomlinson unlawfully, but not intending to kill or seriously harm him, but then as a result of the assault, Tomlinson dies = grounds for manslaughter.
Night Runner said:
After a family member (breadwinner?) was unlawfully killed by the plod in question...
The worst thing is that a meathead like Harwood was allowed into the force.
Breadwinner?? The family had disowned him and thrown him out of the family home years before i am led to believe. If proven wrong on any point i am happy to concede it.The worst thing is that a meathead like Harwood was allowed into the force.
Whether he was disowned by his family is irrelevant.
1. The police are there to protect the public and property.
2. Dereliction of duty?
It's not a case against the UK police, it's about the actions of one police officer. You get bad judges, bad teachers, bad soldiers, bad nurses and bad doctors.
We can all have a bad day at the office, but very few us when having a bad day at work lead to the death of another.
The police did themselves no favour with getting a dodgy Doctor to do the initial autopsy. It's no different from speeders caught doing three figure speeds, or celebrities hiring Nick Freeman to get expert 'witnesses' to try technicalities to get off.
I don't get on with my immediate family so therefore it's OK if some ne'erdowell gives me a few coshes to the head?
1. The police are there to protect the public and property.
2. Dereliction of duty?
It's not a case against the UK police, it's about the actions of one police officer. You get bad judges, bad teachers, bad soldiers, bad nurses and bad doctors.
We can all have a bad day at the office, but very few us when having a bad day at work lead to the death of another.
The police did themselves no favour with getting a dodgy Doctor to do the initial autopsy. It's no different from speeders caught doing three figure speeds, or celebrities hiring Nick Freeman to get expert 'witnesses' to try technicalities to get off.
I don't get on with my immediate family so therefore it's OK if some ne'erdowell gives me a few coshes to the head?
Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 4th May 00:18
Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 4th May 00:19
You entirely miss the point carinaman. The point is that i see no reason that his family should collect monies from his death when they had disowned him. They are behaving like vultures picking at his dead carcass.
Whether his death was lawful or unlawful etc has no bearing on that consideration.
Whether his death was lawful or unlawful etc has no bearing on that consideration.
Tallbut Buxomly said:
I have previously explained my "liberal" view on why i feel the officer should not be punished any further than assault charges. MR Tomlinson was asked/told to move along by the police and refused we see that much in the video. Mr Tomlinson was both very drunk and had serious medical conditions due to his drinking habit.
The police are not above the law however they are allowed to do certain things the public are not within certain criteria. In this circumstance they were right ish but too much force was used and its hard to tell whether deliberate or mere misjudgement.
The man lived locally and worked locally. In short, the very type of person whose freedom the police are supposed to be protecting.The police are not above the law however they are allowed to do certain things the public are not within certain criteria. In this circumstance they were right ish but too much force was used and its hard to tell whether deliberate or mere misjudgement.
I hope the bully of a policemen gets his just desserts.
That's a fair cop Tallbutbuxomly. I'll take that one. 
Diversity says everyone has to be treated equally.
The police can't go round deciding who's innocent and who isn't.
Some parallels here with the woman being dragged through Melksham police station?
It's saddening on the 18.00 BBC Radio news someone was saying that it wouldn't have got this far if it wasn't for the 'citizen journalist' video footage.
Diversity says everyone has to be treated equally.
The police can't go round deciding who's innocent and who isn't.
Some parallels here with the woman being dragged through Melksham police station?
It's saddening on the 18.00 BBC Radio news someone was saying that it wouldn't have got this far if it wasn't for the 'citizen journalist' video footage.
Tallbut Buxomly said:
You entirely miss the point carinaman. The point is that i see no reason that his family should collect monies from his death when they had disowned him. They are behaving like vultures picking at his dead carcass.
Whether his death was lawful or unlawful etc has no bearing on that consideration.
If I may. Whether his death was lawful or unlawful etc has no bearing on that consideration.
Tallbut Buxomly said:
Jesus TF Christ said:
If I shoved you in the back with that force you'd go down, sober or drunk.
Subjective. Personally I am pretty certain a shove like he received were I sober would not put me on the floor, drunk would be another matter but then I rarely ever get that drunk.I am not saying the officer is without blame however the lunch mob mentality behind all of this very disturbing where people aren't taking everything emotion free and in context.
We dont know if he was our was nt there for the protest it's believed not by majority.
We dont know what was said to him and by him in the incident as it unfolded.
We dont know his medical condition leading up to that moment and whether he was already in decline before he was shoved or not.
We dont know whether the officer meant to push him hard enough to knock him over with intent or not (lost his temper or not)
I am not medically trained but dont buy the evidence of the second coroner who claims his internal injuries were caused by falling on his arm/elbow which wouldn't leave external bruising but would be severe enough to cause internal bleeding.
What we do know is there is a massive push to find someone to blame costing us the taxpayer a lot of money.
That's one way to look at it. Another would be that we, as a collective of people have every right and responsibility to find out whether those who are supposed to maintain law and order, acted within the boundaries and responsibilities of the laws they are employed to enforce.
To my mind, there is no financial cost too high that it is not justifyable. One illegal death is one death too many. What ever the man might or might not have been, no one should die in the street through the inapporpriate actions of those enforcing the law.
Using a Doctor that had already been taken off a list approved people to conduct autopsies used by adjoining constabulary is much the same as someone taking their decade old car to an MoT test centre that's known to be not quite as strict as others?
Cost?
But protecting the public is regularly cited as justification for police actions. You can't then ignore that when someone has failed to protect a member of the public because a police officer has made an assumption or been unthinking or negligent.
I guess it's not quite as easy as you or I saying 'Yeah, I made a mistake there' when several people and the corporate image and brand are involved?
Given nobody has held their hands up over the £10BN illegal invasion of Iraq expecting anyone to admit their faults or actions is a bit much?
Given the actions after the death of Tomlinson I'm not sure the police playing the victim card here is much of a goer.
The cost? Perhaps we can lay that at the feet of those that took the independent footage of the shove?
Cost?
But protecting the public is regularly cited as justification for police actions. You can't then ignore that when someone has failed to protect a member of the public because a police officer has made an assumption or been unthinking or negligent.
I guess it's not quite as easy as you or I saying 'Yeah, I made a mistake there' when several people and the corporate image and brand are involved?
Given nobody has held their hands up over the £10BN illegal invasion of Iraq expecting anyone to admit their faults or actions is a bit much?
Given the actions after the death of Tomlinson I'm not sure the police playing the victim card here is much of a goer.
The cost? Perhaps we can lay that at the feet of those that took the independent footage of the shove?
Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 4th May 04:05
Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 4th May 04:06
Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 4th May 04:07
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff