Hardwood found not guilty
Discussion
I know. Tragic this "jury" and "trial" thing we have. Much better to convict emotively.
BBC said:
A police officer who hit Ian Tomlinson with a baton and pushed him to the ground at the G20 protests has been found not guilty of manslaughter.
PC Simon Harwood, 45, of south London, denied the manslaughter, in April 2009, of Mr Tomlinson, 47, on the grounds that he used reasonable force.
Mr Tomlinson, was pushed as he walked away from a police line in the City of London. He later collapsed and died.
His family cried as the verdict was delivered at Southwark Crown Court.
PC Harwood, in the dock, and his wife, Helen, in the public gallery also cried.
The jury of five men and seven women had considered their verdict for four days.
During the trial, the police officer accepted he was "wrong" to have hit and pushed Mr Tomlinson.
He said that, had he realised at the time that Mr Tomlinson was walking away from police lines, he "would not have gone near him".
Father-of-nine Mr Tomlinson, who was a heavy drinker who had slept rough for a number of years, walked 75 yards before he collapsed.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission has said PC Harwood will face internal Met Police disciplinary proceedings later in the year over his actions.
In all seriousness, I imagine the link between the push and the push being the cause of death was never proven, but who knows. PC Simon Harwood, 45, of south London, denied the manslaughter, in April 2009, of Mr Tomlinson, 47, on the grounds that he used reasonable force.
Mr Tomlinson, was pushed as he walked away from a police line in the City of London. He later collapsed and died.
His family cried as the verdict was delivered at Southwark Crown Court.
PC Harwood, in the dock, and his wife, Helen, in the public gallery also cried.
The jury of five men and seven women had considered their verdict for four days.
During the trial, the police officer accepted he was "wrong" to have hit and pushed Mr Tomlinson.
He said that, had he realised at the time that Mr Tomlinson was walking away from police lines, he "would not have gone near him".
Father-of-nine Mr Tomlinson, who was a heavy drinker who had slept rough for a number of years, walked 75 yards before he collapsed.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission has said PC Harwood will face internal Met Police disciplinary proceedings later in the year over his actions.
DSM2 said:
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.
Sorry but with all that protesting going on the last place I would be casually walking would be between the police and the protestors.
I would have miles out of my way to avoid the possible conflict.
I used to change my way out of the local town when the football was turning out just to be safer.
I would have miles out of my way to avoid the possible conflict.
I used to change my way out of the local town when the football was turning out just to be safer.
Harwood's a lovely man though and a credit to the Force:
"Neither jury heard details of Harwood's prior disciplinary record, which can only be reported now. This includes how he quit the Met on health grounds in 2001 shortly before a planned disciplinary hearing into claims he illegally tried to arrest a driver after a road rage incident while off duty, altering his notes to retrospectively justify the actions. Harwood was nonetheless able to join another force, Surrey, before returning to serve with the Met in 2005.
He allegedly punched, throttled, kneed or threatened other suspects while in uniform in other alleged incidents."
"Neither jury heard details of Harwood's prior disciplinary record, which can only be reported now. This includes how he quit the Met on health grounds in 2001 shortly before a planned disciplinary hearing into claims he illegally tried to arrest a driver after a road rage incident while off duty, altering his notes to retrospectively justify the actions. Harwood was nonetheless able to join another force, Surrey, before returning to serve with the Met in 2005.
He allegedly punched, throttled, kneed or threatened other suspects while in uniform in other alleged incidents."
voyds9 said:
Sorry but with all that protesting going on the last place I would be casually walking would be between the police and the protestors.
I would have miles out of my way to avoid the possible conflict.
I used to change my way out of the local town when the football was turning out just to be safer.
I think you will find he had already been 'demonstrating' earlier, standing in front of police vehicles, that sort of thing. Perhaps this will be reported in the mainstream media now.I would have miles out of my way to avoid the possible conflict.
I used to change my way out of the local town when the football was turning out just to be safer.
Or perhaps not.
Zod said:
Harwood's a lovely man though and a credit to the Force:
"Neither jury heard details of Harwood's prior disciplinary record, which can only be reported now. This includes how he quit the Met on health grounds in 2001 shortly before a planned disciplinary hearing into claims he illegally tried to arrest a driver after a road rage incident while off duty, altering his notes to retrospectively justify the actions. Harwood was nonetheless able to join another force, Surrey, before returning to serve with the Met in 2005.
He allegedly punched, throttled, kneed or threatened other suspects while in uniform in other alleged incidents."
A jury need more than claims and allegations to convict."Neither jury heard details of Harwood's prior disciplinary record, which can only be reported now. This includes how he quit the Met on health grounds in 2001 shortly before a planned disciplinary hearing into claims he illegally tried to arrest a driver after a road rage incident while off duty, altering his notes to retrospectively justify the actions. Harwood was nonetheless able to join another force, Surrey, before returning to serve with the Met in 2005.
He allegedly punched, throttled, kneed or threatened other suspects while in uniform in other alleged incidents."
That said I'm very surprised he was found not guilty after the unlawful killing verdict by the coroner, which is to the same standard of proof (beyond reasonable doubt).
Zod said:
Harwood's a lovely man though and a credit to the Force:
"Neither jury heard details of Harwood's prior disciplinary record, which can only be reported now. This includes how he quit the Met on health grounds in 2001 shortly before a planned disciplinary hearing into claims he illegally tried to arrest a driver after a road rage incident while off duty, altering his notes to retrospectively justify the actions. Harwood was nonetheless able to join another force, Surrey, before returning to serve with the Met in 2005.
He allegedly punched, throttled, kneed or threatened other suspects while in uniform in other alleged incidents."
I love how he was allowed to quit, "on health grounds"."Neither jury heard details of Harwood's prior disciplinary record, which can only be reported now. This includes how he quit the Met on health grounds in 2001 shortly before a planned disciplinary hearing into claims he illegally tried to arrest a driver after a road rage incident while off duty, altering his notes to retrospectively justify the actions. Harwood was nonetheless able to join another force, Surrey, before returning to serve with the Met in 2005.
He allegedly punched, throttled, kneed or threatened other suspects while in uniform in other alleged incidents."
What a total
.Derek Smith said:
La Liga said:
n all seriousness, I imagine the link between the push and the push being the cause of death was never proven, but who knows.
It was quite clear in all the press reports that he was guilty.I always thought the Manslaughter charge was inappropriate. I am not defending Hardwood who clearly had some blame for the death of this man. But manslaughter was always a doubtful verdict IMO. Clearly that was the jury view.
I would have thought grievous bodily harm or assault or some other lesser charge would nave been much more likely to succeed and much more provable, because these crimes do not suggest reckless intent to risk death. I think that this is down to poor decisions by the CPS in a high profile case.
Juries never like scapegoats, the Maxwell brothers being found not guilty are another example of the jury not accepting the evidence, which appeared devastating to the world outside the jury room.
I am extremely sorry for the family and the man killed. But I was always doubtful of this verdict, although I personally would have found against Hardwood.
My personal view (that no doubt means nothing) is that he is a thug and should be locked up. If the copper had been pushed and later died, we all know what the outcome would be.
The only positive thing is that anyone with an ounce of sense knows that the copper was TOTALLY in the wrong and will have formed their own judgment that he is guilty.
The fact he has been found guily just makes the police look bad and that they are above the law, thereby gaining even less respect than they currently have.
The only positive thing is that anyone with an ounce of sense knows that the copper was TOTALLY in the wrong and will have formed their own judgment that he is guilty.
The fact he has been found guily just makes the police look bad and that they are above the law, thereby gaining even less respect than they currently have.
Sparta VAG said:
A jury need more than claims and allegations to convict.
That said I'm very surprised he was found not guilty after the unlawful killing verdict by the coroner, which is to the same standard of proof (beyond reasonable doubt).
Coroners are just doctors or lawyers, not a group renowned for being apolitical. Some coroners love the publicity as well. I know nothing about this particular one.That said I'm very surprised he was found not guilty after the unlawful killing verdict by the coroner, which is to the same standard of proof (beyond reasonable doubt).
Juries do come to 'unexpected' decisions but, as every police officer knows, you have to accept that every decision is a 'correct' one although police officers tend to refer to them as right ones.
I remember one judge, a recorder, was so upset by a jury which had found one defendant NG that he read out the bloke's precons to the jury. A pathetic ploy and one that didn't turn out too well as the foreman shouted back that 'it was no good telling us now.' The jury made their irritation known. They were dismissed from any further paticipation in juries. How sensible is that? At last a jury who have been made aware of just how much is kept from them and they are stopped deciding.
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.
Any other country & the copper would have whacked him properly with a baton for taking the pi55, & the PH hordes would be applauding the cops for taking a hard line.
This trial & the one of the Sergeant who slapped the woman who spat at him sum up all that's wrong with society IMHO.
Act like a tw4t & you should get what's coming to you, not go crying to the press/courts/U tube when it does.
Any other country & the copper would have whacked him properly with a baton for taking the pi55, & the PH hordes would be applauding the cops for taking a hard line.
This trial & the one of the Sergeant who slapped the woman who spat at him sum up all that's wrong with society IMHO.
Act like a tw4t & you should get what's coming to you, not go crying to the press/courts/U tube when it does.
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.
Any other country & the copper would have whacked him properly with a baton for taking the pi55, & the PH hordes would be applauding the cops for taking a hard line.
This trial & the one of the Sergeant who slapped the woman who spat at him sum up all that's wrong with society IMHO.
Act like a tw4t & you should get what's coming to you, not go crying to the press/courts/U tube when it does.
bAny other country & the copper would have whacked him properly with a baton for taking the pi55, & the PH hordes would be applauding the cops for taking a hard line.
This trial & the one of the Sergeant who slapped the woman who spat at him sum up all that's wrong with society IMHO.
Act like a tw4t & you should get what's coming to you, not go crying to the press/courts/U tube when it does.
ks.People have been proseucted for having a car carsh where someone has later died of a heart attack or shock etc.
Saddlebag said:
My personal view (that no doubt means nothing) is that he is a thug and should be locked up. If the copper had been pushed and later died, we all know what the outcome would be.
The only positive thing is that anyone with an ounce of sense knows that the copper was TOTALLY in the wrong and will have formed their own judgment that he is guilty.
The fact he has been found guily just makes the police look bad and that they are above the law, thereby gaining even less respect than they currently have.
Imagine if a MoP had done that to someone in the street or someone that was walking away from their dwelling or car? 'I was in fear of my life so I took him down' - despite the fact the chap was unsteady on his feet and walking away from you? The only positive thing is that anyone with an ounce of sense knows that the copper was TOTALLY in the wrong and will have formed their own judgment that he is guilty.
The fact he has been found guily just makes the police look bad and that they are above the law, thereby gaining even less respect than they currently have.
The verdict doesn't really negate the questionable attempts to get CCTV evidence in the investigation of what happened or the dodgy Doctor that did the original autopsy. A dodgy Doctor that had come to incorrect conclusions before that effected the outcome of other cases and MoPs.
I think this will degenerate into a bunfight where as perhaps comparisons should be made to people that get it wrong in any other profession be they incompetent doctors, LIBOR fiddling bankers, odometer resetting car traders or benefits claiming TV presenters.
Discussing this isn't necessarily anti-police, it's just a discussion on one mistake by one officer on one day. Who doesn't make mistakes?
One of the biggest reminders is not to make assumptions?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff