Video reveals G20 police assault...

Quote

Dramatic footage obtained by the Guardian shows that the man who died at last week's G20 protests in London was attacked from behind and thrown to the ground by a baton–wielding police officer in riot gear.

Moments after the assault on Ian Tomlinson was captured on video, he suffered a heart attack and died.

The Guardian is preparing to hand a dossier of evidence to the police complaints watchdog.

It sheds new light on the events surrounding the death of the 47-year-old newspaper seller, who had been on his way home from work when he was confronted by lines of riot police near the Bank of England.

Quote

The film reveals that as he walks, with his hands in his pockets, he does not speak to the police or offer any resistance.

A phalanx of officers, some with dogs and some in riot gear, are close behind him and try to urge him forward.

A Metropolitan police officer appears to strike him with a baton, hitting him from behind on his upper thigh.

Moments later, the same policeman rushes forward and, using both hands, pushes Tomlinson in the back and sends him flying to the ground, where he remonstrates with police who stand back, leaving bystanders to help him to his feet.

The man who shot the footage, a fund manager from New York who was in London on business, said: "The primary reason for me coming forward is that it was clear the family were not getting any answers."

full story & video

pigs.

Admittedly, the push is a little harsh, but in all honesty, if you where surrounded / being followed by shouting riot police, would you be walking along, head down, hands in pockets

I think Id be pretty keen to move on, regardless of if I was involved with the protest or not...

To me, his lack of awareness makes him appear drunk???

The protest was peaceful until the swarms of riot police turned up. They actually turned up during the 'Protest Through Poetry', they wouldn't let anyone pass out through the quarter. Some of the police officers were not wearing ID tags (which is required), and actually had to put it on when asked by journalists. I would actually say they only ordered to turn up to antagonise the protesters.
I was in Liverpool (Slater Street) when the police went ballistic and they were just striking out at people walking about. I hate this side of the police.

Met suspends G20 footage officer, (another one).

Quote

A Metropolitan Police officer shown in YouTube video footage apparently hitting a woman during the G20 summit protests in London has been suspended.

The footage shows the woman swearing at a police officer who then appears to hit her in the face before apparently striking her on the leg with his baton.

Quote

"The officer has been identified and suspended pending further investigation. The officer works as a sergeant in the territorial support group," he added.

Earlier Scotland Yard had said the apparent actions of the officer featured in the new footage raised "immediate concerns".

"Every officer is accountable under law, and fully aware of the scrutiny that their actions can be held open to," police said.

full story and video

I have always respected the police. I was brought up that way. Sadly, over the last few years that respect has been nibbled away. The two incidents of members of the public being attacked by uniformed bags of dog's vomit is just indicative of what has been coming to the fore for a while.

It won't be too far in the future when the average law-biding Joe Bloggs and his pissed-off neighbours and friends say enough is enough and turn on the uniformed numpties who walk around the place looking like an Ironmongers shop on a bad day.

No one is taking the bad apples out of the barrel. The results are becoming obvious.

Surely, with today's excellent investigative journalism, it wouldn't be too hard for the names and addresses of the uniformed scrotes to be found and published. Then they might regret the folly of their actions - and be a warning to others.

This is ridiculus, give them a batton and some riot gear and they think they can fight the world, i've never been a fan of police in all honesty but it just shows how much power they think they have over everyone, if they just used that power in the right way maybe people would actually show them some respect. As Pinzgauer said, they arent taking out the bad apples, and they are very quickly becoming more and more.

Ok so a few policemen get out of hand and they will be dealt with within the law. So why is it in all these so called peaceful protests do we have a large element of the great unwashed hooded idiots with balaclavas and masks who's sole aim is to disrupt and cause trouble and the police are not allowed to hand out what they receive. There's nothing wrong with peaceful protest whenever are they peaceful, if the organisers of these protest marches can't keep the peace then it has to be the responsibility of police to protect the public and their property and they should be applauded for the work the majority of them do. People in this country should be glad its only battened police they face and not machine guns.

Agreed bert. Yes, peaceful protest can get hijacked by the hooded scumbags. They should just be taken out of society FULLSTOP ! Half the problem appears to be that the police don't seem to be able to tell the difference (or can't be arsed to differentiate) between bona fide, peaceful protesters and the Rentamob dross.

Police can (and have to) tolerate verbal abuse on a daily basis. The way they react is the questionable bit. Having to cope with the idiot full of piss and wind on a Saturday night after chucking out time is something few of us would relish. BUT it's their job and it's what they are trained for.

For some uniformed hoody (Check that video again) to kill an innocent guy who CLEARLY wasn't part of the trouble is unacceptable in anyone's book.

The same goes for that gloved, spineless gorilla who hit that woman in the face, then whacked her HARD with his coward stick.

Years of inaction against the hooded slime that contaminate our streets at the weekends etc. have bred a confrontational, anti-authority underclass of testtube rejects that are hell-bent on causing trouble. THEN, in my little black book, it says the police SHOULD beat THEM to a pulp. NOT folk who are making a peaceful, allbeit vocally "iffy" protest.

This whole sketch makes me very angry. Let's build a few camps somewhere were the uniformed vomit bags and uniformed gorillas are thrown in with the testtube hoodies. That should provide some entertainment !!

No apologies this time for the rant.

As much controversy as this will cause, I can see how it has happened, and although maybe I dont agree with the level of force involved, I have no symapthy for the protester.

Regardless of who, what, where, they had been ordered to get back - that is what they should have done.

I see their sole objective in that clip to be to antagonise the police, and that was not the time or the place. Had she taken the first warning and backed off, it wouldnt have happened. The Police cant been seen to change their minds otherwise order would very soon be lost, and the disruption would have been much worse.

I don't think its controversial at all, your quite right why does she have to keep having a go, She was aggressive and looked out of control, when do you want the policeman to act after he's been stabbed or hit on the head with a brick. The trouble is half of these protesters haven't got a clue what the protest is about, they only go to cause trouble, nothing else.

Originally Posted by Shambo

Quote

Dramatic footage obtained by the Guardian shows that the man who died at last week's G20 protests in London was attacked from behind and thrown to the ground by a baton–wielding police officer in riot gear.

Moments after the assault on Ian Tomlinson was captured on video, he suffered a heart attack and died.

The Guardian is preparing to hand a dossier of evidence to the police complaints watchdog.

It sheds new light on the events surrounding the death of the 47-year-old newspaper seller, who had been on his way home from work when he was confronted by lines of riot police near the Bank of England.

Quote

The film reveals that as he walks, with his hands in his pockets, he does not speak to the police or offer any resistance.

A phalanx of officers, some with dogs and some in riot gear, are close behind him and try to urge him forward.

A Metropolitan police officer appears to strike him with a baton, hitting him from behind on his upper thigh.

Moments later, the same policeman rushes forward and, using both hands, pushes Tomlinson in the back and sends him flying to the ground, where he remonstrates with police who stand back, leaving bystanders to help him to his feet.

The man who shot the footage, a fund manager from New York who was in London on business, said: "The primary reason for me coming forward is that it was clear the family were not getting any answers."

full story & video

Originally Posted by Pinzgauer

For some uniformed hoody (Check that video again) to kill an innocent guy who CLEARLY wasn't part of the trouble is unacceptable in anyone's book.

Quote

Amateur video footage captured by a New York fund manager emerged several days later of him being pushed to the ground by a policeman.

Other photographs have also come to light of Mr Tomlinson apparently remonstrating with officers in a riot van in Lombard Street up to an hour earlier.

full article

Although this does not vindicate the officer, it does show that the male concerned was not quite as "peaceful" as the initial video would suggest. Thankfully, the whole of that area is covered by CCTV and so the truth will out.

As for the officer "killing" him, basic law at the moment states, in layman's terms:

Murder is causing the unlawful death of another with intent to kill or cause serious bodily harm. Malice aforethought is an old term now replaced by the intent.

Transferred malice occurs where you intend to kill A and actually kill B, e.g. if you aim a gun at A and miss. This is murder - you do not have to intend to murder the same person you actually kill. And you can have a 'general' intent, for example if you plant a bomb in a shopping centre.

All crimes are analysed legally by splitting them into the actus reus and the mens rea. Both elements must be proved for the defendant to be guilty. Actus reus is physical, i.e. causing the death of the victim. The mens rea is the 'guilty mind', i.e. the intention to kill or cause serious harm.

The other way to look at it is "acting in a manner so negligent that the death of another is likely to be caused". For this to be the case the death has to be a 'virtual certainty' of the defendant's conduct. If it is merely likely, then this is manslaughter. The only thing they may apply if the Officer is charged is something called the "thin skull rule".

The 'thin skull' rule says that the defendant must take his victim as he finds him. Therefore, even if injury or death is not reasonably foreseeable the law still considers the defendant liable if the victim suffered from some physical or mental condition that made him or her vulnerable. I could go further into the other rules that would apply (the "but for test" etc) but it tends to get rather complicated.

From a legal standpoint, I doubt the Officer will be charged with Murder or Manslaughter, mainly because of the fact that he actually died from natural causes. Yes, it looks like the Police Officer concerned may have acted in an unprofessional manner on this occasion - but murder it is not. They have a split second or two to gauge the situation, get it wrong, they get injured or die, get it wrong the other way and someone else gets injured or dies. Chances are, it was his his time to go and he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Maybe, had he not remonstrated with Police an hour earlier, he wouldn't have been in such a state in the first place - we'll probably never know.

Well done Jaci

Bert - after that I need a lie down

Bloody good revision though

Originally Posted by PaganJay

Bert - after that I need a lie down

Bloody good revision though

Now, if i was a bit younger

Wrong time, wrong place? Well then you'd just better stay at home and not feel the need to protest about anything....

Glass skull? Well then, falling roof slate or officer of the law, it was bound to happen sooner or later....

In fact, if it wasn't for these bloody "doo-gooders", [english language failure], the police would be free to arrest, beat up (they must have been asking for it), and incarcerate anyone who doesn't abide by immediate government policy.

I'm surprised that an anarchist managed to shove that bin through the window of the RBS... through the the throng of papperazzi!! How stupid must you be to meet out a bit of 'life on mars' justice to the great unwashed without realising you'd be all over youtube the next day? Not stupid I think... more arrogant. No wander the policeforce don't command the respect they used to.

I did my protesting many many years ago and not once got in any trouble.

As for the "thin skull rule" it doesn't just apply to the skull. It basically means that you have to take your "victim" as you find them - thin skull, pre-existing heart condition etc.

I ask myself why the paparazzi are there in the first place - are they part of the catalyst for such behaviour??

Maybe we should put ourselves in the shoes of the Officer concerned - see how well the sphincters would hold in that kind of situation before we judge

All things considered, it's not as bad as some countries!! Maybe some people should move to the likes of South Africa, Zimbabwe or even America for a while - I think they'd soon appreciate our Police!!

I think there should be a list of names and addresses for the likes of those who stone Fire Engines and Ambulances or spew hatred towards the Police whereby if they ever call upon any of those services, they are told in no uncertain terms to get on with it!! Oh but wait, that won't happen because they don't care that you hate them or attack them, they help you anyway!! Shame!!

There is good and bad in every walk of life, but once again, we don't say "oooh all school caretakers are evil" just because of Ian Huntley do we?? So why should it be the same for the Police? Easy target

Not exactly easy targets are they? Those pictures speak for themselves yet there's no shortage of people round this website who'd rather blame that bloke who had a heart attack for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, or having a 'glass skull'.

I think police are as human as the next person... apart from most people don't want to be in the police.

They're just normal people... not saints, not infallable. Police are very well paid professionals and there's no place for bad decisions and hot headedness... save that for the vigilantes.

I for one could not jump to conclusions based on a few seconds of film footage whether that mans heart attack was brought on by being pushed etc by a policeman. Of cause there are plenty who will because it suits their political views. Thankfully any inquiry will be based on a longer time scale up to his death and not a knee jerk reaction. Its unfortunate it provokes tunnel vision amongst some commentators and provides an opportunity to do some verbal police bashing.

Originally Posted by bert1

I for one could not jump to conclusions based on a few seconds of film footage whether that mans heart attack was brought on by being pushed etc by a policeman. Of cause there are plenty who will because it suits their political views. Thankfully any inquiry will be based on a longer time scale up to his death and not a knee jerk reaction. Its unfortunate it provokes tunnel vision amongst some commentators and provides an opportunity to do some verbal police bashing.

I did have an epic and erudite reply typed out but the laptop decided to reboot itself and so it all went *poof* before I could submit

I will however just clarify that the "thin skull" rule is not used to blame the "victim".

New post-mortem reveals death not due to heart attack

He pushed him over like a sneaky bully in a playground.

What ever the outcome of this inquiry is fine by me, but why do i get the feeling that this cop is going to pay the price for someone getting 7 or 8 bullets in the head recently.

A third Post Mortem has been carried out and other details released regarding the man who died. It is looking likely that the charge against the man who pushed him will be manslaughter.

click me