G20 Pc faces misconduct charge over Ian Tomlinson death

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Tool, Nov 29, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. *** Mods - I cannot find the original thread - move if you want to ***

    The PC that MAY have been responsible for Ian Tomlinson's death is to face a diciplinary hearing - linkytype thang here: BBC News - G20 Pc faces misconduct charge over Ian Tomlinson death

    What concerns me (and I'm no Plod-basher) is the comment

    "No date has been set for the hearing, which will be presided over by two senior Metropolitan Police officers and an independent member of the public selected from a list appointed by the Metropolitan Police Authority"

    Doesn't sound too independant to me...
  2. oldbaldy

    oldbaldy LE Moderator Good Egg (charities)
    1. Battlefield Tours

    It is a disciplinary hearing by his employers (MPA) and the make up sound right.
    If a disciplinary hearing was for, say, a civil servant in The Cabinet Office would an independent member of the public selected from a list appointed by the Civil Service be appointed? I think not.
    If you have an issue with this particular case it is with the CPS & not the MPA.
  3. skid2

    skid2 LE Book Reviewer

    The Met 'The best police service money can buy' (something similar was attributed to Mark Twain)
  4. Prison I hope - if found guilty of course.
  5. How can an internal discipline hearing send someone to prison?
  6. The internal hearing can dismiss him without any benefits (pension etc) if found guilty. I suspect - and Baldy can help out - he is no longer at risk of any jail sentance.

    **Editid for spuuling mestake **
  7. I suspect that will be the outcome. Dismissal from the service loss of benefit ect.
    Only difference is it will be spun so that it isn't obvious that the Tomlinson incident is why.

    I understand the officers history is a little chequered and there is the stuff the tabloids dragged up.
    Cant' have the fingers pointed back at the CPS can we.
  8. That's an interesting take. Why would he be dismissed etc? Presumably there is a range of options (sanctions) which the panel can take. I'd have thought that dismissal would be regarded as confirming some sort of guilt and thus might lead to manslaughter charges (or private prosecution, possibly).
  9. It's not supposed to be independent, it's a police disciplinary hearing. He faces what is known as an 'options in' hearing, that is all options (dismissal, requirement to resign, reduction in pay etc )are available to the hearing. As a result, he is entitled to legal representation.

    The standard of proof in disciplinary hearings is at the lower, civil level (the balance of probabilities) than at a criminal court (where it is 'beyond a reasonable doubt'). In this case, the hearing will be in public. You can safely bet your house that he will be found guilty and dismissed from the service.

    To prove gross misconduct at the civil balance of proof in these circumstances will be much easier than to prove manslaughter at the criminal burden of proof so I'd be surprised if the family go for a private criminal prosecution of the individual officer. Much more likely they'll accept his dismissal and then sue the Met for one or two million in the Civil court.
  10. If it is 'not supposed to be independent' then I suspect he'll be able to claim his Human Rights (Yes, I know, I know!) have been infringed. So I'd guess that any such hearing will attempt to appear scrupulously even-handed. After all, being summoned to a disciplinary hearing is not a presumption of guilt.
  11. I think we differ in what we mean by independent. I don't mean that it will be biased in any way, merely that as a member of an organisation subject to a disciplinary code he will be tried by his senior officers under that code. He accepted this when he joined up so he has to accept that he will face such a hearing. You are quite right that the hearing will be scrupulously even handed although as I say, I'd be amazed if it's anything other than dismissal.
  12. That is unless he decides to pull the pin before the board sits, if he is no longer in the job then he cannot be disciplined and his pension
    contributions will be safe, IIRC.
  13. Rules changed a few years ago. Officers facing disciplinary charges can no longer resign to avoid them.
  14. That's not quite what I said. Note my use of the phrase 'attempt to appear...' Not that I'm cynical, you'll understand.
  15. I must admit I can be 'orrid but watching him get dropped for **** all was a bit chad.

    I did however go all gooey when the big coon hoofed that lady soap dodger triggering an amusing miscarriage.