G20 Protests Death: Police Won't Be Charged

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Mr Happy, Jul 22, 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. Mr Happy

    Mr Happy LE Moderator

    Ian Tomlinson G20 Death: Police Officer Will Not Be Charged | UK News | Sky News

    I dare say if someone video taped me shoving an police officer over on his way from work the CPS would have a different view on the whole thing.

    What with Menzes, never has quis custodiet ipsos custodes applied more than now...
    • Like Like x 1
  2. So a Copper who resigned previously before he could get busted for violent misconduct, (road rage incident), and who shouldn't have been allowed back into the Police, can kill someone in the full public gaze and he's going to get away scott free?

    "…He had faced a misconduct hearing in connection with an alleged off-duty road rage incident during his earlier term of employment, but instead retired on medical grounds, according to the reports.
    However he rejoined the Met as a civilian computer worker despatching officers to calls and later applied to work as a constable with Surrey Police, where he worked for some time. He then successfully reapplied to transfer to the Met.…"

    Officer under investigation over Ian Tomlinson's death 'should not have been working for Met' - Telegraph
  3. The news provokes dejection rather than outrage or even surprise.
  4. Wordsmith

    Wordsmith LE Book Reviewer

    The best one is that they took so long investigating him, that they can no longer charge him with common assault - because those changes have to be lodged within 6 months of the incident.

    So why didn't they charge him with common assault immediately - which looked to be a good bet - and investigate the rest of the charges with a view to bringing additional changes later?


  5. So will this Killer Kop retire again on 'health grounds'?

    Any takers?
  6. Is there any wonder respect for police is at an all time low. The family should have taken out a private prosecution. This brutish thug has probably got a huge smile on his face today. Time, we, the public, decided the priorities of the police "service".

    "CPS officials had assured the family they would decide on whether to prosecute the officer – and on what charge – by Christmas 2009.

    The CPS has given various explanations for the delays, and claim they have had to return to the IPCC for clarification several times on different issues.

    It is also understood that there have been complications surrounding the evidence of an expert witness.

    The IPCC itself was late in mounting an inquiry, claiming there was nothing suspicious about the death for almost a week until the release of footage of the incident obtained by the Guardian forced a U-turn."

    Presumably it was the evidence provided by Freddy Patel, the first coroner, that prevented a prosecution? Funny that..

    As ever, the police are shown to be above the law.

    Edited to add, Guardian has named him as PC Simon Harwood
  7. When is the coalition going to castrate the CPS. Anyone have any idea what it would take to re-role it as an institution representing justice as opposed to criminal interest?
  8. The only one of them which states unequivocally that death was as a result of a heart attack unconnected with the strike or fall was conducted by Dr Mohmed Saeed Sulema Patel who's currently before the GMC Fitness to Practise Panel for "impairment by reason of misconduct and deficient professional performance."

    Disagreement, indeed.
  9. If the "Can't Prosecute Service" failed to hold any Police Officer to account for the death by shooting of an innocent passenger on the Underground, it stands to reason they are not going to charge and prosecute an officer for a possible "common assault".
  10. The other one which was made public stated an arterial haemorrhage as cause of death and the heart attack as a consequence of that, however as near five litres of blood were found in the thoracic cavity this could not have occurred at the time of the fall; Tomlinson would never have been able to stand up or walk 100m whilst losing that much blood, he would have been unconscious within two minutes. The third PM result was never made public.
  11. They could start by weeding out the party faithful and disbanding the "Special Crime Directorate" that was set up specifically to find that Tony Blair had no case to answer in the cash for honours scandal. Our current "independent" Director of Public Prosecutions is a former editor of "Socialist Alternative" and is named after Keir Hardie, Labour's first MP. Better than the last one who played tennis with the Blairs and was one of Cherie's business partners at Matrix Chambers.

    In this case, though, I think the CPS have had their hands tied. There were two different post mortems carried out on the victim. The first was carried out for the police by a pathologist chosen by the police, rather than by the Forensic Pathology Service, as is normal for suspicious deaths in London. The pathologist had previously been reprimanded by the General Medical Council for leaking information favourable to the police in the case of a man who died in police custody.

    The first pathologist stated that Tomlinson had died of a heart attack. The implication is that he is a "tame" pathologist brought in to absolve the police of blame. LINK

    A second post mortem was requested by the family of the victim. The second pathologist determined that Tomlinson had died from internal bleeding and commented that he could not understand how the first pathologist had missed the large quantity of blood inside Tomlinson's body.

    As I understand it, with conflicting post mortem results, you can't get a conviction. The whole thing stinks, especially when you consider the background of the police officer who clobbered Tomlinson. But, in this case, I don't think the CPS are to blame.
  12. Why doesn't the family mount a private prosecution or claim for damages.
    What are the chances the inquest will bring back a verdict of wrongfull killing/death. Answers on a postage stamp...
  13. I think that the CPS can, effectively, stop private prosecutions these days. Also, in some cases, you need the Attorney General's permission to even start a private prosecution. Thirdly, it costs a packet and I doubt that the family of a newspaper seller are well off.
  14. Good result for the copper.
  15. AM this is not entirely true, but this discussion also depends on what the individual is (or ought to have been) charged with. In the case of Tomlinson it certainly should have been possible to charge with assault, if not manslaughter/murder. But the (deliberate?) prevarication by the CPS in conjunction with others has led to this situation.

    Maybe there should be a demand for judicial review of the CPS decision. Maybe the family will secure the services of a decent lawyer. They have obviously been denied justice - and by that I mean proper judicial process, rather than a conviction.