|
U-Know! Forum » Ian Tomlinson cop: no charges |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Merrick 2148 posts |
Jul 23, 2010, 13:12
|
||
|
Thanks for that. The Guardian's extensive coverage amkes extraordinary reading. I've pulled out quotes from a few of their articles for a new blog post http://bristlingbadger.blogspot.com/2010/07/making-killing-invisible.html
|
|||
|
Moon Cat 9577 posts |
Jul 23, 2010, 15:02
|
||
|
Digusting. And, apart from the colossal injustice apparent to anyone with a brain, at a time when the general public's faith in and respect for once generally respected institutions - banks, MP's, etc - is lower than a snail's belly, it's almost insanely badly timed. Mad!
|
|||
|
Moon Cat 9577 posts |
Jul 23, 2010, 15:06
|
||
|
stray wrote: Ha, actually I reckon Hague could have won with a working majority. He would have just needed a few more HIGNFY appearances ;) Recently he has been more impressive in the house than Cameron on the few occasions he's filled in for him. I concur. In fact, most lefty people I know now have something of a grudging respect for Hague these days. It's like, "Well, amongst that cavalcade of cunts, he seems all right really!" Strange times. I cannot take Call Me Dave and Georgy Porgy seriously at all. It doesn't even LOOK right.
|
|||
|
Rhiannon 5291 posts |
Edited Jul 25, 2010, 10:33
Jul 25, 2010, 09:16
|
||
|
http://www.iantomlinsonfamilycampaign.org.uk/2010/07/launch-of-campaign-fighting-fund.html It's too late to get just a charge of assault now? and is manslaughter now 'disproved'? But the attack looked totally unprovoked. There's no justice if the individual who was responsible for it just gets let off. And what does it say about the police service in general, it effectively condones what he did. Maybe he didn't expect the man to die. But that's pretty much irrelevant if it was as a direct result of what he did? Does this all hinge on the fact that the evidence about the autopsy was bodged?
|
|||
Deepinder Cheema 1972 posts |
Edited Jul 27, 2010, 15:41
Jul 25, 2010, 17:51
|
||
|
I don't think it is too late to do something, but there are interesting legal issues which the Police know how to manouvre. I heard on C4 that the further autopsy* was carried out ONLY after the film came to light, which was several days after 'death by breach of Health and Safety'. It is pretty obvious that the man's death was by being pushed and truncheon wallop, and several commentators reckon that a conviction by private prosecution is impossible. If Parliament wanted to do something about they could, they have introduced statute to get rid of double Jeopardy, but this would mean a conflict with the Police. It's obvious that at this moment the Police are toying whether to send the guilty man out to sacrifice or not. I wonder if they can pull out another Health and Safety type stroke. * It emerged that Freddie Patel threw away fluid caused by the trauma away. He did not conclude this was a suspicious death as he seems to be incompetent. This fluid would have contained Blood etc to have given the deceased man a chance for justice.
|
|||
pooley 501 posts |
Jul 26, 2010, 09:16
|
||
I'm donating twenty quid. And sending the link to all I know.
|
|||
|
Deepinder Cheema 1972 posts |
Edited Jul 29, 2014, 02:41
Jul 26, 2010, 16:19
|
||
|
This matter is being debated right now in the House of Commons. Dominic Grieve the Attorney General is explaining by what parameters the CPS have been constrained in reaching their decision. He has fully acknowledged the consternation and the disquiet by this case, as typically seen here on this forum. There have been very demanding questions put to him by Diane Abbott, Maria Eagle, Jeremy Corbin, and others. It is clear that the notion of Justice being seen to be done is paramount in his brain, and he will look at the upcoming Inquest and hopefully Judicial review with great interest. Mention has been made of Dr Patel the Pathologist. Greave has stated that Patel who has been acknowledged generally as incompetent was appointed by the Coroner so the CPS cannot be blamed for this cock up, the Coroner exercising their own independent judgement. It has also been pointed out that a victim of the Camden Ripper was judged to have died of a Heart attack by Dr Patel. Greave certainly seems to be batting away the concerns put to him by his honourable friends. I can see there is a legal argument how difficult it will be to prove that Ian Tomlinson died from something that may or may not have been as a direct result of a such a brutal assault, but you can make a thing as difficult or as easy as you want to, as the whole of medical science finds it difficult to find causal links, that's why a science based on evidence such as epidemiology exists. The CPS have brought loads of charges against the public with little or no realistic hope of a conviction, a few years ago for example against a Met officer whom they disliked, and he won. All this because someone had a camera pointing at the Police.
|
|||
|
Merrick 2148 posts |
Jul 27, 2010, 11:13
|
||
|
Rhiannon wrote: It's too late to get just a charge of assault now? Yes. That has a time limit of six months. Rhiannon wrote: is manslaughter now 'disproved'? No. However, the CPS say that becuase one autopsy says the assault did not contribute to the death, there is a conflict of expert evidence and this means there will be reasonable doubt and thus lead to acquittal. Of course, some might say that deciding between conflicting versions of events is exactly waht a court is there for. The shonkiness of the first autopsy is counterbalanced by the fact that it was the first one, and so was the only examination of Tomlinson's intact body. The charges that also remain open are Actual Bodily Harm and Misconduct in Public Ofice. To get a conviction they need to show that Tomlinson suffered actual harm from the assault, rather than merely being pushed over. The evidence is that he had patterend bruising from the baton strike, so that should be a straightforward convition and it's unclear why the CPS didn't go with these charges. I think it's important to remember that the Tomlinson assualt was unlucky. The police committed thousands of similar assualts that day (the casual nature of it, and the fact that it was on an unthreatening person, shows that the officer was used to it). This wasn't one moment of excessive force, but part of a long-used tactic in public order situations and at protests the police deem unacceptable.
|
|||
Rolling Ronnie 1468 posts |
Jul 27, 2010, 13:18
|
||
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-10777287
|
|||
|
Toni Torino 2299 posts |
Jul 27, 2010, 13:37
|
||
He's a copper, he should abide by the law, and laws of decency, and accept responsibility for what he's done, not use loopholes in legislation to escape prosecution, odiously aided by the CPS and his own institution. I know everybody is entitled to the best possible representation and defence but he's a copper and the public are entitled to expect protection by him, and now after this, from him.
|
| Pages: 5 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
